Printable View
Following on from the control plan news last year
https://www.nzhuntingandshooting.co....-agreed-53941/
Here's the latest plan.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/timaru-herald...id=app-android
Seems like the target is still 10000 on public land. I thought they wanted to cull 10000 which is reported as 12000 so far. They do have a point that the overseas hunters aren't going to be here this season but I still see hints of extermination in the plan. ☹️
They culled over 20K last year. They reckoned there was 35k approx animals then.
This new 10k they want gone is simply slaughter to exterminate.
They were supposed to leave the grown bulls and only target nannies and juvies in the last cull. But they smoked anything that moved.
This new cull is an extermination plain and simple.
There are many many sheeples who hunt, they just can't see through DOC.
There is no trust left,it's long gone.
I think the term used is..shafted, is it not? :D
Yes, and all the talk about recreational shooters being involved is bulldust!
NZDA asked at one of their consultation meetings about them wanting our tallies -apparently not only have they not done an accurate count for the last 8 years, but only Helihunting and Waro count
(i know between the 3 local branches we get 1000 tahr/year on average).
"DOC = putting the CON in Conservation"
The part about overseas hunters I was referring to was the fact they were to shoot 5 nannies for every bull. Fact is Sage and Doc want them gone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Huntfisheat
The last two Tahr hunts i have been on have been in spots that i have hunted for many years with my family and have always held reasonable numbers of Tahr.
These areas are easily accessible for the recreational hunter and the population has never exploded (due to hunting) with no group sizes greater than 6 animals.
One of the areas used to graze hundreds of merinos in the days before land tenure but since the removal of the stock the vegetation has absolutely flourished which can easily support the population of 30 to 40 Tahr that have always existed in the area.
The last cull has gone through and shot everything in these areas to to the point where we cant find a Tahr despite information stating bulls were to be left alone.
There was no justification for decimating these areas especially easily accessible recreational hunting areas.
You cannot negotiate, reason with or trust recidivist liars.
Dont hate me but I will be culling a few animals. Just have to get that stupid licence sorted.
Guy I will be shooting for tells some different stories to what I have read here.
Animal numbers where I have been hunting are healthy as.
The Thar have evolved in the last 10yrs regarding their habitat and are not stupid.
Maybe some hunters need to as well.[emoji16]
Sent from my SM-T510 using Tapatalk
I thing i don't like is when they do all the easy areas that a lot of recreational hunters go.
Game should be managed as an asset. DoC's bloofy minded attitude is just sickening.
The reason for this, is you can park your fuel dump at a convenient road end, operate from there and get the count you need quickly , reducing the fuel used and machine time, maximizing profit margin, this allows the numbers back a bit to stay high and be the count that gets the next contract. They tend to be the same road ends the average ground hunter uses.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbear
Yesterday I was hunting into a secluded short little valley that holds always holds a few animals, and had the pleasure of watching a 44 come flying around the corner with 2 on the strop, flew them past me at my altitude . You don't get a prize for guessing how I feel about that.....
Maybe the areas with the big Tahr populations causing all the Sage/Green/Fuckwit angst, should be openly nominated to the hunting puplic.Quote:
Originally Posted by R93
I don't know of any big populations so don't know what they're on about.Quote:
Originally Posted by 257weatherby
My spots have healthy numbers imo.
Good ratio of nannies to bulls etc.
They would never try and cull them unless they can find them in mature bush and thick scrub.
Any thar in the open also dissappear at a great rate of knots, long before you hear a helicopter yourself.
I used to hate seeing helihunting in my spots but now it works in my favour.
Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
How about rethinking that, or at least explaining it really clearly to us about how you'd convey such a message to the powers that be. "I'm OK, fuck the rest of you" is how it comes across and that thinking will destroy our NZ hunting (and your livelihood with it).Quote:
Originally Posted by R93
I've been out and about on both coasts since last years culling and numbers are at best "different", low in many popular spots and some remoter ones too. If young guys can't get out into the handy spots with a reasonable chance of knocking over an animal the "anti's will have won and some sort of "green rain" will be developed to finish the job.
This view (yours) is fine if your West Coast tahr have a nice forest to run and hide in. Unfortunately for us east coasters the tahr have nowhere to hide and wiping out massive numbers is easy for the choppers.Quote:
Originally Posted by R93
WTF? Who do I have to explain what to? Yeah I am ok.....for now. Probably because of years of adapting and hard work. Read it how ya like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tentman
Sent from my SM-T510 using Tapatalk
For many years now they have been trying to get the last rabbit and have they? no and they never will.
Thar have been on the hit list for a very long time,recovery for the meat,live capture,Govt cullers,search and destroy missions bla,bla.
Regardless of what DOC think or spout they would have more chance pissing in the Queens hat than getting the last one,fact.
Yes they will take a huge hammering in the open shale and tussock areas but their saviour is the WestCoast srub & forested areas and lets face it there's no shortage.
Spending many years chasing around after thar one becomes quite familiar as such. I'm guessing the Bulls that R93 is referring to
would be what the old cullers referred to as scrub Bulls,I could be wrong,,a term we used for the thar that basically stayed in the high scrub/forest. The big boys were/are happy to spend their retirement in such areas, popping out for only short periods.
We should remember that tahr numbers got down to 2000ish in the past, I wouldn’t put it past Sage & co to change the law to allow them to target them on private land. They have been given 1.1billon to spend, that should concern us! The use of Thermal gear makes it a lot harder for animals to hide.
The hunting opportunities in the 80’s were terrible, we don’t want to go back to that.
Game animals on private land will not be safe from you know who, I would almost bet on that.Quote:
Originally Posted by outdoorlad
Very simple for the powers to be to come up with a law as you mention.
Could you imagine DOC allowing animals to cross over into THIER land after they have spent zillions ,nah.
I have read somewhere that they want all our game animals gone and that order is not coming from within our Government.
There is an agenda in place and the Sage lady and her followers will back it all the way :)
ok,I dont as a rule target thar....cant be arsed walking that far or hard to shoot an animal to eat that isnt high on my favourite meat list.
private land is a double edged sword
if say Gary Roonie has got 1500 animals on his stew point safari block
and Eugene n co want 10,000 animals IN TOTAL left after the culls have done thier dirty work.....thats 1500 LESS animals that can be on public land to keep within that total.
sure the animals there behind wire/over boundary CAN walk out and repopulate other areas (as lilybank did for years) BUT its a slippery slope and a simple rule change could see the private land animals targeted too...for better or worse.
Any news from the Tahr Foundation ( with all our $) on this?
@Maxx
They put this on Facebook.
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?sto...40271609925638
Last paragraph is pleasing to read.
NZ Tahr Foundation
Just a quick up date from the Tahr Foundation.
You may have recently seen media reports of a resumption of tahr control.
No formal control plan has as yet been agreed to, the Tahr Liaison group is set to meet on the 19th of this month to consider a draft plan for the period June 20/20 to June 20/21.
The Department and Ngai Tahu have been engaging with all stake holders to hear their views on what form control should take over this period.
The Tahr Foundation takes the view that it is now time to focus on research before any further reduction in tahr numbers. Any control work for the next 12 months should be focused on the exclusion zones and tahr out side the feral range.
Bull numbers in the National Parks will be reduced already due to the activities of recreational hunters who are active right now. There will be less bulls returning to those parks after the rut than were present in the spring of 2019.
The Nation Parks are as much about recreation as conservation, bulls are the main incentive for hunters to visit the parks and kiwi recreational hunters are not only the main visitors to recreate in the parks but also contributors to conservation by removing tahr.
Any attempt to target what is left of the bulls in the parks has no basis in sound management and will be resisted.
Copied and pasted from that facebook page.
MASSIVE TAHR CULL APPEARS TO BE UNDERWAY
It has come to my attention, 4 June, 2020, that:
"Forest & Bird (have) filed paperwork with the High Court to ensure that the Dept of Conservation reduces Tahr to the lowest possible levels in National Parks, this winter. This means that DOC are likely to be targeting all Tahr, of all ages and sexes."
"Legal action is now being taken against DoC with regard to not following the law for Tahr in National Parks. It seems the Tahr Liaison Group members are part of this action."
"Ngai Tahu is a co-designer in the 2020/21 Tahr Control Plan so their perspective, whatever that is, needs to be made public."
picked this off facebook ,anybody else seen it,or heard if its true
Forest and bird intend to take Doc to court to ensure the Tahr population is reduced to no more than 10000 as is the population limit in the Himalayan Tahr plan 1993.
They are still saying the Tahr population is sitting around 35000 and therefore another 25000 Tahr need to be culled.
This is in addition to the 17000 culled last year (12000 public land and 5000 private land according to some sources).
No one really knows what the population currently is sitting at, so one would have thought there needs to be a scientific evaluation of the population and the effects on the environment.
The other big factor is that the Tahr plan states there to be zero Tahr in Mount Cook national park and also Westland national park which includes alot of good Tahr country
Forest and bird will end Tahr hunting in these areas if they are successful by their court action in ensuring the plan is strictly adhered to.
Just gotta suspect that DoC are unenthusiastic about reviewing the '93 plan because its likley that the 10 000 max population will be at risk of being pushed up......and with en election coming up you'd expect the Minister is motivated to lock in a 'control' programme for the next year or 3 so that DoC can reach for that to justify their activities over the next little while regardless of what the election dishes up.
And the big question is how does this 10000 figure fit with the populations on the private country vs public land?
Recreational vs commercial guiding interests? what is more important? money vs recreation?
How do you value recreation and does it hold any value in the eyes of conservationists?
This makes for horrible reading.
I remember the days when there were just 2000 tahr left, that is basically NO tahr per sq km. 10000 animals to hunt at that time seemed like a magic figure.
Yogi you raise some interesting questions.
Why can't us rec hunters who numbers about 80,000 so i have read in the past and members on these hunting forums vote at elections to get the best party in that is in our best interest?? Now i don't wanta spell it out but with MMP, how previously has the current party got into power so easily even with NZ First & the Greens?? If you don't like the Outdoors party or ACT, well guess a chunk of rec hunters voted for what we have? Short memories i suspect on these forums?
This country is over run with sheep Hunteast :)
thats what I said above....if the likes of Rooney has for arguments sake 1500 animals on his blocks.....is that part of the 10,000 or not????Quote:
Originally Posted by yogi
what about the 20 in paddock in peel forest???
The Tahr population on private land should be irrelevant to the Tahr plan as land use is up to the discretion of the land holder.
Its irrelevant whether a farmer chooses to farm Tahr for guiding operations or sheep/beef farming.
Any good farmer knows that whatever animals are being farmed, they will have to be in a manner that is sustainable with their land to be a successful farming operation.
The Tahr plan really should be a guide for managing the Tahr population on public land and must balance the population with environmental sustainability.
The plan used to look at density rather than simply total population and vegetation plots to monitor localized damage. It must be nigh on impossible to determine a total population especially in westland.
With only areas outside of the feral range and areas with high ecological significance getting culled doesnt this mean that with a bit of luck they might leave some of our easily accessible and heavily hunted east coast catchments alone?
TUI anyone?????? twig n tweet will claim it all has high ecological value...the only good thar is a dead one is the mantra....Quote:
Originally Posted by Backsteaks