Hunting in some NSW National Parks

[wearthefoxhat]

Wearthefoxhat, that last statement of mine refers to your statements that because national park rangers "have failed terribly" and their "dismal record of conservation" it is "time to do things differently." That sounds a lot like a huge vote of no confidence in a very dedicated group of people whom I believe we should be thankful to have in our public service. To dump on them like that sounds to me like you do "have them in your sites" so to speak. But I wonder, other than that they currently won't allow you to shoot in the national parks, what is your problem with them?

Ahhh I see.. a thousand apologies.. i meant National park management ...not rangers...

[Tony]

Hi, all.

I'm not a big fan of hunting in general, and I'm downright against it taking place in areas where people (like me) might wander. For example, National Parks. Before anyone accuses me of being uninformed about firearms, or the risk that they do or do not pose, my occupation involves regular training with, and the regular employment of, firearms. I've also personal experience with using them in Somalia, East Timor, Iraq and Afghanistan. Consequently, from my perspective to compare, for example, injury statistics for pasttimes like volleyball with hunting is downright 'stoopid'. A twisted ankle hardly compares to a sucking chest wound. Factor in that more people play volleyball more often than they hunt, and I begin to question the legitimacy of making statistical comparisons in any case.

Of concern to me is that hunters like to dress in camouflage clothing, and they invariably use rifles that are chambered for .223 calibre rounds upwards. So they're not all that easy to see, and they're armed with weapons that have a lethal zone that extends out to 1.5km. As Wayno pointed out earlier in this thread, hunters use ammunition that is intriniscally more lethal than what ordinarily is used in the military. Under the Geneva Conventions and Protocols, modern Armies are (largely) restricted to the employment of full-metal jacketed bullets, bullets that do not expand greatly on impact. Cavitation is, therefore, much less than what applies to equivalent calibre hunting rounds. However, anyone who has personal experience observing what happens to a human body when struck by a 5.56mm (.223) or 7.62mm (.308) military round will attest that what results ain't pretty. And unlike what passes in the cinema, the human body cannot continue to function when it absorbs the kinetic force these projectiles impart. If the person was fortunate enough to survive the impact, and if they were equally fortunate enough to receive immediate aid from someone trained and competent in battlefield wound management, then the victim has about an hour to be evacuated and receive surgical intervention before s/he dies. So, riddle me this. How many bushwalkers: (a) carry HF radios with them? (b) Have wound dressings, IV kits/saline, and combat torniques in their comprehensive first aid kits? (c) Have rotary wing AME standing by, waiting for the call? And, (d) have trauma surgeons prepped and ready to go, just-in-case? Not too many, I'd wager.

I've been shot at a number of times, and I've never found it to be a particularly pleasant experience. However, I expected to be shot at given the places I was in, and the jobs I was doing. I don't expect to be shot at whilst hiking through an Australian National Park.

Ian

Hi Ian,

Many thanks for sharing your experiences and views.

A great post, one of the best posts I have read in this debate on hunting in NP's.

Tony

[Turfa]

turfa...I enjoy hunting... no I love hunting... I love the whole process. the preparation, the practice, I love the learning curve , the chellenge. the improvements I gain from it mentaly and physically, the camping, the camp cooking, the campfire, a few beers, comradeship, sleeping in 10 degrees below, I love the bush and watching the native animals, I enjoy the teaching and the solitude, self dependance and I love the peace. I love stalking my prey and the satisfaction of a clean kill. I love eating my catch. i love it when others enjoy my catch...I love the fact that most of my meat does not have to edure the horrific slaughterhouse prodedure. I love it that farmers appreciate what I do...

Yes I love hunting...

I think that most people on this forum can relate to the love of a hobby... however the pro-hunting lobby seems to ignore the fact that hunting in NP's is deeply unpopular with the majority of National Park users as they feel it is someone else's hobby being forced upon them as the result of a rather slimy political deal. Trying to justify it after the fact with (debatable) conservation ideals possibly makes it worse as you are attempting to argue that you know better than the existing users who hold these places very dear. That is a tough place to argue from.

If the hunters had proactively built a solid, evidence based argument for the benefits of hunting in National Parks, addressed issues relating to safety and implemented a serious testing & licencing process. Then convinced the majority of the public that it would be a worthy contribution to our wild places and run a campaign to have the law changed with the broad support of general public.... the situation might be very different.

Many bushwalkers are not opposed to hunting per se, but certainly are opposed to having it forced on them in places they love by dodgy political deals. If you truly believe that there is a case for hunting in NP's, have the Shooters & Fishers party cancel their deal with the government & have them build majority public support for the proposal based on its merits.

[Nuts]

What relevance Tony?.. that hollow points make a mess?

Juxtaposer, Marie certainly was a progressive lady for her times. Perhaps it needs revisiting, not just for conservation purposes (and not just in NSW).. but it's not really useful to the topic other than food for thought in that part of the debate that seems to diverge into categorising hunters as lesser beings.

[maddog]

... that part of the debate that seems to diverge into categorising hunters as lesser beings.

This seems to be your main concern Nuts, but I'm afraid I missed that part to which you refer. Seems to me they have been treated very well, much better than a bushwalker might expect on a hunting site.

[Nuts]

If that was the case i'd likely be the one trying to convince the 'redneck element' that not all bushwalkers were greenies.. but no, while I think that could actually be the only positive outcome (given that I think the current proposal is/was doomed), I do have more concerns as your review of the topic should show.

[wearthefoxhat]

" Many bushwalkers are not opposed to hunting per se, but certainly are opposed to having it forced on them in places they love by dodgy political deals."

fair commtent Turfa. I think your post is the best I have read yet because you have gone to the heart of the issue. Rest assured if the shoe was on the other foot the hunting communitywould also react the same way.
I certainly hope that hikers and hunters can cohabitate with no animosity and above all safely. The Game council has an excellent safety record so far as does Alpine park for 40 years. I expect this to continue. All game council hunters must wear a blaze orange item of clothing by law for safety reasons. Perhaps those that are genuinly worried about there safety could do the same . Just an idea.
All the best
cheers

[Turfa]

Thank you.. but unfortunately the involvement of the NSW Game Council gives me very little confidence that this process will be well managed or safe. I sit on the committee of a AHO & I am appalled that the issuing of a Game Council 'R' licence requires nothing more than a simple, open book written test. No hands -on test of marksmanship (necessary for humane kills) or safe firearms handling. As has been pointed out in the media recently, it is actually possible to obtain an R licence & therefore be permitted to shoot in NP's without ever having fired a rifle before. That is not a process that generates confidence in the skills of those being allowed to take weapons into NP's.

here is a post from a hunting forum that is a good illustration of the value of an R licence (posted in January 2013)

"just done the r licence thing, was easy as answering 20 questions that are answer a b c or d
and if you get one wrong they will give you another chance to get the answer from the book lol its open book then answer 10 others on game thats the test 20 min max i just walk in to ask what i had to do to get the r and walked out with it".

You are obviously a knowledgeable & persuasive person. Perhaps you could put those skills to good use & work on reform of the Game Council & the licencing process.

[colinm]

I certainly hope that hikers and hunters can cohabitate with no animosity and above all safely.

The only hunters I've ever interacted with in the wild were at Pol Blue campsite, where I cowered in my tent as they screamed around in a ute playing pig noises late into the night, hunting illegally.

Soon it'll be legal, and I'm *sure* they'll be far more safe and considerate then.

Fact is, no matter how good the 'average' hunter is, we'll be placed at greater risk when the idiots among them get a couple of stubbies under the belt. Even the above average hunters place us at risk, and that increased risk we suffer is for the purely selfish reasons of the hunters.

All game council hunters must wear a blaze orange item of clothing by law for safety reasons. Perhaps those that are genuinly worried about there safety could do the same.

Or buy a gun?

[maddog]

NSW should sack Game Council head: Greens

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs. ... t&src=hp25

[wearthefoxhat]

Turfa,,,Yes the training process needs an overhaul IMO. Although we teach and test for proficiency and ethical killing I understand not every club does this. There should be an across the board mandatory training package IMO.

Just been looking over the Game Council's latest public benefit/cost analysis which is interesting and encouraging
as it is 1.98 with projections improving over the next couple of years.

http://www.gamecouncil.nsw.gov.au/docs/ ... ssment.pdf

If the kill rate doubles through increased membership and access to NP's then the economy of scale really kicks in...

[wearthefoxhat]

Colin said...."The only hunters I've ever interacted with in the wild were at Pol Blue campsite, where I cowered in my tent as they screamed around in a ute playing pig noises late into the night, hunting illegally."

These are what you call poachers...I hope you reported this incident to the police with car ID?
Game council hunters are encouraged to report all illegal activity,,
Please don't expect hunters will do the same... Just as some hikers drop rubbish get drunk and loud I expect the majority don't!

This does raise an interesting point actually. Since a local state forest was opened to us the number of pot growers has gone to virtually zero. My local copper mate said they haven't pulled any out of there for some time and according to the locals they never see these blokes heading into the bush anymore to tend their plots...There is plenty of old evidence still in there also one local claims the dumping of rubbish has reduced although I am not sure about this as it is still disgusting in places. Would love to catch one of these mongrels in the act...

[maddog]

If the kill rate doubles through increased membership and access to NP's then the economy of scale really kicks in...

G'day Fox-hat,

The cost of this scheme to the taxpayer has ballooned to 21.5 million dollars.

Cheers

[wearthefoxhat]

If the kill rate doubles through increased membership and access to NP's then the economy of scale really kicks in...

G'day Fox-hat,

The cost of this scheme to the taxpayer has ballooned to 21.5 million dollars.

Cheers

Unfortunately this blowout looks to be National Parks induced..This never happened with State Forests to the best of my knowledge.
NP's will do everything they possibly can to stop this process.

[wearthefoxhat]

Case Study: Deer Management Program for Royal National Park
The New South Wales National Parks and Wildlife Service administers a Deer
Management Plan for the Royal National Park (RNP). A number of research programs
over the past 10 years have indicated that large numbers of deer are impacting on
vegetation within the RNP. The Management Plan aims to reduce deer numbers and
improve community understanding of the impacts of deer.
The Annual Report for the Management Plan indicates in 2008-09, operational
expenditure on deer management shooting program was $25,000. The figure excludes
the salary cost of NPWS staff and Deer Working group members.
The Annual Report indicates the program costing $25,000 in 2008-09 resulted in 81
animals removed, equating to a cost per animal of $308. In 2003, this cost was $490 per
animal and, in 2004, $478 per animal. These costs significantly exceed the costs
associated with community-based plans facilitated by the Game Council and the use of
Volunteer Conservation Hunters. Using Volunteer Conservation Hunters removes the
requirement to pay salaries to night-time shooters and also provides highly skilled and
ethical hunters. In the period 2004-2011 licensed conservation hunters have taken over
2000 rusa deer in peri-urban environments in the Illawarra area at a cost of less than $1
per deer when salaries are also excluded.

http://www.gamecouncil.nsw.gov.au/docs/ ... ssment.pdf

[The Perambulator]

" Since a local state forest was opened to us the number of pot growers has gone to virtually zero. My local copper mate said they haven't pulled any out of there for some time and according to the locals they never see these blokes heading into the bush anymore to tend their plots...There is plenty of old evidence still in there also one local claims the dumping of rubbish has reduced although I am not sure about this as it is still disgusting in places. Would love to catch one of these mongrels in the act..".[/quote]

This statement provides the evidence, people are to concerned for their welfare to visit the local state forest; is it because of the fear of being shot or that the hunters will take the law into their own hands?

[wearthefoxhat]

Some more interesting tit bits....

Conservation hunters removed approximately 15,900 game and feral animals from public
land during the 12 months to 30 April 2011. This represented a 13.6% increase from
2009-10 and reflects the increase in the number of R licence holders. Based on the
results of the 2011 Game Council Licence Holder Survey extrapolated for the entire
licensed hunter population, it is estimated licensed hunters took 794,600 game and feral
animals on public and private land during the 12 months to 30 April 2011, contributing
significantly to the management of these game and feral animal populations in key target
areas (see Table 3.4). This represented significant growth of almost 30% from 2009-10
and reflects the continued positive work of the conservation hunters in recent years.

My comment
This extrapolates out to around $3 per animal removed. Extreemly good value for money when you consider the cost of a pro shooter culling deer in the RNP costs up to $478 an animal... I think I should become a pro shooter lol..

[wearthefoxhat]

" Since a local state forest was opened to us the number of pot growers has gone to virtually zero. My local copper mate said they haven't pulled any out of there for some time and according to the locals they never see these blokes heading into the bush anymore to tend their plots...There is plenty of old evidence still in there also one local claims the dumping of rubbish has reduced although I am not sure about this as it is still disgusting in places. Would love to catch one of these mongrels in the act..".

This statement provides the evidence, people are to concerned for their welfare to visit the local state forest; is it because of the fear of being shot or that the hunters will take the law into their own hands?[/quote]



And that is the type of unintelligent misinformed hysteria that is spruiked by people with no idea...
Are you suggesting a hunter will shoot a pot grower?? ....because that is what happens all the time doesn't it?

OMG you have dragged the conversation down to a whole new level

[maddog]

Unfortunately this blowout looks to be National Parks induced..This never happened with State Forests to the best of my knowledge.
NP's will do everything they possibly can to stop this process.

The costs associated with having recreational hunters in National Parks were always going to be much greater than the cost of the program in State Forests, this is not the fault of the NPWS, but a consequence of expanding the Game Council's recreational hunting program into National Parks.

The assumptions underlying the 'Public Benefit Analysis' conducted on behalf of the Game Council also appear to be questionable. For example, on page 28, it is stated that:

The Government will not be required to fund the Game Council, saving approximately $3m per annum in funding from consolidated revenue...

While the likelihood of this was assessed by the Game Councils Cost Benefit Assessment as 'almost certain', what is actually certain is that the expansion of recreational hunting has now increased the cost to the taxpayer to at least $21.5M.

How could the Game Council be so wrong? Incompetence?

http://www.gamecouncil.nsw.gov.au/docs/ ... ssment.pdf

Cheers

[wearthefoxhat]

$19 million to implement this looks to me the NP.s are fleecing this for all it is worth,
Looks to be a reflection or continuation of the frustration State Forests have dealing with the NP's.

I would love to see the break down on the allocation of funds for this.

where did the game council get it wrong exactly?

[Tony]

What relevance Tony?.. that hollow points make a mess?

Hi Nuts,

You seem to be obsessed with trying to discredit the relevance of my posts in this thread.

Just to put some relevance on your post and views could you tell me how often will you be walking in the NSW National Parks where hunting hunting will be allowed.

Tony

[wearthefoxhat]

Unfortunately this blowout looks to be National Parks induced..This never happened with State Forests to the best of my knowledge.
NP's will do everything they possibly can to stop this process.

The costs associated with having recreational hunters in National Parks were always going to be much greater than the cost of the program in State Forests, this is not the fault of the NPWS, but a consequence of expanding the Game Council's recreational hunting program into National Parks.


Why should the costs be higher??

[Turfa]

....The Annual Report indicates the program costing $25,000 in 2008-09 resulted in 81
animals removed, equating to a cost per animal of $308. In 2003, this cost was $490 per
animal and, in 2004, $478 per animal. These costs significantly exceed the costs
associated with community-based plans facilitated by the Game Council and the use of
Volunteer Conservation Hunters. Using Volunteer Conservation Hunters removes the
requirement to pay salaries to night-time shooters and also provides highly skilled and
ethical hunters. In the period 2004-2011 licensed conservation hunters have taken over
2000 rusa deer in peri-urban environments in the Illawarra area at a cost of less than $1
per deer when salaries are also excluded.

http://www.gamecouncil.nsw.gov.au/docs/ ... ssment.pdf

Unfortunately you are still failing to understand that the general public does not see hunters as a group as "highly skilled" as per my previous comments regarding the lax requirements for obtaining an R licence.

You are an experienced bowhunter & have the skills & knowledge to hunt ethically & safely. However, you will know from your experiences with your 3D archery club, that many hunters do not have that same level of skill, yet they can easily obtain an R licence. With a bow this is not so big a problem due to the short effective range, however an unskilled hunter with a rifle is a different matter. This is what scares people & drives many of the objections.

You will continue to have objections to hunting in NP's while the system gives a licence to any moron who can answer some multiple choice questions in an open book test. That is merely paying lip service to the concept of ensuring acceptable standards, and even many hunters acknowledge this.

You would be better served convincing the Game Council to change their "the more hunters the better" attitude & work to put in place a system that actually ensures R licenced hunters are highly skilled. Your arguments may then have more credibility with the people your are trying to convince.

[wearthefoxhat]

"Unfortunately you are still failing to understand that the general public does not see hunters as a group as "highly skilled" as per my previous comments regarding the lax requirements for obtaining an R licence. "

You may have missed my previous post to turfa. I have already stated that the R license process needs a review/upgrade..

"many hunters do not have that same level of skill, yet they can easily obtain an R licence."

Not at our club but I can't speak for other clubs. Yours?

"You will continue to have objections to hunting in NP's while the system gives a licence to any moron who can answer some multiple choice questions in an open book test. That is merely paying lip service to the concept of ensuring acceptable standards, and even many hunters acknowledge this."

I have attempted to show that the huge concern for hiker and NP worker safety is over done and In my opinion propaganda..
I think I have given good examples to back this.

These " morons" you mention hold a gun license by the way. They have been assesed by suitably trained people and vetted by the police and deemed a competent person or not competent sometimes. This is not the domain of the Game Council.

All clubs should test for proficiency , unfortunately they don't...

This was my comment to turfa previously...

"Turfa,,,Yes the training process needs an overhaul IMO. Although we teach and test for proficiency and ethical killing I understand not every club does this. There should be an across the board mandatory training package IMO."

cheers

[colinm]

Colin said...."The only hunters I've ever interacted with in the wild were at Pol Blue campsite, where I cowered in my tent as they screamed around in a ute playing pig noises late into the night, hunting illegally."
These are what you call poachers...I hope you reported this incident to the police with car ID?

A poacher is an illegal hunter, still a hunter. The same people doing the same thing will now be legally hunting. They will still be hunting. They will still be hunters.

So if I understand your broader point, it's that by giving them licenses I would no longer call them poachers, and they can continue to put everyone around them at risk, but now legally, and I'm supposed to be OK with that.

Please don't expect hunters will do the same.

A few bad apples? So I should feel better if someone I know is shot by a badly-behaved hunter? Actually, no, I feel wronged because even badly-behaved hunters will now be allowed to do their thing with guns in National Parks.

Similarly, the majority of drivers don't drive dangerously, but the ones who do cause damage. Your argument is akin to saying that because only a minority of drivers cause damage, we should allow 4WD owners to drive off-road across suburban parks. I would prefer there to be areas where cars can't drive, and areas where guns can't shoot.

Any hunting in national parks increases the risk to everyone using those parks (whether bushwalking or not) and that increased risk brings benefits to only a tiny minority of the population in the case of recreational hunting, but we should suck it up because ... your argument gets very unclear at that point.

[Tony]

Hi wearthefoxhat,

A question for you, if I am bushwalking in one of the NSW National Parks where there will be hunting allowed and I hear gun shots near by, how do I know if that hunter near me is or is not shooting to the full hunting safety rules.

Tony

[wearthefoxhat]

Colin

As you have clearly shown poachers are already hunting in NP's illegally . This will continue no matter what.
Legitimate hunters hate these criminals as much as you do and legitimate hunters are actively involved helping police catch them...

I am interested ???What did you do? Did you call the police? did you take details?. I am interested to know what you did about this being it is your social responsibility after all. How many people did these poachers hurt or kill on this particular night of terror? did they shoot anyone?

"I feel wronged because even badly-behaved hunters will now be allowed to do their thing with guns in National Parks."

Badly behaved hunters risk prosecution, loss of gun and licence, loss of vehicle and any other equipment they have with them, they lose these things before they go to court and if they get convicted they may lose it all for good and carry a conviction for life..

As for the rest of your post I suggest you go over my previous posts as it is covering old ground and I can't be bothered repeating my self.

[wearthefoxhat]

Hi wearthefoxhat,

A question for you, if I am bushwalking in one of the NSW National Parks where there will be hunting allowed and I hear gun shots near by, how do I know if that hunter near me is or is not shooting to the full hunting safety rules.

Tony

Hi Tony,

You trust him/her the same way you trust an on comming vehicle travelling towards you at 100 ks an hour. you trust that they know what they are doing like we all do.

40,000 deer were killed in the Alpine Park Vic last year. That means at least 40,000 shots were taken. This park has been hunted for 40 odd years with no serious accident and now minimal supervision..
If I was worried about being injured I would rather go hiking in the APV than actually drive there.

[wearthefoxhat]

I forgot to add that 40,000 deer were taken by Recreational hunters.

[Tony]

Hi Tony,

You trust him/her the same way you trust an on comming vehicle travelling towards you at 100 ks an hour. you trust that they know what they are doing like we all do.

Hi wearthefoxhat,

So I have no way of knowing if I am going to be safe in the vicinity of the hunter.

And hunting firearm injuries and deaths are legitimate because we could be in a car accident.

Tony