Recreation Deer Hunting - Parks Victoria

Most illegal spotlighting activity occurs from vehicles on public roads or thoroughfares, compounding the potential for firearm-relatedincidents with other visitors. Illegal use of spotlights may reduce recreational hunting opportunities for law-abiding hunters. Illegalhunting in non deer hunting areas or hunting during the closed season in deer hunting areas may compound the potential for firearmrelatedincidents with other visitors.Illegal use of scent trailing hounds to hunt deer in the parks may disturb other visitors, impact on wildlife and may reduce recreationalhunting opportunities for law-abiding hunters. Forced entry through locked gates to gain illegal access to seasonally closed tracks duringthe wetter months results in damage to assets (e.g. gates, tracks, drains).Targeted enforcement operations through cooperative efforts of Police, Wildlife Officers and Rangers have a higher likelihood ofprosecution when compared to ad hoc patrolling of hunting areas. Observations of Illegal activity are encouraged to be reported to theDSE phone number. This reporting data can help plan enforcement operations in the Parks.DirectionsEncourage hunter education and provide visitor information promoting deer hunting ethics, regulations and safety through prominentlydisplayed park signage for hunters and other visitors. Include contact information to encourage hunters and other visitors to report illegalhunting. Review reported instances of illegal hunting and undertake enforcement in cooperation with Police, Wildlife Officers andRangers.Discussion Points• Many hunters see a need to increase hunting access to public land. Provisions under current legislation may allow for deer huntingareas within the Alpine National Park to be extended. Should the area available for deer hunting in the Alpine National Park bereviewed?• Should the hunting of other species of deer (e.g. Fallow Deer) be allowed in areas of the Parks where the hunting of Sambar isallowed?• Some visitors (including hunters) perceive illegal and anti-social behavior associated with deer hunting as a significant issue whichcan affect their safety, enjoyment and the environment of the parks. In what ways can Parks Victoria and hunters improve theseissues and perceptions?• Many visitors may not be aware that hunting is a permitted activity in many areas of these parks or may perceive deer hunting and thepresence of firearms as conflicting with their experience the parks. In what ways can Parks Victoria and hunters improve these issuesand perceptions?• Adaptive management and research may include monitoring populations, assessing environmental impacts and undertakingauthorised deer control in priority locations as part of part of coordinated, targeted, ecological management programs. (See IntroducedSpecies Discussion Paper). Should partnerships with hunting organisations such as the ADA and SSAA be encouraged to assistParks Victoria to preserve biodiversity?Further Reading• Memorandum of Cooperation between the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia (Victoria) and Parks Victoria.• Memorandum of Cooperation between the Australian Deer Association (Victoria) and Parks Victoria, 1 July 2004.• Errol Mason, 2006, Secrets of the Sambar Volumes 1, Biology, Ecology, Behaviour and Hunting Strategies, Shikari Press.• Errol Mason, 2008, Secrets of the Sambar Volumes 2, Biology, Ecology, Behaviour and Hunting Strategies, Shikari Press.• Max Downes, 1982 Sambar in Victoria (Revised Edition). The Forest Deer Project 1982, Australian Deer Research Foundation.• Arthur Bentley, 1967, An Introduction to the Deer of Australia, Australian Deer Research Foundation.4 Recreation Deer Hunting —

An estimate of the number of sambar shot is provided by the Department of Sustainability and Environment (2006/07 VictorianHunter Mail Survey). This document estimate the number of sambar shot at more than 28,000, not including those shot illegally.Now this is a mail survey, and one could imagine that the hunters that shoot a deer are more likely to return the survey. In NewZealand, Fraser (Science for Conservation 140 DoC?. NZ. 2000) estimates that 50,000 deer hunters shoot about 54,000 deer. InVictoria 2007 there were about 15,000 deer hunters, all of the active deer hunters would hunt sambar even if they also hunt otherspecies. So assuming the average ability of Victorian deer hunters is similar to New Zealand deer hunters, a conservative estimateof the number of deer shot would be greater than 15,000, or at least half the mail survey figure. Note, that this does not include deershot under cull permits and presumably does not include those shot illegally. In 2004 Moriarty (Wildlife Res. 31: 291) estimated thesambar population in Victoria at 70,000. This implies that the number of sambar shot by recreational hunters is close to, or in manyareas exceeds, the replacement rate. Now, due to the arbitrary nature of land classification in Victoria a substantial proportion of thesambar range is not open to hunting. This means that in some areas it is likely that the sambar population is only being maintainedby dispersal from areas where hunting is prohibited.The number of sambar shot by recreational hunters is not small and taking all evidence into consideration it is likely that sambarmortality due to hunting is a very significant factor limiting population growth.It is worth pointing out that in all countries where deer are endemic, population management is achieved through recreationalhunting. Even in publications pointing out that recreational hunting may need to be augmented on occasion to achieve managementgoals. For example Brown et al state: "Through the foreseeable future, hunting will remain a primary mechanism to controlwhitetailed deer populations at broad scales. No socially acceptable alternatives currently exist" Wildlife Society Bulletin 28:797.This can readily seen by considering the likely cost of instituting a government culling program in Victoria. There are few options forbroad scale management, poisoning or shooting. A simple consideration of the relative toxicity of 1080 (sodium monofluoroacetate)in deer vs. native mammals shows that airdrops of 1080 could not be countenanced. The LD50 of 1080 in deer and other ruminantsis about 0.5mg/kg body weight. This is similar to the sensitivity of wallabies and possums. So a dose sufficient to kill a 300kgsambar is certain to be lethal for all native herbivores. Shooting from helicopters is very effective way of controlling feral goats, butis unlikely to be successful in regulating sambar populations due to the propensity of these animals to seek out dense vegetationduring daylight hours. Culling, predominately by helicopter, reduced red deer populations in New Zealand by about 75%. However,even after culling the red deer population density in New Zealand is still probably higher than the sambar population density in mostparts of the Victorian range is now. The third option would be for the government to employ ground cullers. This approach was adismal failure in New Zealand (Caughley, The Deer Wars 1983) and is unlikely to fair better in Victoria simply because of the cost ofemploying sufficient operators for broad scale management. The Tasmanian fox task force recently obtained funding of $5.6million/year. This allows the employment of 34 field officers. Assuming it would be possible to obtain a similar level of funding tosuppress deer numbers through out the Alpine National Park this number of field officers would be insufficient to have any impacton deer population density.These considerations show that recreational hunting is really the only resource available for cost effective deer management on alarge scale. Therefore, it is important that policies are developed to increase the effectiveness of deer hunting as a managementtool.-- Tim Thomas - 15 Oct 2009Excellent comments Tim. Thanks for adding some scientific facts to the debate on deer management.-- Steve Garlick - 19 Oct 2009I am a semi-regular visitor to the ANP. I use the park for fly-fishing fro trout and hunting of Sambar Deer.I am an avid hunter and know of many others who, like me hunt the alpine regions. All of those that I know are responsible peoplewho love the bush. There are certainly the above mentioned management benefits of recreational hunting, however not being anexpert or having studied in this area I can really only contribute my belief that we have a right to continue pursuing our chosenrecreation within the parks.The continued access to the parks for deer hunting is of paramount importance.-- Eamon Leahy - 18 Oct 2009Deer Hunting Discussion Paper & QDMHi Steve,The discussion paper section on QDM (below) which was contibuted by you on 5th Oct 2009 has been relocated here to thediscussion page. The concept of QDM as part of formal park management is not consistent with the management aims under theNational Parks Act (and this is reflected in PV Policy). As such it has been removed from the discussion paper, however, yourinformative contribution has been reproduced below in its entirety.I recognise that the QDM concept is (in part) a response to addressing imballences in deer populations generated by the selectivehunting of mature stags in preference to other classes of deer? Certainly many of the methodologies you describe to address thiscan still be undertaken by hunters on a voluntary basis or co-ordinated by hunting organisations. I note the ADA already promotesthe hunting of hinds on a voluntary basis.Happy to discuss further.Discussion PaperGreater Alpine National Parks9

Regards,-- James Hackel - Parks Victoria - 19 Oct 2009QUALITY DEER MANAGEMENT (QDM) - ACTIVE DEER MANAGEMENT BY HUNTERSQuality Deer Management (QDM) is a management philosophy/practice that unites landowners, hunters, and land managers in acommon goal of producing biologically and socially balanced deer herds within existing environmental, social, and legal constraints.This approach typically involves the protection of young bucks (yearlings and some 2.5 year-olds) combined with an adequateharvest of female deer to maintain a healthy population in balance with existing habitat conditions and landowner desires. This levelof deer management involves the production of quality deer (stags, hinds and calves), quality habitat, quality hunting experiences,and, most importantly, quality hunters.A successful QDM program requires an increased knowledge of deer biology and active participation in management. This level ofinvolvement extends the role of the hunter from mere consumer to manager. The progression from education to understanding, andfinally, to respect; bestows an ethical obligation upon the hunter to practice sound deer management. Consequently, to anincreasing number of landowners and hunters, QDM is a desirable management methodology to ensure balance of the deer herd inline with the land managers and hunters expectations.There is little in the way of practiced or promoted management methodology for sambar in Victoria which results in the harvest ofany legal stag (too many of poor trophy quality) and few, if any, hinds. However in Tasmania, South Australia and on Sunday Islandthe concepts of QDM have been practiced with great success seeing overall deer numbers reduced through the sustained taking ofhinds/does and trophy stags/bucks having increased antler size.QDM guidelines are formulated according to land manager's objectives, goals, and limitations. Participating hunters enjoy both thetangible and intangible benefits of this approach. Pleasure can be derived from each hunting experience, regardless if a shot isfired. What is important is the chance to interact with a well-managed deer herd that is in balance with its habitat. A side benefit isthe knowledge that mature stags are present in the herd - something lacking on many areas under traditional deer management.When a quality stag is taken on a QDM area, the pride can be shared by all hunters because it was they who produced it byallowing it to reach the older age classes which are necessary for large bodies and antlers.Quality Deer Management is a versatile set of tools, large and small, that allow all of us to practice it in a variety of habitats,climates and regulatory settings.For more information google www.qdma.com or follow this link to the Quality Deer Management Association-- Steve Garlick - 05 Oct 2009Extra enforcement and ranger/police presence is required during times of high visitiation such as long weekends and seasonalholidays to ensure compliance with all of the Park values ie. keeping campsites clean, firearms stored correctly in campsites,vehicles/motorbikes used on track and no stupid stuff like "circle work" etc.-- Steve Garlick - 11 Oct 2009James,As you would be aware there is no management of the deer herd in any parks under this plan at present unless it is undertaken byhunters on a voluntary basis - therein we can say there is no management.I understand that QDM could be construed as inconsistent with the "preserve and protect the natural condition of the parks, andtheir natural, cultural and other features" however there are limited areas in the parks that fit this bill regardless of the occurrance ofdeer. There are foxes, hybrid wild dogs (not pure dingos), rabbits, trout, not to mention blackberry, English Broom and a multitudeof other floral pests - some of the floral pests are real pests in terms of their impact on natural values. I haven't even mentioned theimpact of fire over the past 10 years!QDM has delivered results in Tasmania in terms of reducing the overall deer herd and its impact of the livelihood of farmers whilestill providing an adequate and satisfactory hunting experience for hunters. Being a Taswegian I have practical experience in QDMand the positive impact it has had on the properties I hunt on. Of course in Tassie there is a much better understanding of the deerherd as fallow live on farm fringe country, are easily observable because of where they live and how they congregate in herds andhave very predictable behaviour when not under excessive pressure. Like any Adaptive Management Program there was a study ofthe Tasmanian fallow herd struture before QDM was promoted and applied and study undertaken throughout the life of the projectand is being continued by hunters without ongoing government support.ADA and hunters are not unsympathetic to the need to manage the deer. There are other tools and hunting methods that can beapplied as an ongoing management effort for the deer of which QDM and Adaptive Management are but 2 tools in the toolbox.-- Steve Garlick - 19 Oct 2009Hi, I just downloaded a paper I'll be presenting at the Australasian Wildlife Management Conference in Napier NZ this December onPrograms conducted under the ADA - PV MoC. The paper showcases what engaged volunteers can do with a supportivegovernment agency.-- Bob Gough - 19 Oct 200910 Recreation Deer Hunting —

I just had a long phone conversation with deer hunting author Ken Pearce. Amoung many things, we discussed the proliferation ofdeer populations and the effect non-deerhunting areas and stalking only areas may have had on deer populations in various areas.We also discussed examples where deer management has been applied overseas and interstate. Ken is developing a writtensubmission which we will be able reproduce on the website.I found the attached paper from Bog Gough very informative, particularly in regard to the co-operative efforts of PV and the ADA toundertake the practical elements of deer managment.-- James Hackel - Parks Victoria - 20 Oct 2009Australian Alps National Parks Deer Management Workshop Proceedings (2007)The Australian Alps Liaison Committee has published a report of the proceedings of a worksop held in 2007 titled: Deer, BestPractice Management in the Australian Alps National Parks. The report is attached below as "Part 1" and "Part 2".-- James Hackel - Parks Victoria - 20 Oct 2009Submission by Ken PearceKen has kindly given us permission to post his submission via email on the website:Alpine Planning Team, Parks Victoria,Level 10, 535 Bourke Street,Melbourne 3000Comments and thoughts on deer hunting within and outside the Alpine National Park system in regard to the Parks Victoria reviewof the current management plan.To the deer hunter, sambar are the numenon....the inner meaning of the mountains. Their presence or absence does not affect theoutward appearance of the mountain country but it does mightily affect our reaction towards it. Without tracks on the trail and thepotential presence of sambar at each new dip and bend of the hillside, the forest is an empty shell, a spiritual vacuum.Max Downes.It is twenty eight years since the historic National Parks (Amendment) Act of May, 1981provided for deer hunting by stalking in the Wonnangatta-Moroka National Park and the Eildon State Park.At that time, with good intentions, despite knowing a fair bit about hunting sambar, Victoria's deer hunters had little knowledge aboutsambar biology and the then land managers had even less. Most hunters who preferred to hunt sambar deer by ‘stalking' obviouslywell pleased by that decision.However, due to annual, winter/spring seasonal gate and track closures introduced into Victoria's eastern forests in the 1970s,hunters would still have to back pack into well known sambar hunting areas (such as the increasingly popular Wonnangatta Valley),on foot or on horseback between mid June and the ‘Cup Day' weekend at the start of November. It was obvious, right from the start,with the size and weight of an adult sambar deer, reality would dictate that almost 100% of hunters who undertake the effort to packinto areas ‘behind the gates', would target stags only.Even then, back in 1981, logic also dictated that the seasonal mid June to end of October track closures that deny public vehicleaccess to the Alpine National Park complex, most State Parks, State forests and crown land, and which have now been in effect formore than THIRTY YEARS, would over time, result in a noticeable increase in the overall sambar population in Victoria..The 4 month gate closure ‘season', allied to the two month closed hunting period between mid-December and mid-February within the Alpine National Park where hunting is permitted by stalking, effectively granted sambar hinds over six months protectionfrom deer hunters and an unmolested calf rearing period.Is it any wonder sambar numbers have increased in the vastness of the Alpine National Park system where seasonal hunting islegal ?Equally, what about those areas within the Alpine Park system where deer hunting is NOT permitted ? The entire sambarpopulation in those non hunting areas have been free to expand, prosper and extend their range accordingly !Unfortunately, back in the early eighties, deer hunters and land managers did not have the benefit of the knowledge about sambarthat has emerged from 23 years of daily observations from the Bunyip Sambar Project enclosure established by the Australian DeerAssociation at Tonimbuk in 1986.Today, in 2009, when it comes to practical, credible public knowledge of sambar deer in Australia, let alone Victoria, all roads leadto Tonimbuk where we have the luxury and benefit of those 23 years of observations of a captive group of sambar deer, where theenclosure's caretaker, long time sambar hunter, Mike Harrison, is in the unique position of being THE authority on sambar deer inAustralia due to his observations, filming and videoing over that period.Clearly, the decisions made in the past about seasonal hunting of sambar deer in the Alpine park system are obsolete and well outof dateWe now know the reality of effectively allowing almost complete protection for sambar hinds and unmolested calf drops in allforested areas where seasonal gate closures apply.The Bunyip Project has confirmed that the major portion of the annual sambar calf drop covers the months of April, March and Junewhile the major conception dates for the hinds coincides with middle of the 4 month gate closure period...August ! The increased sambar population realities and knowledge gained from the Bunyip Sambar enclosure have been reinforced by thevirtual explosion of high quality video camera work by many deer hunters over the last decade where the longest and continuing dryspell since European settlement in Australia, has seen the tree canopy thin out over much of eastern Victoria, allowing increasedDiscussion PaperGreater Alpine National Parks11

video footage observation of sambar in much of the Alpine Park vastness to a degree undreamt of by hunters prior to 2000.To date, there have been no formal professional studies conducted over a number of years by trained wildlife biologists/scientistsetc, to determine the ecology and effect of the sambar deer in Victoria's forests or Alpine country, to identify IF there is an ecologicalproblem or not with sambar.Only two studies in the USA by William Richardson (1972) in Texas and the three year study of the St. Vincent Island NationalWildlife Refuge sambar in Florida (1983-86), have been undertaken outside the sambar's native Sri Lankan/Indian range. Embryostudies sponsored by Parks Victoria in our water catchment areas began their lives in the Bunyip Sambar Project.Could it be that so far, the vastness of the Alpine National Park system has been able to absorb the thirty plus years of sambarpopulation increase the closed gate season causes, aided by the reluctance of deer hunters to harvest hinds due to the physicallimitations involved of recovering carcasses with no legal vehicle access ?Many smaller in area State forest and crown land areas subject to seasonal gate closures sees hunters able to harvest hinds thatare within reasonable recovery distances to camps/vehicles outside the gates as opposed to many kilometers of long uphill/downhillback packing deep into mountainous high country alpine deer hunting destinations.State forest and crown lands areas that are open to all year round vehicle access and deer hunting, show the resident sambarpopulations in these areas spread thinly through the forest and no visible signs of any environmental concerns. As some examples:Compare the visible sambar deer signposting within the no-hunting Samaria State Park and any adjoining areas of the ToombullupState forest during the cooler months.Compare the mid winter deer sign in the Yarra Ranges National Park and Upper Yarra dam catchment (prior to the recent culling) tothat of the well hunted Big River State Forest as the classical example where no hunting has been permitted since the dam wasconstructed to that of the Big River catchment which has been increasingly hunted heavily for decades.The Alpine Planning Team, Parks Victoria, has an extremely complex task to perform to cater for the future management of theAlpine National Park system.The major priorities for the future management of sambar deer are:1/ In the immediate short term, organize and initiate supervised, controlled vehicle access for accredited, volunteer recreationalhunters during the closed gate season with the express purpose of taking only and as many hinds as possible during eachoperation, exactly the same as with the PV/ADA deer monitoring survey weekends, except on an expanded scale and thatharvesting hinds is strictly the purpose of the exercise.Minimum PV manpower, maximum, free voluntary public input.2/ Recognition that recreational deer hunting is now a major factor with 20,000 licensed deer hunters...double the number oflicensed deer hunters in 2000. Deer hunters have certainly reached or surpassed numerical parity with quite a few other recognizedrecreational pursuits within the Alpine Park. Deer hunters are one of the major public stakeholders regarding recreational usagewithin the Alpine park system. Properly managed, sambar deer are a valuable public recreational hunting resource in Victoria'seastern forested habitat.Possibly more deer hunters backpack into the Alpine wilderness than traditional bush-walkers during the closed gate season.3/ Recognition that in financially challenged times as well as in boom periods, given flexible planning and realistic access,recreational hunting of sambar deer is the only practical and humane management tool available to PV. Consideration for theadoption and development of an ‘Alpine Quality Deer Management' scheme, adapted from the highly successful property and forestbased Quality Deer Management programs that have proven themselves in the USA an here in South Australia and Tasmania, andcould be looked at as a possible future model where a partnership between Parks Victoria and recreational deer hunters canmanage sambar deer long term in the Alpine National Parks system.4/ Investigate the infinitely more enlightened way surplus culled whitetail deer carcasses are utilized in Pennsylvania (USA)compared to the repugnant burying of culled sambar carcasses resulting from recent culling in the Upper Yarra dam catchment.Ken Pearce.-- James Hackel - Parks Victoria - 26 Oct 2009Excellent submission Ken.-- Steve Garlick - 04 Nov 2009Submission by Don Mc MahonDon is a member of the North East Deer Stalkers Association, however these are Don's personal views. He has kindly given uspermission to post his submission via fax on the website:Deer hunter numbers have doubled in the past six years and now exceed 20000Huntable public land diminished over the same periodSambar Deer are Australias premier Game species. My brief comments are as followsWe need to maintain as a minimum, the current access to the existing huntable National ParksWe need to open additional Parks to hunting Deer by stalkingWe shut the gates for 6 months and allow the deer to breed unmolested during Winter/Spring12 Recreation Deer Hunting —

Some additional access during the cooler traditional hunting period would add to the overall harvest rate.Reducing Sambar Deer to pest status would lock hunters "the Governments cheapest management Tool," out of all Parks andleave the Deer without any predators.Not all of the 20 000 licenced Deer hunters are mebers of ADA or SSAA, perhaps Parks Victoria could expand the existingpartnerships to include other Deer Hunting organisations such as the North East Deer Stalkers Association Inc to add to the controlnumbers.An education program by Parks VIctoria to encourage hunters to harvest more hinds may be usefull in reducing overall numbersYours SincerlyDon Mc Mahan-- James Hackel - Parks Victoria - 08 Dec 2009Deer Hunting in National ParksAs a recent devotee of the sport of deer stalking I welcomed the chance to use our natural resources in the National and StateParks in Victoria and some of the State Parks in NSW under the auspices of Game Council NSW. I have found that while hunting inany of these parks that interaction with other park users has been negligible if at all. The fact is that deer hunters are likely to behunting in areas of the parks that other users rarely frequent. I have been studying as much as I can about the deer species I hunt,(Sambar and Fallow)and, as can be seen from the submissions above, that hunting on a regular and managed basis provides thebest control option available. I suggest that the season for hunting sambar in National Parks is increased to all year to fairly allocatethis national resource to one of the major users and that the areas available be increased as well.The accessibility of the National Parks could be improved with, perhaps, controlled access in certain areas over the winter monthsto certain major roads thereby increasing the hunting effect over a longer period and allowing more liklihood of harvesting forvenison as well as trophy animals.Hunters, in general, are conservationists and play an active role in the sustainable use of our natural resources. They are morelikely to have an afinity with the land and recognise the benefits of game management not only for the game species but for thenative flora and fauna as well. I recommend that hunting in victoria's parks is encouraged by the Department and areas andseasons be increased to realise the full benefits that can achieved for all.-- Trevor Dean - 11 Dec 2009Hunting in the Alpine NP is highly valued by most hunters and hunting groups, however there is a perception amoungst many thatthe areas of closure or restriction are somehwat random and the rationales for lines on maps are unclear. Why are some NP opento hunt and others not, there is no logic in this approach. Most can understand the summer closures in periods of higher utilisation,or in areas of high population density etc, but what separates one park from another for hunting access?Mike Harrison makes a very valid point regarding track closures, the full utilisation of the animals taken is often handicapped by theability to physically recover the meat. Track closures are made routinely between set dates, where it would be preferable that thedecision to close be based on condition of tracks, climate conditions and management reasons rather than a blanket closure. Manytracks have remained safely traversable in recent years of low rainfall yet gates are still closed.Legitimate hunters are also frustrated by the actions of rogue individuals/groups as has been publicised in the media in recentmonths, hunters pay for the privelege to hunt, yet they are being publicly called upon to help resource the evidence collection andprosecution of these rogues/poachers, there is a sense of frustration in the lack of resourcing in policing these crimes, which seemslargely due to the reliance of parks officers to have Victoria Police support to undertake detection and apprehension work.Legitimate hunters who have stepped forward to assist have been targetted in the past and there is little tangible protection seen asavailable to those who do step forward.Greg Benton - 11 Dec 2009Regarding the expansion of the land area and range of species to be hunted, I would ask "why not?" I cannot see a good reasonwhy these restrictions even exist in the first place.Recreational hunting on public land in Victoria has an excellent safety record, so this is not a reason to block further expansion.Hunters derive value from expanded hunting opportunities, and also provide ecosystem services and economic benefits. These arereasons to expand opportunties.Deer are not indigenous, so their preservation does not provide ecological value, and has the potential to do the opposite if notproperly managed. Wild deer populations are of value to hunters as a hunting resource, but only if hunting is permitted! Expandingopportunities to hunt fallow deer will reduce their environmental impact but would be unlikely to severely impact their viability as ahunting resource. Therefore, there are good reasons to allow it, and no good reasons not to allow it.The discussion paper only raises the topic of deer, but it seems timely to also consider other introduced species. Why is it that weare not allowed to destroy rabbits, foxes, feral cats and dogs and other exotic non-deer species in National Parks? Most of thesespecies do farm more ecological harm than deer, and also represent a threat to farming operations on adjacent land. Also, huntersderive value from hunting them. Again, there are good reaons to allow it, and no good reasons not to allow it.Discussion PaperGreater Alpine National Parks13

Regarding control programs, whilst I can see their potential, I am concerned that the associations with which the DSE will workcould potentially exploit their position to provide privileged access to prime hunting areas. This goes against the grain of the"essential democracy" of National Parks, championed last century by T. Roosevelt. Except where exceptional public safetyconsiderations apply, any land that can be hunted under specialist programmes should also be able to be hunted on anunrestricted, ad-hoc basis by any Game License holder.Furthermore, it is somewhat surprising to read that deer breeding is outstripping hunting pressure, given how many long hours ofstalking it takes me personally to locate a single deer in areas where I hunt. Deer "hot spots" are a closely guarded secret amongstdeer hunters. Hunters are only too keen to travel to areas of high deer densities and reduce their numbers, but only if they knowwhere to go. If an area is identified where deer populations are high and hunting pressure low, all that would be required to remedythis would be a little bit of publicity. The DSE could establish a website where localised deer overpopulations could be identified andrecreational hunters encouraged to focus on those areas. This would be a win-win situation, without the need for DSE collaborationwith potentially exclusive clubs.-- Russell Edwards - 12 Dec 2009Submission by Brian BoyleBrian is the Chief Executive Officer of Game Council NSW, however these are Brians's personal views. He has kindly given uspermission to post his submission via email on the website:Brian BoyleOrange NSW 280022/12/2009Dear James,I have been following the discussion on hunting in the Alpine National Park with interest and wish to contribute to the discussion onhunting in the Park.First up; I wish to declare that I am a keen deer hunter with a background of having formerly worked in National Parks andReserves in Victoria, Tasmania, New Zealand. I currently work for the Game Council of NSW in Orange, but still hunt in or near theAlpine National Park several times a year.I am submitting to the discussion as an individual, not on behalf of my employer. Any opinions or points expressed are mine and donot necessarily reflect Game Council or NSW government policyWith regards to hunting in National Parks, I believe hunting is a perfectly legitimate and healthy outdoor pursuit and cultural activityin Parks, Reserves State forests and Crown Land areas that makes a positive contribution to Victoria socially, economically andenvironmentally. The benefits of hunting far outweigh the costs and with the proper management and encouragement thiscontribution could be of even greater significance.Hunting has a proven track record of being a safe outdoor pursuit and should be considered and included in Park planning whetheras a response program to control unwanted or overabundant animals or as a healthy outdoor pursuit in its own right. I believehunting in the Alpine National Park should be expanded to include other species such as; rabbits, hares, foxes, goats and pigs aswell as any deer species encountered. Where necessary hunting should be incorporated in strategic integrated control ormanagement programs for game and feral animals.I suggest Parks Victoria consider incorporating the Ecological Deer Management (EDM) approach when planning game and feralanimal management programs within the Alpine National Park.The following is based upon a paper that Dr Andrew Moriarty submitted to the 2009 Australasian Wildlife Management SocietyConference in Napier, NZ;EDM is a new management system for wild deer - developed by Dr Andrew Moriarty (REACH Officer, Game Council NSW) - whichutilises game management and Quality Deer Management as its foundation, but also encompasses impact assessment as used ina traditional pest management system. This new concept allows wild deer harvest levels to be set by land holders and managers inan 'adaptive management' manner, from a 'sustainable harvest level' to a 'damage mitigation level ' - depending on the desiredenvironmental, agricultural and community objectives. EDM is most suited to private and public land where hunters can be utilisedto determine deer impacts, harvest deer and provide population statistics to the management process through hunter returns. Itcould be an ideal concept for community-based cooperative game and feral animal management programs in the Alpine NationalPark.BackgroundThe management of wild deer in Australia is a relatively new and evolving science. Few management approaches have beensuccessfully used on wild deer populations in Australia (Moriarty 2004) and deer (- including sambar and fallow deer in the AlpineN.P.) are expanding their distributions and populations continue to grow.Often deer are categorised as a resource and a pest by different stakeholders (see Nugent and Fraser 1993) - and the AlpineNational Park is no different in this respect14 Recreation Deer Hunting —

Developing targeted strategic management programs based on scientific data and recognising environmental, economic and socialimpacts of deer as well as their value as a hunting resource will be critical to the successful on-going management of deer in theAlpine National Park.To date management of wild deer in Australia has been random and uncoordinated and has consisted of attempts at using deertraps, localised programs incorporating ground shooting and sporadic uncoordinated and un-researched aerial shooting programs.This current situation is typical of the confused and uncoordinated efforts of private and public land managers and governmentauthorities with differing interests in monitoring, researching and managing wild deer populations throughout Australia.EDM develops strategies to reduce the environmental, economic and social impacts which deer may cause to natural areas,agricultural, pastoral and forestry production as well as social impacts. The strategies developed to achieve the desired outcomesshould be based on reliable scientific information. EDM therefore is the strategic application of adaptive management principles toachieve an acceptable level of environmental, economic and social impact by deer.EDM could provide a strategic framework for utilising informed, trained and responsible Conservation Hunters where and wheneverpossible to manage deer (and possibly other game and feral animals) in the Alpine National Park - thereby freeing up personneland financial resources of Parks Victoria and other Vic. government departments to focus efforts on other important or sensitiveareas.Objectives of EDMThe objectives of EDM are to:* Determine the population, distribution and population density of deer in defined areas* Determine the positive or negative, actual or potential impacts of deer in the defined area* Provide a management decision matrix and deer management guidelines and practices to achieve desired outcomes forenvironmentally, socially or economically sensitive areas within the Alpine National Park* Provide Parks Victoria with deer management principles, guidelines and practices to allow for sustainable deer managementwithin defined areas of the Park where deer do not have a negative environmental impact and have potential economic and socialbenefits to the communityImplementing EDM in the Alpine N.P.The first step in implementing EDM is to determine the distribution and population density of deer in the defined area and the actualimpacts (if any) of wild deer. Monitoring is a key process in this.MonitoringAn integral part of an EDM program in the Alpine N.P. would be the development and application of robust and consistentmonitoring programs to provide accountable and transparent reporting to Parks Victoria to underpin progressive improvements inthe performance of the EDM program.There are a number of variables in EDM programs which require monitoring:1. Monitoring the condition of natural assets (e.g.: ecosystems, communities, species and populations) and the deer (behaviour)that may affect these assets.2. Monitoring of the population, distribution and population density of deer,3. Monitoring the environmental, social and economic impacts of deer4. Monitoring outcomes and the efficiency of strategies implemented to manage the population of deer.In general, the monitoring is related to measuring changes in deer abundance, density and distribution, and any changes in impactsor the status of any affected assets.This information is used to ascertain whether the implemented EDM strategies and actions:* are effectively controlling the deer population at the desired levels,* are achieving the desired environmental, social and economic outcomes* assist in understanding how changes in deer abundance and density influence the status of any natural or agricultural assets, andrequire any modification ('adaptive management') to achieve the desired outcomes.While structured monitoring of deer abundance alone can be used to achieve this last outcome, better understanding andmanagement of deer requires simultaneous and on-going monitoring of deer abundance and asset condition.Monitoring the environmental, social and economic impacts of deerIt is imperative to provide scientific data on the impact of deer and the risks they may pose environmentally or economically in theAlpine N.P. Sensitive areas are determined and then appropriate monitoring is undertaken to assess impacts and responses toprogramsDetermining sensitive areasDiscussion PaperGreater Alpine National Parks15

In the absence of quantitative data on deer impacts a predicted threat ranking matrix can be used to predict which areas will bemost impacted by deer (Table 2). This could involve both environmental and social impacts (see Table 1). This system assumesthat an increasing abundance of deer will result in an increased impact. The ranking of management blocks from most sensitiveareas to least sensitive areas will allow land managers to prioritise areas when resources are a limiting factor.Table 1: The classification of areas within the Alpine N.P. into classes depending on predicted deer impacts.Predicted Threat Class 1Predicted Threat Class 2Predicted Threat Class 3Any area classed as an Endangered Ecological Community listed under either the Environment Protection and BiodiversityConservation (EPBC) Act or Threatened Species Conservation (TSC) Act.Any area not listed in Class 1 which has been set aside for nature conservation, including national park estate, other highconservation public lands like TSRs and areas with a wildlife covenantAll other areas within the deer distributionAny area containing a endangered, threatened or vulnerable flora species listed under either the EPBC Act or TSC Act (1 km, bufferaround known individuals)Any area not listed in Class 1 where deer are causing a nuisance to an agricultural enterpriseAny area where deer are having a direct financial impact on an agricultural enterprise.Any area not listed in Class 1 where deer are causing a nuisance on public landAny area where deer are having a direct financial impact on public lands (eg forestry operations)Any area where deer have a high risk of being a danger to the public (eg high deer density areas where deer cross main roadsfrequently)Table 2: A predicted threat ranking matrix which cross references potential deer impact classes with known density estimates toproduce a rank of areas most likely to be impacted by deer.Deer DensityPredicted Threat Class 1Predicted Threat Class 2Predicted Threat Class 3a) High1a2a3ab) Medium1b2b3bc) Low1c2c3cSetting up management blocksAfter potential threats and the density of animals have been estimated within the deer range, specific management objectives willbe established for each management block. Management objectives will take into account the following:1) The level of predicted threat2) The proposed level of deer density reductions3) The location of sensitive areas 4) Land tenure boundaries (where appropriate) 5) Appropriate control measures 6) The location ofresidences, main roads and other potential safety risks Table 3: Possible management objectives and potential control measuresfor each rank of management unit.16 Recreation Deer Hunting —

Bob Gough, Australian Deer Research Foundation.This is a very informative document which outlines the many ways ADA and PV are currently working together, including themonitoring programs occurring within the Greater Alpine Planning Area.See AWMS_Paper_on_PV-ADA_Partnering_programs_V1.doc-- James Hackel - Parks Victoria - 04 Jan 2010Map of Existing Deer Hunting AreasA map which shows the planning areas existing provisions for recreational deer hunting (Feb 2010) has now been posted in theknoweldge gallery. Follow this link to the Map of Existing Deer Hunting Areas and Provisions.- James Hackel - Parks Victoria - 16 Feb 201018 Recreation Deer Hunting —