LAMPING DEER

Constab2

+1 on above but being Ireland cost would spiral very quickly without any justification & a lot more red tape would ensue.Nothing in this country is without
stipulations,regs etc etc.Simple system does not equate to regulating body of any state body.

kakashka

tomcat220t wrote: »

Sections...especially last season ,where they could be lamped was notthing more that legalized poaching ,imo!

And what about the land owner tomcat?section 42's can only be obtained by landowner after good reason is shown..so we get hunting licences after we knock on Farmers door and agree to tackle his deer problem(and lets be honest here,all and any deer are considered a problem to most farmer's) then when problem is dealt with we start complaining
And Who manages their hunting here anyway??take a look at the Photo's thread and what will you generally see?lads standing over a young immature male complaining about lack of trophy animals,"oh if i dont knock it someone else will"is what i hear all the time and its also true,some other hunter will knock it...we complain complain complain and blame everything and anyone but ourselves..sure poaching happens,always has and always will one way or another but if everyone looked after their own patch ALL year round i guarantee results(deer dont sprout out of the ground fully grown on 1st sept either as some seem to think)

groundskeeper willie

i think that system works brilliant over there, and they are very strict if you are caught with an untagged deer. like constab2 i too would have my doubts about it working here though

kakashka

hunterpajero wrote: »

i think every license holder should be issued with tags like in the us and no deer without any tag to go into the food chain,if you use your tags more could be optained at a small fee,thats my opinion anyway

Cant see it working...how many tags?on size of area?on deer population?to land owner or hunter?

Here's another idea-inform all landowners as to the potential value of Stalking on their lands

johngalway

kakashka wrote: »

Here's another idea-inform all landowners as to the potential value of Stalking on their lands

And that leaves the legitimate getting by by the skin of his teeth shooter where?

groundskeeper willie

kakashka wrote: »

Cant see it working...how many tags?on size of area?on deer population?to land owner or hunter?

Here's another idea-inform all landowners as to the potential value of Stalking on their lands

yea i know what you mean it would be difficult to determine amount of tags, especially where you have a number of hunters with permission on same piece of land. on coillte forests this would be no problem because of the cull numbers on each lease.

i dont like the idea of paying for farmland permission (personal opinion) simply because i wouldnt like it to develop to where it will cost money to hunt pheasant fox and rabbit.

tomcat220t

kakashka wrote: »

And what about the land owner tomcat?section 42's can only be obtained by landowner after good reason is shown..so we get hunting licences after we knock on Farmers door and agree to tackle his deer problem(and lets be honest here,all and any deer are considered a problem to most farmer's) then when problem is dealt with we start complaining
And Who manages their hunting here anyway??take a look at the Photo's thread and what will you generally see?lads standing over a young immature male complaining about lack of trophy animals,"oh if i dont knock it someone else will"is what i hear all the time and its also true,some other hunter will knock it...we complain complain complain and blame everything and anyone but ourselves..sure poaching happens,always has and always will one way or another but if everyone looked after their own patch ALL year round i guarantee results(deer dont sprout out of the ground fully grown on 1st sept either as some seem to think)

You think sections are all about deer management on farm land :rolleyes:In an ideal world ,maybe !
I know enough guys that use this loop hole in the system to line their pockets .Make no mistake about its not just the poachers that are knocking 50-60-100 deer a season !
Having said that im sure deer are doing hard to farmers crops in some situations, aswell.

garv123

tomcat220t wrote: »

You think sections are all about deer management on farm land :rolleyes:In an ideal world ,maybe !
I know enough guys that use this loop hole in the system to line their pockets .Make no mistake about its not just the poachers that are knocking 50-60-100 deer a season !
Having said that im sure deer are doing hard to farmers crops in some situations, aswell.

Get a section 45. Dont shoot the land where the farmer got it, shoot everywhere else and tell people its ok you have a section 45.
6 weeks are up, farmer applies again, look ranger there's still deer everywhere.
Shoots away again

Heard that happens alot.

kakashka

johngalway wrote: »

And that leaves the legitimate getting by by the skin of his teeth shooter where?

out on his ear of course...were actually spoilt here..nobody wants to hear it of course

johngalway

kakashka wrote: »

out on his ear of course...were actually spoilt here..nobody wants to hear it of course

I don't agree that people are spoilt. Deer can be an agricultural problem, deer shooters help to manage the numbers. It's a fair exchange.

BELOWaverageIQ

It's not just poachers that are affecting the deer population.
The biggest factor has to have been the severe winter of 2010/2011.
One of the biggest problems in this country is the fact that there is little or no deer management, it's a free for all ( and that's goes for the vast majority of legitimate stalkers too)

kakashka

tomcat220t wrote: »

You think sections are all about deer management on farm land :rolleyes:In an ideal world ,maybe !
I know enough guys that use this loop hole in the system to line their pockets .Make no mistake about its not just the poachers that are knocking 50-60-100 deer a season !
Having said that im sure deer are doing hard to farmers crops in some situations, aswell.

Sections are about protecting landowners livelyhood..i totally agree with you and have said it over and over it's hunters that are ultimately responsible,sections are issued after an inspection,with a number and period and the hunter is then responsible for executing it..IMO numbers dont really mean that much without knowing area etc

kakashka

BELOWaverageIQ wrote: »

It's not just poachers that are affecting the deer population.
The biggest factor has to have been the severe winter of 2010/2011.
One of the biggest problems in this country is the fact that there is little or no deer management, it's a free for all ( and that's goes for the vast majority of legitimate stalkers too)

I agree with you(i fed deer last winter while a top IDS boyo knocked the sh1t out of them from his jeep window on Coilte land next door) ...and IMO management will only happen if it's benificial to landowner..you cant have your cake and eat it

BryanL

To stop Poaching?

Shoot More DEER!

Hunter21

BryanL wrote: »

To stop Poaching?

Shoot More DEER!

Great input to a discussion by you **clap clap**

kakashka

Hunter21 wrote: »

Great input to a discussion by you **clap clap**

But realistically the only suggestion so far that is guaranteed to work against "poaching"!!well help at least:D

kakashka

johngalway wrote: »

I don't agree that people are spoilt. Deer can be an agricultural problem, deer shooters help to manage the numbers. It's a fair exchange.

Well sooner or later we will be paying or out and it will be down to the greed and selfishness of Hunters..fair exchange will be replaced by highest bidder

groundskeeper willie

kakashka wrote: »

Well sooner or later we will be paying or out and it will be down to the greed and selfishness of Hunters..fair exchange will be replaced by highest bidder

from experience hunting on a number of leases over the years the highest bidder is often the one too lazy to stalk. i too fed deer for last 2 years while lads drove the wood lanes looking for handy shots. these lads will then go on about stalking this and dragging that, same fellas never even get their boots wet. agree 100% a lot of "stalkers" have done as much damage as poachers

tomcat220t

kakashka wrote: »

But realistically the only suggestion so far that is guaranteed to work against "poaching"!!well help at least:D

Want to be realistic about reducing poaching ........ put a stop to them selling their meat to game dealers !
Its the cash that drives the big time poachers.

tomcat220t

groundskeeper willie wrote: »

from experience hunting on a number of leases over the years the highest bidder is often the one too lazy to stalk. i too fed deer for last 2 years while lads drove the wood lanes looking for handy shots. these lads will then go on about stalking this and dragging that, same fellas never even get their boots wet. agree 100% a lot of "stalkers" have done as much damage as poachers

100% with above !

groundskeeper willie

as for deer management, take a typical example; you and a couple of mates decide to take a lease in wicklow. because of location it is a high price and deer are scarce. set up a management plan, stick to it and after 3 or 4 years you will see obvious improvements. but after 5 years its up for tender again and if anyone goes to have a look they will see the results of your 5 years work and if they bid higher your wood is gone.
its the leasing system here that works against management

landkeeper

the fragmented land ownership also works against meaningful management , a good buck left in one farm to breed gets shot as soon as he wanders off to another property

johngalway

kakashka wrote: »

Well sooner or later we will be paying or out and it will be down to the greed and selfishness of Hunters..fair exchange will be replaced by highest bidder

Greed and selfishness of hunters? You mean poachers surely? Poacher does what a poacher does, doesn't matter a fig if the legitimate shooter is paying for the land or not, it won't stop a poacher poaching.

Just because a € can be squeezed out of someone doesn't mean it has to. I had a sheep farmer a few weeks ago fall all over himself trying to give me money for the white legged fox I shot on his land. Wouldn't take it, much prefer to be let know if any of my sheep are somewhere they shouldn't be out on the hill if they go walkies. Another fair exchange, as the walking I do after his foxes might save me some walking another time. Thankfully a lot of people think this way.

Stop deer being a commodity and there'll be an improvement in the situation. It won't ever stop 100% but people have a habit of not bothering with things that don't turn a few bob.

bazza888

white legged fox?did you do a write up?imissed it?!!

johngalway

bazza888 wrote: »

white legged fox?did you do a write up?imissed it?!!

Yup, just his back legs if I remember right, shot him on beachy land, photo is in the lamping the night away thread.

bazza888

is the farmer getting him stuffed?

johngalway

bazza888 wrote: »

is the farmer getting him stuffed?

Lol, the only thing he was interested in stuffing him with was lead and that job was done

bazza888

i thought you were saying he was offering you money for it after you had shot it cause it had white legs!

johngalway

bazza888 wrote: »

i thought you were saying he was offering you money for it after you had shot it cause it had white legs!

No, he was offering me money because he lost a lot of hens and ducks to one lamp shy fox before, also has sheep so foxy isn't too popular.

bazza888

i wouldnt take money for it either,i have one local lad who wont let me shoot yet the last 2times iv been out iv seen a fox in his field with the sheep!maybe if he looses a few lambs he will let me!