Sickened while stalking

4200fps

wexfordman2 wrote: »

Wdai reckon 9% of licenced Stalkers sell deer, so that's about 450 people. Going by those figures that's 10 deer each on average.

Wdai havent a clue so. I know a scumbag who'd sell 10 on his worst week to gamedealer but anyways let him at it as its coming to an end for him, they are not growing back to shoot

Fallow01

4200fps wrote: »

Wdai havent a clue so. I know a scumbag who'd sell 10 on his worst week to gamedealer but anyways let him at it as its coming to an end for him, they are not growing back to shoot

4200fps Specsavers comes to mind I never said anything about WDAI saying "10" wexfordman2 said it in his post........

If you know he's selling more than 10 a week and his a poacher, have you reported him?

4200fps

Fallow01 wrote: »

4200fps Specsavers comes to mind I never said anything about WDAI saying "10" wexfordman2 said it in his post........

If you know he's selling more than 10 a week and his a poacher, have you reported him?

I didnt say anything about you Fallow01 or did i? Report him? The rangers are blue in the face trying to get him for years.

Fallow01

4200fps wrote: »

I didnt say anything about you Fallow01 or did i? Report him? The rangers are blue in the face trying to get him for years.

I took it you were saying "Wdai havent a clue so. I know a scumbag who'd sell 10 on his worst week to gamedealer...." I didn't quote WDAI as saying guys were only selling 10 deer......

No hassle

PL05

Fallow01 wrote: »

Even though they already seem to represent most deer stalkers I'm not suggesting everyone should nor as you say does everyone want to be part of an organisation even a forum but a forum could learn from them as they seem to be the only ones ticking all the boxes and getting results.

Having attended their events there is nothing monopoly about it, just like minded folk giving their time for free for the benefit of our sport.

I understand their patrols are national and operated by stalkers like us, they also have gun club and local group members. From patrolling our own area you can never be at every gate or forest and could be a busy fool if you respond to every rumour.

In all my years I've never seen so many prosecutions and guys being stopped so they must be doing something right

As i said im not trying to be smart. I was a member of one of these years ago and did,nt like how, in my opinion, a hand full of people had a say and anyone else,s opinion did,nt matter. Also i saw on one of their web sites [not saying which} basicly advertising, that if any farmers/landowners are having problems with deer damage to contact them and they would send someone to assess the problem. maybe have wording wrong but something along those lines. Now im not saying that they cant do this but with the clout they have you can see where im going with ordinary lads not getting a look in. Anyway, anyone who is part of one of these groups is entitled to be and i respect this, but im just giving an opinion. And if they,re doing all you say they are then fair play and point taken.

wexfordman2

Just had a look at an post site, it would cost about 600 euro to deliver leaflets to 4,600 households in a rural are in Cork, not including the price of the leaflets themselves.

I reckon that's doable

Fallow01

PL05 wrote: »

As i said im not trying to be smart. I was a member of one of these years ago and did,nt like how, in my opinion, a hand full of people had a say and anyone else,s opinion did,nt matter. Also i saw on one of their web sites [not saying which} basicly advertising, that if any farmers/landowners are having problems with deer damage to contact them and they would send someone to assess the problem. maybe have wording wrong but something along those lines. Now im not saying that they cant do this but with the clout they have you can see where im going with ordinary lads not getting a look in. Anyway, anyone who is part of one of these groups is entitled to be and i respect this, but im just giving an opinion. And if they,re doing all you say they are then fair play and point taken.

That's a joint agreement they have with the IFA, where landowners are complaining about deer, they're are regional co-ordinators who will contact the farmer if he contacts his local IFA office and assign a stalker to call out, they involve the stalkers in the area already. There is a paperwork trail involved and culling animals is not always used.

I take your point if you're not a member you could be left out but as I said they involve local hunters, the only requirement is you have some formal training such as the HCAP which I'd imagine the IFA would want rather than a free for all

luvhuntin

I was in the WDAI but after seeing some of the crap they posted on social media it was clear to me that they are out for Deer Hunters only esp there own little click. I find it esp difficult to read some of these posts when one of the well known members of it openly boasts about how many Deer he shoots. Ive heard of some crazy numbers-probably more than most of the poachers caught recently:rolleyes: They seem to be against lamping aswell so fox shooters watch out:eek:

Fallow01

luvhuntin wrote: »

I was in the WDAI but after seeing some of the crap they posted on social media it was clear to me that they are out for Deer Hunters only esp there own little click. I find it esp difficult to read some of these posts when one of the well known members of it openly boasts about how many Deer he shoots. Ive heard of some crazy numbers-probably more than most of the poachers caught recently:rolleyes: They seem to be against lamping aswell so fox shooters watch out:eek:

I took these comments off their FB page where a stalker is giving out about the media calling poachers hunters and giving stalkers a bad name

WDAI response "Your right its the same with the genuine lampers or dog men, that's why we should all keep reporting them, its making a difference"

From that comment I think they very much support lampers

They have the largest FB page of any organisation from what I can see with a lot of members, so they must be doing something right I've learned a lot and not experienced any of what you say

You seem to have a chip on your shoulder about them or is it just me

luvhuntin

NO I have no chip on my shoulder-Typical WDAI response:rolleyes:just pointing out a few flaws as I see them. Another is the meat handeling course they have been going on about for the last few months which will only cost EUR100-any word on that? Its very easy to get big numbers of members on Facebook BTW so dont let that get to your head either:D. Just for the record I highly commend WDAI for the work they have been doing in catching poachers and highlighting cases that have gone to court and a sentence been passed.

PL05

Fallow01 wrote: »

That's a joint agreement they have with the IFA, where landowners are complaining about deer, they're are regional co-ordinators who will contact the farmer if he contacts his local IFA office and assign a stalker to call out, they involve the stalkers in the area already. There is a paperwork trail involved and culling animals is not always used.

I take your point if you're not a member you could be left out but as I said they involve local hunters, the only requirement is you have some formal training such as the HCAP which I'd imagine the IFA would want rather than a free for all

I have HCAP, insurance etc. Just out of curiosity, if say i had a permission in a certain area, say in offaly and if i contacted WDAI as a non member and asked them, if any farmers around the area i shoot contacts them re issues with deer and would they nominate me to call on farmer. In your honest opinion, do you think they would entertain me.

Hillhunter

I Think this is going away from where the thread started, there is enough antis out there to bash stalkers/hunters without ourselves having a go at each other.Only my 2 cents worth.

PL05

Hillhunter wrote: »

I Think this is going away from where the thread started, there is enough antis out there to bash stalkers/hunters without ourselves having a go at each other.Only my 2 cents worth.

Agreed we might be straying a tad ok. But there is some relevance. eg: if WDAI are doing all whats been discussed already then whats the point of all this. The point i was trying to make is that if we involve WDAI, it wont be a case of bringing them on board it would be them bringing us on board. And nobody,s having a go at anybody, just having a debate. To be honest i think we,re just going around in circles here. As i said before, everyone should look after their own permissions {what ever it takes} think thats what i,ll do and forget about this.

luvhuntin

And im just pointing out a few things to be wary of getting involved with them. For all the good work they do they don't like to be questioned, ignore questions, and are a little two faced on some of the points they preach.

old n grey

PLEASE DO REALIZE ONE CANT USURP THE POWERS OF STATE.The powers that be do know most of those who break the laws of the land.Remember in time the wheel does come full circle. Here in the slieve blooms it is no different we too have our poachers,their road is coming to an end.

PL05

old n grey wrote: »

PLEASE DO REALIZE ONE CANT USURP THE POWERS OF STATE.The powers that be do know most of those who break the laws of the land.Remember in time the wheel does come full circle. Here in the slieve blooms it is no different we too have our poachers,their road is coming to an end.

Hope your right. But unfortunatley the powers that be have a habit of closing the stable door after the horse has bolted. which might be to late for deer numbers to recover from this scurge. Remember that at the moment for every female taken by these scumbags is two deer gone in the future.

Hillhunter

NPWS have just released figures showing a 36% decline in section 42's issued year on year , that is enough to tell us our deer are in deep decline , whether due to poaching or greedy hunters it will all be the same in a couple of years if something definite is done collectively

Grizzly 45

First off a somewhat reliable figure of how many deer there actually are out there would be a great help,and a followup in four years would be needed to say either yes or no on decline or increase.

Cass

I don't really want to get involved in the core topic of the debate as i've nothing else to add that has not already been said, but from reading over the last few posts something sticks out at me.

We have figures for deer returns, and figures for deer licenses issued. What i would like to see (and it'll most likely never happen) is the returns for each person. IOW if they listed returns in numerical value from the person with most returns to the person with the least amount of returns. Then see what kind of numbers licensed & legitimate hunters are actually giving in. Then compare those numbers to the records from the game dealers. I'm sure the numbers would shine a light on an issue that rarely gets spoken about. Legitimate shooters, shooting serious numbers of deer, and selling them. All legal, but has the same detrimental effect on deer numbers.

I know these numbers are based on what the person declares, and in most cases may never be accurate, but it will give an insight. By this i mean is poaching the sole cause for decline in deer numbers or is it legitimate hunters shooting dozens of deer each year or lastly some combination of both?

Might be saying this arseways, but i think you all understand what i'm saying.

PL05

Cass wrote: »

I don't really want to get involved in the core topic of the debate as i've nothing else to add that has not already been said, but from reading over the last few posts something sticks out at me.

We have figures for deer returns, and figures for deer licenses issued. What i would like to see (and it'll most likely never happen) is the returns for each person. IOW if they listed returns in numerical value from the person with most returns to the person with the least amount of returns. Then see what kind of numbers licensed & legitimate hunters are actually giving in. Then compare those numbers to the records from the game dealers. I'm sure the numbers would shine a light on an issue that rarely gets spoken about. Legitimate shooters, shooting serious numbers of deer, and selling them. All legal, but has the same detrimental effect on deer numbers.

I know these numbers are based on what the person declares, and in most cases may never be accurate, but it will give an insight. By this i mean is poaching the sole cause for decline in deer numbers or is it legitimate hunters shooting dozens of deer each year or lastly some combination of both?

Might be saying this arseways, but i think you all understand what i'm saying.

Would also be interesting to see if these figures tally with cull amounts issued by coillte for each let, if say a person hunts solely on coillte leases.

Dian Cecht

How many of you concerned hunters are using moderators for shooting deer? What distances are you shooting deer at?

If you are going to shoot a few for the pot every season why do you need a moderator? I know there may be places where there's livestock nearby but if you're only going to fire one shot (assuming you hit what you aim at) why would you worry about the noise of a single shot.

Lads these days are shooting (apparently) at serious ranges. Years ago lads had to actually stalk deer & as a result shot less.

PL05

Dian Cecht wrote: »

How many of you concerned hunters are using moderators for shooting deer? What distances are you shooting deer at?

If you are going to shoot a few for the pot every season why do you need a moderator? I know there may be places where there's livestock nearby but if you're only going to fire one shot (assuming you hit what you aim at) why would you worry about the noise of a single shot.

Lads these days are shooting (apparently) at serious ranges. Years ago lads had to actually stalk deer & as a result shot less.

I use a moderator for various reasons, as you said, livestock, some of my permissions have horses on them also. If im going on to farmland just before first light i dont want to be disturbing the farmer and his family or his nieghbours. Also i believe that moderators can affect power at a long distance so i still try to get as close to an animal as possible. And my mod came as package so why not use it. I certainly dont use it to sneak about, if thats what your getting at.

Cass

PL05 wrote: »

Would also be interesting to see if these figures tally with cull amounts issued by coillte for each let, if say a person hunts solely on coillte leases.

Pretty much. It's a curiosity thing more than anything else. IOW are poachers being blamed for all the woes of declinging numbers or are legitimate shooters (intentionally or not) doing as much damage if not more, but feel they are not simply because they abide by the laws.

I suppose this would lead back to some of the posts i scanned over the last few pages about newer laws regarding the shooting, tagging, monitoring of deer and how it is used/disposed of once shot (sold or used for personal consumption)

Dian Cecht wrote: »

How many of you concerned hunters are using moderators for shooting deer?

I have a mod, but switch between using it and not.

Not sure how the term "concerned" fits in your comment though.

What distances are you shooting deer at?

Shortest distance this year was 37 yards, and the longest was 121 yards.

If you are going to shoot a few for the pot every season why do you need a moderator? I know there may be places where there's livestock nearby but if you're only going to fire one shot (assuming you hit what you aim at) why would you worry about the noise of a single shot.

Other than noise reduction a moderator also reduces felt recoil allowing for a quick follow up or secondary shot if needed. Also the noise reduction is only applicable at the shooter's position. The bullet still makes a sonic crack.

The use of a moderator is not something to be ashamed of or for others to look down their nose at those that use them. Plus if others are like me they use their rifle for foxing, etc. during the off season, and it comes into play when out lamping.

Lads these days are shooting (apparently) at serious ranges. Years ago lads had to actually stalk deer & as a result shot less.

There is that trend.

Dian Cecht

Jasus, some here are very touchy & defensive :rolleyes:

Thanks Cass. Wasn't aware they reduced recoil and such. Never had one myself and where/what I shoot I don't need one ........................ yet

PL05

Dian Cecht wrote: »

Jasus, some here are very touchy & defensive :rolleyes:

Thanks Cass. Wasn't aware they reduced recoil and such. Never had one myself and where/what I shoot I don't need one ........................ yet

Sorry if i took you up wrong there. Might be the wording you used, eg, you concerned hunters and why do you use moderators. Was,nt having a go at you. Have you fired a big calibre rifle before, they are extremely loud.

Dian Cecht

PL05 wrote: »

Sorry if i took you up wrong there. Might be the wording you used, eg, you concerned hunters and why do you use moderators. Was,nt having a go at you. Have you fired a big calibre rifle before, they are extremely loud.

Fair enough lad. This is not the same as having a chat face to face

I'm not au fait with moderators tbh and currently I see no need or have any use for them. A few buddies have them on their rifles and to me it just makes the rifle longer, heavier & more difficult to lug around.

As for firing big calibre rifles. Yes I have but I don't make a habit of it

Cass

Dian Cecht wrote: »

Jasus, some here are very touchy & defensive :rolleyes:

Your comments come across as ever so slightly condescending (whether intended or not), and the use of rolleyes, and other comments such as touchy, etc. only make it worse.

Remember that the written word looses context so you need to be extremely clear in your intention when writing. However it's understood there was no insult intended, and none reciprecated.

Thanks Cass. Wasn't aware they reduced recoil and such. Never had one myself and where/what I shoot I don't need one ........................ yet

They are useful and if i'm honest i used to like one one a rifle not only for effect, but for cosmetics. However lately (the last few years) i'm growing out the "need" for one. I like to have them, and generally get one with every rifle, but as said above i switch between using one and not.

I've shot most large calibers, and love shotgun shooting. So recoil doesn't bother me much (i know, i'm really tough ). As you said i usually only get one shot at deer so find myself using the mod less when out for them. However for foxing at night i always use a mod, plus i usually go with a lower caliber to reduce the noice even more. This is to increase the number of foxes i can get plus the sound of a shot seems amplified by the quietness of night.


Lastly i'll use my "ould fella" as an example. He is in his sixties and loves his shooting. However he is not a young man anymore, regardless of how he thinks he feels, and i notice he feels the effect of a rifle more than years ago. So a mod on his rifle gives him the necessary reduction in recoil to make his shooting more comfortable and hence as enjoyable to him.

PL05

Dian Cecht wrote: »

Fair enough lad. This is not the same as having a chat face to face

I'm not au fait with moderators tbh and currently I see no need or have any use for them. A few buddies have them on their rifles and to me it just makes the rifle longer, heavier & more difficult to lug around.

As for firing big calibre rifles. Yes I have but I don't make a habit of it

Point taken. Your right about lenght and weight, thats the case with mine but it makes up with comfort when using it and eliminates any flinching also.

Hillhunter

Cass wrote: »

I don't really want to get involved in the core topic of the debate as i've nothing else to add that has not already been said, but from reading over the last few posts something sticks out at me.

We have figures for deer returns, and figures for deer licenses issued. What i would like to see (and it'll most likely never happen) is the returns for each person. IOW if they listed returns in numerical value from the person with most returns to the person with the least amount of returns. Then see what kind of numbers licensed & legitimate hunters are actually giving in. Then compare those numbers to the records from the game dealers. I'm sure the numbers would shine a light on an issue that rarely gets spoken about. Legitimate shooters, shooting serious numbers of deer, and selling them. All legal, but has the same detrimental effect on deer numbers.

I know these numbers are based on what the person declares, and in most cases may never be accurate, but it will give an insight. By this i mean is poaching the sole cause for decline in deer numbers or is it legitimate hunters shooting dozens of deer each year or lastly some combination of both?

Might be saying this arseways, but i think you all understand what i'm saying.

good point cass, i would say we have quiet a few hunters, legitimate shooting for gain, was told of one lad shot over 250 last season that went to game dealers, this fella also got a section 42, so god knows what his total is for a couple of years. Goes back to the points earlier , we will not have deer in a few years time unless something is done on all aspects. I myself have been stalking/hunting with over 30 years and have never found the need to sell deer , i only eat what i shoot. Stop the sale of deer (even for 1 year, every couple of years )and we might have some hope of keeping the species from going extinct in Ireland.

Lotharmike

Hillhunter wrote: »

good point cass, i would say we have quiet a few hunters, legitimate shooting for gain, was told of one lad shot over 250 last season that went to game dealers, this fella also got a section 42, so god knows what his total is for a couple of years. Goes back to the points earlier , we will not have deer in a few years time unless something is done on all aspects. I myself have been stalking/hunting with over 30 years and have never found the need to sell deer , i only eat what i shoot. Stop the sale of deer (even for 1 year, every couple of years )and we might have some hope of keeping the species from going extinct in Ireland.

Said it before & I will say it again make it illegal to sell all wild deer for 10 years, poaching would cease over night.There are plenty of charities who would take any spare carcasses from a deer licence holder who shoots more than he needs.I know of lads legitimately(Licence holders) taking 100-200 a season.Absolute disgrace imo I would question anyone returning them numbers as to HOW you can shoot that many legally.The days are coming when the licence will command a hefty fee,if used to serve for conservation of the national herd & stamp out this disgusting behavior I personally would gladly
pay it.All the posts here raise very valid concerns but I bet any organisation who does not involve the farmers/landowners are wasting their time.Farmers want Deer gone.Simple, combat that and you might get somewhere .