Deer Licences refused due to declining numbers

Big Buck

Look I don't 'want' to pay for a hunting licence. I don't 'want' to pay for anything, no more than anyone else does. But I do think some things are worth paying a few quid for.

Or you could take up fishing, but you have to pay for a fishing licence.
Or golf, but you have to pay membership or green fees or something.

If you have permission from landowners to hunt deer on their land and it doesn't cost you anything for leases or anything, then you are shooting deer for free. Don't include diesel or tax on ammo or the price of a breakfast roll on d way home, you are shooting deer for free.

Zxthinger

Cass wrote: »

Not long in after a good stalk so apologies for the delay in replying.

Seems i've caused a little bit of a stir. While Sparks has perfectly explained it above i just wanted to add my own take.

If the NPWS deem the lands to be over shot or too many people on it they can refuse a license. This is what ha happened. The land i was talking about has been poached to hell and the land owner is too nice and never refuses anyone permission.

The NPWS have rangers or DCOs. District Conservation Officers. Their job is to determine the suitability of land(s) for the amount of people with permission on them and the amount of returns from previous years to suggest possible deer numbers. I'd have no problem with them restricting or prohibiting shooting on such lands if it leads to an increase in numbers and a break to a heavily shot area.

I don't know. No point in bullsh*ting you. However as said above i've no issues with this. I've a dozen other permissions and frankly i cannot shot the land in it's current state.

I'd have no issue either. I'd like to think it'd go to the NPWS directly, but that's a discussion for another day.

I cannot see this working.

If they banned the sale of it it would result in two issues:

1. A black market for venison.
2. Reduction in number of shooters because there is no money it it for them, and increase in deer number to the point that they would bring in the army to cull numbers (or something along those lines).

You own nothing.

What?

Can you elaborate on this? Not getting your meaning.

As above you own nothing.

It's a simplistic and naive attitude to think that "as a citizen" you own them. Well you don't. By that logic you don't need a deer license, permission to enter land, permission to shoot on Coilte land, etc. Because "as a citizen" in your own country it's your right to have your things.

Wake up.

Ha! Wake yerself up. kid! only a gang of clowns would propose another charge for something that is their birthright.
I suppose you were happy to pay yer property tax and couldn't wait to pay for water too.
Ha.

meathstevie

On the point of ownership of game; they're wild animals and legally a wild game animal becomes the property of whoever succeeds in lawfully hunting it.

Essentially whoever hunts a patch of land with the proper permission in place and with a proper firearm and shoots a game animal becomes the owner of the carcass. Until that moment nobody owns the animal.

This had distinct advantages being that it doesn't provide for far reaching exclusivity and shooting stays relatively accessible for just about anyone with an interest but with that comes the disadvantage that shooting in Ireland is essentially a free for all. Good luck to anyone trying to find a happy compromise.

This position is fundamentally different from a lot of continental countries where the holder of the sporting rights has the rights the game on the land, dead or alive.

To fall in with Grizzly, it definitely wouldn't do any harm if the NPWS became a bit more "poaching police" again.

Big Buck

Birthright?
Ah here!!

Cass

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Personally,but thats just me,I'd rather they did their JOBS that we PAY with our tax monies ..

I < insert expletive> hate that statement. It's like telling a member of An Gardaí that you pay his wages. Such utter crap.

You pay your taxes. Your money may, and most liekly never makes it to the NPWS or dept of agriculture that funds it. So what you do is pay tax. End of.

..........and will only affect the law abiding.

This is the third time i've heard. Tell me how it effects the law abiding and not the poacher?

If your area is full of poachers and NPWS know this,why arent the stalkers demanding that the flood the area with rangers on a random basis??Heck if it was my area I'd be volenteering to do anti poaching patrols myself .Actually I'd be doing it myself anyway..

They ARE. You have one, maybe two rangers for the area. Between the size of the district they cover and the time they can give to each individual area it's impossible to police it effectively.

As for volunteering, i already do. I've the numbers of both rangers in my area and when i finished my stalking this evening i spent another hour driving the area looking for cars, jeeps and lights.

They dont have to be at every forest corner 24/7 in the season,but it works as a discouragement and might actually catch someone actin the mick.This sounds like someone sitting in their office and looking for an easy solution that doesnt require them going out and getting wet and dirty and having to earn their pay at 5AM or midnite on the weekends.

Wrong. So very, very wrong. I know the rangers and between their work, patrols, and other duties such as court, etc. they dedicate as much time as they can to actively combating poaching which resulted in a number of arrests and convictions last year.

Ligitimate shooters complaining about poachers = Another bunch of pains in the ho*e.Solution black list the area where they are too many liscenses,that will shut them up!

I don't get that at all.

They signed up for the job,this is part of it too,we all have unpleasent parts of our work lives to deal with that are inconvient.

You have to approach and deal with armed people on a possible daily basis? Try to combat poaching and other illegal acts without 5% of the budget An Gardaí have or the powers they wield too?

They do a hard job under tough conditions. I'd sooner support their initiatives than belittle, bitch, and criticise them. If they can be improved on they offer advice, help.

Everyone these days have limited budgets to run depts or private enterprises, and we still manage to do it so why is the NPWS the exception?

What is their budget? Do you think it's €200 million, €150 million, €50 million. Or more along the lines of a few hundred thousand up to possibly a million?

........... and they aren't there doing their part.

They are trying, but with no support and the "don't rat on someone" attitude that is embedded in Irish culture or my personal favorite "nnothing to do with me, but i;ll moan like feck later about it".

I'd be asking why black list an area,when there if it has a problem not actively police it or at least show some face and flag at least?
but thats just me.

Explained above.

When I apprenticed here 30 years ago as a game keeper out in Dromoland estate in Clare,the Dept of Wildlife [as it was then known] rangers were lads that would rather spend their days[ and nights if need be] sitting out in a forest waiting to catch poachers than actually be in an office doing paperwork.

You mean back in the days when poaching was done with .22 Hornets, and the like? How effective were they then?

Zxthinger wrote:

Ha! Wake yerself up. kid! only a gang of clowns would propose another charge for something that is their birthright.

Utter crap. Birthright!! I'd like two tickets to the fantasy land you live in.

I suppose you were happy to pay yer property tax and couldn't wait to pay for water too.
Ha.

Don't tell me. You didn't because "as a citizen" you're entitled to your water from your land, and don't need no stinking Government to charge you fr your property?

Jesus, are ya really that naive? Seriously? Do you really think the world works like that? If so then i'd suggest you come back and talk to me when you hit 18 and have a car, house and other things that require tax to be paid because either you're a child and don't have these issues to worry about or you're talking it up for the masses. It cannot be because you don't pay your taxes as you'd be posting your nonsense from inside a cell in the Joy.

Zxthinger

Big Buck wrote: »

Look I don't 'want' to pay for a hunting licence. I don't 'want' to pay for anything, no more than anyone else does. But I do think some things are worth paying a few quid for.

Or you could take up fishing, but you have to pay for a fishing licence.
Or golf, but you have to pay membership or green fees or something.

If you have permission from landowners to hunt deer on their land and it doesn't cost you anything for leases or anything, then you are shooting deer for free. Don't include diesel or tax on ammo or the price of a breakfast roll on d way home, you are shooting deer for free.

Glad to hear that yOu too don't want fees but youre wrong to compare fishing and golf with deer shooting! Serious money goes into river management and restocking fish is most rivers. Golf courses cost millions to build and maintain. Deer are wild and don't need to be fed or housed or have habitat created for them! It's just there! It was always just there! And with some common sense rules they will always be there!
Try banning game sales or curtailing it but leave the pot hunters alone.

staghunter

A ranger can blacklist an area for licences to be granted on.there's no way in the world he can stop people hunting on land where they have permission from the landowner who owns the sporting rights.unless the ranger gets this written into legislation it's not worth the paper it's written on.we had a situation like this on rivers around us where legislation was brought in to close the river for spring salmon and it would open again for grilse fishing.they forget to renew legislation this year 'believe it or not' and even though the fisheries officers didn't want you fishing there wasn't a thing they could do.this is a fact because I was fishing river.and for those of you who want to throw money away so rangers can get new computers and bigger binos and nicer boot's because that money you pay will never be used for anything productive.I thought at this stage in this country we'd have figured throwing money at a problem doesn't fix it

Zxthinger

As far as I know I'm prob twice your age and twice your weight. I have paid too much tax to several failed government over the last thirty years of working and I'm sick of bailing out free loaders and clock watchers in the gov and their quangos!.. The countries suffering the fallout of years of either bad calls or no calls and I'm not paying any more increase to line their nests.
I'm also not going to be reading anymore of your over enthusiastic super separated post! It's seems that might be better off with a wife and kids as you might spend a little less typing out super mega post.!..
Night night mate.

Grizzly 45

Cass wrote: »

Not long in after a good stalk so apologies for the delay in replying.

Any luck or any sight?:)

I cannot see this working.

If they banned the sale of it it would result in two issues:

1. A black market for venison.
2. Reduction in number of shooters because there is no money it it for them, and increase in deer number to the point that they would bring in the army to cull numbers (or something along those lines).

Not necessarily a black market either.IF it is so much in demand, there would be a massive increase in commercally farmed deer. Most deer that is bought in our supermarkets is NZ farmed deer as is most of the deer in the US and Europe.
The reason we have a illegal commercial game harvesting is like the Blood diamond market.The dealer buys in at low price from the poacher and ligit shooter and sells CERTAIN CUTS only at a 200% mark up! The rest is just so much sugar and a pain to sell on belive it or not. This is also why the GDs want neck or head shot animals ,a quick boiler house heart shot might damage the prized cuts. So you have lads trying to make a profit selling at a fixed low price to a GD who is profiting 300% on their efforts.


If you are out hunting to make a profit,you shouldnt be hunting at all!:mad:
You are seeing animals as a Euro note and not as a quarry and a renewable resource that is there for you and future generations of hunters to be passed onto them.Quite frankly,I'd be very happy to see a reduction of those kind of "hunters" in the morning if that was the case,as they arent true hunters,just as much as a commercial buffalo hunter in the 19th century was a hunter.
This s the ultimate problem in this whole situation. Money.
Nature herself is a pretty good regulator of herds and how many deer will be in an area by the food supplies and weather.

A country that is starting to have this dilemma on a bigger scale this season is the USA.They have an absolute prohibition on selling any game to a 3rd party,and have in some states over pouplation is becoming a problem.So it is being mooted that commercial sales might be allowed for the first time since the 19th century again.

Zxthinger

staghunter wrote: »

A ranger can blacklist an area for licences to be granted on.there's no way in the world he can stop people hunting on land where they have permission from the landowner who owns the sporting rights.unless the ranger gets this written into legislation it's not worth the paper it's written on.we had a situation like this on rivers around us where legislation was brought in to close the river for spring salmon and it would open again for grilse fishing.they forget to renew legislation this year 'believe it or not' and even though the fisheries officers didn't want you fishing there wasn't a thing they could do.this is a fact because I was fishing river.and for those of you who want to throw money away so rangers can get new computers and bigger binos and nicer boot's because that money you pay will never be used for anything productive.I thought at this stage in this country we'd have figured throwing money at a problem doesn't fix it

Very well said! I applaud you.

Cass

staghunter wrote: »

there's no way in the world he can stop people hunting on land where they have permission from the landowner who owns the sporting rights.

You are correct, and i said that previously. He told me that it's only for the purpose of the deer license. I still have permission to shoot the lands, and he cannot stop that, but for the purposes of hunting deer, no.

Zxthinger wrote: »

As far as I know I'm prob twice your age and twice your weight.

Sweet baby Jesus. You're 74 and 32 stone. How do you move around?

I have paid too much tax to several failed government over the last thirty years of working and I'm sick of bailing out free loaders and clock watchers in the gov and their quangos!.. The countries suffering the fallout of years of either bad calls or no calls and I'm not paying any more increase to line their nests.

M'eh.

I'm also not going to be reading anymore of your over enthusiastic super separated post! It's seems that might be better off with a wife and kids as you might spend a little less typing out super mega post.!..
Night night mate.

Ah come on. They take fecking ages, and it takes all the fun out of it when you don't reply. Grizz will. Watch his reply. it'll be pages. Cheers Grizz.

As for the wife and kids. No thanks. They cost too much. You should appreciate that.

Big Buck

Zxthinger wrote: »

Glad to hear that yOu too don't want fees but youre wrong to compare fishing and golf with deer shooting! Serious money goes into river management and restocking fish is most rivers. Golf courses cost millions to build and maintain. Deer are wild and don't need to be fed or housed or have habitat created for them! It's just there! It was always just there! And with some common sense rules they will always be there!
Try banning game sales or curtailing it but leave the pot hunters alone.

"Common sense rules". Exactly.
You say they will always be there but I don't know. There's no extra ground being made for any of us to hunt on, but there's more and more people starting to hunt deer. And we all want to shoot a few don't we? If the number of stalkers increases every year so will the number of deer being shot. That's not to mention the poaching.
I would be concerned for where we're going to be in 5 years time with maybe twice the hunters we have now, will the deer be able to keep up?

Cass

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Any luck or any sight?:)

2 hours stalking 3 príckets. Was out with ruger1984c.

When we "caught up" with them, they where up the side of a mountain and it was getting short on time and daylight so we called of the stalk. As we watched them go up further ruger1894c spotted a lovely stag. A nice 6 pointer and the príckets were heading after him as he moved on.

Going to cut out the evening stalks for bit. The mornings are turning out better numbers and better chances. Plus i'm limited in my ability to stalk (with the leg and all).

Sparks

Zxthinger wrote: »

The people of Ireland already own the resources of this island.

Yes, we do, collectively. Which means you "own" 1/4,000,000th of whatever deer you're aiming at. I reckon that comes to about five thousandths of a gram (or one tenth of a grain if that's easier to visualise) of the meat.

So technically, if you snuck up on the deer and licked its flank, that should be free, because you'd be getting your share of the deer. Knock yourself out, but you really should get someone to youtube it for the rest of us, good laughs are hard to come by...

Zxthinger

Sparks wrote: »

Yes, we do, collectively. Which means you "own" 1/4,000,000th of whatever deer you're aiming at. I reckon that comes to about five thousandths of a gram (or one tenth of a grain if that's easier to visualise) of the meat.

So technically, if you snuck up on the deer and licked its flank, that should be free, because you'd be getting your share of the deer. Knock yourself out, but you really should get someone to youtube it for the rest of us, good laughs are hard to come by...

What a wasted life you have! You really need to spend more time doing something productive. Maybe it's time you took up hunting instead of interfering with those try!

Sparks

Zxthinger wrote: »

What a wasted life you have!

You'd be surprised how often I think that when reading here some days...

But no, seriously, we ought to have a youtube deer-licking challenge. I can see the tagline now...

Think you're a real hunter? Just how close can you get?

My gosh man, think of the bragging rights you'd get!

Grizzly 45

< insert expletive> hate that statement. It's like telling a member of An Gardaí that you pay his wages. Such utter crap

.

Too bad you think like that,so who in your opinion pays the public servants? Forgot sorry you are right its the EU that pays for this broken down country.Still borrowing what 80 million a month according to a headline in the indo today.

You pay your taxes. Your money may, and most liekly never makes it to the NPWS or dept of agriculture that funds it. So what you do is pay tax. End of.

And? Thats a problem for us all in the fact we dont demand accountability from our Govts on any issues at all.Especially where our money goes.

This is the third time i've heard. Tell me how it effects the law abiding and not the poacher?

Do you obey the law?YesAre you the one giving out about your area being blacklisted?You are.Do you think your local poacher gives a fiddlyfuk if that area is blacklisted or is complaining about it?? He'll carry on his merry way while you Cass law abiding shooter will sit and fume that this area is over poached...
criminals dont obey laws,hence they are criminals

Cass wrote:

They ARE. You have one, maybe two rangers for the area. Between the size of the district they cover and the time they can give to each individual area it's impossible to police it effectively.

As for volunteering, i already do. I've the numbers of both rangers in my area and when i finished my stalking this evening i spent another hour driving the area looking for cars, jeeps and lights.

Wrong. So very, very wrong. I know the rangers and between their work, patrols, and other duties such as court, etc. they dedicate as much time as they can to actively combating poaching which resulted in a number of arrests and convictions last year.



I don't get that at all.

You have to approach and deal with armed people on a possible daily basis? Try to combat poaching and other illegal acts without 5% of the budget An Gardaí have or the powers they wield too?

"You signed up for the job you know the risks"..So was I told by AGS when I had to deal with an obnoxious drunken scrote when I had to serve court papers on him and he took a swing at me with a chair leg,and they refuse to prosecute BECAUSE of that very statement..I dont have the privilige of being behind a desk with a nice pension and perks and lunch breaks and time off and all the rest of a civil servants life. So they already have law behind them to do their jobs,so this "having to deal with armed people" BS cuts no ice. FS you make it sound like they are dealing with ISIS throat cutters!

If they feel the job is too risky then your options are
Quit. or demand proper protection and tools for the job to do it effectively.Which as civil servants they would proably get quicker than anyone else would.

They do a hard job under tough conditions. I'd sooner support their initiatives than belittle, bitch, and criticise them. If they can be improved on they offer advice, help.

Heres an idea.
1] Get list of all liscense holders in the district about to be blacklisted.
2]Invite to a public meeting at a convient time and place.
3]Lay out the situation about the poaching and the fact that the area will be black listed in the future if the poaching doesnt stop or drops dramatically
4] State that it would be in everyones intrest if they want to keep shooting heree next season to start patrolling the area and start taking regs etc and other legal
means to start getting this under control.
5] Develop it from there.

But that might be work and thinking outside the box and against the rules.Rather just weild beuracratic power than sort out the problem with the affected parties.

What is their budget? Do you think it's €200 million, €150 million, €50 million. Or more along the lines of a few hundred thousand up to possibly a million?

Even if it is a lousey 250 grand there are private companies doing security work on less and better.If the state cant handle this problem then give it to people in the private sector who can and WILL do the job efficently and within budget.
Could think of at least SIX security companies who would jump on this job.

They are trying, but with no support and the "don't rat on someone" attitude that is embedded in Irish culture or my personal favorite "nnothing to do with me, but i;ll moan like feck later about it".

.

You mean " Dont rat someone unless there is money or advantage to be gained or favour to be curried with your over lords"?:rolleyes:
True,not much that can be done on that one.

You mean back in the days when poaching was done with .22 Hornets, and the like? How effective were they then?

Yup ,way back then:) Effective ,well go to Dromoland today and see what sort of an utter shambles it is including the Coilte part of the estate,which was under the Dept s remit and is under NPWS now.The herd is an utter mess with hardly a good head,thats if there is any left as the place is now over poached by everyone from Ennis ,Shannon,Limerick and all points of the compass. In the time I worked there there was if I remember rightly two incidents of poaching.One a Chinese lad from Limerick with a .22lr sticks in my mind.Nowadays,with neither private shoots or maybe minimal NPWS coverage,coming from Newport I think these days,proably its over run.

Big Buck

BryanL wrote: »

The WDAI is there to protect deer for people selling deer stalking.

I would love to know where you're going with this...

natdog

Quote:If they banned the sale of it it would result in two issues:

1. A black market for venison.
2. Reduction in number of shooters because there is no money it it for them, and increase in deer number to the point that they would bring in the army to cull numbers (or something along those lines).

If they banned the sale of wild deer it may well lead to a black market but that makes it a hell of a lot harder for poachers to sell the game on and would be of little use to game dealers if they cannot advertise it as wild game.
I would also agree with what grizzly said people who hunt animals for money shouldn't be hunting at all.
As to the massive increase in deer numbers you predict it might help lads get more shooting from farmers and landowners and also help bring down the fees being charged by caoilte.
But anyone who thinks that bringing in a licence fee will help the poaching problem needs there head checked.

Cass

Zxthinger, you're gonna love this one.

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Too bad you think like that,so who in your opinion pays the public servants?

The avergae person pays what, €8,000 - €10,000 per year in taxes, etc. Spread that over all the different departments, and civil servant positions, etc. Your talking about pence per department. So i'm not trying to justify where the money goes only the comments of "i pay your wages". No you don't. You pay tax. It's a pet peeve, and i hate it.

Do you obey the law?Yes

Yes

Are you the one giving out about your area being blacklisted?You are.

No i'm not. Read back. I said i understand why, and don't really care because i have other permissions to use.

Do you think your local poacher gives a fiddlyfuk if that area is blacklisted or is complaining about it?? He'll carry on his merry way while you Cass law abiding shooter will sit and fume that this area is over poached...
criminals dont obey laws,hence they are criminals

I'm not fuming. The way i see it is now the land is black listed, anyone caught shooting on it is poaching. As the NPWs won't issue a license on this land, and ring the person applying to explain why, the person involved knows they cannot shoot on the land so that leaves the poachers. Meaning if a ranger sees ANYONE on the land they are poaching. Easier to catch and convict.

......... "having to deal with armed people" BS cuts no ice. FS you make it sound like they are dealing with ISIS throat cutters!

It takes some balls for a ranger to approach a lad, armed with gun, and attempt to do his job. He has no idea of the lad he is going to deal with.

If they feel the job is too risky then your options are
Quit. or demand proper protection and tools for the job to do it effectively.Which as civil servants they would proably get quicker than anyone else would.

Dear Christ. Seriously? Quit!!!!

Nothing is ever that black and white. As for getting proper tools. The fecking Gardaí cannot get the right tools and they have to deal with the proper scumbags of the country.

Heres an idea.
1] Get list of all liscense holders in the district about to be blacklisted.
2]Invite to a public meeting at a convient time and place.
3]Lay out the situation about the poaching and the fact that the area will be black listed in the future if the poaching doesnt stop or drops dramatically
4] State that it would be in everyones intrest if they want to keep shooting heree next season to start patrolling the area and start taking regs etc and other legal means to start getting this under control.
5] Develop it from there.

So give the poachers a heads up, and demand action from the same people that bitch and moan, but won't get up of their arses unless they get paid or something in return.

Back to the 2% rule there.

But that might be work and thinking outside the box and against the rules.Rather just weild beuracratic power than sort out the problem with the affected parties.

You criticise the NPWS for this action, yet demand action of some sort. While it may not be right, pretty or correct it's the actions of men, not an organisation, to stomp out an element that we all hate, and they are trying to do so by any means necessary.

Could think of at least SIX security companies who would jump on this job.

Ha, ha, ha.

Get a lad, on less than €18,000 per year, to watch over something that could earn him thousands more if he looks the other way, and/or will get him a hiding if he tries to stop it.

Plus what about legislative changes to allow this? The NPWS don't control that.

Yup ,way back then:)

The old days are not the good old days. Not always. Sometimes it just means people have been wrong, longer.

natdog wrote: »

If they banned the sale of wild deer it may well lead to a black market but that makes it a hell of a lot harder for poachers to sell the game on and would be of little use to game dealers if they cannot advertise it as wild game.

Where there is money there is a way. Not saying it's anything close to drugs, but you don't see smack dealers advertising in Donedeal yet junkies know where to go for what they want.

I would also agree with what grizzly said people who hunt animals for money shouldn't be hunting at all.

Then why oh why are some people, that would classed as spearheading deer conservation/management initiatives, the ones that sell hundreds each year? And why or how can people continue to ignore what they do while complaining about deer selling? That to me is more sickening that selling deer. The double standards and false idolisation.

Either get on with your life and ignore/let people that sell it, sell it or start to criticise the legal shooters that do as much harm if not more than poachers.

As to the massive increase in deer numbers you predict it might help lads get more shooting from farmers and landowners and also help bring down the fees being charged by caoilte.

How?

If lads cannot sell what they shoot they won't shoot as many. Either that or they'll dump the carcass. I shoot between 7 - 12 a year. Between friends and family that always covers me. Now if i was shooting 250 per year what do i do with them? As it is i can sell them, but now i cannot so i don't shoot them.

But anyone who thinks that bringing in a licence fee will help the poaching problem needs there head checked.

Why?

If it can raise funds, directly for the NPWS, to help with poaching, patrols, more rangers, etc. then why would you grudge a small license fee? What is it about a fee that is so repugnant to you?

natdog

Cass wrote: »

Where there is money there is a way. Not saying it's anything close to drugs, but you don't see smack dealers advertising in Donedeal yet junkies know where to go for what they want.

What your saying here doesn't make sense, simply will it make it harder to sell poached deer. YES

Then why oh why are some people, that would classed as spearheading deer conservation/management initiatives, the ones that sell hundreds each year? And why or how can people continue to ignore what they do while complaining about deer selling? That to me is more sickening that selling deer. The double standards and false idolisation.
Either get on with your life and ignore/let people that sell it, sell it or start to criticise the legal shooters that do as much harm if not more than poachers.

These people you talk about sell hundreds a year and declare every bit of it?
These people probably also give caoilte thousands every year for shooting rights and price normal lads out of the market that would like to hunt for the pleasure of it and for the pot. Would it not be better for more people to shoot less than less people shooting more if that makes sense.

If it can raise funds, directly for the NPWS, to help with poaching, patrols, more rangers, etc. then why would you grudge a small license fee? What is it about a fee that is so repugnant to you?

Once again in Ireland the answer to fixing a problem is throw money at it.
If what you say happened and we had more patrols more rangers etc. in five years time the rangers need a rise and they need brand new 4x4s etc. were will the money come from?
that's right me and you.
once these fees come in the door that's it they only go one way up

p.s. sorry about the way I quote cant figure out the proper way to do it.

Cass

What your saying here doesn't make sense, simply will it make it harder to sell poached deer. YES

Harder, possibly. Impossible, no. It will not eliminate poaching and for a time, will only slow it down. Selling deer serves a purpose. It provides where there is a demand, but like all things is open to abuse.

The answer is not to ban it, but to better police it.

These people you talk about sell hundreds a year and declare every bit of it?

I don't know. When you reach a certain level in terms of numbers you can only fudge the numbers so much. IOW if you shoot 20 and declare 15 it might be done. You shoot 200+ then claiming you only got 10 might be a bit of stretch.

These people probably also give caoilte thousands every year for shooting rights and price normal lads out of the market that would like to hunt for the pleasure of it and for the pot.

I'm not even going to get into Coilte. Paying a state body to shoot deer to protect their forestry. I'll give up deer stalking before i ever resort to that. However i will say this. Spme people have no option but to use Coilte lets as private lands simply are not available to them. It's the reason we must consider ourselves, lads with private permissions, lucky.

However it's not just Coilte. I've seen this on private lands. Syndicates moving in and offering money to landowners. Some have taken it and within 2 - 3 years regretted it as i posted about on another thread a couple of weeks ago.

Would it not be better for more people to shoot less than less people shooting more if that makes sense.

If it worked that way, which it does not. You have lads that shoot a few a year, some that shoot more than a few, and then lads that absolutely abuse the system and drop dozens to hundreds each year.

hence the reason i say it needs better management rather than banning certain aspects.

Once again in Ireland the answer to fixing a problem is throw money at it.

How else do you propose it get solved? Do you know anyone that works for free? That will give up their job, time, family life, personal life, etc. "for the good of it"? Seriously, nothing is free so to think that investment is a problem, when it is a solution, is silly.

If what you say happened and we had more patrols more rangers etc. in five years time the rangers need a rise and they need brand new 4x4s etc. were will the money come from?

But you just said above that throwing money at it will not solve anything. So now not only do you need money, but more of it.

I rang a ranger last year after hearing a shot and seeing a light. He could not call out because there was no Diesel in the jeep/car. I'm not talking about giving these guys €100k per year with expenses and fancy holidays. I'm talking about the basics they need to at least attempt to do their job. If that comes in the form of a small fee from every deer stalker then so be it.

I've seen and heard all the talk about tags, and how other countries do things better. Yet when the mention of implementing some of those ideas here, such as a tag or license fee, etc. is made there is uproar.

that's right me and you.
once these fees come in the door that's it they only go one way up

In the last 20 years the gun license fees have gone from €25 and €32 per gun per year (shotgun & rifle) to €80 per 3 years. So from €75 & €96 for three years to €80 for three years. IOW a minimal increase in one and a drop in another.

What makes you think that a deer license with a fee of say, €20 per year would go to such a height that none of us could afford it after the same 220 year time period? Considering the current price is €0.

Cass

natdog wrote: »

p.s. sorry about the way I quote cant figure out the proper way to do it.

When you reply to a post instead of clicking on the quote icon use the multi-quote icon.



You may click as many of these as you need to quote multiple posts but nothing will happen other than that icon being highlighted so don't panic if a new reply window does not open. When ready to reply to them click on "Post Reply" in the bottom left of the screen page, and all the posts you selected will appear, including the names of the posters that posted the comment.

If you want to answer a specific piece of each post simply highlight the bit you don't want to respond to, and delete it. Leaving the bit you do want to reply to intact.

hiddenmongoose

What got me interested in this thread was the fact that the npws could blacklist an area and any one on that land was poaching.I didnt agree with this as i believed that would need a misisters signature effectively making state sanctuary ,but then I read this

staghunter wrote: »

A ranger can blacklist an area for licences to be granted on.there's no way in the world he can stop people hunting on land where they have permission from the landowner who owns the sporting rights.unless the ranger gets this written into legislation it's not worth the paper it's written on.

and then Cass you agree

Cass wrote: »

You are correct, and i said that previously. He told me that it's only for the purpose of the deer license. I still have permission to shoot the lands, and he cannot stop that, but for the purposes of hunting deer, no..

But then (if im reading this right you contradict yourself?

Cass wrote: »

I'm not fuming. The way i see it is now the land is black listed, anyone caught shooting on it is poaching. As the NPWs won't issue a license on this land, and ring the person applying to explain why, the person involved knows they cannot shoot on the land so that leaves the poachers. Meaning if a ranger sees ANYONE on the land they are poaching. Easier to catch and convict.

Im not arguing with you Cass or trying be a knob tripping you up in your own words but as I said what got me interested in this thread was that as far as I read and understood from what you were saying was the NPWS could just black list an area and anyone on it was poaching(as you say above)? Surely they cant do that.Yes Im sure they could not issue a licence or refuse to renew a licence on the basis of that permission BUT if you can obtain/renew your licence based on other acres from other permissions you now have your deer licence AND if the farmer/landowner in the blacklisted area invites you in then you can shoot deer there as you have both a current deer licence and permission off the land owner.
Which scenario is it so ?

natdog

Cass wrote: »

I don't know. When you reach a certain level in terms of numbers you can only fudge the numbers so much. IOW if you shoot 20 and declare 15 it might be done. You shoot 200+ then claiming you only got 10 might be a bit of stretch.
Yeah but shoot 200 declare 100 that's over 4000 grand untaxed.

I'm not even going to get into Coilte. Paying a state body to shoot deer to protect their forestry. I'll give up deer stalking before i ever resort to that. However i will say this. Spme people have no option but to use Coilte lets as private lands simply are not available to them. It's the reason we must consider ourselves, lads with private permissions, lucky.
Is paying a licence fee not the same thing we are still paying the state to protect state assets.

However it's not just Coilte. I've seen this on private lands. Syndicates moving in and offering money to landowners. Some have taken it and within 2 - 3 years regretted it as i posted about on another thread a couple of weeks ago.

And how do you think these syndicates are getting the money to pay land owners. Yes selling deer to dealers.

How else do you propose it get solved? Do you know anyone that works for free? That will give up their job, time, family life, personal life, etc. "for the good of it"? Seriously, nothing is free so to think that investment is a problem, when it is a solution, is silly.

nobody is asking for something to be done for free they already get paid.

But you just said above that throwing money at it will not solve anything. So now not only do you need money, but more of it.
I rang a ranger last year after hearing a shot and seeing a light. He could not call out because there was no Diesel in the jeep/car. I'm not talking about giving these guys €100k per year with expenses and fancy holidays. I'm talking about the basics they need to at least attempt to do their job. If that comes in the form of a small fee from every deer stalker.
Think you took me up wrong I don't want to give them a fee I was giving a scenario that we always get from the government of proposing a fee become totally dependant on it and in a couple of years its not enough so put it up again.

In the last 20 years the gun license fees have gone from €25 and €32 per gun per year (shotgun & rifle) to €80 per 3 years. So from €75 & €96 for three years to €80 for three years. IOW a minimal increase in one and a drop in another.
What makes you think that a deer license with a fee of say, €20 per year would go to such a height that none of us could afford it after the same 220 year time period? Considering the current price is €0.
Its not really the same thing the gun licence is more an admin fee.

Grizzly 45

[

QUOTE=Cass;92049035]Zxthinger, you're gonna love this one.

Please stop using my name and posts or length in your debate with Xthinger.:mad::mad:

No i'm not. Read back. I said i understand why, and don't really care because i have other permissions to use.

Lucky you,but for the ones that dont?And whats to say your other permissions will be safe,because once the area is denuded you can be sure they will move on and the problem starts again someplace else.

I'm not fuming. The way i see it is now the land is black listed, anyone caught shooting on it is poaching. As the NPWs won't issue a license on this land, and ring the person applying to explain why, the person involved knows they cannot shoot on the land so that leaves the poachers. Meaning if a ranger sees ANYONE on the land they are poaching. Easier to catch and convict.

And you said they have TWO lads to cover this entire area and adjoining areas? Thats a favour now of a 1to8 to the poachers of ever being caught.
You cant have it both ways.

It takes some balls for a ranger to approach a lad, armed with gun, and attempt to do his job. He has no idea of the lad he is going to deal with.

Part of the package when you signed up for the job.Get over it.Think any Garda hasnt the same problem or jail warden?
I agree 100% it is a stupid situation for any of those three bodies to be in,but thats what you get if you want lofty ideals of unarmed police and state bodies. By and large has there ever been a NPWS or predecesor shot in the line of duty here?

Dear Christ. Seriously? Quit!!!!

If you cant stand the heat and all that...Why the frup would you stay in a job ,no matter how good the money is if it is wrecking your head on a daily basis.

Nothing is ever that black and white. As for getting proper tools. The fecking Gardaí cannot get the right tools and they have to deal with the proper scumbags of the country.

So give the poachers a heads up, and demand action from the same people that bitch and moan, but won't get up of their arses unless they get paid or something in return.

Ah yes the typical response..."THAT will never work Because....." Do be a hyprocrite now,and accuse me of the same.:P Its no better or worse than what is being suggested.

Back to the 2% rule there.

Not really as there is a collective sanction on the whole .Help out or lose the lease.

You criticise the NPWS for this action, yet demand action of some sort. While it may not be right, pretty or correct it's the actions of men, not an organisation, to stomp out an element that we all hate, and they are trying to do so by any means necessary.

I critize it because it is a short sighted ,quick fix solution that like most of these quick fix solutions wont work long time.Its like putting wall paper on a wall that has major damp problems.Looks good for awhile,then falls off the wall.
If there is nothing there anymore the poachers will move onto your other leases and the problem continues.Black listing the area will just leave it open to further abuse,and if they only have two lads to cover it the chances of being caught are now even less as the ligit shooters who might be watching out for strangers are gone as well as they have no dog in that fight anymore.

Ha, ha, ha.

Get a lad, on less than €18,000 per year, to watch over something that could earn him thousands more if he looks the other way, and/or will get him a hiding if he tries to stop it.

Plenty of Poles.Lithuianians,Russians,Philliphinos and former East bloc types with military experiance out there well versed in hand to hand who would be willing to do it,belive you me. 18 grand or less is what some of these people work on here.

lus what about legislative changes to allow this? The NPWS don't control that

.

Never said they did,but it is funny how quick legislative changes can be brought in when it suits and govt depts clamour for it or need equipment under Health and saftey it can be got really quickly.
Funnily enough I do belive it was a requirement of the job too to be a gun liscense holder as well.As you never know what sort of "vermin" you might encounter on your patrols...But that might have back in the olden days and not in the more modern enlightned better ans smarter times.;)

The old days are not the good old days. Not always. Sometimes it just means people have been wrong, longer.

kindly explain that last bit of your comment abit more in detail.

Then why oh why are some people, that would classed as spearheading deer conservation/management initiatives, the ones that sell hundreds each year? And why or how can people continue to ignore what they do while complaining about deer selling? That to me is more sickening that selling deer. The double standards and false idolisation.

Couldnt agee 100% more with you on that point.

Either get on with your life and ignore/let people that sell it, sell it or start to criticise the legal shooters that do as much harm if not more than poachers.

This is again a slight problem of definitons here as well.Anyone who is poaching or harvesting ,is actually a" legal shooter" as they have been liscensed by AGS to hold a firearm and by NPWS to hunt in a certain area.
Doubt that there arent many illegally held firearms being used in poaching here.
So we have a load of rotten apples in our own apple barrel which needs to be addressed as well.

If lads cannot sell what they shoot they won't shoot as many. Either that or they'll dump the carcass. I shoot between 7 - 12 a year. Between friends and family that always covers me. Now if i was shooting 250 per year what do i do with them? As it is i can sell them, but now i cannot so i don't shoot them.

How the FRUP can anyone shoot 250 plus deer legally in a 6 month season and continously do this year after year without raising suspicions?Even taking sect 42 into it as well?
Even 7to12 a year is abnormally high by EU standards.The average is about 4.5 in Europe thats including road kills and under a very highly controlled game management plan.
Going by these figures as being a sweeping generalisation for the 26 counties ,and I'm no maths genius.That means there are more wild deer in Ireland than the national herd.Which would suggest that we have more thn plenty and should be encouraging this country as a great tourist shooting spot as well.
Think another problem is

We dont actually have a clue how many deer there really are out there in the 26.So Noone can say with any accruaccy whether we have a falling or rising or static pouplation.
Relying on the returns and GD accounts is now a farsce as we know it is blaggarded and there is no sanction on not filling it in correctly or accurately.

f it can raise funds, directly for the NPWS, to help with poaching, patrols, more rangers, etc. then why would you grudge a small license fee? What is it about a fee that is so repugnant to you?

Proably because like "tax" it wont go to where it should be doing the most good.Plus learning from experiance here,this wont stay a "small fee" for long either.It just becomes another money tit for a govt to squeeze.
In an utopia certainly and welcome,in Ireland very doubtful.

useurowname

Ouw, my head is starting to hurt just trying to follow the points made(and they're very good) this thread... but I think I just want to go hunting.

Sparks

hiddenmongoose wrote: »

if im reading this right you contradict yourself?

No, if you have permission to shoot on someone's land, that's exactly what you've got - permission to shoot. If you're shooting foxes or rabbits, that's all you need. But if you want to shoot deer, you need a licence as well as the permission to shoot. That's the bit the NWPS isn't granting for blacklisted areas.


BTW, ZXthinger had one reasonable idea above:

Heres an idea.
1] Get list of all liscense holders in the district about to be blacklisted.
2]Invite to a public meeting at a convient time and place.
3]Lay out the situation about the poaching and the fact that the area will be black listed in the future if the poaching doesnt stop or drops dramatically
4] State that it would be in everyones intrest if they want to keep shooting heree next season to start patrolling the area and start taking regs etc and other legal means to start getting this under control.
5] Develop it from there.

It's not a horrible idea, in fact it's pretty good, but it's got two problems that you need to solve - Cass has outlined one (the 2% problem), but nobody's mentioned the other, namely that step 1 in the idea is something that we can't do. You can't ask for a list of all licence holders in an area, data protection would land like a ton of bricks on anyone who gave you such a list (think about it, a list like that would be of huge interest to certain burglars...).

In fact, we've noted this for at least a decade now - we just don't have any way of contacting all licence holders.

hiddenmongoose

Sparks wrote: »

No, if you have permission to shoot on someone's land, that's exactly what you've got - permission to shoot. If you're shooting foxes or rabbits, that's all you need. But if you want to shoot deer, you need a licence as well as the permission to shoot. That's the bit the NWPS isn't granting for blacklisted areas.

yes they are not granting licences on the basis of those areas but if you have a licence already based on other land(like Cass has) and you have landowners permission on this ''blacklisted '' area then what LAW are you breaking if your stopped? you have a deer licence in your back pocket And you have land owners permission so what law have you broken to be charged with?

Example , I have my licence for deer , today farmer blogs rings me and asks me to shoot deer on his land (a new permission to me) Im delighted and say yes .Little do I know its one of these ''blacklisted areas'' so that evening while out stalking the NPWS spots me calls the GS and approach me in the field,I produce a current firearms licence a current deer licence and a written permission of the landowner/shooting rights holder.Now what law have I broken that the guard can arrest or prosecute me with?

Cass

I'm gonna shorten this to make for easier reading:


hiddenmongoose - The NPWS issue licenses based on the land permissions you submit. If you submit land they deem unsuitable for deer stalking then as the Government body responsible for that they can refuse. If you remove that permission from your application and get your license then shoot deer (ONLY DEER) on that land you re in the breach of the terms of your deer license. IOW the reason it was granted. The ranger will ring or contact you so it's not like you can use the "i didn't know excuse". Put it this way, you apply for a rifle for target shooting & hunting. You get refused because the Super does not want you having that gun for hunting. He grants the license for target shooting only. You go out hunting with it. You're caught, now you are in breach of the conditions of your license. Same thing.



natdog - My point about the numbers/returns is that regardless of the amounts declared legal shooters are doing as much harm in some areas as poachers are by shooting massive numbers. A license fee for deer is a small amount and nothing close to the fees for Coilte leases. Plus i said i would have no problem paying a small fee IF it went to the NPWS to help with deer manangment, poaching patrols, etc. You said the typical Irish solution is to throw money at a problem, and i highlighted that it cannot be done without money. We shoot deer, and as such if i'm asked for a small fee for a license to continue doing that then i've no problem with that. You dismissed the point i made about the gun licenses but you cannot do that simply because it does not suit your argument. The fact is the Government could have bled us when the new gun licensing system came it. The fact is they didn't and i don't see why you would think deer license fees would be any different.


Grizzly45 - It was a joke with Zxthinger so calm your jets. I only mentioned you once, and your last post only shows i was right. As for permissions if i loose them i loose them. I'll be pissed, but cannot change it. I cannot go on thinking the worse or i'll be chewing Zanax like sweets and never leave the house. Not all land owners/farmers are as open to granting permission. I have 7 permissions for the last 8 years that the land owners have given to me and one other. So anyone else on the land should not be there in the first place. Plus the numbers i see most years are steady if not on the rise. As Sparks pointed out your idea won't work for legal reasons. You criticise the NPWS rangers simply because your venting. Your constant desire to "fight the power", criticism off the way things are, dismissal of things YOU believe won't work before they have gotten a chance to be tested, Ireland as the butt of all your rage, etc. is frustrating to read and quite frankly a massive fecking downer. Not to mention i'm sick of reading it. It's far from a great little country, but there is not restrictions on the airports. To use your own words if you can't handle the heat, get out. Everything from you is negative. I'm not saying walk around with sunshine and lollipops, but at some point you need to step back and think before you talk/type. I mean "mercenaries" as deer rangers, paid for by the private sector. Come on, next you'll be wanting Black Hawk choppers, etc. You pine for the "gud oul days". There gone, and the only difference between then and now is with social media nothing is secret.


As one last point in general. I used the term blacklisted. It is not something that was said to me or used by the NPWS or any ranger.