hunting in national parks, NSW and Qld

By Birding-Aus, on July 21st, 2012

Hi everyone,

I know it won’t make any difference but I want to write to the premiers of NSW and Qld over the proposed opening of national parks to recreational shooting.

Just wanted to float what I think are the main reason why this is a bad idea past you to see if there are arguments I have missed:

1. The stated reason for allowing hunting is to control feral animals, but feral animals are not controlled by recreational shooting, but by carefully managed extermination or suppression campaigns conducted by professionals.

2. Recreational shooters have no interest in exterminating feral animals from national parks, otherwise they would no longer have anything to shoot, and there have been cases where hunters have introduced additional feral animals as game into reserves. The effect of this policy could in fact be to increase the number of feral animals in national parks where they were not present before (especially deer being moved to new areas).

3. Shooters create more disturbance in national parks than other users, as typically they move off paths and tracks. This would include damaging vegetation and frighting native animals, driving them away. This is particularly the case if they bring dogs into national parks.

4. Unsupervised shooters may target native animals and birds instead of ferals.

5. There is likely to be a conflict between shooters’ and others’ use of national parks, and other users may be injured in shooting accidents.

6. There already exists an industry catering for shooters on private properties, to open national parks up to shooting is to take money away from rural landholders who have previously offered hunting on their properties.

Carl Clifford

July 21, 2012 at 5:39 pm

Unfortunately, the NSW Government relies on the votes of the Shooters and Fishers party to be able to pass Legislation in the NSW Upper House. The S&F party has the NSW Government well and truly over a barrel, when it comes to running the state.

Best example of quid pro quo I have seen in NSW politics for years.

Cheers,

Sent from my iPad

===============================

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)

http://birding-aus.org ===============================

John Wright

July 21, 2012 at 5:30 pm

It seems that the politicians concerned are not thinking too much about the general public with these kinds of issues. Just out to please their “base”. If it were put to a referendum, then it would lose hands down.

That said, there is an issue of how to control feral species in national parks and adjacent areas, and a discussion on that alone might prove educational for both The Shooters and their allies as well as the environmentalists. There seems to be suspicion on both sides, so an open, frank debate might be worth it. For example, hunting might be allowed for several weeks once every 3 years in order to knock down the feral population of a national park, after which other control programs could be implemented to try to stop the population bouncing back. But any such hunting should be licensed, supervised by park rangers and well-advertised in advance. But this blanket “anyone can shoot ferals unrestricted and unsupervised at any time in any national park in NSW & QLD” is crazy, if that is what they are trying to achieve.

July 21, 2012 at 2:56 pm

Peter,

I am sure that the pig dogger lobby will be wanting that, as their share of the quid pro quo.

peter

July 21, 2012 at 3:40 pm

But are they likely to get it? I doubt the public would tolerate it. I think they understand the problem with dogs running around better than they do shooters claiming to be killing ferals.

"Greg Little"

July 21, 2012 at 2:27 pm

John

The requirement of insurance for potential shooters in the parks is a good idea.

Greg

"Stephen Ambrose"

July 21, 2012 at 2:32 pm

Hi John,

You might like to also make the additional point that hunting in national parks will drive some feral and native animals onto neighbouring rural lands. This could result in increased damage to crops and increased grazing competition with livestock. Potential predators (e.g. dingoes) could follow the grazers onto rural lands, which would increase the risk of mortality or injury to livestock.

(Trying to think of economic reasons because the pollies are obviously not interested in environmental ones).

Stephen Ambrose Ryde NSW

July 21, 2012 at 2:29 pm

Has anyone proposed that dogs be allowed in national parks?

Peter Shute

Dave Torr

July 21, 2012 at 2:15 pm

We only have to look at the behaviour of some duck hunters (especially on opening morning) to know that there will always be some who do not abide by any rules and do not really care what they shoot!

Jim Smart

July 21, 2012 at 1:21 pm

Hello John, Dave and Birding-Aus people,

The NSW Parliament is currently holding an Inquiry into the Management of Public Land in NSW.

See:http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/committee.nsf/0/18b4c6b001e0d367ca2579e9000215c2/$FILE/ATTVTHSX.pdf/Terms%20of%20reference.pdf http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/committee.nsf/0/18b4c6b001e0d367ca2579e9000215c2/$FILE/ATTVTHSX.pdf/Terms%20of%20reference.pdf

The Committee is chaired by a member of the Shooters Party and has terms of reference biased against conservation values. For example Term of Reference 3 states:

3. Examination of models for the management of public land, including models that provide for conservation outcomes which utilise the principles of “sustainable use”.

This could cover a multitude of activities in addition to so called “conservation hunting”. The Shooters have been pushing for “Game Parks”. We could,for example, see deliberate release of a range of exotic animals into our National Parks for commercial hunting.

If we birders value National Parks based on conservation we need to let our views be known to this committee. The Shooters will certainly be drumming up many submissions for their point of view.

Submissions to this Committee must be made by August 1. They can be made online at:

http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/committee.nsf/0/18B4C6B001E0D367CA2579E9000215C2 http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/committee.nsf/0/18B4C6B001E0D367CA2579E9000215C2

Jim Smart East Maitland NSW

July 21, 2012 at 1:05 pm

Sounds good. Although there would be a large number of hunters who would operate professionally and with low-impact, there unfortunately will probably also be a significant percentage of “ferals with guns” who could pose a danger to the general public (and to themselves) if allowed to hunt unrestricted in the parks. I also think that the knowledge of unregulated, unsupervised hunters being active in a national park would deter families, overseas tourists, etc. from wanting to visit it. Additionally, national parks are supposed to be places where people can relax and enjoy the tranquility of unspoiled and unpolluted natural beauty; the last thing I would want or expect when visiting the solitude of a national park is to hear gunshots ringing out all the time. Your point about hunting dogs potentially being used is also well made – you also wouldn’t want to come across a pack of those while hiking, especially if their owner was several minutes behind them (mind you, you could shoot them yourself and get some bounty money!)

As I said in a previous response, I think penalties for any violations of the law need to carry special mandatory criminal sentences more severe than normal if they occur within a national park. The burden of proof should also be put on the defendant rather than the prosecution, so that the hunter is automatically assumed guilty unless he or she can prove that they weren’t the culprit. Perhaps the gun club that the person belongs to should also be held jointly liable for any violations by their members. Each hunter should also be required to have the minimum 10 million dollars of public liability cover that commercial users of the national parks need to have before allowed access. These provisions would be necessary to try to ensure that if the hunting within national parks gets the green light, at least the hunters would be aware that what they got was a special privilege, not some kind of right.

John ===============================

July 21, 2012 at 12:33 pm

Sounds good John. I would have thought that it might be possible to expand on point 5 to the effect that the possible presence of shooters will deter other visitors which will in some areas have a marked effect on tourism. It may of course be offset by an increase in revenue from hunters, but I suspect that hunters will be mainly locals or will camp out, whereas many other tourists will spend significant amounts of money in the area?

Good luck anyway

Dave

Birding-Aus

hunting in national parks, NSW and Qld

11 comments to hunting in national parks, NSW and Qld

Mailing List

Book Search

Meta