national park visits

Submitted: Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 13:06
ThreadID: 103376 Views:3092 Replies:9 FollowUps:20
This Thread has been Archived
So with the impending new rules stating hunters will be allowed to hunt on 79 national parks..
those of us, that use them, whats your view..

I am a hunter, and have shot on state forests, crown land.. that is designated for such use..
and many private land holders farms, assisting in removing foxes.. and rabbits..
recently BOF, barry o farrel allowed the opening up of national parks to hunters alike..

now people have a extreme view on no hunters should be near any person in national parks.....
but I can say from 7years of evidence that no accident has ever happened.
which states that this program can work, letting shooters into national parks.

they come into small towns and buy food, fuel for the 4wd's and repairs when needed as well.

not only that but the economical benefit to the tax payer in getting rid of feral pests..

in NSW state forest.. that are logged, the estimated benefit to the tax payer is 2.4million dollars, that's just for one year...
at no time has a non shooter been at risk from a hunter..
if anything the hunter is as risk from themselves.. accidental shootings.

the way things are going now, the NPWS cant even manage the parks let alone control the feral pests in the national parks..
hunters provide a effective, immediate and well proved data of removing feral species..
as such in SA with successful results in getting rid of feral goat populations in one national park..

quite a few years ago the government used the army sharp shooters in one national park in qld, and shot 500 feral cats in 3 DAYS !!
where the bilby was being wiped out from feral cats.....

ideally again the army should be brought in, helicopters and sharp shooters to get rid of the brumbies in the high country..
after all we are paying them anyway, and they do require ongoing training...
no better target practice than a moving animal.. or train the pilots in a moving, unpredictable target. !!
but not only the high country, camels in the simpson desert, or even pigs across Australia, or wild buffalo up north.

why not use this as a training exercise.. after all we foot the bill on useless training exercises.. where money could be better spent
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Krooznalong - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 13:28

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 13:28
Those brumbies and camels may be introduced and doing some damage (not aware of any evidence as to how much) but geez it's bloody lovely seeing them.

Will never forget the brumbies at a hut in the mist on dusk in the high country. Magical experience.

And when we did the desert trips (Canning, Simpson, Anne Beadell etc) we looked forward to sighting camels.

Cats - yep shoot the bloody lot. Pigs likewise. But it will never happen - too many of the buggers out there now.

Don't have a problem with regulated shooting in NPs or SFs (although I see that Game Council was recently wiped out in NSW so SFs now off the shooting list). Wonder if the NP program will now get to go ahead???

Use of army for pest control - not a bad idea, however machine guns would necessitate total closure of the area being cleaned out and that would not go down well with some.
AnswerID: 515238

Follow Up By: mountainman - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 13:46

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 13:46
sorry but if your using a sharp shooter these people are HIGHLY TRAINED, individuals..
and are bound by laws and obligations.. id imagine..
its not shooting willy nilly with a machine gun..
throwing a 100 rounds into one animal..
these people are trained to kill, with the least anount of bullets.
theyre not trained like that like how you see In a movie.. just guns blazing......

I agree, nothing wrong with the odd camel or brumby in the bush !!
but to the numbers currently around now, its at the detriment to the environment..

but the camel numbers are over a million in central Australia..
at a guess..
I know for a fact brumby numbers double every 4years.

theyre are over 17million feral cats in this country..
about 22million feral pigs..

they only just recently mustered camels in the simpson desert or one of the parks near it..
they just recently conducted a massive camel cull in the simo.. areas.

the army doesn't use machine guns with sharp shooters..
that's the whole point...
a sharp shooter is trained to make the most of every bullet..
not pull the trigger and ooh let a 100rounds out..

don't forget about the roo cull in Canberra..
ooh how the locals try and stop it..
how else do you control population explosions in good times..?
and then the bad.....yet the locals are happy to see them starve to death..
that's the most horrific way to die, other than poison.. and that's what they prefer..
just makes no sense..
mind you they don't have much sense in the first place..
FollowupID: 794431

Follow Up By: Member - PJR (NSW) - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 15:50

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 15:50
Don't forget to shoot the dogs as well krooza. There is a small bunch of them at the moment near Burra that are attacking local sheep at night and killing them. Not even eating anything off them.

It's only a minority of "locals" mountainman. The majority them see the sense in it and agree or do not have an opinion. But the media has another opinion and want to sell papers etc. Not all locals mate. Far from it.

I don't have a gun. I actually get shivers even thinking of using one. Years ago I eradicated a few rabbits and so on. But events have changed and I don't like them.

Common sense and history tells me that the hunters should not pose a problem. But I still get cold shivers and the heebeegees when they are anywhere within hearing range. But that's not a reason to stop them.

Lets see what the future brings and lets hope it is all good news.

FollowupID: 794442

Follow Up By: mountainman - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 16:41

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 16:41
well said PJR......
but if I mentioned all the pests id have a bloody long list...

cane toads for one..
politicians another....
wild dogs
drug dealers...
mobile speed camera's....... especially QLD where there secretly hidden on the side of the road.... and the warning sign out where you see it, but its too late to slow down..
but where do I stop..

don't forget barry o farrel...
a lot of people's ex wife's........ ha ha ha
or the damn next door neighbours dog that barks at all hours...
or the damn cat leaving their landmines behind on your lawn...

don't forget that clown Ian Mcdonald politician who rorted the NSW public of millions of the proposed mine in the hunter valley....
he need castrating........ and then hanged..
not worth wasting the bullet on him..

mr obede made MILLIONS from that scam...... of a deal !!!!!
FollowupID: 794451

Follow Up By: Member - PJR (NSW) - Wednesday, Jul 24, 2013 at 09:22

Wednesday, Jul 24, 2013 at 09:22
Very true about mentioning all the pests. And some of the two legged variety either.

Before saying anything else MM, this is NOT a personal attack at you or shooters and hunters. The habit of some posters and fellow 4WD tour members "hating" cats has been quite hurtful and I feel obliged to say our side where I cannot be cut off like around a camp fire and can slowly and diplomatically say my piece.

We have hunters in our 4WD club and those that I have spoken too on an individual basis, are quite fair about the whole issue of ferral animals. They can enjoy the hunt by all means. Either in their "jeans" or "genes". (chuckle from a post further down).

We used to go on trips with the club, a big Canberra 4WD club one. On EVERY trip without miss there was always a conversation or comment about eradicating cats. Yep! Cats. Not dogs. Not foxes. Not people either. Sometimes dogs and other animals but cats were ALWAYS mentioned. And not too thoughtfully for the animal lovers in the group. I said animal lovers not just cat lovers for a reason. No one with any social or humane feelings want animals tortured or hurt unnecessarily. I spoke up once, got my tongue tangled and was a little too direct on the CB. I immediately got a response from the leader, the president, who suggested that it was not called for. What I said wasn't but what I meant was. We had just passed a dead kitten, not cat, on the side of the road and people were quite rough with their comments about cats. But I was the one who got "shot" down.

We have cats at home and they will never be a problem. They stay inside or in a large cat cage that has a double door external access for cleaning and cat hatches directly from the cage into the house for 24/7 access to the cage. Not even a grown frog or snake could get into the cage.

Comments such as "Cats - yep shoot the bloody lot" from cat haters on every trip (there is always one) do grow quite offensive over time. They usually follow the sighting of any ferral animal or road kill. Every trip.

It has ruined a lot of evenings around the campfire for us. So we shut our mouths and go to bed early.

I totally agree that wild cats are also an issue. But an equal issue at the most not a major one. Totally agree but not all cats are and never will be.

After hearing that all cats should be shot on every trip, even the training ones, it gets a but insulting. And every forum as well. You yourself said it. I know that you don't mean ours at home. But . . . . .

I feel better now guys. Enjoy your hunting but after a few close calls in a past "life" I think that I will leave the guns to you lot.

FollowupID: 794500

Follow Up By: get outmore - Thursday, Jul 25, 2013 at 03:09

Thursday, Jul 25, 2013 at 03:09
The issue with using the army is miltary rounds are quite innefective and cruel.
Its hard to kill anything outright with it as it passes straight through and is not desighned to mushroom and impart its energy
Leaving anything shot to crawl off and slowly die
FollowupID: 794593

Reply By: Barbera72 - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 14:17

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 14:17
Finger crossed it's not going to happen to one of my favorite NPs
AnswerID: 515241

Follow Up By: mountainman - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 14:35

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 14:35
why ?
this sort of uninformed view is what's the issue.
what's your argument ?

I have evidence that's states its completely safe and proven.
im all ears.
happy to listen and not make judgements based on scare mongering or fears based on lies......
that's the biggest problem.....
peoples emotions, and not based on facts over what's been going on for years in Victoria's state parks....... hunting safely !
FollowupID: 794438

Follow Up By: Barbera72 - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 16:17

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 16:17
Sorry mate, you say you are happy to listen and not make judgement, yet you say I'm "the issue because I have an uninformed view" on the matter? Is it uninformed because it is not your view? Apart the fact I cannot see a connection between amateur recreational hunting in NPs and feral animal control even if I try hard, I can't even remotely relate a supposed benefit to taxpayers from opening hunting in some NPs. I do understand hunters are represented by some politician who can have some significant weight in parliament and so this come to politics.
You have evidence this is safe? Good, i'm not concerned about safety. "Scare mongering or fears based on lies"? Don't care. I see National Parks as places to enjoy nature away from the mess of society, I do rockclimbing, camping and bushwalking therefore I don't want to be told: today you cannot enter because hunters are shooting. Then, I am aware the politician will make decisions independently from my views and this is all good. And good for you as well as hunter.
On the top of all this I can say sincerely: I can't stand weapons of any kind and shooting. I can't see the joy of killing an animal.
I hope this help to answer your question Mountainman.
FollowupID: 794445

Follow Up By: mountainman - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 17:09

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 17:09
you've just put your foot in your mouth.....
from your reply

everyone is entitled to their view..
and that's it......
that's your view..
not based on any facts or evidence as ive previously mentioned..
and wont listen to it either, where im happy to hear it......

your not even prepared to hear the other side of the story......

you cant make an informed opinion on the current situation..
state budgets aren't enough.. to cover pest eradication.
shooters provide a free service to the tax payer....
at their own cost..

im sorry but man has killed animals since the day he was born..
for thousands of years...... and aborigines for THOUSANDS OF years previous to us....
this Is in our jeans..
obviously you eat meat..
soo someone has to kill your food for you..
well at least the meat you eat...
I have no problems with that..

happy to see your view........
but its obvious you cant be open to serious discussion....
which is what this is..

that's the thing, bushwalkers and campers have been co existing for years with hunters..
there hasn't been parks closed.......
ever because of a few shooters enjoying their hobby..

only when a cull is organised is when a park is closed.. and professional licensed hunters are used..
this is their job..
they have extremely strict guidelines to follow regarding culls......
and are instructed by NPWS..
FollowupID: 794452

Follow Up By: Barbera72 - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 20:21

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 20:21
Don't play the card of the foot in the mouth. You started attacking with nonsense my simple post: my wish of this never happening to my favourite NPs. As simple as that.
My views on "shooting for fun" doesn't have to be supported by facts or evidence, unless you want me to sign a piece of paper stating I don't like shooting for fun?

To answer your long list of statements directed to me:
"state budgets aren't enough.. to cover pest eradication" maybe, but you go shooting for fun not to help eradicate pests

"shooters provide a free service to the tax their own cost.." doubt amateur recreational shooters provide such service, btw did I ask for?

"im sorry but man has killed animals since the day he was born..for thousands of years...... and aborigines for THOUSANDS OF years previous to us...." not for fun and not with guns but just for a feed

"obviously you eat meat..
soo someone has to kill your food for you..
well at least the meat you eat..." soo, how do you know I eat meat?
Are you just making an "uninformed opinion"?

"this Is in our jeans.." shooting may be in my jeans, surely it ain't in my genes.

FollowupID: 794473

Reply By: Member - Frank P (NSW) - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 15:29

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 15:29

An update:

O'Farrell HAS NOT allowed the opening up of NPs to hunters. In fact, a couple of weeks ago he SEVERELY RESTRICTED the planned access by hunters to NPs.

Firstly and with immediate effect, the Game Council, which was to oversee recreational hunters as young as 12 using conventional hunting firearms as well as bows, crossbows and black powder "antique" weapons, has been disbanded following an independent review of its operations. The review found that in essence the Council was incapable of discharging its regulatory and safety monitoring obligations, for a number of reasons.

This action has put an immediate stop to all previously allowed hunting activities that were permitted under the auspices of the Game Council. Until new arrangements are in place, NO ONE is allowed to hunt in state forests and other crown land - all the arrangements that permitted it have been withdrawn. However, you can still hunt on private land with the landowner's permission.

Beginning in October sometime, a new system will be in place on a trial basis.

- The trial will take place in only a few of the originally planned 79 NPs. They will all be outback parks.
- Only conventional hunting firearms will be allowed. No bows, crossbows or black powder "antiques".
- Shooters must be 18 or older, properly licensed.
- There will be other qualifications (competence, target identification, etc) but I don't know specific, just because you have a licence and a firearm doesn't mean you will get approval. It is not automatic.
- Shooters will be accompanied by an appropriately trained NPWS ranger who will have the authority to cancel a hunt at any time.
- Application to hunt must be made considerably in advance so that at least one month's notice can be given to other users of the affected Park, Forest or whatever. (Previously it could be as little as 48 hours)
- These arrangements apply to all the previous areas where hunting was allowed in NSW (except private land), ie State Forests, Reserves and other Crown Land.

There are other details which I cannot recall or which have not yet been finalised, but that's the guts of it.

Now for a more personal bit ...

Not so long ago my wife and I were in the line of fire from shooters in a national park. It was a close call.

In our incident the shooters were locals from one of the farms on the access road to the NP campground. Being locals they would have known about the campground and the possibility that campers could be present, but they made no effort to find out. They just arrived on their quadbike and started shooting 'roos. Some of those fled in our direction and shots were fired at them, ie toward us. Until we made our presence known (flashing torces, yelling out) those people were unaware of our presence. As soon as they saw us they hightailed it out of there.

We do not believe we were intentionally shot at, but we believe that the type of incident we experienced is typical of the risk that would be imposed on campers, walkers and other users of national parks if unsupervised recreational shooters of unknown ability, skill, competence and attitude were to be allowed simultaneous access with those other users.

I'm sure the majority of shooters are careful, responsible people, aware of the rules and also of the dangers their passtime presents to themselves and others, and who prepare and act accordingly. But then there are the others, and it is their stupidity, ignorance and callous disregard for the rules and safety of others who spoil it for the majority. Isn't it always the case (as per the recent posts on EO about bogans trashing campsites).

Trouble is with this activity (shooting) mistakes (if that is what they are. Disregard of rules and safety is not a mistake, it is a conscious action) are so easily fatal.

My wife and I are not opposed to culling of feral pests in NPs or other Crown Land. We are not opposed to hunting. But we are most definitely opposed to the use of poorly supervised recreational hunters of unknown ability, responsibility, concsience or ethic to be mixing it up with other users.

We think the use of professionals, assisted by skilled and proficient recreational shooters in an appropriately controlled and supervised way is an effective method of controlling feral pests in public landsd.
We think O'Farrell's amended plan has merit and hope that it will not be watered down by sectional and political interests.

Sorry for the long post.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 515246

Follow Up By: mountainman - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 16:31

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 16:31
yes that is correct.
I believe at the minute 13 national parks are proposed.. for hunting.
once research, or the evaluation then the 79 will either be going ahead or not..

sadly with everything.. and in any field, work or other you will always find the rogues that don't play by the rules, or have no care for anyone..

these people bring the whole shooting fraternity into disrepute..
just like the whole cattle export ban overseas..
only a few abbitours doing the wrong thing crippled the industry..
which Mr Ludwig shut it down.. with massive ramifications.

whole point is you will always find an element of humans in anything doing wrong.

im sad you had to be put in that position, that no proper hunter would ever want to be put in themselves.. being a close call to being shot.
we stand by ethics where we aim to kill with one bullet, and show compassion to the animal to kill most humanely and ethically.
and if needs another shot, very quickly followed to put the animal down and reduce pain and suffering caused by a misplaced shot.

this is far more humane that any poison.
which can take days to a week to kill the animal.

that is also correct that "this" hunter that you mention has no regard for his or the welfare of the publics safety at hand..

we stand by a code of safety at all times..
identify the target and beyond the animal.
if unsafe do not shoot !!

as you said....
"Trouble is with this activity (shooting) mistakes (if that is what they are. Disregard of rules and safety is not a mistake, it is a conscious action) are so easily fatal."

this is soo true, but this person isn't a hunter at all..
there just a cowboy out for a killing no matter what risk..

this element needs to be removed.. from the hunting fraternity.

and yes state parks in nsw are off limits.....shooting wise..

in Victoria is unchanged.. shooting in state parks..
Shooting in national parks with the required R licence.. un changed
for specific game..

its very obvious the above people caught out shooting near humans around dusk ? or after are not real hunters at all...
this is most dangerous, its obvious to a hunter.. once the sun goes down you cant see much in front of you let alone behind the target your shooting

im not here to represent a one sided view..
im open for discussion..

and the above post is brilliant by Frank P
and I agree..

but as I said, these people aren't hunters..
don't act to a code or ethics we hunters live by...
FollowupID: 794449

Reply By: Iza B - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 15:29

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 15:29
Too many fools and cowboys among the shooters to ever get my approval to be out there when I'm using a NP. I go there to enjoy the quiet, not dodge bullets.

AnswerID: 515247

Follow Up By: AlbyNSW - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 18:33

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 18:33
Yes I hear you. The 4WD fraternity have the same problem with a minority number of redneck types damaging the environment that gives everyone a bad name
The trouble is the stakes are much higher when firearms are involved
FollowupID: 794463

Follow Up By: mountainman - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 19:15

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 19:15
yes that's true in everything..
I used to 4wd with mates, but with what they did,....
id rather go on my own..

they're reason to go into the high country the weekend before the long weekend..
was..... now get this.....
to stuff up the tracks before anyone else does..
gladly this person is not a person id ever go away with..again...
nor does he own a firearms license ......

please dont put us all in the same pot.

any fraternity has the same problem..
cowboys driving trucks......
what about the one firm having all their trucks modified to go faster..
and the coppers had to use their helicopter fleet to track them across the COUNTRY.......over 50 semi's...... you remember that ?
The drivers just left the trucks on the side of the road and bailed... !

this company only ever got looked into.. after a elderly couple in sydney was instantly killed from the trck smashing into the rear of it..

a hammer can be lethal in the wrong hands, or even a car..
remember skyes law ?
all in the name of jailing a driver not stopping when asked, and that person then crashed into a sedan and killed a little kid......
skyes law is named after the kid...

stakes are the same in everything..
someone can get killed..

people get killed at work, place accidents..

just because a gun is involved people doesnt mean the risks are higher.
its the knob using it.
like everything..

yes its nice to go into national parks for the peace and quiet..
they are big enough to handle both hunters and campers alike...

dodging bullets is a bit extreme..
FollowupID: 794469

Reply By: Witi Repartee - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 17:18

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 17:18
Shooting in National Parks has been a long tradition in NZ. Permits are generally required and may be restricted at peak visitor times, i.e goat shooting in the Whanganui National Park during the summer tramping and kayaking period. There is no evidence of an increase in fatalities or near misses. However despite shooters accessing these parks for Possums, goats, deer, pigs and goats, feral animals remain an ongoing problem.
AnswerID: 515256

Follow Up By: Member - Frank P (NSW) - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 18:11

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 18:11
"However despite shooters accessing these parks for Possums, goats, deer, pigs and goats, feral animals remain an ongoing problem."

It's interesting you say that, WR.

It could be that the numbers are so out of control that nothing short of a concentrated blitz on a park will bring the situation under control.
I believe that is likely to be the case here too.

However, consider this also ...

After our little incident described above, the attending senior ranger the next day and a colleague who used to be responsible for the control of feral pests in NSW state-owned property (no names, no pack drill) each independently told me a similar story ...

That is that contracted shooters brought in to cull feral pests - goats, pig, deer - shot the trophy animals and left the females and juveniles to live another day ... "To give us something to shoot at next time, mate"

If that is true, and I have no reason to disbelieve these two, it is difficult not to be cynical.

That is why I believe that the NSW National Park shooting program needs to be properly supervised to ensure that the real objective (the cull) is being met.

I'm not sure if state forests need such a stringent program, but suspect they do. Land owners adjoining crown land will welcome an EFFECTIVE culling program, whether the crown land is NP, state forest, reserve or some other.


Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

FollowupID: 794461

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 18:56

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 18:56
Interesting Witi. So presumably there's a tradition of occasional shooting deaths in NZ parks? There have been deaths in 2007, 2010 and 2013 from shooters across the ditch, including ironically one of a marksman. The moral - don't go hunting in NZ 2016 if you believe in sequences.

I'd have few problems with trained, tested (a psyche test would be useful), and licensed (by government environmental groups, not hunters associations - foxes and chookhouses comes to mind) hunters having occasional access to NPs for feral animal control. But I don't believe for a minute that the majority of sporting shooters are as vigilant, caring or accurate as Mountainman suggests and I have no doubt at all that "near misses" and "accidental" shootings of non-target species will either not be reported or will be covered up.
FollowupID: 794466

Follow Up By: garthyguts - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 19:23

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 19:23
What's the difference to driving to Bourke on the main road, there are people shooting on private land either side of the road and not one person or vehicle has been shot. will be the same any where you travel
FollowupID: 794470

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 20:39

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 20:39
Yes, I can see the similarities Garthy.
FollowupID: 794475

Reply By: AlbyNSW - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 19:45

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 19:45
Let's call a spade a spade! It annoys me that shooters want access to NP's under the guise of pest control. Let's get real, hunters just want to shoot stuff and are looking for new areas to do it! They are not interested in environmental preservation, I don't see the same people wanting to eradicate cane toads etc or looking to remove the noxious weeds or prevent soil erosion.
I have nothing against shooters and participate myself in pest control on relatives properties.
I saw a program on TV a couple of weeks ago with an interview with I think it was the president of the shooters party? or a similar representative. He was showing his trophy room with the heads of various game from around the world and told the story of how he recently got permission (and paid a fee) to the African Govt to shoot an elephant. He described how he walked up to the elephant and from about 20 feet away killed the animal with a single shot.
Have to say that I don't think the image portrayed in the program did anything to help the shooters cause in general.
I have an open mind on the whole hunting subject but if any shooting does get approved I think it needs to be regulated by other than the shooters themselves
AnswerID: 515264

Reply By: Member - Mark (Tamworth NSW) - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 20:51

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 20:51
I've shot roos, pigs, feral cats and rabbits when I was younger on private properties, I agree with professional helicopter shooting of brumbies in places like Guy Fawkes NP between Coff's and Glen Innes. I am definitely not a greenie.
But I can not agree with allowing shooters into NP without ranger supervision. As mentioned above there are just too many cowboys, who won't limit themselves to target feral animals.
I know responsible pig doggers who would do a great job in a NP with feral pigs, but I don't have confidence to say they would be in the majority.
I don't call Tamworth or Armidale the outback yet there are NP in those regions amongst the 13 in the trial. I've been in Coolah Tops NP with my family when illegal shooting was going on, it's scary let me tell you.
The only solace I take out of it is that most of the shooters in these parks I visit are too lazy to venture more than 25m from their 4WD on a track and I will be hopefully well away from those tracks.
I also struggle with the phrase that these shooters support local communities by buying produce in the communities near the NP. Unless they stay more than several days they don't need to and rarely cart their rubbish out, they just dump it in the parks.

Around here the shooters presently don't control the feral animals in the state forests where they can shoot, why do they need more country to shoot in?

AnswerID: 515267

Follow Up By: AlbyNSW - Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 20:58

Tuesday, Jul 23, 2013 at 20:58
Well said Mark
FollowupID: 794479

Follow Up By: garthyguts - Wednesday, Jul 24, 2013 at 09:47

Wednesday, Jul 24, 2013 at 09:47
Mark, you cant blame every shooter for a few. it's like saying every caravan owner leaves rubbish and toilet paper all over the side of roads and rest area's
FollowupID: 794506

Follow Up By: Member - Mark (Tamworth NSW) - Wednesday, Jul 24, 2013 at 20:58

Wednesday, Jul 24, 2013 at 20:58
No Garthy I don't brand all shooters as iresponsible, but unfortunately there are few 2nd chances with a gun.

As I said I know some individual pig doggers who are given free range over a number of private properties would do a wonderful job in a NP with feral pigs. But again there are too many cowboy pigdoggers. The good ones I know aren't that interested in NP anyway as there is no shortage of feral pigs on private properties they have "visiting rights" on.

As to the argument of controlling/ eradicating feral cats with recreational shooting, dream on. You will really only find the cats at night by spot lighting where you are generally confined to tracks, and that won't make a huge dent in the population.

FollowupID: 794577

Reply By: The Landy - Wednesday, Jul 24, 2013 at 11:52

Wednesday, Jul 24, 2013 at 11:52
The need to cull feral animals in some (all) of our National Parks is a well informed argument, and I suspect the majority of the population wouldn’t disagree with the need to do this from time to time.

The problem that arises is how it will be done, that is humane to the animal and keeps the park safe for all users at the same time.

When it comes to the use of firearms in National Parks for the purpose of culling I suspect views will be polarised because there are three groups, those who love guns and can see the merit in their use, those who can’t stand them and will never agree, and possibly a lesser number that could be persuaded either way, or who don’t really care.

Whilst the new proposals appear to cover the level of competency and safety of those who will be engaged to undertake a cull with firearms and therefore placing safeguards that might be adequate to most people, I still have the issue of the rogue shooter.

A rogue shooter can turn up anywhere, anytime, and in any National Park and place the safety of others at risk, unfortunately that is something that confronts us already, and “Frank P” in his post highlights his experience in this regard.

But does the use of firearms in National Parks put us on a “slippery slope” whereby it might encourage more than just the “rogue” shooter to have an unauthorised go in a National Park. The sound of a gun-shot might encourage others to pull their firearm out, not necessarily then and there, but next week, or next month. After all if someone else is doing it perhaps it is okay? A line of thinking that seemingly tends to prevail, increasingly.

A bit like the “track closed” sign, most four-wheel drivers will obey it, but plenty of usually reasonable and law abiding people on seeing fresh tracks might form the view that if someone else has done it recently, than it might just be okay to ignore the sign. The stakes are raised when it involves firearms.

I think firearms are most likely the best and most humane way to tackle the culling of feral animals. The question for many National Parks users, such as me, is whether the desire to see culling take place is great enough to allow the use of firearms in National Parks.

Could this be like Pandora's Box, or letting the Genie out of the bottle?

I'm concerned it might be...

AnswerID: 515305

Follow Up By: Member - Frank P (NSW) - Wednesday, Jul 24, 2013 at 14:34

Wednesday, Jul 24, 2013 at 14:34
"I think firearms are most likely the best and most humane way to tackle the culling of feral animals. The question for many National Parks users, such as me, is whether the desire to see culling take place is great enough to allow the use of firearms in National Parks."

I said in my earlier post that my wife and I support properly controlled and monitored culling of feral pests in national parks.

Despite the extra safeguards the NSW Premier has put in place for the trial of the re-vamped system, I am still not sure that shooting should be permitted while other users such as campers, bushwalkers, birdwatchers and others are roaming about at random.

No-one on foot is compelled to stick to tracks, which I understand will have a degree of protection imposed because shooters will not be permitted to shoot on or over walking tracks or near campgrounds. However, anyone can walk a creek, a stream-bed or bush-bash and camp out if they wish. Will that freedom to roam have to be curtailed to accommodate shooters? That would seem to me to be an inequitable restriction on the many to accommodate the few.

The alternative would be to close to other users a part or all of a NP or public land that shooters are using. Is that reasonable and equitable? (I am talking about shooting for sport here, not an organised cull.)

On 14th April the Sydney Morning Herald reported that there were 6 million visitors in the previous 12 months to the 79 parks that were to be affected by the hunting proposal. In the same period there were just 26,000 applications to hunt in State Forests. Is it reasonable that all or part of parks be closed to the great majority to accommodate such a minority special interest group for their sport? I don't think it is.

However, if is to accommodate an organised cull where recreational shooters take part, then yes. In those circumstances, don't close the park just for a weekend shoot-off. Close it, or part of it, for as long as it takes for the shooters, under the auspices of NPWS, to do a proper cull or eradication, as far as it is practicable, of the targetted feral pest.


Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

FollowupID: 794524

Reply By: Member - Matt M - Thursday, Jul 25, 2013 at 12:14

Thursday, Jul 25, 2013 at 12:14
I don't disagree with the thrust of your discussion, except the Army bit. How can you say that current training exercises are 'useless' but flying around shooting feral animals will provide some kind of value? The ability to shoot straight is about the most basic requirement of Army training mate. Kind of like turning the key is to being a competent driver. The 'useless' training undertaken to prepare our troops for overseas deployments is unbelievably complex and focused on surviving and winning in a very difficult environment, one where the 'ferals' shoot back, plant IEDs, mount ambushes and commit all sorts of atrocities.

Otherwise, yeah agree with you.

AnswerID: 515356

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (11)