THE DEER MENACE

Dominion, Volume 19, Issue 256, 13 July 1926, Page 11

THE DEER MENACE

Sir.—The statements made by the Hon. R. F. Bollard on the deer menace in New Zealand as reported in your issue of to-day shows a singular misconception of the real position. To read his statement one would imagine the deer were -wandering undisturbed over the lands of the farmers, who were only prevented from shooting them down by the protection afforded by the acclimatisation societies, and that all that had to be done was to remove the protection and the door would at once be destroyed. In reality the complete removal of protection would cause less deer to be shot. I venture to say that not one single farmer in Now Zealand is prevented from shooting deer that are doing them harm. I have never heard of .any society opposing any destruction of deer by farmers in any wny in recent years, but in many cases they assist the destruction of' deer where they are harmful. The revenue for this work they obtain from deer-stalking licenses. 'Withdraw protection and the revenue will automatically cease. No reasonable deer stalker wishes to preserve any deer that are likely to cause harm to farmers. The good heads are mostly obtained well back in the ranges, and the stalker looks for his best sport far removed from civilisation. In the mountain-! the country itself is the protection of the deer, not the acclimatisation societies, and there it la impossible to kill out tire deer owing to the inaccessibility of the country and the cover afforded by the native forest. The deer are there now for better or worse, and we should make the best of them. , Most of the southern societies, largely through the efforts of Mr. J. Forbes, of Christchurch, have worked out a splendid system of “blocking” the country in the ranges, by which each licensee is given the sole right to shoot deer over a particular area during the stalking season of about six weeks. This right is generally decided by ballot several months before the season opens, and thus a stalker in England often arranges his block before he leaves for New Zealand. Remove all protection and this system goes by the board, and a get-tiiere-first scramble would ensue for the best blocks, which would be highly distasteful to decent stalkers and which would render visits from overseas visitors practically impossible. In South Westland district the deer are unprotected during ten months, but are protected during March and April, during which licenses are issued. Ibe money obtained from these licenses is expended in shooting down deer during the winter. This system could be further extended if necessary. We have an expensive loiirist Office whoso work is to encourage tourists to visit New Zealand. We parade our fishing and shooting as an attraction, let Mr. Bollard says he intends to throw nwav one of the great attractions of New Zealand. For what purpose? It would cause loss door to be destroyed, not more. One might as well remove the protection of trout and lose the revenue of the fishing licenses, lake what steps are necessary to keep the. deer in check. But let not anyone imagine that removing all protection would effect this—l am. etc.. ROBERT. A. WILSON.