Game management in Germany

[Jonny]

I've been sitting on this for a little while, but the currently active thread on bears in Southern Ontario reminded me of it.

 

Game management in Germany is interesting for two reasons: firstly because it's a big surprise to most people that there's so much game in Germany, secondly that the way they manage the game is fascinating in and of itself.

 

http://www.spiegel.d...nal/zeitgeist/0,1518,663411,00.html

 

http://fwp.mt.gov/mt...tingGermany.htm

 

From another site: Germany has one of the largest deer populations in

Europe (1), and ≈19,000 tons of venison are consumed

in Germany each year Information on distribution of age

groups was obtained from local hunting authorities. The

target population of our 3-year study was ≈3,492,000 roe

deer, 181,000 red deer, and 157,000 fallow deer (Table 1).

The population size was estimated by assuming that the

annual hunting bag (number of animals killed each year)

represents approximately one third of the population, that

age distributions in the hunting bag correspond to those of

the deer population, and that the annual population sizes

before hunting did not change during the study period.

These assumptions correspond to management regulations

for hunting (2). During the 2002–2003 hunting season,

1,117,511 roe deer, 60,407 red deer, and 52,240 fallow deer

were killed in Germany (2). On the basis of these data, the

hunting bags of cervids >18 months for the 3-year study

period were estimated at 2,095,000 roe deer, 109,000 red

deer, and 94,000 fallow deer

Edited April 28, 2010 by Jocko

[Jonny]

Judging from that hot "Bear" thread, people would rather debate the pro's and con's of shooting a wild animal and have pissin' contests over who knows the most, than to examine game management strategies that allow for hunting while at the same time minimizing the potential for problems - be it bear/people or deer/cars, etc.

 

The fact is that in certain ways, animals and people don't mix and it's a question of maintaining a balance between viable populations of animals and lessening their negative impact on people, while also allowing traditional hunting to take place.

 

Besides its economic impact on Northern Ontario, the cancellation of the spring bear hunt removed an important management tool, and let's face it, when animals and man meet, management is necessary.

 

I wonder if anyone actually had enough interest in the management question to browse the links I posted.

[ehg]

I read the links and was surprised at the numbers of deer and wild boar in Europe.

Was thinking in the thousands but actually a few million.

 

Seems like hunting is for the elite. First you need much money and then pass rigorous testing.

200,000 deer being roadkilled a year in Germany doesn't sound too good.

[bigfish1965]

 

The fact is that in certain ways, animals and people don't mix and it's a question of maintaining a balance between viable populations of animals and lessening their negative impact on people, while also allowing traditional hunting to take place.

 

 

Just like training a dog is actually about training the owner, wildlife management is more about managing the people. The first step in any plan is reducing incursion via non-destructive techniques.

Having a balanced system is more important than providing hunting opportunities because achieving that ensures good hunting. Good hunting is the result of a good plan, not the goal.

[Jonny]

Seems like hunting is for the elite. First you need much money and then pass rigorous testing.

 

I didn't read it that way. When you look at shares in a management lease that you can buy in Germany, it may be similar to, say, an Ontario deer camp. And if you look a the bucks you spend for gear etc. to go on big game hunting trips here, that really adds up too.

 

 

Just like training a dog is actually about training the owner, wildlife management is more about managing the people. The first step in any plan is reducing incursion via non-destructive techniques.

Having a balanced system is more important than providing hunting opportunities because achieving that ensures good hunting. Good hunting is the result of a good plan, not the goal.

 

Of course habitat is important, yes, but I think you may be splitting hairs here. The good management and the good hunting are co-dependent.

 

If you read the article closely, there are so many boar and deer in Germany that the system is not balanced without hunting. It's not the natural balance that matters (there isn't any, because it's more of a "farmed" system, for lack of a better term), it's the wildlife/people balance that's important.

 

It's much more analagous to Southern Ontario than Northern Ontario. In most of N. Ont. a natural balance could be achieved. Not in S. Ont.

Edited April 29, 2010 by Jocko

[bigfish1965]

I didn't read it that way. When you look at shares in a management lease that you can buy in Germany, it may be similar to, say, an Ontario deer camp. And if you look a the bucks you spend for gear etc. to go on big game hunting trips here, that really adds up too.

 

 

 

 

Of course habitat is important, yes, but I think you may be splitting hairs here. The good management and the good hunting are co-dependent.

 

If you read the article closely, there are so many boar and deer in Germany that the system is not balanced without hunting. It's not the natural balance that matters (there isn't any, because it's more of a "farmed" system, for lack of a better term), it's the wildlife/people balance that's important.

 

It's much more analagous to Southern Ontario than Northern Ontario. In most of N. Ont. a natural balance could be achieved. Not in S. Ont.

 

I would not say that good management means taking over the role of predator. Sharing the role, certainly, but being exclusive predator...bad idea. There are too many over lapping areas where hunting is permitted and not.

As far as S. Ontario goes, we need those predators. Where would the rabbit and rodent population be if not for the coyotes? What farm damage would occur without a 24/7 predator about. Sure they take sheep and chickens, but the primary food for them is rodents.

The population tells you the food source is good still. They are healthy, big and have no mange. We will see in the next few weeks what the litters are like.

 

Now the biggest thing...the coyotes are here to stay. You cannot kill them off. There are too many areas where hunting is not allowed..any attempt at a cull will drive the coyotes deeper into the city and increase litter sizes. There they will adapt to us..thats when it gets bad.

It is only a matter of time before the bears get here. I hope we learn by then that killing off animals just because we don't know what to do with them or because we are afraid of them is not the answer.

 

You cannot eliminate a species without a massive campaign that will never,ever get public approval.

This is not Germany. They have done so much to destroy their wolf population that an abundance of deer and other wildlife was inevitable.

The provinces animals got along just fine before we got here. The ideal is to have as little interference as we can. A return to the natural and indigenous animals has always been the goal of the plan for Ontario.

 

BTW....watch the tick population do a massive explosion this year...I mean massive..on a scale we have never seen. All the ingredients are in place. The only thing that can alter this wildlife swing is a hot and dry summer.

[Jonny]

Isn't it amazing to realize that hunters in Germany are well-thought-of and hunters in Canada are looked at with doubts. You would think it would be the other way around.

 

 

 

A return to the natural and indigenous animals has always been the goal of the plan for Ontario.

 

 

 

I don’t think that’s true in a wholesale way, especially not in the kind of numbers that used to exist in S Ont. That’s just not realistic. The habitat’s just not there, and too many conflicts with people would occur – just look at the fuss about ONE bear in the London area!

 

 

 

And there are certainly not going to be any plans to establish a protected wolf population in S Ont!

 

 

 

I think you might be referring to things like the re-introduction of wild turkeys and the re-introduction of elk. But those things were done with a view toward also increasing hunting opportunities. In the case of wild turkeys we might definitely say their re-introduction has been a success. With elk, it has been less so. For example, in the Iron Bridge area, on the Huron North Shore, farmers' complaints about the elk have prompted a reversal of policy, and efforts are being made to reduce the herd (not through hunting) even though the herd is small.

 

 

 

Wild turkeys do not come into conflict with human activities; elk do.

 

 

 

I haven't stayed abreast of the deer situation in Rondeau Provincial Park, but some time ago there was great concern that an expanding deer population was browsing so heavily that it was destroying Ontario's only example of naturally-occurring Carolinian forest. That was (is?) a destructive change in the environment, one that people do not want.

 

 

 

Coyotes were rare in S Ont until fairly recently yet there was no plague of rabbits and rodents. I assume they were held in check quite well by raptors (hawks, owls, etc.) and by small carnivorous mammals like mink and weasel. I’m not so sure coyotes are an important part of the ecosystem. I think you’re correct though about not being able to get rid of them, and about hunting being too controversial. Too many bleeding hearts in the cities.

 

 

 

Beavers, on the other hand, which you mentioned before are impossible to get rid of, well, they’re much more susceptible to control and eradication (mostly by trapping). They are tied to water and to identifiable lodges (or bank holes) and feed beds. Don’t forget that the fur trade almost wiped out beaver in the less remote parts of Ontario a few centuries ago.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jonny]

Interesting follow-up to the discussion. Seems the beavers also have an impact on the fisheries.

 

The beaver has already been exterminated twice in the island’s history, once in the 1800s and again in the 1920s. The current population was introduced in 1949.

 

http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/05/13/prince-edward-island-to-cull-nuisance-beavers/

[Twocoda]

I haven't stayed abreast of the deer situation in Rondeau Provincial Park, but some time ago there was great concern that an expanding deer population was browsing so heavily that it was destroying Ontario's only example of naturally-occurring Carolinian forest. That was (is?) a destructive change in the environment, one that people do not want.

 

Living in the St Thomas area at the time of this issue i always believed your statement to be a ploy to keep the bleeding hearts at bay from the real reason there was a required mass cull...(deer meet car)insurance companies pissed) i was all for the cull but i wish they had of opened it up to the general hunting public instead of just the natives....although they put a small dent in the population ...they drove more deer to the east and north ( london area ) shortly there after deer were showing up in the city..(literally in banks )..convenient for the hunters of the area but in essence ...what they did was relocate the problem...two years running a friend of mine hit the crocket list with two massive Bucks...

 

The Carolinian Forest is as it was ( in my opinion )

 

This thread is a good read ...thanks Jocko and Rick

Edited May 14, 2010 by Twocoda