Wednesday, 13 November 2024

Motions

Deer hunting

Jeff BOURMAN (Eastern Victoria) (15:51): I move:

That this house notes that:

(1) deer hunting is the premier hunting activity in Victoria, with over 48,000 game licences held for the express purpose of hunting deer, both by stalking and hound hunting;

(2) recreational deer hunting contributes over $200 million a year to the Victorian economy and provides around 2000 jobs, with 69 per cent of hunter expenditure coming from regional Victoria;

(3) recreational deer hunting is the dominant below-snowline use of the Alpine National Park and the revenue from hunting tourism is vital to several regional communities;

(4) Victoria’s recreational hunters kill around 140,000 deer annually, most of them female and most of them on public land;

(5) the recreational deer harvest in Victoria dwarfs that of government-sponsored control programs, all whilst providing triple bottom line benefits to the state;

(6) there are large tracts of public land that are national parks that are not open to seasonal hunting by licensed deer hunters, with no sound rationale for their exclusion;

and calls on the government to open appropriate tracts of applicable national parks at suitable times to recreational hunters to increase opportunities for Victoria’s burgeoning recreational deer-hunting community to engage in their chosen outdoor recreation.

I will just quickly run through it. Deer hunting is a premier activity in Victoria, with 48,000 licences for stalking and hound hunting, and there are about 220,000 people with a shooters licence in Victoria, so whilst deer hunters are a growing cohort, there are a lot of people that do enjoy shooting as well as hunting. The Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party are always advocating for public land being for the public and for expanding use as long as it is appropriate, so we do not, obviously, support any new national parks, though I will note the ones that we are going to fight were promised some time ago, but it has been such a long time I do not see why we are at it at the moment.

There has been a lot of conjecture about how much shooting and hunting do or do not inject into the economy, but in the last study it was over $200 million into the economy. That is not chump change; that is a fair whack, basically, of expenditure that is completely by choice. About 69 per cent of that $200 million – roughly $140 million, bearing in mind I am a politician, not a mathematician – goes to quite a struggling part of this state, and that is the rural and regional economy. $140 million might not seem a lot to a chamber where we talk in tens or hundreds of millions or billions, but 140 million bucks to, say, the servo up at Kerang or 140 million bucks for a motel out in the north of the state or the east of the state – not that there are any ducks in Gippsland, of course –

Enver Erdogan interjected.

Jeff BOURMAN: It is an ongoing joke, Mr Erdogan. But that sort of money means a lot to a lot of people. Discretionary income is the key to this. It is not a job; it is something people do. They spend this money by choice; they spend this money on upgrading their stuff by choice. Hunting of course has been in the human DNA since the day we were either created or crawled out of the primordial ooze, depending on your view on life, but we have been doing it. Some people hunt in supermarkets; I suggest more people should hunt on public land, where it is appropriate.

Getting down to how many deer are removed from the environment, this is where the opposition to these sorts of things gets kind of weird. Hunters remove about 140,000 deer from the Victorian environment. This is not shooting things as a cull and this is not being paid by someone to do it; this is people who spend their own money to willingly go out and remove the deer from the environment and generally eat as much as they can carry out. Obviously, some people will go deep into the wilds and carry out as much as they can – say, a full-sized sambar stag. You can get up to 80 kilos or thereabouts of usable meat from them, and that is a lot to be trying to carry 10 kilometres over mountainous territory, but generally people will take what they can. If you are lucky enough to shoot one that is near a car, generally a whole lot more gets used.

Culling programs cannot compete. Helicopter gunships fly around at hideous expense and generally use semiautomatic rifles, which we are not allowed to have as recreational hunters, and they shoot the deer. But they shoot them to stop them. At a recent inquiry in New South Wales one of my colleagues, Robert Borsak, was asking questions of the bureaucrats up there, and it can take up to 15 shots to shoot a deer or a horse-sized object from a helicopter. That ain’t humane in anyone’s book. Most on-the-ground hunters go for one shot, one kill. I have seen plenty of instances where that is the case. Occasionally wounding is an issue, and I always suggest people practise more. Going to a range is not just a thing to do on a spare day. If you are a hunter, you should at least up your proficiency – there is no such thing as being too good a shot. But most hunters pride themselves on getting the kill done as humanely as possible. After all, hunting is not necessarily about just killing the animal. It is walking out there, it is being in nature, it is camping, it is spending time with friends and family and it is using public land in the way it was intended to be used.

There are still large tracts of some existing national parks that could be used by recreational hunters. Currently, the deer are just culled, so it is not like they are not being shot. But there are also some, such as Wilsons Prom, where an organised cull is the only way to do it. Some time ago I did not watch actual shooting, but I did watch the behind the scenes of the culling. To keep people safe – because it is a tourist attraction – they shut off every possible avenue they could find, yet people still made it through. They had Parks Victoria people supervising hunters that had proven their abilities. I saw that there were avenues where you could shoot and could not shoot, and in the end it diminishes the take, but it makes it safer given the small area and where it is.

We look at what we have got going around now, and there are opportunities. Opportunity knocks every once in a while, and I believe that whilst public land is a conversation we are having, we should look and think about this practically. The practicality is that we are removing deer from the environment. National parks as they stand, even where you can hunt deer, present quite some problems. If you are out hunting a deer and you see a feral cat go past or a feral dog – not a dingo, but a feral dog – or any other thing that has been declared a pest, you cannot shoot it. If you shoot the pest animal while you are in a national park and get caught, you will lose your licence and be charged even though you can hunt a deer, which also torpedoes the idea of making deer a pest unless you want to shoot less of them.

It does make me wonder why the Invasive Species Council and the Victorian National Parks Association and all their co-tenants at 60L spend so much time trying to have deer declared a pest, when it will actually mean less will be hunted, less will be shot and less will be removed from the environment. If they were true to their names, they would be more about getting as many removed as they could – not just, ‘I don’t like people hunting them because, God forbid, they might enjoy it.’ If you do it as a job, it is okay, but if you enjoy it, it is not good, so I do not know what happens if you enjoy your job.

But it gets down to the problem then of ideology. Ideology is one of the biggest hurdles to good public policy, when you just have a mindset and you will not think outside that mindset. We all have it to a degree. I have my ideology. Everyone here has their ideology. But we should always, always think outside the square. I will give the Animal Justice Party one thing: at least they are always consistent. They do not want anything hunted, they do not want anything shot, they do not like culls and they do not like recreational hunting or for anything that was moving to be eaten.

Some people want deer to be declared pests. In fact the amount of times over the last 10 years – and it has been 10 years I have been in here – I have had to explain to people from all over the political spectrum why making deer a pest would be bad surprises me. If deer are declared a pest, then the landowner is required to control them at the landowner’s cost. Game animals are managed by the government, and therefore in this case we pay to hunt game animals. What you can do on a farm, on private land – obviously, subject to animal welfare concerns – is shoot them any time of the day or night, as long as you abide by safety rules and calibre rules and such. So to declare them a pest would do nothing except make farmers have to pay for it, whereas now it is the government’s problem. Right now, as it stands, a farmer can spotlight a deer, whereas you cannot on public land – and nor should you; even if it is other hunters out there, you do not want people spotlighting at night where they cannot see beyond the spotlight. So why does everyone – the royal ‘everyone’ – want them declared a pest? Ideology.

Deer hunting brings income into the regions and urban areas. There are gun stores, there are camping stores and there is, obviously, petrol. Site transporters are still somewhat on the horizon; we cannot just transport ourselves wherever we want. It delivers protein to the hunter and their family. They know where it has been from paddock to plate. They have actually done it, something we cannot say for supermarket meat. The part I enjoy the most is just getting the hell out of town. You can get out there. You spend a lot of time walking around. Maybe you get to actually shoot at an animal and complete the hunt, but a lot of the time it is just being there. It is being out; it is being miles from anywhere and, if you are lucky, out of phone coverage. You wonder why this would not be supported by everyone, except as I said Animal Justice. They have always got a thing. I do not like being nice to Animal Justice, but in fairness at least they are consistent.

I think we should investigate whether we can get recreational hunters into more appropriate existing national parks at appropriate times to reduce the number of deer. It increases the fiscal input into the regions, gets more people away from devices and gets more people out into nature, not just watching it on TV like others.

Katherine COPSEY (Southern Metropolitan) (16:03): I thank Mr Bourman for bringing this motion today, but the Greens will not be supporting it. This is just a blatant ploy to get access to more and more public land for the benefit of a very small group of Victorians who like to shoot and kill animals. Not content with locking people out of Victoria’s wetlands for months of the year to shoot ducks, now the shooting lobby wants to lock us out of more of our national parks. If families wanted to go for a bushwalk in a national park, would the onus be on them to work out which part of the national park was off limits for that day or month because of the risk of bullets flying around? Maybe they would be required to wear a hi-vis vest in order to not be shot while trying to enjoy the peaceful connection with nature that our national parks provide. Hundreds of thousands of Victorians use our national parks daily, weekly and monthly. One of the joys is that people know that these parks are protected. They can simply arrive and choose their pastime of pleasure – walking, orienteering, birdwatching, camping, swimming or picnicking.

Rather than giving open slather to hunters in more of our national parks, the government should be urgently removing deer from the Wildlife Act 1975 to reflect their true status as an invasive pest species. It is ridiculous that deer are protected under the Wildlife Act. The reason that this act now protects invasive feral deer as game animals is pressure from the shooting lobby. Last year Labor had the perfect opportunity to address this issue in the Victorian Deer Control Strategy, and instead once again they caved in to pressure from the shooting lobby, which has a vested interest in continuing populations of deer at high levels so that they can shoot at them.

And before we hear pathetic excuses from the shooting lobby that they are part of the solution to the deer problem, it is abundantly clear that amateur hunters are completely not up to the task of getting rid of this major feral animal problem that they through their lobbying have in fact assisted in creating. Amateur hunters have done little to manage populations across areas in which they are already allowed to shoot – demonstrable when we see how much the deer populations are increasing.

Deer are an invasive species. They do cause damage to our environment and they do cost farmers, community and the state a fortune. They should be declared pests under the Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994. Now, the Minister for Environment recently provided an answer to a question on notice that half of these species of deer that are common – chital, rusa, wapiti and sika deer – are undergoing review of their classification to determine whether they should be classified as pest animals under the act. We will continue to ask questions about this and also about other species, such as hog, red, sambar and fallow, and whether their classifications are suitable for review. The solution to the deer problem is not locking Victorians out of their own national parks because there are bullets flying around. The Greens will not be supporting this motion today.

John BERGER (Southern Metropolitan) (16:06): I rise to contribute to Mr Bourman’s motion, which relates to deer hunting across Victoria, and I want to say from the outset that the Allan Labor government supports this motion. On a personal level I am particularly pleased with this motion and its aims. In particular this motion moves that:

(1) deer hunting is the premier hunting activity in Victoria, with over 48,000 game licences held for the express purpose of hunting deer, both by stalking and hound hunting;

(2) recreational deer hunting contributes over $200 million a year to the Victorian economy and provides around 2000 jobs, with 69 per cent of hunter expenditure coming from regional Victoria;

(3) recreational deer hunting is the dominant below-snowline use of the Alpine National Park and the revenue from hunting tourism is vital to several regional communities;

(4) Victoria’s recreational hunters kill around 140,000 deer annually, most of them female and most of them on public land;

(5) the recreational deer harvest in Victoria dwarfs that of government-sponsored control programs, all whilst providing triple bottom line benefits to the state;

(6) there are large tracts of public land that are national parks that are not open to seasonal hunting by licensed deer hunters, with no sound rationale for their exclusion …

And the motion calls on the government to open appropriate tracts of applicable national parks at suitable times to recreational hunters to increase opportunities for growing deer-hunting communities to engage in their outdoor recreation of choice.

Firstly, I want to begin by thanking my friend Mr Bourman for bringing this motion to the chamber, because I am excited about the opportunity it provides me to talk about many other outdoor recreational activities that Victorians take up on the weekend. As stated in the motion, around 140,000 deer are killed each year by recreational hunters from all corners of the state. These kills for the most part are happening on public land, and the majority of these kills are also female deer. Within the public land of course we are discussing national parks, many of which are not open to seasonal hunting by licensed recreational deer hunters.

Deer are hunted for a wide variety of reasons, but recreation appears to be the salient one among them. Over 48,000 game licences are held in the state specifically for deer hunting. Of that figure an overwhelmingly large majority are for deer specifically, at 29,000. An overwhelming majority of game licence holders in Victoria are men between the ages of 28 and 57, who make up just over 33,000 of the game licence holders. The number of hunters is in fact growing each year. From 2023 to 2024 the number of game licence holders specifically for deer rose by about 1140. Right now that number is just under 47,500. A decade ago it was just over 28,000.

A large majority of deer hunters also live in the east of Victoria, out in Gippsland. If you go out to Bairnsdale, statistically you are two to three times more likely to find a hunter than if you were going to go to Portland or Warrnambool, and even then it is much higher than what you would find in Southern Metropolitan Region. That of course is not surprising, given the high concentration of deer out around Traralgon and Bairnsdale compared to outer Melbourne or the west of Victoria.

Just under 70 per cent of hunter expenditure in this state comes from those regional areas, and in fact deer hunting may well be one of the most common recreational activities in regional Victoria. According to Mr Bourman’s motion, there can be around $200 million attributed to deer hunting activities in Victoria. In fact the estimated contribution to our economy in 2019 was $201 million to be sure. That is over 50 per cent of the total recreational hunting contribution. The vast majority of the boost, and the 3000 jobs it creates in Victoria’s regions, includes $12 million in Mansfield, $11 million in Gippsland and $9 million in the Latrobe, and it is a growing sport. This can be attributed in part to the large number of deer in the state. We have nearly 1 million deer in Victoria spread across around 40 per cent the state.

But this boom has its downsides, and that can be causing grief to local communities and wildlife. That is why the Allan Labor government has continued with the state’s deer control program to bring the deer population boom under control at a manageable rate. The Allan Labor government announced a long-term strategy for deer population control in 2020 and allocated $22 million to deliver it. We are working in close cooperation with our federal government partners and understand that deer population issues transcend state borders. In fact the recent 2024–25 Victorian budget provided $11.6 million over three years to support safe, sustainable and responsible hunting. This investment helps support the work we are doing in this space to ensure best practices and to enable the important compliance and enforcement work of the Game Management Authority.

With the exception of hog deer, which is the smallest deer species in Australia – they have a yellow and reddish-brown coat and weigh around 40 kilos – there is no bag limit for recreational deer hunting. Sambar deer, for instance, can weigh up to 220 kilos, doubling the height of a hog deer, yet there are important and reasonable limitations. For a mixture of pragmatic and safety reasons, recreational hunting is not permitted at night – defined as half an hour after sunset until an hour before sunrise – on public land. On top of that, we recently adopted a commonsense approach to tamp down on the illegal spotlighting of deer.

Nevertheless, as Mr Bourman has alluded to in his motion, there is a difference in what the government and the private sector are doing, and this is reflected in the rules. Here the hunting of deer at night for control purposes, like protecting your land or family, is permitted on private land by the landowner or with the permission of the landowner to a third party. This plan understands the changing needs of Victoria and the ability to control the population in different parts of the state.

Our efforts to control deer as part of the broader interstate plan is working, and it is not just keeping our roads safe but protecting our environment. It is helping to keep the ecological balance. The government and peak hunting bodies recognise deer can have a negative impact on biodiversity, safety and agriculture and cultural values. Deer hunting does help keep the population under control somewhat, with hunters going out and about.

I have spoken in the past in this chamber about venison, again on the point from Mr Bourman, who is an expert on this topic, and I have spoken about the excess of wild venison that is being developed for commercial and charitable purposes in the United States, something debated in this chamber. Clearly there is a lot of work to be done in this space, and there is great potential for harnessing this. This is why I am pleased the government has recently done a lot of work in this space, including the Wildlife (Game) Regulations 2024, which did not include any additional restrictions on the recreational hunting of deer. However, I think we can all agree it is quite reasonable to require hunters to deal with wounded deer. On top of that it modernises the system, allowing for the use of handheld thermal imaging devices to hunt deer. This will be particularly useful during the day.

To wrap up today, we will continue to work with our partners across Victoria and the country to deliver great outcomes for the community in this space. That includes the Australian Deer Association, or ADA, the Sporting Shooters’ Association of Australia, or the SSAA, and we will work with government and non-government organisations, private landholders and government agencies to undertake deer control across the vast and beautiful countryside of Victoria. In fact just in September this year the Allan Labor government announced support for our hardworking farmers to protect their livestock, including an investment of more than $2 million to undertake dingo monitoring and support for the north-west farmers to adopt management strategies. As part of this package of announcements the wild dog management program was expanded to include extra support to farmers to meet targeted controls of a wider range of animals, including deer. This expansion has led to the program being renamed as the vertebrate management program.

Melina BATH (Eastern Victoria) (16:14): I am really pleased to rise today to speak on behalf of the Nationals and the Liberals as lead speaker in relation to Mr Bourman’s notice of motion 600 and state that whilst this is a bit of a snapshot of what is happening in the world of deer hunting and game hunting in Victoria it is also a fairly soft approach, calling on the government to continue to open up tracts of land in applicable national parks.

In Mr Bourman’s contribution to the house he started off by saying he does not want to see any new national parks. I might like to just share with the house that as of today the petition that I have put forward in conjunction with Bush User Groups United, BUGU, has just shy of 23,000 signatures. So if anybody listening at home would like to actually go and jump online, have a look for ‘No more new national parks’. It will come up, and you can sign it and be the 23,000th person to sign that. We would love your support. It sends a message to government that we do not need new national parks. What the government needs to do is to have a better approach to active land management of all of our public land estate, and I will get into that shortly.

Mr Bourman talked about national parks, and I will talk about that. He also spoke about ducks and duck hunting, and it is something that the Nationals and Liberals have passionately fought for, the continuation of duck hunting in this state.

Bev McArthur: What a wonderful thing.

Melina BATH: It is a wonderful thing. He also mentioned Wilsons Promontory down near my home area and the importance of management there – and that is particularly in relation to hog deer, which I have actually seen down at Wilsons Prom – public land in general, feral pests and weeds. Also, he spoke about how ideology is not good public policy, and that is actually something that is absolutely dear to my heart.

Deer hunting does come in a whole variety of shapes and sizes. It is game hunting, and people who speak to me and I communicate with are very active in their praise and support for deer continuing to be a game-hunting species. In speaking to some of my locals down in Gippsland, we have two classifications of deer hunters: you can be a hound hunter or you can be those who stalk and, as they call it, glass – stalk and glass. It is certainly an art, and clearly in the past, if you were a successful hunter many, many centuries ago, then you got fed, because traditionally hunting was all around the pursuit of having a meal. Now people often use it as a way of communicating with each other and spending time with family and friends; different age groups all participate in this traditional activity.

We talk about the economic benefits, and I note that the RMCG 2020 report, which was unpacked very openly and well in the duck-hunting inquiry, goes to the very point that recreational hunting in general, of which deer hunting is part, is worth over $356 million. That was some years ago now, so I am sure that has increased in value, and that is both spend by the hunters in general and the flow-on effect generated from their activity.

The key thing for everybody who is a regional MP is that 69 per cent of the hunting-related expenditure occurs outside of metropolitan Melbourne. It occurs in the regions and it occurs in our country towns and hamlets, and that is a good thing. It occurs at the Dargo pub, at the Licola General Store and at the Heyfield pub. You can stop in at Latrobe Valley, Sale, Straddie or Bairnsdale, and the Rosedale butcher does a mean piece of kabana on your way out into the bush to continue with your hunting fraternity. You can go into, as we have seen in the motion, the great Alpine National Park below the snowline, Wonnangatta, Tamboritha and the like, and also around Seaspray, where there are some hog deer, down in Gippsland.

You have got sambar, you have got red, and red I understand are often in those mountainous regions and in the Grampians, where apparently now this government has decided it is going to lock it up from people who have been doing another traditional pursuit, rock climbing, over many, many decades, which is having an impact on the community. Deer hunting provides specifically over $100 million and over 3000 full-time equivalent jobs across the state, and as I said, many of those are in regional Victoria.

One of the things that Mr Bourman touched on was about public land, and he spoke about how ideology is not good public policy. If this government is not at sixes and sevens in relation to state forests, national parks and the like – over a period of time it has set up VEAC, the Victorian Environmental Assessment Council. It has gone into the central west investigation in that space over there in the Wombat State Park and Lerderderg State Park and Mount Cole State Forest area, where there was timber harvesting in the past, now shut down by this government. It has now decided that it is going to lock up somewhere around 400,000 hectares of state forest into national parks.

What we are concerned about on this side of the house is very much how they are going to look after more national parks when this government are not looking after the national parks that they already have. You go into the Central Highlands – and we have got the eminent panel that has been around for a little while and then we also see the Great Outdoors Taskforce. If you go to their new, revised website, you see that they have actually carved out the scope of the Central Highlands, and so the statement on that Great Outdoors Taskforce website says, ‘We will not be looking at’ – I am paraphrasing – ‘cauterising or locking up any more national parks from that space,’ which is Gippsland, the Emerald Link and the north-east region. But it is not saying it will not lock up all of the Central Highlands, all of the great forest national park-slated area. This would of course impact on some of the regions that Mr Bourman is talking about and some of the hunters that we are talking about in this debate today.

What we on this side want to see is proper, active management of public land. Things like out-of-control bushfire do not recognise land tenure. Pests and weeds – and we know that Mr Bourman has mentioned that in his contribution – do not recognise that they are now going into different land tenure and say, ‘Oh, gosh, I’d better stop.’ What we do recognise is that this government is cutting the knees out of our public service of boots on the ground, of people to look after those tracts, both in state forests and national parks. It is cutting funding, creating more headaches for vulnerable species and more proliferation of pests and weeds, and it is certainly going to compromise our native species. And not to mention wild dogs – and these are wild dogs. One of my friends recently told me that only over the cup weekend they saw that they were a black shepherd cross type of dog and they were around hunters, actually being quite feral but also quite dangerous around those hunters.

In relation to the national parks, very sadly we saw in the Weekly Times – and I am aware of this document – that the state government is cutting the funding so much it is actually cutting back what are called essential services. I think it is a document that clearly shows that a number of must-do services will be cut, and there are some services that could occur if we had the money. But these are things like invasive feral pest management. This government are on one hand saying, ‘Let’s make new national parks over here. What about the central west, the great forest national park? We’ll think about something in the east, or not,’ but they are not looking after the public land that we have.

I want to understand. We know that the state of the environment report and the State of the Forests do not actually have forest care metrics. Why does this government not check? They shut a timber industry down because of what could happen to vulnerable species, but they are not actually doing any assessment on species in the public land estate, whether it be state forests or national parks, and I think that is a condemning offence. I think this motion could be stronger. The Nationals will support it, as we back our hunting fraternity in Victoria.

Georgie PURCELL (Northern Victoria) (16:25): It will come as no surprise that I rise to oppose this absurd and cruel motion today, but I do thank Mr Bourman for bringing it to the chamber and allowing me the opportunity to talk about the awful state of hunting and shooting here in Victoria.

Deer hunters have already received an additional approximately 90,000 hectares in the eastern alps and an extension of the deer stalking season in Baw Baw National Park in 2018. I have not heard a single complaint from them that they are struggling in the already existing killing range; in fact, as is highlighted in the motion, deer hunters are already killing a massive 140,000 deer per year. But not content with this, they are now asking to shoot alongside children on their family strolls when they are enjoying the beauty and peace of our national parks. They want children to learn that there is no place of peace, that they should expect to see weapons and hear the sounds of gunshots in their place of play and recreation. People should not have to witness the piles of carcasses left rotting and the destruction of our state’s nature at the hands of hunters. Our parks should be shared and peaceful places. As Ms Copsey touched on, we have already seen areas of our land and recreational spaces locked away during the duck-shooting season to appease a very, very small minority. The safety of cyclists, children, families, runners, birdwatchers and every other national park user should not be an afterthought. This is the so-called sound rationale Mr Bourman is searching for.

We animal advocates are often told that we are too emotional, driven by compassion instead of rationale, yet I would argue that it is hunters and shooters who have this bizarre affliction. Hunters kill innocent animals which cannot defend themselves, in their own habitats. Introduced animals are here not through their own choices but our very own irresponsibility. Their status does not reduce their ability to suffer, and we have an obligation to them to make the kindest and the most ethical choices. I will not stand here today and claim that they are not doing damage to our environment, but the impact is in fact very, very overstated and used as justification for yet another thrill kill of an animal in this state. But what is more deadly to our environment than deer is the trudging of hunters on the ground – the litter and the disturbance to both flora and fauna as they hunt off designated paths.

What we also know is that shooting programs do not have any long-term impact on population numbers at all. It is a bandaid approach. For years now scientists and experts have been asking governments in this country to implement real and effective long-term solutions, and we know that this actually works. It has been proven overseas in wild horse populations in America with the use of simple immunocontraceptives, and the technology is readily available for us to try right here. We have continuously asked the government to fund this to protect our environment and native animals and to address the non-native species’ impact on biodiversity in a meaningful way that is not killing animals for the sake of recreation. The environment is not our battleground. I condemn this motion before us and encourage all other members to do the same.

Tom McINTOSH (Eastern Victoria) (16:29): We certainly have a diversity of opinions in this chamber. We have extremes from one end of the Nationals to the other of the Greens, who would generally and most commonly speak of doom and gloom – no matter what the issue being discussed the world is falling apart, the sky is falling in. However, the government here – the Labor Party – we can walk and chew gum. The role of government is to represent all Victorians, and that means that we can protect natural environments, we can protect biodiversity, but we can also ensure that there are places for people to get into nature, whether that is bushwalking, whether that is camping, whether that is fishing or whether that is hunting.

We know that deer numbers are well beyond what they should be and what they must be from an environmental perspective, the degradation that occurs in our natural spaces thanks to deer, the threat that deer pose to agricultural land and the threat that deer pose to Landcare groups and to farmers trying to revegetate property, let alone from getting into stock and whatnot and fencing. We simply must continue to ensure that deer numbers do not rise. We know that deer crossing roads is a really, really dangerous issue. It does not matter whether you are talking about the areas around the hills around Monbulk, Emerald and that sort of area in the state seat of Monbulk within the region of Eastern Victoria that I represent or South Gippsland or East Gippsland. We know that we need to reduce these numbers. Farmers and those that are trying to do regenerative work are all calling for this.

We have tens of thousands of hunters in Victoria who want to be out reducing deer numbers. As Mr Bourman has raised numerous times over the previous months and years, it is for food, which I am completely supportive of. I have met with locals around Gippsland, and they are looking at sausages, steaks and this sort of production, which can either be consumed here in Victoria or exported, and looking at mobile commercial abattoirs and ways that we can use this meat so it is not going to waste. I am remembering Mr Bourman’s contribution from the past. We could be making sure we are feeding those that are hungry with programs like those that are being delivered in New Zealand. We should always look at ways that animals that are a nuisance and that are causing issues can be consumed.

Obviously, we know that there are very large economic benefits in the state from hunting. Ms Bath mentioned some of the towns in eastern Gippsland and other places where a lot of people are going through and getting accommodation or going to the pubs or going to the shops on the way through. There are something like 3000 people employed to service the industry and 50,000 licensed game hunters. Recreational hunting makes an estimated $356 million contribution to the Victorian economy, and deer hunting contributes $201 million of that total, so it is an incredible economic benefit. Mansfield sees in the vicinity of $12 million of economic benefit, East Gippsland $11 million and Latrobe $9 million, so it is important for those regional communities. And it is important that we engage, as we do, with our First Nations communities on the management of these deer. It is an important and good opportunity to work together.

As I said earlier in the piece, we just absolutely need to get these numbers down, and we need sensible conversations so that this can happen. I completely agree with and understand anyone who does not want to see unnecessary animal cruelty, and as a society we are all trying to remove that in many, many walks and forms. Even since I was a kid I have thought there are far better practices across the board. But at the same time we need to bring a level of common sense to how farms are able to run and how land is managed so that we get good broad outcomes, whether it be for those farms or whether it be for other animals that are impacted by animals that are either crowding out or impacting them. We have seen that so much in Australia with so many introduced species, whether it be foxes or rabbits, obviously dogs and various cats. Cats obviously are a massive issue. We need to have sensible conversations about how we deal with these and how we ensure that we have the best environmental outcomes and the best outcomes for a majority of our animal species.

I would like to support this motion brought forward by Mr Bourman. I want to thank him for bringing it and I want to thank everyone for making a variety of contributions. I am proud that this government is able to work through a range of issues with our public spaces to ensure that the majority of Victorians get to appreciate them and get to spend time together out in the great outdoors, because it is so important that we remain connected to those spaces in our public lands.

Wendy LOVELL (Northern Victoria) (16:36): I would like to congratulate Mr Bourman on bringing this motion forward. Hunting is a very important industry. In the country it adds a lot of economic activity and provides a lot for our local communities. Hunting is not something that just country people do. In fact most of the hunters that come to regional Victoria come from Melbourne; a lot from the northern suburbs of Melbourne and a lot from the south-eastern suburbs of Melbourne. Hunting makes an enormous economic contribution to the state. An assessment that was done on the economic contribution of hunting in Victoria in June 2020 by the government found that at that time it was around $356 million that hunting provided in economic contribution and 3138 jobs. The vast majority of that economic contribution is to regional Victoria and to regional economies. In fact of that $356 million, deer hunting accounted for over $200 million. It is a very important contributor to our economic activity in regional Victoria.

Deer are not native to Australia; they are a feral species. What we are seeing currently is that we have an overpopulation of deer in this state. What is happening with the deer, because there is an overpopulation, is that they are not just in remote areas of the state, they are not just hidden away in the alpine areas, they are coming down into the urbanised areas and they are causing havoc on our roads. As I said, they are not native. They are hard-hoofed animals, so they do enormous environmental damage.

The government are happy to ban brumbies and to kill all the brumbies, and I know that they are supporting this motion as a way of controlling the deer species as well. I cannot understand the Greens not supporting this motion, because the Greens always say that they support the environment. In not supporting this motion, they are supporting non-native animals doing environmental damage in our state. With the Greens not supporting this motion, it shows just how shallow is the Premier’s promise that even if she locks up public land as national parks, she will allow seasonal hunting to continue, because what we will see is the government doing a deal with Greens, when they need their vote for something, to ban that seasonal hunting in those national parks.

As I said, deer are hard-hoofed animals. They do environmental damage. They do a lot of environmental damage in our waterways because their hard hoofs do enormous damage as they are going down to water. But they also wallow near the waterways. They wallow to cool themselves down or to control parasites. But some of the wallows that are created by deer can be 2 to 3 metres wide and a metre deep. That does enormous environmental damage on the edge of waterways. They also do enormous environmental damage to trees by rubbing their antlers up and down the trees, an activity that they undertake called rutting.

These animals, which are now in enormous numbers, need to be controlled. What better way to allow them to be controlled than to allow recreational hunters to hunt these animals for food? They do not leave them lying around in the forest, as the Animal Justice Party and the Greens would have you imagine; they actually hunt these animals and take them home for food. Venison is well sought after. My own mother used to love to get some venison from some of my brother’s friends who were shooters, and she loved having that venison in her freezer to use whenever she wanted it. There are many, many people who do use the meat from these animals. They do not just leave them to rot in the forest, unlike the government’s shooting of brumbies, where those animals are being left to rot in our forests. It is terribly distressing for bushwalkers to come across horses that have been shot and left to rot in the forest. The Greens and the Animal Justice Party are quite happy to support that activity, but they are not happy for recreational shooters to responsibly go out and shoot these animals.

This would be a seasonal thing in the parks. It is not locking people out of the national parks at all. In fact it is opening the national parks up to more people by allowing the Greens and their bushwalking friends to have access to the parks at certain times and, for a very short period of time during a seasonal shoot, the shooters to have access to that park. But it would not be all parks, and it would not be all parks at all times.

I think that the Greens and the Animal Justice Party actually need to take a good hard look at themselves. They do need to do a lot of research to see why the government and the Liberals and Nationals will be supporting this motion. It is because it is good for the economy, it is good for the environment and it is good for the wellbeing and mental health of people who enjoy recreational shooting.

I will keep my contribution to those few remarks, but I congratulate Mr Bourman on bringing this motion to the Parliament, and I look forward to supporting it.

David LIMBRICK (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (16:43): I would like to thank Mr Bourman for bringing this motion to the house, which calls on the government to open appropriate tracts of applicable national parks at suitable times to recreational hunters to increase opportunities for Victoria’s burgeoning recreational deer-hunting community. I think that there will be many people in the community who are not only very happy to see this motion but also happy to see the government’s support for this motion. There have been many people fearful, including within my own party, of the government locking up land and locking up national parks so that various activities cannot be undertaken. Indeed I have been to a number of rallies recently – I know Mr Bourman was there also at many of them – where people were not only concerned about hunting deer but also concerned about prospecting, horseriding, the collection of firewood and many other activities. What we are actually talking about here is the possibility of opening up more national parks to be available for hunters to enter and shoot and hunt deer. I think this is a good thing.

It is undeniable – everyone knows it – that deer are not a native species and they do cause environmental damage. I do not think anyone argues otherwise. We do need to get their numbers down, and this is a good way of doing that, and it does not cost any money, really, compared to government programs where they shoot them from the air, which are very expensive. Allowing people to go out there with their families or friends actually generates economic activity in this state, as has been outlined by others. I got to witness some of this close-up quite recently. I went hiking with one of my sons up to the Howqua River near Mansfield in Alpine National Park and the adjacent area. It is a very beautiful area, and we were very lucky with beautiful weather. We hiked deep into the bush, and the first night there were not many other people around. On the second night a young man with a group turned up, and he had a rifle, and he was hiking to go and try and find some deer. He informed me that he did not find any, unfortunately. He was a bit disappointed about that, but he still had a good time anyway. Even though I am not a hunter myself, I can confirm that his presence did not alarm me or cause me any trouble whatsoever with his activities. Hiking and camping were totally compatible with him going in there and hunting. It is a very, very big forest there, an enormous forest.

I would also say that I would like to see more of this from the government, because there are many Victorians that see this as an important cultural activity. Many people have been doing it for generations. We need to remember that there are many different cultural activities in Victoria, and one of those is hunting. People like going out there and collecting food for their families. Indeed recently I was able to try some deer salami which someone made. It had wine in it, and it was very delicious. Many people enjoy eating venison with their families. It also can save money. If you have got a big freezer and you use the full carcass, that is a lot of food that can feed a family for a significant period of time. So many people can save money doing that, as well as having delicious wild food, and it is a great way of getting in touch with nature in our state.

Yes, we do need to get deer numbers down. I think everyone agrees that there are too many at the moment. They are causing environmental damage. This seems like a great way of doing that. I am very happy to hear the government speak about this rather than locking up national parks. Yesterday I was concerned about locking climbers out of Mount Arapiles, which is another story, which I am quite disappointed about. At least we are talking about opening up parks to more activities, because after all these parks are owned by the people of Victoria and they should have access to them for whatever activities they want to engage in in those parks. I commend this motion to the house.

Michael GALEA (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (16:48): I also rise to speak on motion 600 by Mr Bourman today, a motion that I know is very dear to his heart. I am very excited to be making a contribution on a topic which is of some significance and importance as well. I note that in Mr Bourman’s motion he talked about deer hunting being the premier hunting activity in Victoria, and also he referred to a burgeoning recreational deer-hunting community, and certainly the evidence does appear to bear that out.

Last year, with many other members in this place, including Mr Bourman, and with you, Acting President McArthur, I took part in the inquiry into Victoria’s recreational native bird hunting arrangements. We did see that the economic impact, the economic value of hunting activities as a whole to the state of Victoria, has indeed increased. What was actually interesting is that we saw that with some aspects of hunting their economic contribution was low, such as native bird hunting, and indeed it was native bird hunting that was seeing significant decreases in the amount of economic activity generated through those activities. Conversely, however, when it comes to pest species such as deer, we did actually see the numbers of deer hunting increase, and we also saw the economic impact of that deer hunting increase as well. I note that Mr Bourman in his remarks and indeed in the motion referred to the economic contribution of over $200 million per year to the Victorian economy, and Mr McIntosh in his contribution helpfully broke down what those figures represent at a more localised regional level as well.

It is fair to say that certainly Victorian hunters are voting with their feet, and whilst the hunting of our recreational native birds appears to be diminishing and diminishing and diminishing, we are indeed seeing increasing numbers in deer hunting. Based on the emphasis in this motion from Mr Bourman that it is the premier hunting activity and it is a burgeoning part of the hunting community, it is certainly good to see that focus shift to those areas such as deer hunting. For many reasons, which have been outlined by previous contributions, deer are a significant pest species as well. Indeed Mr McIntosh spoke about the environmental impact of out-of-control deer populations in places in his region and in the parts of my region which border his – in communities such as Beaconsfield and Beaconsfield Upper in South-Eastern Metropolitan. In his examples of the areas of Monbulk, Pakenham and those broader areas as well we are seeing the impact that out-of-control deer are having. We are seeing the environmental destruction, and we are seeing the impact on native species as well. It is becoming an increasing concern for many of my constituents but many, many more of Mr McIntosh’s constituents and those of other members in this place who do represent regional areas.

In noting that and in noting of course the need to control these populations as humanely as possible – it is not the deer’s fault that they are here; they do not know any better. It was the damned fool who introduced them however many years ago, just like the damned fool that introduced rabbits to this place as well. But the fact remains that they are a problem, they are wreaking havoc, and measures that can further encourage, promote and support the control of these species are to be supported. It is indeed one of the reasons why the government members will be supporting this motion today.

We also know that we have the commitment to the open space and the places where deer hunting, amongst other pest species hunting, is enabled to thrive and to continue being supported by this government. Indeed I note the Premier’s comments at the recent bush summit, where she reinforced and underlined that. I know that sent colleagues across the chamber – in fact we do not actually have any members of the opposition, either Liberal Party or National Party, here in the chamber at the moment, which is disappointing and seems to be all too frequent. Perhaps it is not a motion that is all too dear to them, Mr Bourman, but at least I acknowledge your advocacy on this issue, even if the Nationals and even if the Liberals cannot be bothered to be here. I know that the Premier’s comments resonated amongst those communities in regional Victoria. I will make one note, Acting President McArthur, that you are indeed here. I have marked you in your role as Acting President, though, and I know that you have a very good contribution to make, which I am sure will be memorable, as yours always are, following mine. But I do note that those comments were crystal clear on how this government sees the right of people to be able to have outdoor recreation in our state’s many wonderful natural areas.

I know it is perhaps no longer observed as much as it is observed in the breach in this place, but I understand that there is a ruling from the Chair that members are supposed to stay for the speech after theirs. Ms Lovell was quick to leave the chamber immediately, even while Mr Limbrick was speaking. But I did find it interesting that the best she could say was that the Greens do not support this and as a result that means we cannot trust the Premier when she speaks on this issue, which is, quite frankly, bizarre. Oh, good to see you, Ms Lovell. It is, quite frankly, bizarre to draw that long bow between saying what the Greens party will do and what the government will do, because you have seen the track record of this government when it comes to supporting these matters, and that is something that will absolutely continue under the leadership of Jacinta Allan.

As I said, I have spoken before in this place about my support for the humane and sensible control of deer populations, especially in these outer urban and regional areas where they have been causing such havoc. Indeed in that same inquiry to which I referred earlier we did in fact have a draft recommendation that was put forward by our chair Mr Batchelor, who is also in the room, which would have directly gone to the issue of deer hunting. As we know, the recommendation of the report was for a different outcome on recreational native bird hunting. However, one draft recommendation, which was provisionally entitled recommendation 5, which members can find on page 220 of the report, was that the Game Management Authority should focus on supporting and expanding game hunting for non-native species such as deer, fox and rabbit to assist with the control of these invasive species – an entirely and eminently sensible recommendation, I would have thought.

I completely understand it was moved by Ms Copsey that that be removed, and indeed I understand her motivations, as indeed I understand Ms Purcell and her motivations for voting against that as well. But it was nevertheless curious to see Ms Bath, Mr Mulholland and, yes, Mr Bourman himself vote against that motion, and I am disappointed that as a result of those votes the draft recommendation from that report was kaput, was no more, and as a result we were not able to make that recommendation to government. However, in my remarks on the report I did nevertheless outline my support for that as a much more reasonable and effective way for hunters to continue hunting in a way that is not impacting on our native bird species. But what is certainly clear to see, based on the results of those economic impacts in particular, is that hunters are voting with their feet. They are supporting the hunting and the control of pest species such as foxes and such as rabbits as well as of course but also in particular deer for all of the reasons that have been gone through.

I know I do not have any personal experience with hunting deer, or any animal for that matter. It is not for me. For those that do, it is something that they can do. I do not know what is involved in particular, and in fact given the economic impact that is generated, you might even say that it is a dear thing to do. Nevertheless, for the reasons I have gone through and for the reasons that other members have so well articulated in this place as to the environmental impact that out-of-control wild deer are having on our native flora and fauna, I am pleased to support this motion and commend it to the house.

Bev McARTHUR (Western Victoria) (16:58): I am pleased to support Mr Bourman’s motion. Thank you for bringing it to the chamber. Deer hunting is not just a premier hunting activity, it is an essential part of Victoria’s conservation strategy, contributing significantly to maintaining ecological balance.

I was pleased to recently support a very important petition to ensure that the licences of recreational hunters are expanded in order to end the aerial culling of deer. It is unfair that hunters paying a licence fee to the Game Management Authority will have their opportunities to hunt limited, but I equally have massive reservations about the ability of Parks Victoria to run a proper operation to contract out deer control to the private sector. For reasons of organisational competence as well as fairness to licence-holders and preferable welfare outcomes for the culled deer, it would be far better and cheaper left in the hands of properly licensed Victorian hunters. For the purpose of the exercise, I might read out the petition, which has already garnered 2677 petitioners:

The petition of certain citizens of the State of Victoria draws to the attention of the Legislative Council that aerial culling of deer in areas that can be hunted by recreational hunters needs to end. Aerial culling is extremely expensive, imprecise and animal welfare standards are not kept as animals are shot to stop, not shot to kill.

Aerial culling of deer in western Victoria and other parts of the State is being conducted in areas where recreational hunters have paid license fees to hunt deer. With fees set to increase, this is even more insulting as hunters are expected to pay more for less opportunities. These license fees could be used to fix rural roads and infrastructure rather than wasted on expensive helicopter culling with mixed results.

Many hunters use venison to supplement their groceries and given the cost-of-living crisis the culling of these animals is leading to the waste of perfectly good venison that could be used or donated to charities with government assistance. We call on the Government to confine aerial culling to locations where recreational hunters are not allowed and encourage more recreational hunters to get out to help with deer control.

The petitioners therefore request that the Legislative Council call on the Government to stop the aerial culling of deer in areas that can be hunted by recreational hunters.

That makes complete sense, and hopefully the government will listen when Mr Bourman presents that petition.

Deer hunting offers significant benefits to farmers by helping to control the deer population, which, if left unchecked, can cause extensive crop damage and impact local agriculture. Overpopulated deer herds consume and trample crops, leading to economic losses for farmers and increased food prices. This management approach is a practical, sustainable solution that supports farmers’ livelihoods, promotes biodiversity and ensures that rural communities can thrive.

Deer hunting can also help curb the spread of diseases like chronic wasting disease, which can affect both wildlife and potentially livestock. Deer hunting provides a sustainable source of lean, organic meat which is often donated to food banks or consumed by hunters, reducing food waste and promoting food security. If Parks Victoria does aerial culling, those carcasses are left to rot or to be fed on by wild dogs and foxes and other vermin – we just had a debate about wild dogs, so there is no point in providing food for them. I look forward to seeing all of you tomorrow at the second annual Hunters for the Hungry game meat barbecue. There will be vegetarian and vegan options too – I do not know why they would want to be there, but it is a great opportunity to learn more about sustainable, locally sourced food.

Moreover, the financial benefits of deer hunting are considerable; $200 million goes into Victoria’s rural economy each year, supporting local jobs and businesses and bringing substantial benefits to small communities and regional tourism.

With growing deer populations across the state, it is important to protect our native flora and fauna by reducing overgrazing and the competition deer pose to other wildlife. This activity of licensed hunters doing the shooting prevents overpopulation and reduces the strain on local ecosystems, which can lead to healthier forests and agricultural areas. I do not know whether those people inside the tram tracks are aware that during the rutting season deer completely demolish tree populations. They ringbark trees and kill them, so they do extensive damage to the environment at that time of the cycle.

I have to say to the government – as I have said on numerous occasions – locking up the forests and throwing away the keys is not the answer to maintaining the forests. As Mr Limbrick says, forests and national parks are for the people. They own them. Parks Victoria does not own them, the government does not own them, the so-called environmentalists or the Greens do not own them. They are for everybody to use. This extraordinary performance of the government recently of trying to stop rock climbing is –

David Limbrick interjected.

Bev McARTHUR: just insane, as Mr Limbrick has just reminded me – totally insane, totally unnecessary. Rock climbers are the most environmentally conscious users of the environment that you could possibly find, and it is absolutely outrageous that you would consider ending rock climbing in certain areas of Victoria. There is no justification whatsoever.

I was pleased to be on the duck-hunting inquiry, and I am exceptionally pleased that the government did not accept the recommendation. That was the best part about it. Thanks to your friends in the union movement I think, who aided and abetted, common sense prevailed within the government leadership ranks to ensure that duck hunting continues in this state. What a good thing! At least somebody gets in the ear of government and gets the answer right.

Hunting is also a longstanding tradition for Indigenous Australians, fostering a deep connection with nature, encouraging responsible wildlife stewardship and preserving cultural heritage. According to a Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions report titled Traditional Owner Game Management Strategy:

… deer are sometimes hunted for food (considered good game quality similar to kangaroo) … Traditional Owners consider deer as animals which negatively impact on the health of Country causing destruction to delicate and endangered ecosystems and risks to associated cultural values.

On so many counts encouraging licensed deer hunters to cull deer is a good thing. There are no negatives attached to it. The negatives are encouraging Parks Victoria to do the culling because, as I have said, the deer will be left to rot. They will not kill them humanely, especially from the air. It is much better that we have licensed deer hunters doing the culling, and we are going to be saving the taxpayers money. What is not to like about that? Whether it is for conservation, economic support or the tradition of ethical hunting, deer hunting deserves our support.

Jeff BOURMAN (Eastern Victoria) (17:07): I will be brief. I will mainly go on the Greens’ contribution because it was kind of funny. ‘Self-serving’ I was called. Well, of course. Have a look at the party name – it is pretty self-evident.

There was also locking people out whilst we go shooting things off paths next to kids and all that. I invite the Greens, or anyone else, to show me one part of the state where people are locked out for recreational hunting. They are for culling for safety reasons, as I said, but I am not aware of anywhere. Lambasting hunters and stating how little they remove and then telling everyone how bad the deer are is another problem with the Greens’ mindset, because it is ideology. They should be wanting us to get rid of more deer as long as it is safe. I do not get it. Hunters for the Hungry – we are still working on that. I would love for that to get through. Tomorrow there is the Sporting Shooters’ Association of Australia game meat luncheon. There will be vegan and vegetarian options available for all of those who want them.

David Limbrick: Very inclusive, Jeff.

Jeff BOURMAN: I try to be, Mr Limbrick. Back to my motion, this is about appropriateness. This is not opening up all lands everywhere and everything. It is about doing it in the right place, at the right time and in the right way. I am really pleased that the government has got on board, and I thank everyone, even the Greens and the Animal Justice Party, for their contributions, because that is what democracy is all about.

Council divided on motion:

Ayes (32): Ryan Batchelor, Melina Bath, John Berger, Lizzie Blandthorn, Jeff Bourman, Gaelle Broad, Georgie Crozier, David Davis, Moira Deeming, Enver Erdogan, Jacinta Ermacora, Michael Galea, Renee Heath, Ann-Marie Hermans, Shaun Leane, David Limbrick, Wendy Lovell, Trung Luu, Bev McArthur, Joe McCracken, Nick McGowan, Tom McIntosh, Evan Mulholland, Harriet Shing, Ingrid Stitt, Jaclyn Symes, Lee Tarlamis, Sonja Terpstra, Gayle Tierney, Rikkie-Lee Tyrrell, Sheena Watt, Richard Welch

Noes (6): Katherine Copsey, David Ettershank, Sarah Mansfield, Rachel Payne, Aiv Puglielli, Georgie Purcell

Motion agreed to.

Business interrupted pursuant to sessional orders.