Another week, another reheated anti-deer story. Same activists. Same talking points. Same missing context.
Stock & Land (paywall) this week ran a story portraying Yanakie landholder Karin Ruff as an ordinary farmer battling a broken system. There is just one problem: readers weren’t given the full picture.
Karin Ruff is not simply a random landholder caught in a bureaucratic nightmare. She is an executive member of an Invasive Species Council-aligned activist group and a longstanding campaigner on deer issues. That is relevant context, and readers deserve to know it.
Presenting an activist as a neutral local voice while omitting those affiliations creates a misleading impression from the outset.
Then there is the property itself.
The article frames this as an agricultural livelihood story. Yet the property in question is reportedly a small lifestyle block of around four hectares, not a broadacre farming operation or large-scale primary production enterprise. During COVID, exceptional arrangements reportedly led to permits being issued when inspections could not occur. If permits are now being assessed more rigorously against demonstrated impacts, that is not evidence of government “protecting deer”. It is evidence of the system operating as intended.
Authority to Control Wildlife permits exist for demonstrated impacts on assets, livelihoods and environmental values. They are not designed to satisfy activist campaigns.
And then, right on cue, enters the Invasive Species Council.
The article relies on commentary from John Kelly, whose recent greatest hits include extraordinary claims blaming deer for making the Yarra River brown and publicly misidentifying wildlife impacts in online videos. This is the same movement that says it wants an end to “culture wars” while continuously fuelling them.
Even the language used in the story raises questions.
The article repeatedly refers to deer as “feral deer”. Yet the Victorian Government itself does not use that terminology in permit systems, legislation or management frameworks. Words matter because language shapes perception.
Most frustratingly, this is not even a new story.
It is effectively a re-run of the same narrative we’ve seen before: deer bad, hunters bad, government failing.
The formula has become predictable:
Find activist → remove context → amplify outrage → ignore nuance → repeat.
Victoria’s deer management challenges are real. Landholders facing genuine impacts deserve support and practical solutions. Recreational hunters already contribute significant management outcomes across public and private land and harvest around 170,000 deer annually.
But activism dressed up as independent reporting does not improve wildlife management. It simply generates heat instead of light.
We’ll continue calling out weak evidence, selective storytelling and manufactured outrage wherever it appears.
Because facts still matter…at least to people on our side of the discussion!
Read more:
The Deer Wars and the Invasive Species Council’s Tangled Web of Claims
