The Invasive Species Council (ISC) has spent years campaigning against wild deer in Victoria. More recently, it has become increasingly focused on one specific target: removing game status from deer.
SSAA Victoria has been accused of focusing heavily on this issue. That observation is correct.
The reason is simple.
Game status poses no barrier to managing overabundant deer populations. What it does provide is the framework that has underpinned public land access, hunter education, harvest data collection and responsible game management in Victoria for more than fifty years.
It matters because there are approximately 47,000 licensed deer hunters in Victoria – around one in five firearm licence holders. More than 22,000 are members of SSAA Victoria alone.
Recreational deer hunting also contributes an estimated $201 million annually to Victoria’s economy and supports more than 1,700 jobs, overwhelmingly in regional communities.
This is not a fringe issue.
Nor is it simply about deer.
Because increasingly, what appears to be happening is an ideological campaign against both hunters and hunting itself.
And perhaps most of all, against the idea that people actually value wild deer.
They don’t like deer.
They don’t like hunters accessing public land.
And they really don’t like that many Victorians actually like them.
That last point increasingly appears to sit at the heart of the debate.
Manufactured crisis or management issue?
The latest example involved the Invasive Species Council promoting what it claimed was a Herald Sun article about hog deer overrunning eastern Victoria.
Except it was not a Herald Sun article.
It originated in Bass Coast News – a small digital-only local publication owned by News Corp.
The article claimed:
“A large swath of eastern Victoria is under siege from feral hog deer as a local farmer claims red tape and state government bureaucracy is stopping her from (controlling) the wild beasts, which are causing damage to her land and ringbarking young trees.”
“Under siege.”
“Wild beasts.”
The language itself tells the story.
The reality is very different.
Wild hog deer occupy a narrow and highly discrete coastal strip in Victoria. They are not sweeping across eastern Victoria.
And where impacts occur, Authorities to Control Wildlife (ATCWs) are routinely issued where justified.
Activism presented as agriculture
The article relied heavily on comments from Karin Ruff.
Readers were presented with the impression of a landholder speaking on behalf of farmers and primary producers.
But Ms Ruff is far from a neutral voice.
She serves on the committee of the Victorian Deer Control Community Network – an organisation closely linked with the Invasive Species Council. She has publicly supported advocacy campaigns against deer and signed joint campaigns calling for changes to deer management settings.
In another recent article she stated:
“Recreational hunting is being prioritised over primary producers and the bush.”
But Ms Ruff is not a broadacre producer speaking for agriculture.
She operates a small bush lifestyle property.
That distinction matters.
Because activism is entirely legitimate.
Presenting activism as representative of farming generally is something different.
Why hog deer?
The focus on hog deer is not accidental.
They are the only deer species in Victoria not automatically unprotected on private land.
There are sensible reasons for that.
Hog deer are internationally significant, naturally scarce, geographically restricted and highly valued as a game species.
Their impacts are comparatively low.
And despite repeated claims, there is no evidence that necessary control activity is being blocked.
Parks Victoria itself has undertaken significant hog deer culling on Wilsons Promontory.
Landholders with genuine impacts routinely receive ATCWs.
The suggestion that hog deer are protected from management simply does not withstand scrutiny.
What Jack Gough says…and what the evidence says
ISC CEO Jack Gough recently stated:
“Victoria is the only mainland state where feral deer, an introduced species that trashes and tramples our bush, is protected as a hunting resource.”
That claim requires context.
For abundant deer species in Victoria there is:
- Year-round open seasons
- No bag limits
- Public land hunting access
- Night hunting provisions
- Thermal equipment approvals
That does not resemble protection from harvest.
Mr Gough also stated:
“The Victorian government has been running a protection racket for hunters. State forests have become game parks.”
That statement perhaps reveals more about the agenda than intended.
Because the implication appears to be that public land hunting itself is the problem.
Yet research suggests otherwise.
Studies examining sambar deer distribution found higher deer abundance in nearby national parks and closed catchments than in heavily hunted State Forests.
If reducing deer abundance was genuinely the objective, greater recreational access would appear to be part of the solution — not something to oppose.
New Zealand recognised this years ago.
Land managers there actively work with recreational hunters to target overabundant deer populations.
The result is a management approach built around partnerships rather than culture wars.
The fantasy of eradication
Perhaps the most extraordinary recent claim came through ISC social media:
“We can eradicate deer if the government brings ambition, funding and focus… You can’t do that while deer are protected.”
There is just one problem.
Science says otherwise.
Recent research demonstrates eradication can be exceptionally difficult even on isolated islands where there is no immigration of new animals.
Victoria has extensive, connected mainland populations spread across millions of hectares.
For established populations, eradication is not a serious management strategy.
Management is.
Claims versus reality
Claim: Deer are protected from control.
Reality: Deer can be hunted year-round with no bag limit and extensive access provisions.
Claim: Hog deer are sweeping across eastern Victoria.
Reality: Hog deer remain confined to a narrow coastal distribution.
Claim: Recreational hunting impedes management.
Reality: Recreational harvest likely removes more deer than many expensive control programs.
Claim: Deer can be eradicated.
Reality: Science suggests eradication is extraordinarily difficult even in far simpler environments.
Claim: This is about biodiversity.
Reality: Too often it appears to be about opposition to hunting and opposition to public land access.
Victoria deserves honest conversations about wildlife management.
Not fundraising campaigns built on exaggeration.
