Farmers jumping on Safari bandwagon

[Am88]

Have phoned and asked in the last two days 6 or 7 stations regarding the possibility of heading onto their land to hunt Chital. All have had the same response, some more polite then others, answer being no, as now they run safari's or let people on to run safari's on their land. Quite frustrating as now they have gone from a pest that gets culled out of helicopters to a prized possession they let roam but they are still happy to whinge about the damage they do. One gentleman even said after saying no, he wishes they'd do more safari's cause he has so many and wants them gone, well hello mate I'm trying to assist in that. Their decision is theirs which is fine, but don't whinge when people aren't happy to pay to come onto your land more then you would like them to. Bit of a rant for the day. Carry on

[GQshayne]

That is disappointing. I currently do not have anywhere to hunt, so I feel your pain.

[Bill]

good friendships require work, what you put in is what you'll get out !!

[deye243]

good friendships require work, what you put in is what you'll get out !!

Not always the dollar will always turn a farmer in to a dopy bugger I have seen it many times ...... And don't they get s**ty when they finally work out you were the option and when they ring you and you tell them you only shoot for farmers the stood with you ......
They might own the land but it is a rear shooter that understands the pest and how to really work it ...... especially with dogs and pigs ......

[Sergeant Hartman]

Not really a hunter, but

Playing devils advocate, to understand the farmer, most aren't mega rich, most probably have a pest problem. Most don't like d**kheads.

So someone going on a farm/station with a few hundred ferals like foxes and deer, and shooting 1 or 3 deer every couple of months aren't really doing him a favor, unless I suppose if they make a decent dent on the fox numbers. But he still has a problem with deer eating his grass.

He wants most his ferals taken care off as quickly as possible, otherwise you having the enjoyment of a good hunt which he is paying for in lost productivity. Ie he is in effect paying you to have a free weekend of fun on his property.

Add to that most farmers I have seen are s**t businessmen, holding off on shooting feral in hope of 1 or 2 paid safaris a year is likely doing them more damage than it's worth... but they may not see it.

Have a friend that shots pests etc, and he makes it a point to contact all his farmers regularly esp if he hasn't been shooting their in a month or two.

[Farmerpete]

As a farmer I'm with ziad on this one.
a lot of guys on this forum think that farmers should be indebted to them for hunting but I pay the rates and fix the broken stuff when shooters break it I also hold a gun license so I don't really need you to shoot on my land.
I used to allow it because it was the nice thing to do
I no longer let people on, the last straw was a guy driving through a wire rope used to guide my irrigator because pig. If I didn't see it I would have been paying a couple hundred thousand for a new irrigator when it fell over
As nice of a notion it is that your saving the farmer money or time the truth is I can kill more pigs in a week using a bag of chook food a night and 1 can of cssp(pig poison) on the last night then hunters can shoot in a month, just proved that last month.

The reason I keep a gun is the occasional crafty bugger that's been shot at or trapped previously and takes some energy to kill

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying all shooters are irresponsible or don't care I'm just saying past experience and the fact I'm liable (insurance wise) for what happens when I let you on makes me cagey about letting people on unsupervised at least a safari makes the operator liable not the land owner

Not trying to upset people Just trying to give a little perspective

[Blr243]

I’m aware that when I shoot three dozen pigs I’m not even scratching the surface........wild dogs and foxes are different , a landholder benefits well from just a few gone. I once heard of a safari client accidentally shooting a farmers dog while spotlighting. And the shot was under the supervision of the guide ....they are no longer welcome

[GQshayne]

As a farmer I'm with ziad on this one.
a lot of guys on this forum think that farmers should be indebted to them for hunting but I pay the rates and fix the broken stuff when shooters break it I also hold a gun license so I don't really need you to shoot on my land.
I used to allow it because it was the nice thing to do
I no longer let people on, the last straw was a guy driving through a wire rope used to guide my irrigator because pig. If I didn't see it I would have been paying a couple hundred thousand for a new irrigator when it fell over
As nice of a notion it is that your saving the farmer money or time the truth is I can kill more pigs in a week using a bag of chook food a night and 1 can of cssp(pig poison) on the last night then hunters can shoot in a month, just proved that last month.

The reason I keep a gun is the occasional crafty bugger that's been shot at or trapped previously and takes some energy to kill

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying all shooters are irresponsible or don't care I'm just saying past experience and the fact I'm liable (insurance wise) for what happens when I let you on makes me cagey about letting people on unsupervised at least a safari makes the operator liable not the land owner

Not trying to upset people Just trying to give a little perspective

Owners of the family property we used to hunt on had many shooters on there over the decades. As you say, it was the done thing. I can only recall one incident that was related to me, a group of students were target shooting, using glass bottles! They were asked to leave.

In later years we were the only people allowed on. By that stage, it was considered that letting a stranger on was too much of a risk. In this day and age, it is hard to argue against it.

[flutch]

There are a hell of a lot of places that are plagued with pests that will not allow people on to shoot anymore. The reason is simple, there have been too many morons in the past, shooting too close/in the direction of houses and buildings, breaking or destroying equipment and infrastructure, letting themselves back on the place unannounced, damaging livestock, bringing others with them not authorised to be there, and other assorted things right down to being wreckless/dangerous to themselves and getting lost and needing to be recovered at the farmers costs etc...

Unfortunately it is my experience that most people I give a chance to from the city do one or more of these things, there are reasons for this, some of those being they have no experience/all the gear and no idea. other reasons are ego, smart asses, cant shoot/hunt, so basically I'm down to just one city lad that I will happily take, all the others have done some of the above problems and more. Oh unethical shots also.

[on_one_wheel]

Diversification is a farmer's best friend.

I think it's great that some are cashing in on the demand.
What was once a pest has now become a valuable resource.

As for saying "now they have gone from a pest that gets culled out of helicopters to a prized possession they let roam but they are still happy to whinge about the damage they do." If they're making money from them, I doubt they'd be complaining. When numbers get out of control theyd still kull... but when Joe blogs fronts up for his yearly hunt, why not say, show me the money. I've paid to hunt and was happy to hand the landowner some coin, it's great pocket money for them.

[Farmerpete]

I’m aware that when I shoot three dozen pigs I’m not even scratching the surface........wild dogs and foxes are different , a landholder benefits well from just a few gone. I once heard of a safari client accidentally shooting a farmers dog while spotlighting. And the shot was under the supervision of the guide ....they are no longer welcome

I'm aware of the benefit to the farmer that's what gets your foot in the door but all I'm saying is that the shooters all too often take the invite for granted...
a mate of mine once had an idiot he didnt know show up with a knife and tell him 'I'm going hunting here ' - when he politely reminded him he didn't have permission (and had no chance of getting it with that attitude)he basically refused to leave it took threatening to have him arrested to make him leave - he didn't even know him

I'm not saying your not helpful or that responsible shooters aren't appreciated, just asking you to remember without the landowner you have to pay the ssaa for the pleasure of owning a safe full of very expensive hole punches

It's a shame a handful of idiots have ruined it for the majority

[Die Judicii]

You say you've "phoned" various stations to ask permission.

BIG MISTAKE.

Unless you already know and have met in person the owner or manager of a station,,,, they would never in a blue fit give you permission.

Personally face to face introduce yourself so they can at least make a reasonable assumption of what and who you are.
If you can show/prove that you are suitably insured would also be a positive in your favor.

[Member-Deleted]

Lets give both sides a bit of credit here I have seen both sides and those that have lost their shooting properties have been done wrong if they have done everything right by the farmer but that's only a small percentage then I can see the side of Farmerpete when dick heads destroy property that took precious dollars to obtain I've hunted and or shot semi professionally since I was 6-7yr old and found most farmers were up front . If you work on a good relationship with the land owner then there's no reason for them to bring in others to do your job and most likely would not on the other hand if you are not keeping the ferals down then there is a reason so they will bring in help and yes the $ is making its mark up here to but this will bite them on the arse down the line because the ligit feral hunter won't hunt where others consistently hunt., as Farmerpete said he could kill more in the period of a week than most shooters would shoot in a longer period that's ok if the farmer has the time which most of the big farms don't have, and lets not loose sight of who's doing who a favor here farmers and shooters do each other a service no more no less only smaller farms can use self culling as and vantage point the whole point is if you're going to be a pest yourself to the farmer then you won't ever get properties to hunt and it's not only shooters that are getting farmers to shut their gates to everyone we have a big problem with motor bikes off road leaving gates down, cutting fences when they're lost , leaving cars and trailers on roads needed to be used ,rubbish, rubbing human sh#t on gate handles, and a big one erosion tracks for the wet quiet a list of what not to do if you want to return there these farmers protect their properties like they protect their homes and don't like it messed up it's best you only leave behind the dead pest and tyre tracks when i go I inform the farmer when I enter the property and when I leave usually they meet me at the gate for a chat and what I've shot and plan another trip and what's getting around so we're in contact with each other constantly this forms good relationships for both but again the down to earth feral shooter does as much for farmers as farmers do for shooters it's not one sided the one sided thing is the farmers own the land and I think some shooters forget that and don't always do the right thing and farmers should think before ejecting their loyal and safe shooters for safari's as most safari people only chase trophies leaving the rest behind unless they're brought on to shoot everything that's feral so then what's the reason to decline the original shooter doesn't sound right

[Am88]

You say you've "phoned" various stations to ask permission.

BIG MISTAKE.

Unless you already know and have met in person the owner or manager of a station,,,, they would never in a blue fit give you permission.

Personally face to face introduce yourself so they can at least make a reasonable assumption of what and who you are.
If you can show/prove that you are suitably insured would also be a positive in your favor.

I don't really have the option of driving 3-5 hours one way, try to find a gate to a place I have never been, to ask for permission, then If I get knocked back drive 2 more hours to another station etc. Sometimes a phone call has to suffice. Like it did on the weekend and I have been granted a visit to 2 stations.

Obviously I had a bit of rant and somethings may have been taken the wrong way, I was NOT rubbishing the farmers, and what I was annoyed at was the fact that yes one or two were quite vocal on how many deer they had and they wanted them gone yet the safari's were not coming often enough for their liking.

Now, if I was granted access and the farmer told me that he wanted the deer gone and shoot the lot, well if that's what he wanted I would oblige. I would keep as much meat as I could and hand out what I could. It's no different to me when I go on a Roo cull, I'm there to cull them and that's what I do. I have access to a station where he lets everyone on as he wants them gone, and now basically they are, hence why I was after another location.

So apologies to any farmers that are here and took anything the wrong way, one problem with forums is you cannot express emotion very well

[Bill]

You say you've "phoned" various stations to ask permission.

BIG MISTAKE.

Unless you already know and have met in person the owner or manager of a station,,,, they would never in a blue fit give you permission.

Personally face to face introduce yourself so they can at least make a reasonable assumption of what and who you are.
If you can show/prove that you are suitably insured would also be a positive in your favor.

This 100%, i have only ever gotten permission on decent station thru friendship with either current workers or previous workers/managers.

its just not worth the risk to insurance having unknows on your station.

[Spanielz11]

Sadly it seems to be the way these days, what with all the tools going around being flogs on property and screwing it for anyone else. It honestly is either you are really matey mate with someone or your chances are slim. Again depending on your locality can greatly reduce any chance at all, i.e no public state forest or the like to us.
Looks like the old days of heading out to property with a couple dozen eggs, milk and the local paper are far behind us, at least in the region where i am located.

[flutch]

Sadly it seems to be the way these days, what with all the tools going around being flogs on property and screwing it for anyone else. It honestly is either you are really matey mate with someone or your chances are slim. Again depending on your locality can greatly reduce any chance at all, i.e no public state forest or the like to us.
Looks like the old days of heading out to property with a couple dozen eggs, milk and the local paper are far behind us, at least in the region where i am located.

yeah mate, and as for what old mate said before you, despite what insurances someone has themselves the station owner/lease holder/pasturalist is always liable for people on their property. and I know of stations that despite the desperation to have things culled cannot afford the premium increases they have already incurred from having flogs on their place. Too many morons in the world and the rest of us are unfortunately made to move as slow as the dimmest wit of the collective.

[Wapiti]

It really is a shame to see some shooters take places they go for granted, the way some behave, and some even expecting farmers to pay THEM. Not in all cases sure, but here, you'd only have to go into the local farm joint and get a list of people who'd be out in a flash for nix, locals too.

We priced the extra premium for having hunters on, to "cover" us, it was between $600 and $1100 a year. I'd bet 99% of farms wouldn't even consider this, until they have a shooter who rolls a quad and breaks his neck, or anything else, and sues. Because the guest will sue, as his family now has lost a bread winner. And having the insurance doesn't stop you from being taken to court initially, with the insurance company looking to minimise their payout.
This is a big risk, and this is the world we live in now. I have heard, that some places are demanding to see personal liability insurance for pro shooters before they are allowed on, as legally they are no different from a subby tradesman who can't start on a site without his personal liability, as there's money involved. The SSAA insurance in your membership doesn't cover any of this, ask them. We did.

So why can't a farmer charge for the use of his place to get some money out of it? Nobody goes to a national park for free, or a 4wd park either.

[Bill]

Last time I was out at Silverdale rifle range I had a yak to the fella sighting in rifles next door, next thing he is offering to take me to a couple of his hunting properties, unfortunately I had to decline his invitation as I just had too much on.

i always have a yak to 2 or 3 other shooter nearby as thats my nature

[Die Judicii]

To AM88,,,,,,,,,,
I did not take it that you were "rubbishing farmers" Mate,,,,,, I was just saying it the way things are these days.
IF you could do just one weekend (maybe even without f/arms) and visit as many properties/stations as possible,, and make yourself known face to face.
Your chances of getting favorable responses are far greater than just being a faceless voice from God only knows where,, on the telephone.
You aren't going to be accepted all the way throughout the weekend, but at least some may say yes.
After all,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, How many properties/stations do you think you can service adequately anyhow ??

Then once you've got one or some that will give you a go, return next week end or month at an agreed time, and do your stuff.
Do it well and Mr Farmer may then put in a good word to a neighboring property that previously refused you.
Quality,,, Not Quantity,,,,,,,, and Make haste slowly.

I speak from experience of being both a shooter looking for an opening,,,,, as well as being a property owner myself

To Wapiti
What I said/meant was by showing that you, (the shooter) at least have insurance will go a step closer to being accepted as opposed to those that have nothing at all.
But at the end of the day the shooter still has to demonstrate responsibility, trust,safety, reliability etc etc ad infinitem.

As for payment,,,, there are a lot of shooters these days that are willing, and do, pay the farmer. Nothing wrong with that.

[Spanielz11]

It really is a shame to see some shooters take places they go for granted, the way some behave, and some even expecting farmers to pay THEM. Not in all cases sure, but here, you'd only have to go into the local farm joint and get a list of people who'd be out in a flash for nix, locals too.

We priced the extra premium for having hunters on, to "cover" us, it was between $600 and $1100 a year. I'd bet 99% of farms wouldn't even consider this, until they have a shooter who rolls a quad and breaks his neck, or anything else, and sues. Because the guest will sue, as his family now has lost a bread winner. And having the insurance doesn't stop you from being taken to court initially, with the insurance company looking to minimise their payout.
This is a big risk, and this is the world we live in now. I have heard, that some places are demanding to see personal liability insurance for pro shooters before they are allowed on, as legally they are no different from a subby tradesman who can't start on a site without his personal liability, as there's money involved. The SSAA insurance in your membership doesn't cover any of this, ask them. We did.

So why can't a farmer charge for the use of his place to get some money out of it? Nobody goes to a national park for free, or a 4wd park either.

If that is the case mate, that its going to incur an extra 1100 dollarydoos a year for the insurance, I would have no qualms paying that portion for the owners, for the duration i have access to that property i.e each year i can shoot there i'd cover that cost. That peace of mind for the landowner is worth more to everyone involved than the price of the premium.

A question here to the landowners that are following this thread, do you still find that fella's offer their services where they can? like repairing fences, helping work on the machinery (obviously if its within their skill) etc,etc. Just from chatting to a lot of blokes around the mid 20 age bracket it comes across as most just wanting a free pass to go and be yahoo's. just my 2c.

[Member-Deleted]

G'day Wapiti mate you say the ssaa insurance doesn't cover for the need to shoot on properties as you've said you've been in contact with them i'm not sure how it stands but with the Shooters Union they have a liability insurance for their members i'm pretty sure it covers all liabilities but will check to make sure but on insurance it's best you have your own insurance anyway especially when shooting on other peoples properties that way you know the insurance is there and you design it to cover all aspects of hunting and shooting on properties not belonging to you it is a basic safety net to save you drama if something was to happen also show it to the farmer and it will show him/her that you are working toward his/her interests as well its not rocket science to gain access to properties just rock up well dressed and ask there's two answers ''yes'' or ''no'' just ringing up is a little daunting for most farmers but if ringing is better for you then do so but all the farmers around me would not give you access by phone call I don't know how many times it's been said but the farmer has last say if you are prepared to pay for access good for you that's fine if you get paid to shoot that's fine to good luck if you are prepared to shoot for nothing just to gain access then that's fine to there are many opinions with different wants and needs you can't possibly have one answer but the outcome is the same dead pests so people no matter what you need it will not be the same as the next fellow or what you are prepared to do to gain access will not be the same as the next fellow and property owners are not all alike but all require complete adherence to their requirements for your access as there is a lot at stake for them you are entering their home one would say and at end of the day the farmer can do as he sees fit with his property we may not like it at times but that goes with the territory of shooting someone else's land whether we like it or not

[Wapiti]

Hi Granddadbushy, I called SSAA Insurance to ask and they told me the automatic members insurance doesn't cover my liability for having anyone on the place. My wife and I are both in the Shooters Union also, same deal with them. They could probably explain it better than I ever could and only know the yes and no of it.
We sat down with Wesfarmers WFI who do our stuff last year, to make sure we have covered ourselves properly in this day and age, the manager was absolutely insistent we either don't let anyone past the gate without specialist liability insurance (which they won't touch as it's not worth the trouble, he reckons) or don't let anyone on at all.
He told us of a few farmers who have lost their complete life's work from a hunter rolling a quad and being TPD, vehicle and firearm accidents resulting in that and worse, he hears the worst of it. So we started to look around, and it's expensive.
I bet most farmers have no idea how serious this legal liability stupidity is, and think their 10 or 20 mil liability in teir farm and contents covers it but it does not.

Spanielz11 that's a real gracious thing to say, that you'd pay the cost to get access, sole access of course. Most wouldn't though, either money is tight or would rather see it as a favour exchange.

Working for favours is something that's a mixed bag, some farmers would love a sparky to install an aircon or plumber to sort out a bathroom in exchange for hunting, others know then that it's now an "exchange of favours" which is the same as paying a daily rate to hunt, in the eyes of the law. That ups the liability again. Its actually less of a potential cost to get someone in to do the job whos an insured subcontractor. The world is rapidly becoming very difficult, and it's the lawyers that have made it like this.

[GQshayne]

Hi Granddadbushy, I called SSAA Insurance to ask and they told me the automatic members insurance doesn't cover my liability for having anyone on the place. My wife and I are both in the Shooters Union also, same deal with them. They could probably explain it better than I ever could and only know the yes and no of it.
We sat down with Wesfarmers WFI who do our stuff last year, to make sure we have covered ourselves properly in this day and age, the manager was absolutely insistent we either don't let anyone past the gate without specialist liability insurance (which they won't touch as it's not worth the trouble, he reckons) or don't let anyone on at all.
He told us of a few farmers who have lost their complete life's work from a hunter rolling a quad and being TPD, vehicle and firearm accidents resulting in that and worse, he hears the worst of it. So we started to look around, and it's expensive.
I bet most farmers have no idea how serious this legal liability stupidity is, and think their 10 or 20 mil liability in teir farm and contents covers it but it does not.

Spanielz11 that's a real gracious thing to say, that you'd pay the cost to get access, sole access of course. Most wouldn't though, either money is tight or would rather see it as a favour exchange.

Working for favours is something that's a mixed bag, some farmers would love a sparky to install an aircon or plumber to sort out a bathroom in exchange for hunting, others know then that it's now an "exchange of favours" which is the same as paying a daily rate to hunt, in the eyes of the law. That ups the liability again. Its actually less of a potential cost to get someone in to do the job whos an insured subcontractor. The world is rapidly becoming very difficult, and it's the lawyers that have made it like this.

Its a shame in another respect too - the property we used to hunt was sold a number of years ago now, but we are still in contact with our grazier friends. We have been to family weddings and seen a number of children born, and now grown up, and a funeral too. Just recently, we heard they were trying to collect photos of the family farm, and were finding it difficult. They had obviously not taken many themselves. But we had photos of many things taken over 25 years or so that we had been there. We gave them what photos we had at a family gathering they were having, and looking over them, she commented that we had been a part of their lives for a very long time. And that is how we think of it too. We also learned a lot about the land, what good land management was, and wool growing. Experiences we would not have had otherwise.

All because we went there to go hunting. Something that is becoming rarer nowadays. Very sad.

[Member-Deleted]

Ah yes Wapiti I can see what you mean the ssaa and shooters union are saying the insurance covers the shooter for being sued not the loss or damage to the farmer sucks doesn't it ? so I do agree something should be available for both parties

[Shootermick]

Hunters are privileged to be allowed onto a family’s farm. And unfortunately a small few do the wrong thing and that causes the farmer to shut the gate to everyone in the end.