Are Syndicates effective?

[slider]

Syndicates are about making money, not effective deer control
As has already been said, a syndicate isnt going to cull every deer possible, it would ruin their sport

Not always correct. Many syndicates in commercial forestry would simply lose their lease if then didn't take every opportunity.
In any case in such situations its not possible to kill out everything. In one syndicate in I'm its a case of shoot on sight (in season). Cull numbers have been consistent for 20 - 30 years

 

[SteveW]

Not always correct. Many syndicates in commercial forestry would simply lose their lease if then didn't take every opportunity.
In any case in such situations its not possible to kill out everything. In one syndicate in I'm its a case of shoot on sight (in season). Cull numbers have been consistent for 20 - 30 years

Was just about to say the same! If you don't hit the cull targets on the commercial blocks you are replaced!
Also just read Ronin's post and situations that occur like that stink in my opinion, where new man comes in and brings someone he knows in!
Happens in the day job as well!

 

[nun_hunter]

Not always correct. Many syndicates in commercial forestry would simply lose their lease if then didn't take every opportunity.
In any case in such situations its not possible to kill out everything. In one syndicate in I'm its a case of shoot on sight (in season). Cull numbers have been consistent for 20 - 30 years

In these instances the syndicates are about making money, just not for the leaseholder or syndicate members.

They're in place to either compensate the forestry owner/operator for the loss of trees or to save them the expense of paying someone to manage the deer.

If they weren't making money or were consistently losing enough trees and eating into their profit margins then they would do as some areas have and pay contractors to cull enough. All the while they are in the black they'll happily allow people to pay for the privilege of "managing" their deer numbers.

 

[slider]

In these instances the syndicates are about making money, just not for the leaseholder or syndicate members.

They're in place to either compensate the forestry owner/operator for the loss of trees or to save them the expense of paying someone to manage the deer.

If they weren't making money or were consistently losing enough trees and eating into their profit margins then they would do as some areas have and pay contractors to cull enough. All the while they are in the black they'll happily allow people to pay for the privilege of "managing" their deer numbers.

True to an extent. A good syndicate lease operates on a not for profit basis the each member paying an equal percentage and all being reasonably local.
Sure, I would rather not pay for the privilege of managing the Foresters deer but that the way the system works. It gives me the opportunity to shoot deer without being a contractor.