Are fallow deer pests, or are they protected animals in their own right? There's also a third consideration, which is tightly intertwined with both those assertions - are fallow deer a commercial resource that can be used to for financial gain in Tasmania?

It's been more than five years since a University of Tasmania report was released that showed wild fallow deer numbers in the state would balloon to more than one million by 2050.

Two government inquiries and a draft management plan later, it is believed Primary Industries Minister Guy Barnett is poised to release its strategy into managing wild fallow deer herds in the coming days.

What is unique about this issue is that it intersects through a large cross-section of the community, but the issue of wild deer management is increasingly becoming a social community issue, as more and more people come across fallow deer and interact with them, as herd numbers move closer to urban areas.

Crash data from State Growth has shown traffic accidents involving fallow deer has fluctuated in the past several years. From 2013 to 2021 there were 63 vehicle incidents involving deer.

READ MORE: Rents anticipated to rise substantially in three Launceston suburbs

Tasmanian Farmers and Graziers Association chief executive John McKew said the cost of roaming fallow deer on farming property was "in excess of $10 million" per year.

This is only the cost impact of loss of production, and associated infrastructure, such as when the deer damage fencing and eat silage or crops during their roaming.

"Farmers are the ones who are bearing the brunt of this issue ... and they are prepared to bear the cost, if they have the right tools to equip them to manage the problem," he said.

READ MORE: Launceston Golf Club to get a little smaller after council approves rezoning

Farmers have the ability to apply and register for crop protection permits through the Department of Natural Resources, which gives them permission to shoot deer on their property.

However, there are still limits on when and how they can catch deer, due to fallow deer being a partially protected species in Tasmania.

Mr McKew said farmers were becoming increasingly desperate, and wanted to see more tools available to them, such as baiting, aerial shooting and greater use of thermal detection technology.

"Crop protection permits are the only way farmers can manage deer and we recognise that it's part of the solution, but it's not the only solution," he said.

Mr McKew said the wild fallow deer population was continuing to grow, which suggested traditional control methods were not working.

"We can't keep doing the same thing and expecting a different result."

He said farmers were willing to work in partnership with recreational shooters to control deer on their properties, but required legislative help from the government to do so.

Discussions surrounding wild fallow deer management in Tasmania have been ongoing for at least the past five years.

The UTAS report, among other things has prompted a federal Senate Inquiry, a state Legislative Council inquiry and resulted in the draft wild fallow deer management strategy.

It is understood the final Wild Fallow Deer Management Strategy is likely to be released by the state government in the coming days.

Deer management and catering for the needs of a diverse group of stakeholders, including some, such as the shooting community, which does not have a consensus on how best to manage deer populations, is complicated - but it all stems down on how best to control the numbers of wild deer that are roaming far and wide.

READ MORE: Man dies after single-vehicle crash at Longford

An aerial survey conducted by the government to more accurately gauge fallow deer numbers gave an estimate of the population to be at 53,660 wild fallow deer across the state.

Fallow deer were surveyed in a 19,905-square-kilometre survey area, with the results suggesting a density of an average of 2.7 deer per square kilometre.

Deer numbers gave grown by about 5.4 per cent per year between 2006 and 2019, after accounting for the annual harvest.

Tasmania also has about 170 deer farms, where farms have sprung up, fencing in existing populations of deer.

However, a report commissioned by the government into the feasibility of a wild-shot commercial industry, noted less than 10 had enough numbers to support a commercial business.

The largest commercial deer farm in Northern Tasmania is Springfield Deer Farm, owned by Michal Frydrych.

Mr Frydrych has long advocated that commercialisation of wild fallow deer would decimate his industry.

However, other stakeholders say if the right protections are in place, a wild-shot venison industry would help manage the population.

A feasibility study into the possibility of a trial for wild-shot venison, authored by Launceston consultant Owen Tilbury found that there was a large cross-section of support for a trial.

However, the state government continues to distance itself from the introduction of even a small-scale trial.

While the majority of deer farmers remain opposed to the idea of a wild-shot venison trial, despite broad support from the community, the hospitality industry and from game producers.

The report, produced by CLIP Consulting, was made public in December 2021, but was delivered to the department in 2020.

Large portions of the document, including response from game processors, deer farmers and the pet food industry were redacted.

READ MORE: 64 women fleeing family violence living in state transition houses

However, from the portions that remain unredacted, the report shows there is adequate supply and demand for wild-shot venison.

It also showed there was support for a trial of wild-shot venison and laid out a five-year implementation plan.

The report showed that over 80 per cent of the broader community felt that the deer that are currently wild shot should be sold to the public if compliant with applicable food safety standards.

An allegation of bias from the Australian Deer Council against the author Owen Tilbury has been completely dismissed, after the council suggested that Tilbury had a social relationship with a stakeholder.

Mr Tilbury is a certified practising market researcher by the Market Research Society of Australia and is bound by their code of ethics, and an independent reviewer verified the report's contents prior to any allegation of bias, which came following a call from the hospitality industry to increase access to venison.

John Kelly from Lenah Game Meats has long been an advocate for the introduction of a wild-shot fallow deer industry for Tasmania.

Lenah Game Meats processes venison, wallaby and other game meat for markets in Tasmania and on the mainland.

However, he is forced to process deer from the mainland, because legislation doesn't allow recreational shooters to sell to restaurants.

"Last year we bought 200 tonnes of boneless wild harvested venison from interstate to supply our existing markets. If we could have a wild-shot industry here, then that would be 200 tonnes of Tasmanian venison that was shot by Tasmanian hunters," he said.

Mr Kelly said there was an appetite for venison that was growing.

"We don't promote venison in any way, but we can't keep up."

Mr Kelly said the maths was simple, if we could establish an industry in Tasmania, there would be more jobs, and it could leverage off Tasmania's clean and green brand.

He said the farmed deer industry in Tasmania was small-scale, and could be supported by a wild-shot industry.

Tasmania's shooting community is not in consensus when it comes to the management of wild fallow deer.

The report from CLIP Consulting said of those surveyed, there was nearly an even split between those who support a commercialisation and those who don't.

Tasmanian Shooting Union president Alistair Shephard said there were many differing opinions regarding fallow deer in Tasmania, but most shooters were frustrated about strict legislation and requirements that hampered their ability to shoot - either for fun or commercially.

"Recreational shooters can only shoot deer at certain times of the year, and they have strict bag limits - from that perspective that's not going to control numbers," he said.

"If you're looking to control numbers, one of the easiest things you can do is to remove some of those restrictions."

Mr Shephard said community sentiment and Australia's strong firearm legislation meant that it was difficult to be a shooter in Tasmania.

And while he understood the sentiment, he wished some of the rules and regulations would be relaxed.

A survey compiled as part of the Tilbury report showed almost an equal split between those who were in support and opposition of a wild shot industry.

Almost a quarter of hunters, especially younger ones, indicated a willingness to consider engaging in the commercial harvest of wild deer for crop protection.

Mr Shephard said another factor was that there was some division among the recreational shooting community regarding the use of fallow deer shot for sport.

"If some people shoot deer because they want to have the antlers as a trophy, then they are opposed to opening up the industry, because it will mean less deer to shoot," he said.

Mr Shephard said, however, he believed there was an opportunity to appease both camps, and the growth in deer numbers meant there were plenty of wild deer.

The wild fallow deer management strategy is expected to be released by Primary Industries Minister Guy Barnett in the near future.

However, a question still remains about whether those management strategies will include decision regarding a wild-shot industry.

It's clear there is willingness in the community to help reduce and control deer numbers, the question is still how will they be able to.

An NRE spokesperson said the Tasmanian Wild Fallow Deer Management Plan aimed to ensure the impact of wild fallow deer on agricultural production, conservation areas, forestry and the broader community are balanced with maintaining deer as a traditional recreational hunting resource.

After the plan is finalised, NRE will develop an implementation strategy to outline specific actions and timelines to ensure the plan is delivered.

What do you think? Send us a letter to the editor: