Man fined for failing to tag 'flighty' pet deer with 'sharp antlers'

An elderly Adelaide Hills man who repeatedly tried to place mandatory identification ear tags on his "pet" deer — including an attempt to tranquillise them — has been fined after failing to succeed at the task.

The Environment, Development and Resources Court of South Australia found the 81-year-old owner of the deer had attempted to tag the animals, but both he and one of his sons were injured in the process.

In a published judgment, Senior Judge Michael Durrant said the man had also tried tagging the deer after they had shed their antlers.

"I was told the deer are described as flighty animals possessing sharp antlers," he said.

"Assistance was sought from a person associated with Monarto Zoo to tranquillise the animals.

"I am told those attempts were unsuccessful because the animals could not safely be approached."

The judgment noted the man, who acquired the deer after he retired, had "a strong attachment" to the 30 to 40 deer on his property and "regards them as pets".

The man pleaded guilty to one count of failing to comply with an action order issued under the Landscape South Australia Act, an offence which carries a maximum penalty of $25,000.

Under state law, domestic deer over the age of 12 months must be fitted with a permanent ear tag bearing an identification number linked to the deer keeper's property. The animals must also be tagged before being moved to another property.

Extra time allowed, but still no compliance

A Landscape Officer noted the untagged deer in April 2022, and issued a compliance order requiring the animals be tagged by the end of August 2022, Senior Judge Durrant said.

He said the man did not comply, despite being given multiple extensions of time to do so.

According to the judgment, the property had facilities for the handling of deer on his property, but they had been destroyed in a bushfire and were yet to be restored "to their former condition".

"Notwithstanding those extensions, the requirements of the action order remained unfulfilled," Senior Judge Durrant said.

"There are several practical difficulties associated with compliance with the order."

Senior Judge Durrant said the man "was afforded several opportunities to comply with the action order" but the "circumstances do not suggest a deliberate refusal to engage with the regulatory process or an absence of effort directed toward compliance".

"The defendant nevertheless remained under an obligation to comply with the action order," he said.

"The practical difficulties he encountered do not excuse the offending."

Senior Judge Durrant said the requirement to tag domestic deer served several purposes.

"The identification regime assists in the management of disease risk, biodiversity impacts, habitat degradation, wildfire management and conservation planning," he said.

He noted the man's advanced age, poor health, lack of prior offending, limited financial means and that he had otherwise been cooperative with authorities.

Senior Judge Durrant convicted the man and, after applying a discount for his guilty plea, fined the man $6,300.

He also ordered that all deer at the property over 12 months of age be fitted with a permanent ear tag by the end of November.