23 February 2010, 14:11
Weathered“HELI-HUNTING” IN NEW ZEALAND
WHERE ARE WE AT ?
This information brief deals mainly with Himalayan Tahr which constitute the second or third most sought after trophy by recreational and guided hunters in New Zealand. Less is mentioned of chamois but the impacts of helihunts on chamois will be very similar.
Himalayan Tahr, hemitragus Jemlahicus were liberated near Mount Cook in 1903, they exploited the benign environment they were released into and their population peaked at around 50,000 animals in the late 1950's to early 1970's.
Commercial helicopter recovery (WARO) switched from venison to tahr in the 1970's and rapidly reduced the population to less than 1000 animals. The National Government of the time under pressure from recreational hunters placed a moratorium on the commercial (WARO) hunting of tahr. The presence of tahr was permitted within 7 management zones within which the population was controlled under the Himalayan Tahr Control Plan (HTCP) of 1983. The HTCP has allowed tahr to be managed at a population of between 8000 and 12000 animals with a target population of 10,000. Tahr are listed as a pest by DoC but by and large have been managed successfully under the HTCP at an annual cost of between $120,000 and $320,000.
Himalayan Tahr were recently re-categorised by IUCN from a VU2A animal to near threatened (NT) status
http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/searchIUCN definition of NEAR THREATENED (NT)
A taxon is Near Threatened when it has been evaluated against the criteria but does not qualify for Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable now, but is close to qualifying for or is likely to qualify for a threatened category in the near future.
The protection afforded Himalayan Tahr under the IUCN Red List does not extend to tahr outside their home range. The New Zealand herd is not protected. However every tahr trophy that leaves New Zealand must have a certificate of origin or a CITES exemption issued to comply with IUCN protection status identifying the trophy as coming from New Zealand.
New Zealand has the largest feral herd of tahr able to be hunted in the world. This dominant position is unlikely to continue. Tahr hunting permits are now being issued again in the Himalaya. Tahr from New Zealand were exported to Argentina in the 80's and released onto game parks in the Argentine Andes, they have since been released into the wild, this feral Andean herd is growing it currently numbers 450-1000. Tahr have also been released into the wild and can be hunted in Romania. Private tahr herds are also kept in Texas behind the wire for trophy hunting.
The protective proprietorial nature of New Zealand recreational hunters towards tahr is understandable given that the very herd that the commercial operators seek to exploit with helihunting concessions is the same herd helicopter operators almost wiped out by 1978.
The herd currently numbers around 10,000 to 12,000 animals DoC search and destroy culls remove 3000 animals, recreational hunters kill a further 3000 animals if not more. DoC do not keep records of recreational hunter kills. The tahr herd is able to sustain this high hunting pressure as it comprises a 60% to 80% female component. The mortality rate amongst bulls from energetic reproductive cost and hunting is very high.
A research paper produced by Parkes and Tustin for the New Zeland journal of ecology details the mature bulls of trophy class available for hunting. A tahr population of 13000 animals will contain only 268 trophy class bulls, Helihunt concession applications have applied to take 1213 bull tahr in one season. In addition a further 1400 chamois are sought by helihunts
New Zealand recreational hunter issues with current temporary concessions and helihunting
1/The department’s description of a helicopter to spot and drop hunters is inaccurate.
The use of a helicopter to hunt for and locate trophy animals is no different from commercial WARO in impact and activity. All stakeholder groups attending on Feb 12th including the helicopter operators themselves maintain the activity is commercial and refuse to have it defined as recreational/commercial.
No international or national recreational hunting group accepts trophies taken by coercing or driving animals with a helicopter. Ref SCI amendment to the trophy rules dated 9th May 2009 disqualifying helihunt trophies and page 98 of the current SCI rule book. NZDA ban the act of helihunting.
You can only assume the definition of a trophy was described to DoC by helicopter helihunters and no one else. If the intent of helihunt concessions was to encourage wealthy overseas trophy hunters to come here it is very likely to have the reverse effect. Every ground hunted trophy that leaves New Zealand will be tainted with the suspicion of helihunting. Is helihunting part of the 100% pure image NZ wants to project.
New Zealand hunters have a philosophical opposition to helihunts on public conservation land.
Helihunting is an activity contrary to the values, ecology and ethics our national parks were created to support. New Zealanders in general have an expectation of conduct consistent with these values within our parks and PCL. Commercial and recreational activities managed by DoC should reflect those values. Clients of helihunts are going to great expense to divorce themselves from the very values New Zealanders wish celebrated and aspire to in our parks. Helihunting has no place in New Zealands national parks.
Currently 'allowing' helihunting without due process creates a dangerous legal precedent within our PCL and national parks. How does the Department of Conservation reconcile the prosecution of a walking guide who took four people for a walk and was prosecuted
http://www.voxy.co.nz/national...national-park/5/6526 with allowing helihunting an illegal unconsented activity, to operate with conservator/ministerial approval.
The contention that helihunts are a previously legal activity is incorrect. The Department of Conervationss position was revealed as indefensible under coronial oath in March 2008
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/quee...illegal-coroner-toldMost recreational hunters agree that aerial access and management plans are the correct forum for helihunt applicants to apply for consents. No applications have ever been lodged by operators within the public consent process. All helihunt concession applications directly to Conservation Boards have been declined. The Otago Conservation Board declined a helihunt application in 1995. Canterbury Conservation Board declined a helihunt application in Nov 2007.
(Canterbury Conservation Board Paper 2005/031 for board meeting 080405)
The Westland Conservation Board Declined a helihunt application in 2007.
It appears the Canterbury Conservator by ' allowing' helihunts to be conducted throughout selected areas of the Southern Alps are not only in contradiction of the area conservation boards past recommendations but the 2008 National govt election promises for outdoor recreation as well.
http://www.national.org.nz/Art...aspx?articleId=28247There is also possible conflict with the Conservation Authorities directive through the conservation management strategy to urge consistency in aerial access plans amongst conservancies. The Mount Aspiring National Park Plan identifies and prohibits helihunting. The Aoraki Mount Cook Management Plan excerpt below prohibits approval of any concession creating increased aircraft activity. The Canterbury Conservancy is seeking on behalf of helihunt operators to promote concession approval to hunt in Aoraki Mount Cook National Park through change in the AMCNPP this month.
Reading the current figures from applicants supplied. There will be 31 helicopters and 16 concessionaires carrying out helihunts with a harvest of up to 3000 animals, predominantly tahr and chamois.
This will have 2 effects
1/That helihunts will increase aerial activity significantly is obvious
2/The helihunt harvest of 3000 animals is an unsustainable number that defeats any intent to manage the activity and will quickly collapse the recreational hunting resource available from over hunting. This will directly encourage operators to hunt outside their legal concession blocks within national parks and wilderness areas.
An environmental mitigation levy of $500 per tahr and chamois is sought by the department, as one of the possible revenue benefits of helihunting.
There are five questions to ask .
1/ How much environmental impact will burning an extra 6000 to 9000 hours of helicopter kerosene (3000 animals requested at 2-3 hours flying per animal) on PCL going to have ?
2/Will the direct environmental impact of helihunt helicopter use out weight the environmental mitigation fee ?
3/Will the removal of trophy animals and direct competition from helihunt activities discourage recreational ground hunting ?
4/Will the recreational incentive to hunt alpine species be removed along with the trophies taken by helihunts.
5/Will this decreased recreational hunter participation lead to an increase in tahr and chamois population with a resultant increased control cost burden on the Department of Conservation.
Have DoC or the applicants carried out any research into the above questions has due consideration been given as required under the act.
http://www.legislation.govt.nz...atest/DLM104648.htmlHere is the direct quote from the act
Matters to be considered by Minister
• (1) In considering any application for a concession, the Minister shall have regard to the following matters:
• (a) The nature of the activity and the type of structure or facility (if any) proposed to be constructed:
• (b) The effects of the activity, structure, or facility:
• (c) Any measures that can reasonably and practicably be undertaken to avoid, remedy, or mitigate any adverse effects of the activity:
• (d) Any information received by the Minister under section 17S or section 17T of this Act:
• (e) Any relevant environmental impact assessment, including any audit or review:
• (f) Any relevant oral or written submissions received as a result of any relevant public notice issued under section 49 of this Act:
• (g) Any relevant information which may be withheld from any person in accordance with the Official Information Act 1982 or the Privacy
Would it be a better idea to only ground hunt alpine animals using current aerial access concessions and no helihunters at all? Levy a $500 fee on every tahr trophy that leaves NZ. DoC and MAF already administer these trophies as required by CITES. Chamois could have a similar levy collected too. This would result in the same income to the Department of Conservation and no helihunt concessions. It would be simple to exempt any tahr trophy taken off a private property game park accompanied by a GST receipt if you wish.
Compliance and mitigation.
Heli-hunting did not “emerge” the activity is a direct result of loss of WARO concession integrity administered by the Department of Conservation over the last 30 years (30 years of heli-hunting as claimed by heli-hunt operator Mount Hutt Helicopters). Heli-hunting is not new and has been recognized as early as 1983 (Safari Hunting) in department literature and the HTCP.
Compliance is an important point to keep in mind in when considering helihunts. The Westland Conservation Board Pointed out in 2007 that inadequate provision within a helihunting concession with respect to compliance and mitigation was good grounds to decline the application.
During the stakeholder meeting 12th February 2010 two representatives of the helicopter industry both maintained they could not operate helihunt businesses without herding or chasing animals.
Given this position will there be any better compliance under spot and drop concessions than now ?
Can the impact of helihunts be managed or mitigated. The concession applicants have offered no assessment of impact or mitigation measures.
You would have to be very concerned with the impact of helihunts on recreational hunters
Within the HTCP priority of control is assigned to recreational ground hunters and ground hunting guides, allowing helihunts or spot and drop activities by helihunters under a commercial concession amounts to denial of access to the ground hunting groups and is in conflict with the principles of the Himalayan Tahr Control Plan
With regards to animal welfare issues, helihunt operators have been known to herd and harass the animals to exhaustion, animals are peppered with buckshot to move them or slow them down enough for the client to get a shot at. Often the animals are injured from falls or running to escape the helicopter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcDMX4tQTy4 This is not the image New Zealand hunters want to project of New Zealand hunting.
Will intrinsic values as described in the Conservation Act and the National Parks Act
http://www.legislation.govt.nz...latest/DLM37796.html be maintained ?
Will enjoyment "in full measure" as protected under the National Parks Act be preserved? Can DoC guarantee recreational users they have the processes and compliance tools to manage helihunts on PCL? Past WARO concession activity and helihunts non compliance records cast significant doubt on any protection at all.
While tahr and chamois are not protected our right to hunt them in peace and quiet enjoying our public land in full measure is protected.
Recreational hunters maintain DoC cannot mitigate or manage the impact of helihunting on any other backcountry recreational users. There are so many compelling arguments against helihunts and very few for.
In summary
If the Department of Conservations wish was to explore revenue generation from trophy hunting in New Zealand it could be simply achieved for less cost and no environmental impact whatsoever by levying a fee when a trophy leaves the country. There would be no need for a single helihunt flight.
Those that want to helihunt can still helihunt on private land. Those physically incapable of ground hunting PCL can hunt the easier private game parks. Just because there are no helihunts does not mean less able hunters will shun the New Zealand hunting experience.
It is important to note there are already aerial access concessions such as those granted by the West Coast conservancy in their aerial access plan that allow helicopter operators to drop a ground party in and pick them up at any time . This can occur on any PCL land not designated wilderness or National Park, these easier access coastal areas are non exclusive and well used by guided and recreational hunters with minimal impact on recreationalists seeking more remote experiences. Most recreatio0nal users support this controlled easy aerial access and point out the fundamental difference that while a helicopter is used to access the area it is not used to helihunt or spot and drop hunters. An operator is liable for prosecution under the Conservation act if they do chase an animal without concession.
http://www.legislation.govt.nz...atest/DLM106639.htmlIf helihunts are permited this will remove protection under the above act and legalise the chasing down of animals for sport.
If support for a tourist trophy hunting industry was intended then create a robust well regulated government controlled hunting guide authority.
A $50 million dollar hunting industry is not on the line, we should request the figures and their basis from the applicants be supplied for scrutiny. Recent conversations with guides and landowners suggest a figure half that with the major component generated on private land hunts. It seems only 1-2 million dollars is spent on helicopter charter and guides for helihunts.
Helihunts operate in conflict with Conservation Strategies, Conservation Board decisions FMC, NZAC, Forest and Bird and New Zealands national recreational hunting body, The New Zealand Deerstalkers Association.
.
hehehe tharzes!!! plenty private properties would have thar breeding on them.