Hi just a revisit to update you all
There are 16 outfitters and guides who specialise in helihunting tahr and chamois listed below.

As some may be aware helihunting has been a contentious issue in New Zealand and has been carried out under temporary seasonal concessions for 2 years.
The Department of Conservation have continued to allow helihunting in the face of overwhelming opposition.

It was declared today by the Commmissioner for the Environment that that the Department of Conservations Helihunt concessions were under investigation by parlimentary office. Here is an excerpt from the speech

Tuesday, 8 November 2011, 9:27 pm
Press Release: Parliamentary Commissioner For The Environment
Prosperity or Posterity? The Future of Conservation Land

quote:

As I mentioned earlier, there are eleven specially designated wilderness areas on land managed by DOC.
It’s not easy to get to them – on purpose.
They have no tracks and no huts.
Those intrepid souls who go there have to tramp for days from the end of a track to get to them.
You are not allowed to get a helicopter to fly you into a wilderness area.
But sometimes helicopters are allowed to, and do, land in wilderness areas.
Occasionally for search and rescue.
But if the experience of being in a wilderness area is interrupted by the thud thud thud of a helicopter, it is probably heli-hunting.
Heli-hunting for those of you who don’t know is the pursuit of an animal to the point of exhaustion, then shooting it.
Usually chamois or thar – in order to get a fine trophy head.
Shades of red jackets and hunting to hounds.
So why is heli-hunting allowed in wilderness areas?
It’s because it is considered to be pest control under the Wild Animal Control Act.
You couldn’t get a concession to film a movie in a wilderness area but you can chase an animal – noisily for miles – and shoot it.
And even putting animal welfare concerns to one side, something doesn’t seem right here.
So heli-hunting is one issue we will be looking into in our investigation into commercial uses of conservation land.

The Parlimentary Commission for the Environment has far ranging powers independent of government departments and can recomend an activity be terminated.

If you are considering booking a hunt in New Zealand and have been offered a helicopter hunt to "position" you, think twice. You may arrive and find you are walking which I sincerely hope you do enjoy

Heli-hunting concessionaires in 2011:

Helicopter only
Amuri Helicopters Limited

Guiding component only
South Pacific Safaris (NZ) Ltd
Glenroy Station Ltd
Mt Cook Trophy Hunting Ltd
New Zealand Mountain Hunting Ltd

Guide and helicopter components
Alpine Deer Group Limited
Station Air Ltd
Alpine Hunting Adventures Ltd
Mountain Helicopters Fox Glacier Ltd
Aspiring Helicopters Ltd
Way to Go Heliservices Ltd
Mount Hutt Helicopters Limited
Back Country Helicopters Ltd

The definition of helihunting in the official department summary

quote:

Heli-hunting, or aerially-assisted trophy hunting, as it is also known, is defined as a continuous activity involving searching for an animal by helicopter, the positioning of hunter and guide on the ground to allow shooting of the animal, and then uplifting of trophy, hunter and guide to return to base. The helicopter may, at times, be used to herd animals out of difficult to reach areas or to safe shooting positions.
The difference between aircraft landing concessions, where aircraft are used to convey and position hunters directly to specified landing sites and then return for pickup at a predetermined time days to weeks later, and heli-hunting concessions, is that in heli-hunting the aircraft is used to search for a trophy and is integral to a continuous operation where all on board return to base as part of the one trip.

As you can see the concession activity describes an element of herding and hazing you are all reminded that.
Safari Club International (SCI). SCI in their Code of Ethics, Measures Manual, and in their 9 May 2009 Aircraft policy disbar their members from hunts which use aircraft to haze and herd game and from entering any trophy taken in this manner into their trophy book.

As to suitability of some of these outfitters to hold a convention stand while holding hunting concessions disbarred under SCI rules? well I'll leave that to SCI to figure out.

Most of us in New Zealand do not want helihunting. I recomend you engage a guide who ground hunts only and you enjoy your hunts in New Zealand as they should be conducted. Good Hunting

Good news, Weathered. I would love to see it banned outright completely.
Hunting them the right way is mountain hunting unparalleled.

Have been thinking about heading back down and doing another DIY tahr/chamois combo.

Thanks for posting the info.

Weathered,the last two years I have been into Tahr country and both times on foot.I often wished for a chopper many times going up those bloody mountains but in the end the 20 days on the hoof are something that cant be replaced if you want to enjoy your wonderful South Island to its fullest.
I may yet be dropped into a place by chopper for a future hunt but it wont phase me if even that is banned.
"hunting" from choppers is pure bullshit and I do hope that is banned outright.
I`m sure Shanks filled you in on our last hunt and the visit by a chopper!

quote:

Originally posted by Scottyboy:
Good news, Weathered. I would love to see it banned outright completely.
Hunting them the right way is mountain hunting unparalleled.

Ah 'the right way' to hunt, and ban all else outright. The slippery slope leaving nothing but pit traps and spears in the interest of ethics.

I'll keep the ability to shoot from vehicles thanks if I so choose, use dogs with a knife on hogs, use semi-autos in countries that allow them, or night sights, calibres too large, too far ranging, or just plain politically uncorrect thanks.

quote:

Originally posted by Karl:

quote:

Originally posted by Scottyboy:
Good news, Weathered. I would love to see it banned outright completely.
Hunting them the right way is mountain hunting unparalleled.

Ah 'the right way' to hunt, and ban all else outright. The slippery slope leaving nothing but pit traps and spears in the interest of ethics.

I'll keep the ability to shoot from vehicles thanks if I so choose, use dogs with a knife on hogs, use semi-autos in countries that allow them, or night sights, calibres too large, too far ranging, or just plain politically uncorrect thanks.

And you'll never, ever understand... probably never hunt either, just shoot a few animals.
But as long as you keep your "politically uncorrect" standards.
What you do in your part of the world is over to you, but with any luck one day we might be able to tell you to have sex and travel.

We come from the same part of the world.

My point was while some of us might not agree with some styles of hunting, banning is a very very strong word to use.

The difference is between choosing one modern implement(aka a rifle) or two modern implements, a rifle and helicopter .We can also assume people travelling to the south island or NZ to hunt are not fucking swimming across the water or rowing a traditional canoe either.

At the end of the day, some fat dentist wants to fly over and shoot deers behind a fence or whatever more power to him.

Myself I like knifing pigs using dogs for example, and using calibres far larger than is needed on other game, so hunters like myself might be next on the chopping block. Better to let anti's do their own dirtywork than for hunters to turn anti on each other..

difference is Karl is that the heli-hunting does have an effect on the recreation of others, it is not just about the animals or the ethics but consideration for all users!!

Yeah, I think you get it Matt.

You have to ask too, When do's it become not hunting? I'd suggest use of a chopper in this manor is well past that point.

The arguments you put forward Karl, are at best facetious.Again more of the type we see here from The guides doing it. Mainly because they have no other argument they can use.

Just as a matter of interest then. How should one hunt camels in Australia from an ethical standpoint? Fair to use a vehicle until one is sighted or should you just get dropped off on the edge of your chosen desert and go after them on foot? Reckon that could be a physical challenge beyond most of those here advocating a total ban on chopper transport for hunting purposes.
No , I'm not a fan of heli shooting or driving game to the hunter with a chopper but sure as hell can't see what is wrong with being transported into the general hunting area by one . Perhaps NZ could adopt a policy similar to Alaska where you can't fly and shoot on the same day?

quote:

Originally posted by Bushchook:
Perhaps NZ could adopt a policy similar to Alaska where you can't fly and shoot on the same day?

No one is talking about banning helicopters from flying hunters in, or ever have. Its the useing of choppers to conduct the hunt thats the issue.

quote:

Originally posted by NitroX:

quote:

Originally posted by Bushchook:
Perhaps NZ could adopt a policy similar to Alaska where you can't fly and shoot on the same day?

2 thumbs up.

If you add a flight plan requirement of a fixed overpass height to the terrain nobody hunting on the ground should be disadvantaged significantly by over-passing helicopter transfer flights, because thats all they can be ...............transfer flights at height.

bearing in mind that actual height above theground can be an issue in the mountains - especially when consdiering cloud height.

quote:

Originally posted by Karl:
At the end of the day, some fat dentist wants to fly over and shoot deers behind a fence or whatever more power to him.

And while we are talking of fat dentists, why don't we just ban all fat arsed rich dudes from hunting and make tipping a capital punishment offence then some of us ordinary guys just might find Africa and other places a bit more affordable to hunt.

There's PLENTY of cheap hunting in Africa!! Supply and demand mostly dictates the prices and availablility (aside from actual costs) - not the tipping habits of the wealthy...

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:
There's PLENTY of cheap hunting in Africa!! Supply and demand mostly dictates the prices and availablility (aside from actual costs) - not the tipping habits of the wealthy...

It was tongue in cheek stuff Matt. Personally I'm not too concerned about someone that wants to shoot something from a chopper if that floats his boat, no different than those of us who have shot from vehicles, used spotlights, etc, as a means of getting an animal. Of course we are probably fortunate here in that no matter how we shoot our animals we can never control their natural population growth. Choppers have to be employed every now and again to cull our animals to keep them at a level that is sustainable for our countryside.

From my observation it is the paying hunters who have seen loss of free public hunting in most countries, where the land owners and guides see to it that land is locked up to protect the resident animals for those with the money to pay to hunt. Admittedly sometimes the firearms laws of those countries also contribute. It has happened in your top end, has happened in Europe and also Africa and I am sorry but the practice of tipping just goes to accentuate the problem. That just does not make for cheap hunting.

While we have vast tracks of public land protected for free hunting, good firearms legislation that allows ownership and use of such by all fit and proper persons and visitors, a generally tipping free society, I don't mind the odd lazy 'shooter' who wants to shoot from a chopper. I have had no compunction in using them to get into and out of our back country, just like I use a 4WD to access areas I can by road. I enjoy my days of hunting which are tough in their own right but not foot slogging for the sake of it. Even most of very our early hunters, both guided, cullers and recreational used a variety of transport modes to get into their hunting areas from horse, boats, the old cars of the day, the early Auster aircraft, even god forbid bren gun carriers sans the bren gun.

So you can see that most of us Kiwis are pretty relaxed about modes of transport, from the old to the modern, for getting into and out of our hunting areas. I suppose what grates us the most is the locking up of land to the exclusion of the average hunter, to cater for the rich paying customer and the indecent, to our culture anyway, practice of tipping that goes with it. Whether these people choose to shoot their animal from a chopper is immaterial really, in fact it is probably better so they piss off out of the country quicker.

Except that the older style of transports were limited to where they could go by the terrain. Try take a bren gun carrier into the Urewera or whataroa. Maybe only one site in any valley that could land an Auster.Most of the methods you mention are limited too the back of farms.... its a different story.
Personally I have no problem with what or how much a visiting hunter pays or tips, just as long as I don't have to, and that public land is kept at reasonable levels for all.

quote:

Whether these people choose to shoot their animal from a chopper is immaterial really,

I think you are far out of touch with the general public view on this.

Shanks the general public don't give a damn about what happens in the hills, your sentence "Personally I have no problem with what or how much a visiting hunter pays or tips, just as long as I don't have to, and that public land is kept at reasonable levels for all." really sums it all up if that was the way it would stay but unfortunately in the countries I mentioned it is the paying and tipping hunter, whether he or she be resident or visitor, that leads to the locking up of land and the climbing of costs for hunting.

I hunted Aussie buffalo for $100 a day which really must have only just covered the cost of pick up from Darwin airport, firearms licencing at the police station, running a vehicle around all for 10 days or so, food and lodging, guiding on animals although we were probably more than self sufficient in this area, a barbeque and beers on the last night, and transport back to the airport. No trophy fees and virtually unlimited animals, not that we were greedy.

Ask Matt how this compares to what it costs a foreigner or even an Aussie now to shoot just one buffalo.

Thankfully we can still do it cheap in our country and I have done it this way over the years for friends and visitors from overseas. May this long continue.

Yeah but we have a slightly different system here, in that we have a massive amount of public land that is open to hunting. What we have to protect is the animals.
Fed farmers, federated mountain clubs, forest and bird, deerstalkers.... and many more are against helihunting. Thats far more of the public than any hunting related issue in a long time.

I maybe wrong, but were not Buffalo cleaned off most public land? leaving only aboriginal controlled and private land where few are charged as the only alternative?

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:
Yeah, I think you get it Matt.

You have to ask too, When do's it become not hunting? I'd suggest use of a chopper in this manor is well past that point.

The arguments you put forward Karl, are at best facetious.Again more of the type we see here from The guides doing it. Mainly because they have no other argument they can use.

My arguments are your arguments applied to other areas. If they are at best facetious I suggest you try harder to understand yourself.

As to when it not becomes hunting that is the slippery slope.If the game is there and it is sustainable, I suggest it is personal choice how you arrive, shoot and collect the animal Most other items of 'consideration' as Matt puts it are secondary.

What a lot of Australians forget and Kiwis are plain too niave to grasp is during Australia's 1996 law changes the shock was not what was lost, but that hunters managed to keep anything at all given most of the damage was done by anti's prodding gunowners into 'drawing lines' on each other.

In particular the trophy and big game crew attacked the high capacity, pump shotgun and semi-auto guys on the basis of 'fair hunting', to gain protection for their own sports- and wiped them from the face of Australian hunting forever.

The muzzleloader and bowhunting crew sat back of course knowing a line was being drawn that perfectly suited 'their idea of when hunting is not hunting'

I hope the parallels are clear here.

As to the main difference between NZ and Australia its no mystery.

The differenced is the anti's have not pressed NZ hard yet.

By pressing hard I don't mean whether the police of the EPA or whatever have had a few bullshit meetings with farmers etc- what I mean is is the US antis with UN support and hundred million in lobbying support have not turned up with a full campaign plan.

When that happens you will have a group on your doorstep who have the power and experience terrorising the world's most powerful congress into getting their way. When they hit australia they had everything, not just political backing but dirty work- power cuts, death threats , to fake reps going door to door through whole suburbs acting drunk to ruin politicians votes. A real operation.

Little old NZ will buckle like a piece of cardboard, and one of the major mechanisms as bans around the world have shown, will be hunters 'drawing lines' on each other.

As to Public opinion of any hunting issue its irrelavent.

Joe bloggs suburbanite sees hunting as another 30 second issue switching between channels when they have a million other things to be confused by- baby fur seals, dissappearing rain forests etc.

What makes him care is after direct lobbying to the govermment by a focus group, something eventually filters down to him eventually as a law change and TV popular opinion.


In other words worrying about whether he likes the idea of a helicopter to arrive, shoot or even land on top of the animal makes no difference, since its all the same to an anti to get him hating all forms of 'animal killing' anyway.

I don't klnow enough about game numbers for heli hunting, so if it is a legitamte sustainability issue that is another thing.

But going off some of the posts above, don't be part of any banning mechanism on an emotional basis is my advice to hunters. It never wins you any votes with the public or anti's in the long run.

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:
Yeah, I think you get it Matt.

You have to ask too, When do's it become not hunting? I'd suggest use of a chopper in this manor is well past that point.

The arguments you put forward Karl, are at best facetious.Again more of the type we see here from The guides doing it. Mainly because they have no other argument they can use.

quote:

Originally posted by Karl:

My arguments are your arguments applied to other areas. If they are at best facetious I suggest you try harder to understand yourself.

Karl you are arguing in support of a practise that you know nothing about

quote:

Originally posted by Karl:

Little old NZ will buckle like a piece of cardboard, and one of the major mechanisms as bans around the world have shown, will be hunters 'drawing lines' on each other.

As to Public opinion of any hunting issue its irrelavent.

Not correct; expectations of conduct on public land are to be consistent with majority public approval. The New Zealand public have already rejected helihunting as a recreational guided hunting activity on public land.

quote:

Originally posted by Karl:
Joe bloggs suburbanite sees hunting as another 30 second issue switching between channels when they have a million other things to be confused by- baby fur seals, dissappearing rain forests etc.

What makes him care is after direct lobbying to the govermment by a focus group, something eventually filters down to him eventually as a law change and TV popular opinion.

I certainly hope so in the case of helihunting

quote:

Originally posted by Karl:

In other words worrying about whether he likes the idea of a helicopter to arrive, shoot or even land on top of the animal makes no difference, since its all the same to an anti to get him hating all forms of 'animal killing' anyway.

Thats not our experience here in New Zealand. Is it unreasonable to expect conduct from guides and their clients that supports a positive image of hunting. Read what SCI and have to say on helihunting in my first post, SCI have already measured helihunting and banned it.

Read the definition of helihunting in my first post.

quote:

Originally posted by Karl:
I don't klnow enough about game numbers for heli hunting, so if it is a legitamte sustainability issue that is another thing.

That about sums it up, you dont know shit about this issue and your not trying to learn, you are arguing from position of ignorance. Apart from the many good reasons to ban it helihunting is not sustainable for the herd either.

quote:

Originally posted by Karl:

But going off some of the posts above, don't be part of any banning mechanism on an emotional basis is my advice to hunters. It never wins you any votes with the public or anti's in the long run.

It aint emotional, its protecting our public land recreational hunting from short sighted guides who dont give a damn about a sustainable hunting resource.
Its commercial SCI and NZPHGA registered guides screwing everyone else in New Zealand over, go check, those listed are all registered SCI/NZPHGA, or used by registered outfitters for public land helihunting.
Its about asking guides to stop helihunting and behave on public land in a manner consistent with the values we New Zealand hunters think should be preserved there.

Do you have a problem with New Zealanders, including NZ hunters deciding how its going to be in New Zealand?


Helihunt

Good example of a helihunt above

I originally posted as a courtesy to hunters listing the above outfitters, the terms and conditions of their hunt may change without notice under parlimentary investigation.
It is the first time ever a recreational concession has been singled out for investigation.
It indicates the degree of concern helihunting and the processes behind it are generating at parlimentary level.
Helihunting continues under a temporary concession issued on an seasonal basis. Being able to hunt in this manner it is not a given do not take helicopter placement with herding and holding for granted.
You may be asked to get out and walk is what I am saying, is that too hard?

This issue has nothing to do with anti's and firearm ownership. If its not facetious, then as Weatherd points out, it maybe ignorance.
The choppers have already had one go at this herd, reducing numbers to some 1500 animals at the end of the 70's. Hunters fought that and we now have a herd that supports 10,000 plus and produces some 6-800 true trophy potential bulls each year. The choppers have applied to take out 1600 bulls each year! You work out if that is sustainable Karl.
Hunters saved this herd once from commercial degradation. We have a damn right to have it hunted in a manor that complies with our culture and ethics.

quote:

Originally posted by eagle27:
then some of us ordinary guys just might find Africa and other places a bit more affordable to hunt.

Jeez eagle, I just had a look at a Kiwi outfitter's site and was gobsmacked at the prices asked.

I hunted in Namibia last year (first trip to Africa) and for 8 days hunting and 4 animals (blesbok, warthog, oryx and springbok) I was charged US$3800. If I spent the same amount of money with the above mentioned outfitter, I'd get two goats and a pig, sorry...trophy boar.

You can hunt Africa cheaply and have a lot of fun at the same time.

Having said that, if you are a fat arsed dentist with a wallet you can't sit on, there are plenty of outfitters in Africa and New Zealand it seems, who'll happily reduce the thickness of that wallet and increase your comfort.

A lot of recreational hunter in NZ use helicopters to fly into very remote huts that are too far or too difficult to walk to. There are literally hundreds of such blocks and thousands of hunters would fly in and start hun ting and after 3 or 4 days fly out. The Alaskan law will not work in NZ & the heli companies would go bust.

quote:

quote:
Originally posted by Bushchook:
Perhaps NZ could adopt a policy similar to Alaska where you can't fly and shoot on the same day?

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
A lot of recreational hunter in NZ use helicopters to fly into very remote huts that are too far or too difficult to walk to. There are literally hundreds of such blocks and thousands of hunters would fly in and start hun ting and after 3 or 4 days fly out. The Alaskan law will not work in NZ & the heli companies would go bust.

how would that make the helo companies go broke??? and why would it not work - you didnt explain....

There are already helicopter access concessions that allow hunters to be placed on the mountain in the morning and picked up in the afternoon.
These sort of placement hunts are popular with guides and recreational hunters and are well used.

These irregular access concessions do not allow the animals to be herded or hazed and are not under threat.

Helihunting is a seperate concession activity

Often the weather is bad enough the only decent weather you get is the morning you fly in and you may spend a week in the mist like this,


It is bloody hard to assesse animals in these conditions and do it quickly, I hunt alone doesnt help.

Then you walk out in this



I dont mind zoned areas getting use by hunters who get dropped off in the morning and collected in the afternoon. Its helicopter placement and not helihunting.
Its using the helicopter to the advantage of less vigourous hunters in high use zoned areas anyway and has little impact on the hard core who move further into the tough stuff.
Impose the fly and no hunt day rule on those hunters who do not helihunt and you impact hunters who do no harm to anyone.
The difference in the North American model (apart from the North Americans having excellent game management) of no hunt on a flying day is that in NZ the helicopter access is zoned, its helihunting that is unzoned.
Helihunting permits hazing animals. Irregular placement access is zoned and prohibits helihunting.


I was in there for 12 days and was in continual mist and rain
Still got these though, all in one afternoon and in the mist but I will be honest its hard work and very fast snap shooting. I stopped shooting because in the mist and rain you can not tell the difference between a 8.5 and a 9.5 inch trophy, its just not worth it.
The meat went to some back packers.

Hey, I recognize that spot! Third time lucky you reckon, Cant have rain, dodgy foreigners who like to play with sights and a mate who pulls a sicky on ya the next trip.

Helihunting is a runinous strategy

Discussion on proposals to ban heli-hunting is like opening a hornet's nest. In a response to the heli-hunters' association last week defending their claim to shoot New Zealand's prized trophy Himalayan tahr and deer, business reporter Simon Hartley considers the views of Shaun Moloney, of the New Zealand Deerstalkers' Association, who vehemently opposes heli-hunting.


Millions of tourism dollars are not at risk if heli-hunting on public conservation land is banned, according to the New Zealand Deerstalkers' Association, which says the cash-strapped Department of Conservation is already missing out on millions in potential income.

The heli-hunting issue is multifaceted; questioning moral and ethical practices through to legislative interpretation, with emotive claims and counter-claims being made by the protagonists.
Himalayan tahr are at the centre of the heli-hunting debate.
United Future leader Peter Dunne has proposed an outright ban on heli-hunting by 2013, a stance which has the full support of the New Zealand Deerstalkers' Association, whose members pride themselves on the ethics of ground-based hunting excursions.

"Heli-hunting is an aerial armchair perversion of sport, literally a financial and conservation disaster that destroys the integrity of New Zealand's national parks and back-country," said Shaun Moloney, spokesman for Queenstown-based Southern Lakes branch of the New Zealand Deerstalkers' Association.

Last week Dunedin-based QC, Colin Withnall, put forward arguments on behalf of the 12 companies in the South Island Wild Animal Recovery Operators' Association, saying millions of dollars would be lost in southern tourism if heli-hunting was banned.

An independent report on heli-hunting's financial contribution is being collated for the operators' association.

In reply, the NZDA this week said it believed tourism-based hunting on private land, which hosted about 80% of those hunters, generated annual revenue of between $26 million and $28 million.

But when it came to allowing foreign hunters access to Doc land, the department was potentially missing out on fees of $5 million.

New Zealand has the only stable herd of Himalayan tahr (about 10,000) which can be hunted.

While heli-hunting may require a three-day stay, ground hunting expeditions can be up to 14 days.

Mr Moloney said hunters wanting a similar type of trophy animal to New Zealand's Himalayan tahr overseas would have to pay an equivalent fee of up to $NZ16,233.

"Heli-hunters pay only $400 dollars per tahr for an alpine trophy worth over $US12,500," he said.

Mr Moloney, also a member of the five-person NZDA heli-hunting subcommittee, said about 450 to 500 tahr trophies left New Zealand annually, with each one requiring a certificate of origin issued by Doc or Maf.

The certificate said the trophy originated in New Zealand, and without this paperwork the trophy could not be imported into the tourist hunter's home country, he said.

"New Zealand charges $40 for each of these certificates. Legislative change could simply alter the charge to $US12,500 per certificate, instead of only $40. That's potentially over $5 million dollars lost annually," Mr Moloney said.

Well managed guided and recreational ground hunting could provide a huge income boost to Doc, countering that millions of tourism dollars would therefore not be at risk if heli-hunting on public land was banned, he said.

"High-value big-spending hunters visiting New Zealand do not expect to heli-hunt. Visiting tourist hunters are uncomfortable with heli-hunting.

"Using a helicopter to hunt from and run down animals for sport is banned anywhere else the world," Mr Moloney said.

"Helping out the cash-strapped Department of Conservation and supporting New Zealand as a quality hunting destination can be achieved simply without heli-hunts," Mr Moloney said.

He said data on the temporary heli-hunts concessions "reveals a damning picture". Doc charged each heli-hunt client only $780 dollars per hunt during 2011."Less than $800 per hunter is hardly high value, but it gets worse," Mr Moloney said.

While Doc revenue from concession payments was about $200,000 from heli-hunting, Mr Moloney said a breakdown of the costs of administering heli-hunts revealed a net income to New Zealand, after costs, of less than $100,000.

"No cost can be calculated as to the loss of New Zealand's 100% Pure brand image from heli-hunting," he said.

Safari Club International, whose members make up the majority of high-value hunters visiting New Zealand, disqualified heli-hunted animals from trophy status, he said.

"Heli-hunts produce worthless trophies to our most valued hunting tourists," Mr Moloney said.

At the centre of legal discussion is what is considered by some to be a "loophole" in the Wild Animal Control Act of 1977, which pre-dates the Conservation Act of 1987, but not the National Parks Act 1980.

The Wild Animal Control Act takes precedence over both, but heli-hunting operators and Doc say it authorises heli-hunting.

The Wild Animal Control Act allows heli-hunters to operate under a "wild animal recovery operator's" permit.

The legislation was enacted in the early days of deer carcass recovery; which does not specifically address trophy hunting, but nevertheless authorises heli-hunting concessions.

Mr Moloney said the temporary two-year heli-hunting concessions were "written for helicopter owner benefit and no-one else" and warned that if 10-year concessions, at present under consideration, were granted by Minister of Conservation Kate Wilkinson, it would be "a back-country disaster" for New Zealand.

"There are quality ways to promote New Zealand's spectacular back-country and hunting opportunities rather than selling New Zealand's Southern Alps as an aerially themed thrill park to fly around, running down animals with a helicopter," he said.

Mr Moloney questioned the sustainability of heli-hunters, saying the 16 businesses involved had requested to take 900 trophy tahr and 1100 chamois annually.

"Heli-hunting is unsupportable in the long term. If heli-hunters are allowed their demands, within five years heli-hunting will collapse its own business base, decimate the trophy animal pool and produce substandard trophies with dissatisfied international hunters leaving New Zealand feeling short-changed," Mr Moloney said.

On three separate occasions during the past decade heli-hunters had applied for concessions to conduct their activity and been turned down by the Otago, Canterbury and West Coast Conservation Boards, but they carried on heli-hunting anyway, he said.

The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Jan Wright, was so concerned about the implications of 10-year heli-hunt concessions, she had initiated an investigation into the concession processes surrounding heli-hunts, he said.

Mr Moloney believed an open public consultation process attempting to install 10-year heli-hunting concessions on public land would be "overwhelmingly defeated"; which was what happened in Aoraki Mt Cook National Park when heli-hunting was publicly notified for consent and defeated by public opposition in 2010.

"Public land was never intended as income support for helicopter businesses relying on public tolerance of unethical, unwanted activity, for financial survival," Mr Moloney said.

It would appear the heli-hunting debate on using conservation land is headed in the same direction as last year's controversial mining proposal on accessing conservation land, which polarised public opinion and forced a Government U-turn.

Critical to the issue will be Doc's forthcoming decision on how it handles the question of whether to introduce 10-year concessions, and whether that proposal is publicly notified.

- simon.hartley@odt.co.nz



Helihunting To Be Banned
By Simon Hartley on Tue, 20 Dec 2011
News: Business | DOC

A contentious trophy hunting proposal, where the Department of Conservation is considering issuing 10-year permits to heli-hunting operations, appears set to be shelved.

In the short term, a major confrontation will be avoided between the groups and associations representing thousands of ground-based recreational hunters and 16 heli-hunting, mainly southern-based, operators, who host foreign hunters on conservation land shooting prized tahr and deer.

However, if due process and consideration for the 16 applicants under the law is not followed, legal counsel for the operators have threatened to seek a judicial review under the Bill of Rights.

The wider issue of heli-hunting in its present form is yet to be played out publicly.

Both parties - ground hunters and heli-hunting operators - claim millions of southern tourism dollars will be lost if their respective hunting methods are threatened in any way.

An internal Doc report has been completed on the applications of 16 heli-hunting operators for the 10-year concessions, including 12 operators who make up the South Island Wild Animal Recovery Operators Association, and a final Doc decision may be released this year.

The 16 operators get two-year temporary concessions from Doc, but critics claim they hunt because of a legislative "loophole" in the Wild Animal Control Act allowing a "wild animal recovery operators" permit, which some argue is for deer culling and recovery operations and not specifically for trophy hunting.

United Future's Peter Dunne campaigned to seek an outright heli-hunting ban; and he is now Associate Minister for Conservation.

Sources in Wellington said yesterday the proposal for 10-year heli-hunting will not go ahead, given Mr Dunne's agreement with National and his new conservation position.

"It [10-year concessions] will be `on hold' because of the agreement; it will not be a goer for Doc to pursue," the source said.

Mr Dunne was unavailable for comment yesterday and a senior Doc manager was unaware if the 10-year proposal had been formally shelved.

Counsel for the South Island Wild Animal Recovery Operators Association, Dunedin-based Colin Withnall QC, said he was not aware of any "shelving" of the 10-year concession proposal.

"They [16 operators] are entitled to apply and have their applications considered under the law that is in force." Mr Withnall said he had already cited precedent-setting cases, based on the Bill Of Rights, 1688, to Doc, and if applications were "shelved" he may consider seeking a judicial review.

Despite rumours circulating the ground-hunting fraternity that the heli-hunting section of the National and United Future supply and confidence agreement had been overturned, a spokesman for United denied the fortnight-old, three-year agreement had been overturned.

Consideration for the 10-year concession comes under Doc's Canterbury Conservancy, which has become the lead conservancy for processing heli-hunting concessions for the South Island, conservator Mike Cuddihy said yesterday.

He "couldn't verify" that the concession proposal had been shelved, saying a report on the applications by the 16 operators had been completed and was about to be sent to one of Doc's deputy director-generals.

"It [heli-hunting] is a very complex issue and there is a lot to be considered," he said.

Mr Cuddihy was aware of the report's findings but could not disclose any information, and it was possible the deputy director-general may publicly release his report before the end of the year.

Speech from the throne by the Governor General of New Zealand



Speech from the Throne
Wednesday, 21 December 2011, 11:26 am


Delivered by His Excellency Lieutenant General The Right Honourable Sir Jerry Mateparae, GNZM, QSO, Governor-General of New Zealand, on the occasion of the State Opening of Parliament, Wednesday 21 December 2011

quote:

Honourable Members of the House of Representatives. It is my privilege to exercise the prerogative of Her Majesty the Queen and open the 50th Parliament.

E nga Mema o te Whare Paremata o Aotearoa, tenei aku mihi mahana ki a koutou, tena koutou katoa.

Following the General Election in November, negotiations between political parties have resulted in the formation of a National-led Government with a majority in the House on confidence and supply.

Confidence and supply agreements have been signed between the National Party and, respectively, the ACT Party, the Maori Party, and the United Future Party.

As agreed with the United Future Party, legislation will be introduced to stop helicopter hunting on the conservation estate involving the shooting of game animals from helicopters and the herding and hazing of game animals as part of the hunt. The Game Animal Council Bill will be progressed.

lets hope all the talk leads to the out come we all want, poli promises sometimes fall when the time comes

The Game Animal Council Bill will describe the real workhorse of hunting administration in NZ or it will be a toothless tiger with exemptions in Govt perogative .
Hoping for the best for you guys on the other side of the ditch.

Dont hold your breathe the Minister must approve the representatives on the GAC, almost all rec hunter groups have earned her wrath over their opposition to her helihunting concessions.
You may notice nothing in the media anywhere from the Minister of Conservation on helihunting she is royaly pissed at us.

quote:

Originally posted by Weathered:

You may notice nothing in the media anywhere from the Minister of Conservation on helihunting she is royaly pissed at us.

Thats what happens when facts get in the way of political wheeling & dealing.

Ministers sure hate it when their decisions have been overturned .................been there done that.............when they cool down & the reality of public support sinks in , she will probably be spinning the story to claim credit for the change come election time & her people start to count votes on issues.
A dozen or so votes & the political support they might have provided to the party machinery aint gonna get her re-elected.

you've won the battle over the concessions , but the war is won in the detail of the GAC Bill when it eventually gets to parliament.

Ministers always have the final say on appointments to Advisory Councils............ but if they are seen to 'stack' an advisory council with 'toadies' they risk the wrath of the public affected & create a disaffection issue for themselves at election time ............few ministers are completely stupid, & take their 'lumps' when they come along with a well organised campaign.

quote:

Originally posted by DenisB:

quote:

Originally posted by Weathered:

You may notice nothing in the media anywhere from the Minister of Conservation on helihunting she is royaly pissed at us.

Thats what happens when facts get in the way of political wheeling & dealing.

Ministers sure hate it when their decisions have been overturned .................been there done that.............when they cool down & the reality of public support sinks in , she will probably be spinning the story to claim credit for the change come election time & her people start to count votes on issues.
A dozen or so votes & the political support they might have provided to the party machinery aint gonna get her re-elected.

you've won the battle over the concessions , but the war is won in the detail of the GAC Bill when it eventually gets to parliament.

Ministers always have the final say on appointments to Advisory Councils............ but if they are seen to 'stack' an advisory council with 'toadies' they risk the wrath of the public affected & create a disaffection issue for themselves at election time ............few ministers are completely stupid, & take their 'lumps' when they come along with a well organised campaign.

You are the guy who wished for me to lose interest in hunting before my body fails me, I would prefer if you stayed out of my threads. You make no contribution best stay in Australia where you belong. New Zealand will not be good for you.

Just a quick question...... What about someone like my father in law who would give everything he has to shoot a tar. He has a completely frozen ankle due to an accident and would need to be either dropped in a very good hunting spot or shoot from a chopper? Myself I hav
E a very bad knee, I can walk in for 3 weeks hunt shoot but would need help bringing game out of areas like this.? Just throwing another side out there

Actually who cares if he is a fat rich prick from anywhere. Has he had heart attacks or whatever. we as hunters should promote hunting and hunters. I don't agree with a few things in the whole ethics thing. But still if we argue between ourselves we will break ourselves down eventually. We don't know as individuals the story behind every hunt and why it happened that way.

quote:

Originally posted by battered:
Just a quick question...... What about someone like my father in law who would give everything he has to shoot a tar. He has a completely frozen ankle due to an accident and would need to be either dropped in a very good hunting spot or shoot from a chopper? Myself I hav
E a very bad knee, I can walk in for 3 weeks hunt shoot but would need help bringing game out of areas like this.? Just throwing another side out there

Irregualr aerial access zones outside the parks allow you to be dropped off in the morning and picked up in the afternoon, it provides easy access to good hunting areas.
These zones are not under threat, herding and holding the animals is not permitted under the access permit. If you cant get a tahr there then best go onto private land.

Shooting game from a heli is not hunting.....being dropped off in a remote area to pursue game on foot is hunting.....do we all agree on that?

quote:

Originally posted by Norton:
Shooting game from a heli is not hunting.....being dropped off in a remote area to pursue game on foot is hunting.....do we all agree on that?

Most helihunted animals are not shot from the helicopter, they are shot from the ground after the animals have been located, assessed then driven or herded from the helicopter,
Its simple enough for a client to shoot an animal from the ground after its has been chased for maybe 15 to 60 minutes.

Its a really simple sentence to get your head around.

Using a helicopter to intentionally influence animal behaviour is not hunting.