Shankspony, Herding, hazing and shooting from heli, IF ENFORCED should be acceptable and I understand is much the law of the land today, or is it not?

If this is current law and cannot be enforced how would a new law with the 24 hour restriction be enforeced any better? Who is providing the clock for instance?

quote:

Originally posted by johnfox:
Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't Alaska prohibit flying and hunting on the same day?

Yes
It is a good rule.

quote:

Originally posted by muygrande:
Shankspony, Herding, hazing and shooting from heli, IF ENFORCED should be acceptable and I understand is much the law of the land today, or is it not?

There is a loophole thats allowing these aspects, which is what we are trying to get changed.

quote:

If this is current law and cannot be enforced how would a new law with the 24 hour restriction be enforeced any better? Who is providing the clock for instance?

I'm not expecting, or hoping that this would become law. It was mearly a question for those who would consider a helihunt or heli-access option.
It could be done though through the use of a spider track type system.

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:

quote:

Originally posted by muygrande:
Shankspony, Herding, hazing and shooting from heli, IF ENFORCED should be acceptable and I understand is much the law of the land today, or is it not?

There is a loophole thats allowing these aspects, which is what we are trying to get changed.

quote:

If this is current law and cannot be enforced how would a new law with the 24 hour restriction be enforeced any better? Who is providing the clock for instance?

I'm not expecting, or hoping that this would become law. It was mearly a question for those who would consider a helihunt or heli-access option.
It could be done though through the use of a spider track type system.

Guys - If you want to make it easy, just lobby for the new law to be a "no hunting, same day airborne - law"!

It will work, and likely guys will abide by the law. I've hunted Alaska numerous times, flying into remote locales, it works fine. I've done exactly this sort of thing on a sheep hunt in the NorthWest Territories. You can legally fly into the hunting area via chopper, but cannot hunt until the next day. It works fine that way. The whole 24 hrs thing, that's just gets complicated. Make it easy, and maybe you'll get more support.

Frankly, I've hunted with Gary (2002) and don't completely share the full opinions of the Kiwis here, but I see their point as well. I for one would be fine with flying into the area with a chopper, over-nighting before any hunting can take place, and then spending a few days on the mountain, hoping to get Tahr/Chamois, while hunting on foot.

Maybe a reasonable compromise might help get the problem solved?

This argument has raged for years. It doesn't seem to diminish at all. Feelings are strong.

I personally would not want to heli-hunt. Some apparently do.

Some of these heli-hunts have been on TV's shows here in the USA. That astounds me.

Johnfox, you are correct.

Sorry guys, not sure why my first post is repeated numerous times above?

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:
Sorry guys, not sure why my first post is repeated numerous times above?

Stutter finger?

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Thats a pretty evolved variety of game management, discussing something like that in NZ at our current level of game management would be akin to explaining a waltz to a cage full of chimpanzees.

You mean just like trying to explain to some people in New Zealand that visiting hunters who participate in a legal hunt should be chastise?

Gidday Saeed,

Your argument is akin to not chastising paedophiles who visit countries with lax child welfare rules for taking child sex tours. It may be legal but morally reprehensible.

We must draw the line somewhere.

Happy Hunting

Hamish

quote:

Originally posted by Hamish:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Thats a pretty evolved variety of game management, discussing something like that in NZ at our current level of game management would be akin to explaining a waltz to a cage full of chimpanzees.

You mean just like trying to explain to some people in New Zealand that visiting hunters who participate in a legal hunt should be chastise?

Gidday Saeed,

Your argument is akin to not chastising paedophiles who visit countries with lax child welfare rules for taking child sex tours. It may be legal but morally reprehensible.

We must draw the line somewhere.

Wow... what an analogy!!!
In which country is paedophilia legal??

quote:

Originally posted by Hamish:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Thats a pretty evolved variety of game management, discussing something like that in NZ at our current level of game management would be akin to explaining a waltz to a cage full of chimpanzees.

You mean just like trying to explain to some people in New Zealand that visiting hunters who participate in a legal hunt should be chastise?

Gidday Saeed,

Your argument is akin to not chastising paedophiles who visit countries with lax child welfare rules for taking child sex tours. It may be legal but morally reprehensible.

We must draw the line somewhere.

Happy Hunting

Hamish

So now as you guys say, a "Fat, Rich, High Roller" overseas hunter who books and goes on a hunt that is perfectly legal in your country, but is conducted contrary to your personal ethics, is on par with a pedophile going on a sex tour? Really?

I was trying to educate myself on the NZ hunting issues at hand but I must say that several things here don't add up exactly! The argument is being tainted with an aspect of "Class Warefare" as the same terms are being brought up over and over pitting the local Kiwi's against the "Rich" overseas hunter. I find some additional holes in the local argument as well, mainly centered around the assertion that the overwhelming majority of New Zealanders are in favor of changing the law but 16 operators and 1 lawyer are holding the entire country hostage? Now, the comparison of visiting hunters to pedophiles?

When making your point to a group that is not familiar with your issues, it is best to put forth your argument in a straight forward manner, clearly highlighting the items of concern. Logic, truth, and integrity go a long way to getting people to see things your way. Hyperbole (pedophiles) and jealousy (the rich), not so much! It cheapens the argument and makes the points being espoused petty and less believable.

Because of the way this thread has turned, I've lost interest in this subject.

quote:

I was trying to educate myself on the NZ hunting issues at hand but I must say that several things here don't add up exactly! The argument is being tainted with an aspect of "Class Warefare" as the same terms are being brought up over and over pitting the local Kiwi's against the "Rich" overseas hunter. I find some additional holes in the local argument as well, mainly centered around the assertion that the overwhelming majority of New Zealanders are in favor of changing the law but 16 operators and 1 lawyer are holding the entire country hostage? Now, the comparison of visiting hunters to pedophiles?

I'm a free market conservative and I despise heli-hunting. It's not about class warfare.

Re. the 16 operators and 1 lawyer 'holding the country to ransom'. Obviously this is not the biggest issue in the New Zealand economy right now. There are a thousand other more important issues on taxpayers and voters minds. So yes, 16 operators and 1 lawyer can hold up proceedings on what is, to most of the general public, a very small issue.

The paedophile analogy is a poor one. However, the point which is being sought is this; when some action is illegal in one country and legal in the other it does not cease to be immoral in the country in which it is legal.

quote:

It's not about class warfare

100% correct.

Having said that, this type of activity, I won't call it hunting, is the preserve of the well heeled. It's expensive and that's just the way it is, it's got nothing to do with jealousy or class envy.
It's out of reach of the average blue collar Joe.

quote:

The paedophile analogy is a poor one.

Agreed, not only poor but wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by johnfox:

Having said that, this type of activity, I won't call it hunting, is the preserve of the well heeled. It's expensive and that's just the way it is, it's got nothing to do with jealousy or class envy.
It's out of reach of the average blue collar Joe.

Some of the cheapest tahr 'hunts' are heli-hunts.... you can go right to the helo-owner and buy an hour or two in the helo with no other costs!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Sam Wise:

The paedophile analogy is a poor one. However, the point which is being sought is this; when some action is illegal in one country and legal in the other it does not cease to be immoral in the country in which it is legal.

Lion hunting is illegal in Botswana. Lion hunting is legal in Zimbabwe, Tanzania, Zambia, and several others. Is Lion hunting immoral in the countries where it is legal because it is illegal in Bots? You don't make a credible argument! And that is my point.

I keep hearing how the 16 operators have hired a "high priced" lawyer to represent their interests and that this "high priced" lawyer is the reason the law isn't being changed, even when the "rest of the sporting community of NZ opposes helihunting". I read a hunt report from D. Nelson earlier today about her helicopter hunt in NZ back in 2003. Fully 9 years ago. Same arguments then as today. Am I to believe that in 9 years, 16 outfitters have been able to pool their money more effectively and purchase said "high priced" lawyer than ALL the rest of NZ's sporting enthusiasts? Surely the rest of the country could organize themselves and collect donations enough to hire an army of "high priced" lawyers to represent their interests. That is, if money is the reason the law hasn't been changed. If money isn't the reason the law hasn't been changed, why is money and "The Rich Overseas Client" continually brought up? See, this just doesn't add up. When you guys start complaining about how much more money one party has over the other and claiming that is the reason the law is counter to what the masses want, the argument looses credibility.

Johnfox says "100% correct, it's not about class warfare" then turns around and says, "it's got nothing to do with jealousy or class envy. It's out of reach of the average blue collar Joe". I'm sorry John but that sounds contradictory to me. You hear that kind of contradiction a few times and guys like me who don't have a dog in the fight, but are willing to support you if you can educate me adequately, suddenly begin to question the real motives.

Just to be clear of my motives here guys. I would have no problem using a chopper to gain access to the high places. But only for access. I would not participate in helihunting as I think you guys have defined it. I have no interest in finding a Tahr from the chopper, then landing to shoot it or using the bird to herd animals in any way. Only to be dropped off for the day in order to hunt. I am not in support of helihunting. But I can't help wondering if the way you guys are presenting the issue is not part of the reason you haven't been able to change the law. When folks perceive the issue to be the "Have's vs the Have Not's", the real issue often gets overlooked. Bringing in ridiculous analogies such as the pedophiles and even the "clarification" that started this post, certainly don't help the case either.

quote:

Originally posted by Hamish:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Thats a pretty evolved variety of game management, discussing something like that in NZ at our current level of game management would be akin to explaining a waltz to a cage full of chimpanzees.

You mean just like trying to explain to some people in New Zealand that visiting hunters who participate in a legal hunt should be chastise?

Gidday Saeed,

Your argument is akin to not chastising paedophiles who visit countries with lax child welfare rules for taking child sex tours. It may be legal but morally reprehensible.

We must draw the line somewhere.

Happy Hunting

Hamish

Hamish,

Now you REALY are stretching the point.

Comparing a visiting hunter using a legal means of hunting to utter criminals such as pedopheles is beyond belief!

One activity is legal in your country, and the other is utterly disgusting to the whole human race!

You are beginning to sound like those who are branded with being "antiSemitic" for criticising anything Israel does, regardless of how criminal that is!

CHANGE YOUR HUNTING LAWS!

Until you do, your argument doesnot hold any water.

Again, look at hunting in South Africa, and the endless arguments that has created, without solving any problem.

quote:

"100% correct, it's not about class warfare" then turns around and says, "it's got nothing to do with jealousy or class envy.

Point out the disparity Todd....

as for this statement, "It's out of reach of the average blue collar Joe".
I'll reiterate, it's a statement of fact nothing more, I don't give a damn about who can, and who can't afford to indulge in any activity.

It's wealthy people who buy carved poached elephant tusks in Hong Kong just as it's wealthy 'hunters' who support heli hunting.
Stop the demand and you cripple the supply.

BTW I'm from across the ditch in Australia so I don't have a dog in the fight either, but I totally support the Kiwis who are fighting to stop this abhorrent practice.

quote:

Lion hunting is illegal in Botswana. Lion hunting is legal in Zimbabwe, Tanzania, Zambia, and several others. Is Lion hunting immoral in the countries where it is legal because it is illegal in Bots? You don't make a credible argument! And that is my point.

We're getting into some convoluted and ambiguous country here. Let me clarify again. The action has to be immoral to begin with. Obviously morals change from individual to individual and this is where the waters become muddied. The US legislature saw fit that heli-hunting was objectionable enough to be banned in the US. The fact that it is objectionable does not disappear when one boards the plane to NZ. Botswana and Kenya have banned lion hunting but a high number of African counties allow it. New Zealand is -to my knowledge- the only country that allows heli-hunting for trophy shooters on public land.

The argument that some people have different morals and we should accept them all is often used by the far left, but it's flawed. Some things are right and some are just wrong. That's how it is.


Also, once again, this isn't about have's and have not's. Repeating it does not make it so.

The main point is don't come to NZ and heli-hunt. It's not hunting and it's nothing to do with the NZ hunting experience.

quote:

CHANGE YOUR HUNTING LAWS!

We have changed them.

The outfitters offering heli-hunts are able to operate because of a loop hole in the law.

quote:

Originally posted by Sam Wise:
The US legislature saw fit that heli-hunting was objectionable enough to be banned in the US. The fact that it is objectionable does not disappear when one boards the plane to NZ.

What statute is that exactly?? You can book a perfectly legal 'heli-hunt' for introduced animals in Texas!!

quote:

What statute is that exactly?? You can book a perfectly legal 'heli-hunt' for introduced animals in Texas!!

Is that on public land or is it simply a way of culling feral pigs on private property?

Not quite the same is it.

quote:

Originally posted by Sam Wise:

quote:

What statute is that exactly?? You can book a perfectly legal 'heli-hunt' for introduced animals in Texas!!

Is that on public land or is it simply a way of culling feral pigs on private property?

Not quite the same is it.

No it is not on public land (there is very little public hunting land in Texas) - but you made the claim that there is some over-riding legislation that prohibits heli-hunting in general in the USA and that is not the case.

I am totally against heli-hunting on New Zealand public land ... but the others are right - the loopholes need to be closed.... Blasting visiting hunters wont help the situation!!

quote:

Blasting visiting hunters wont help the situation!!

Won't it???

Ask the OP if he's planning another heli hunt in NZ....

I have indeed lost interest in this thread but I keep coming back to it because of a couple of reasons. First, some of the arguments posted here are just not fact or at a minimum, lack credibility.

For instance the comment about the US legislature banning heli-hunting in the US, so if it is illegal in the US is stays illegal for a US hunter when he boards a plane to NZ. The US Legislature has done no such thing. The State of Alaska has rules against flying and hunting on the same day and if I'm not mistaken, choppers can only be used for emergency situations. But here in Texas, we just passed a law allowing the hunting of feral hogs from helicopters. It's is a blast, no pun intended. By the way, I fully support the Alaska restriction and the Texas opportunity! They both serve the local purpose.

Also the comment "it's got nothing to do with jealousy or class envy" and then "It's out of reach of the average blue collar Joe". Back to back sentences that contradict each other.

Why did I wade into these waters in the first place? Well, I have a NZ hunt booked this year. I've had it booked for 3 years. Honestly, I had no idea you guys in NZ had a problem at all. I didn't do a lot of research other than to book with a guy that was referred to me. Once I began checking into it, I see you guys have some issues with the way NZ hunts are being conducted. To make matters worse, my outfitter is one of the 16. Oh, Crap!!! Honestly, my inclination is to cancel and eat the airfare and deposit but I can't because the wife has been looking forward to the trip for 3 years now. Numerous trips to Africa without her has put me into the position where I owe it to her and can't change the plans. I called and emailed the outfitter advising him that I will not participate in heli-hunting as you guys have defined it. I am willing to ride the chopper to the high area to be dropped off and picked up at the end of the day, and hunt in between. No herding or spotting of animals from the bird. He says, "No Problem". We'll see. But I know what I will and will not do, and have already stated as such.

Here's the problem I have concerning all of this. The way the NZ non-resident hunting issue is being presented leaves me somewhat confused as to what exactly is going on. The money issue and terms such as "Rich Overseas Hunters" keeps popping up again and again. You guys are telling me it isn't the issue, but looking back over this thread and the others on the same subject, it just keeps popping up over and over. Even the stag hunts on the estates. Who cares how much someone has or doesn't have. What difference does it make to anyone who is secure in his own station in life? As much as class warfare is being denied since I first mentioned it last week, I've received several PM's from Kiwis who are telling me that class warfare is exactly what is going on but they don't want to say so publicly.

The pedophile analogy presented today is not the first time this has been floated. But how ridiculous!

The constant whining about how the 16 outfitters have bought the process by hiring a "high priced" attorney who has hijacked the nation's true desire to ban heli-hunting. I only see a few vocal Kiwis posting here. Is the populace of NZ as opposed to the practice of heli-hunting as the vocal few claim, or is it really a non issue to most residents of NZ? Here is where 1 + 1 doesn't add up to 2 for me. If the sportsmen of NZ are really 99% against heli-hunting as claimed, and the 1 "high priced" attorney representing the 16, is the only cog in the wheel preventing the banning of the practice, why can't the 99% get together, pool their money (the way the 16 have), hire an army of "high priced" attorneys, and get the deal done?

In short, the arguments being presented are not being laid out in logical order, based on solid foundations that make sense. There are all of these petty insinuations and crazy analogies that undermine the discussion. You guys have a good argument in stating that heli-hunting your Tahr and Chamois is a less fulfilling experience than doing it the right way. Leave it at that and fight to get the laws changed. Leave the childish stuff out of the argument and you'll have broader support. For me, there has been enough BS uncovered that I'm not interested in learning more about the dynamics at play. You guys can fight your own battle in the manner you choose. I'm just going to shoot my tame stag, and if time allows, fly to the mountain, and hunt on foot for my alpine quests without further chopper assistance. I promise to only brag about my conquests to the people I choose to brag to. Why would that make a difference to anyone here since none of you know me. I hope that meets with approval but ...

Yes it is a big deal for NZ hunters Todd - no denying that. The land we are talking about is not a vast wilderness like Alaska or NWT... it is a relatively small area and when you pump a couple or three hundred helihunters over the top of a bunch of local hunters - they are going to get PISSED. That is on top of the other actions of the helo companies and the govt - poisoning, netting and aerial shooting their natural resources... It is a bad deal and visiting hunters should be encouraged to say NO to heli-hunting...

Todd, you make some valid points. It is often hard when fighting an issue like this to explain all the side issues. I'll give it a go.
This is not the only issue of concern that hunters are facing. There is a massive amount of competition for our game animal resource. Equally repugnant is one other facet of the true WARO(Wild Animal Recovery Operations.), the parent of the bastard child we are discussing here. Thats the unregulated slaughter for a carcase value, of all and any deer unlucky enough to find itself under the wrong chopper. A very high percentage of the best stags are killed for meat export off public land every year simply because they are the biggest animals.
We are also fighting the loss of access to the public resource. Farmers who once allowed free access, are now looking a further income alternatives, and wild animals fit in there. To some extent thats where the dislike of estates comes from. The loss of hunting country to overseas hunters.It all builds resentment. Water allotment and quality issues and Aerial poisoning of vast tracts of public land that also kills game animals as a bykill are also huge issues.
Right now in one of my other roles, I am looking at an issue where a district council has no recognition of hunting as an accepted rural activity. this has the imminent possible effect of closing down some levels of game bird hunting in a few weeks time over a vast tract of rural NZ.
We have a government Dept that has no mandate to protect Our game animals, and has shown a huge lack of determination in following up and stopping some of the legal transgressions that are going on.... to the point of corruption it would seem. Hell they have even started to experiment with the poisoning of trout from some waterways.
There are about 50,000 big game hunters in NZ amongst a population of 4 million, and at voting time this issue just doesn't register enough overall interest from non-hunters who are more concerned with Tax's, health and education.
Despite this, we are slowly winning. The first step is the imminent introduction of a Game animal council which will take some of the responsibility from DOC and which will have a level of hunter involvement at board level.
The other is a politician who is against helihunting, and who is trying to limit it in return for support from the ruling party.
I think to some extent wealth is an issue. Overall hunting in NZ is by and largely a cultural right, and more heavily supported by middle to lower income persons who are often more likely to do the majority of their hunting close to home and for food. Tahr hunters would probably struggle to make up 10% of hunters. Its a small resource that is at the end of the country and costs money for most of us to access.

I respect and appreciate the effort you have put in to ensuring a hunt that you can be proud of. If your operator fails to guarantee an acceptable hunt, contact me and I will find a way to do so for you, if I have to take you myself.

quote:

Originally posted by Sam Wise:

quote:

I was trying to educate myself on the NZ hunting issues at hand but I must say that several things here don't add up exactly! The argument is being tainted with an aspect of "Class Warefare" as the same terms are being brought up over and over pitting the local Kiwi's against the "Rich" overseas hunter. I find some additional holes in the local argument as well, mainly centered around the assertion that the overwhelming majority of New Zealanders are in favor of changing the law but 16 operators and 1 lawyer are holding the entire country hostage? Now, the comparison of visiting hunters to pedophiles?

I'm a free market conservative and I despise heli-hunting. It's not about class warfare.

Re. the 16 operators and 1 lawyer 'holding the country to ransom'. Obviously this is not the biggest issue in the New Zealand economy right now. There are a thousand other more important issues on taxpayers and voters minds. So yes, 16 operators and 1 lawyer can hold up proceedings on what is, to most of the general public, a very small issue.

The paedophile analogy is a poor one. However, the point which is being sought is this; when some action is illegal in one country and legal in the other it does not cease to be immoral in the country in which it is legal.

Gidday Guys,

Sorry I did not express myself too well there. The point I was trying to make is exactly as Sam has said is that when some action is illegal in one country and legal in the other it does not cease to be immoral in the country in which it is legal.

Drawing a long bow I know but you see here more succinctly put my point.

I didn't want to infer any correlation other than that above between helihunters and paedophiles and apologise to any who took offence.

Happy Hunting

Hamish

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
e) Its a crap hunting technique I dont like it and neither does the rest of the country


Why are you and the rest of the country allowing it then?

Saeed it is not always easy to change things, we only have to look at the exploitation and abuse of women and children in the pornography industry that takes place in most countries of the World and will continue to take place while there are those that pay and indulge in it.

Allow me to quote you on the practice of tipping which I and most Kiwis abhor and try to keep from becoming a practice in our country -

“Tipping is one of the evils of the modern world”
“In Africa, I have always left a tip, and have always felt that it was well deserved”

Whenever the above subject comes up on this forum it seems the majority of hunters are not comfortable with the practice of tipping and prefer it not be there but while everyone continues to practice it, it will be there to stay.

The very point being made by my fellow kiwi hunters is that we do not want helihunting in our country and we do all we can to oppose it but the battle is not made any easier by tourist hunters perpetrating the practice, in some cases maybe unwittingly, although I doubt that any knowledgeable hunter travelling the World to hunt would not see helihunting or fence hunting for what it is.

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:
Todd, you make some valid points. It is often hard when fighting an issue like this to explain all the side issues. I'll give it a go.
This is not the only issue of concern that hunters are facing. There is a massive amount of competition for our game animal resource. Equally repugnant is one other facet of the true WARO(Wild Animal Recovery Operations.), the parent of the bastard child we are discussing here. Thats the unregulated slaughter for a carcase value, of all and any deer unlucky enough to find itself under the wrong chopper. A very high percentage of the best stags are killed for meat export off public land every year simply because they are the biggest animals.
We are also fighting the loss of access to the public resource. Farmers who once allowed free access, are now looking a further income alternatives, and wild animals fit in there. To some extent thats where the dislike of estates comes from. The loss of hunting country to overseas hunters.It all builds resentment. Water allotment and quality issues and Aerial poisoning of vast tracts of public land that also kills game animals as a bykill are also huge issues.
Right now in one of my other roles, I am looking at an issue where a district council has no recognition of hunting as an accepted rural activity. this has the imminent possible effect of closing down some levels of game bird hunting in a few weeks time over a vast tract of rural NZ.
We have a government Dept that has no mandate to protect Our game animals, and has shown a huge lack of determination in following up and stopping some of the legal transgressions that are going on.... to the point of corruption it would seem. Hell they have even started to experiment with the poisoning of trout from some waterways.
There are about 50,000 big game hunters in NZ amongst a population of 4 million, and at voting time this issue just doesn't register enough overall interest from non-hunters who are more concerned with Tax's, health and education.
Despite this, we are slowly winning. The first step is the imminent introduction of a Game animal council which will take some of the responsibility from DOC and which will have a level of hunter involvement at board level.
The other is a politician who is against helihunting, and who is trying to limit it in return for support from the ruling party.
I think to some extent wealth is an issue. Overall hunting in NZ is by and largely a cultural right, and more heavily supported by middle to lower income persons who are often more likely to do the majority of their hunting close to home and for food. Tahr hunters would probably struggle to make up 10% of hunters. Its a small resource that is at the end of the country and costs money for most of us to access.

I respect and appreciate the effort you have put in to ensuring a hunt that you can be proud of. If your operator fails to guarantee an acceptable hunt, contact me and I will find a way to do so for you, if I have to take you myself.

Shankspony,

I like your approach to the issues. Fact based and no pettiness. An opinion worth respect.

Cheers,

Todd

Todd - there are a lot of NZ hunters who view this forum frequently , but who choose not to get involved in the discussion.

There are many reasons for that , not the least being that as a nation we tend to just get on and do things rather than stand round and talk about it . However , you would be sadly mistaken if you thought that perceived silence was due to some sort of lack of interest on the part of the NZ hunting fraternity.

Its sad to use terms like rich overseas hunters , which imply that we cant afford the same style of hunting . The truth is , as I see it anyway , that actually the average NZ hunter is considerably less wealthy than the average visiting hunter. Wages in NZ are vastly behind Australia , Britain or the USA in real terms , and therefore very few of us can afford the type of hunt that the often-mentioned hunting guides supply to their clientele.I guess there may a degree of envy involved , but ultimately I believe most of us are not opposed to overseas hunters coming here at all . The opposition is to the methods unscrupulous hunting guides here use to relieve the tourist hunter of his money , yet give him a " good time ".

If the visiting hunter was aware of the locals sentiments on heli-hunting prior to booking their adventure , or the fact that their guide and helicopter operator planned on poaching the animal off public land in an illegal manner - do you imagine the overseas hunter would want any part in the deal ? I think most would not ...

But the visitors are not informed of this situation when they book , often only finding out when they post their hunting story here with a nice pic of the trophy animal and helicopter hovering in the background.... And you guys wonder why some of us get a tad vocal?

So - please come and hunt here . Use a chopper if you must to access the hunting zone . But hunt the animal from the ground . Be an actual hunter , rather than an aerial assassin. Do the hard yards and rise to the challenge .

You will definately be a better person for it , and your NZ alpine trophy will hold a special place in your heart because you EARNED it , as opposed to because you PAID for it.

Then maybe - just maybe - you will understand why recreational hunters in this country think the way we do , and react the way we do when challenged the way we currently are .

If Shanks or I could understand and explain how things are the way they are we would not be having this discussion would we ? the bloody helihunts would not be happening. It is that simple.

The law and the interpretation is so convoluted, that in itself is one of the reasons we are still stuck with this. I dont even understand all of it and I am better informed on this issue than any of you. Collectively a few of us have spent over $5000 just to get an opinion on where to go. Untill the govt change the law we are stuck with it.

A few of you here have jumped on a a few comments and used them as justification to invalidate a lot of other very accurate comments backed by Information available to you in the links. Thats your choice you dont need to be convinced just dont get upset when hunts using helicopters as described in the AATH concessions get slammed either.

None of you have convinced me that I should like helihunts in New Zealand either or that I should sit silently while you all applaude each othere helihunts here.

quote:

Originally posted by muzza:

So - please come and hunt here . Use a chopper if you must to access the hunting zone . But hunt the animal from the ground . Be an actual hunter , rather than an aerial assassin. Do the hard yards and rise to the challenge .

You will definately be a better person for it

Muzza,

Really? I mean really? Rise to the challenge? I'll be a better person for it? I doubt anything I do on a hunt for an introduced species in NZ will have any bearing on my sense of self worth or will equal the challenges I've already risen to for that matter. Let's try this one on. Muzza, come to Texas. We have Nilgi and Black Buck introduced on some of our ranches. Come and hunt them but don't use a truck to get around the ranch. Just walk from the ranch house and find them on foot in the 110 degree heat. Work for your animal. You'll be a better person for it. Rise to the challenge of stalking and shooting the animal on his own terms. Come on man! Why can't we keep the hyperbole out of it?

You guys evidently have a problem getting your government, in the form of the Department of Conservation, to take you seriously and effect the changes to the law that you seek. As an outsider looking in, I can see why. The logical arguments for shutting down heli-hunting, which I support you on, get mingled with emotional crap such as "you'll be a better person for it", the pedophile analogy, and the statements in the Heli Hunt Info for Visiting Hunters sticky thread by Taupo Hunter where he refers to "the fat fucks" and "the fat rich pricks". It damages credibility! Just stick to the facts. They are strong enough.

Correct me if I'm wrong.
Aren't all "introduced animals" in NZ considered pest/vermin? Thar, Chamois, all deer etc?
They are shot from helicopters and sold to markets?
They are poisoned by 1080?
They are shot by locals and no meat or horns are salvaged? Cull hunts?
The heli hunting laws would be simple to change.
1. List the animals you want to be considered to be "game" animals in the book.
2. It is illegal to take/shoot any game animals the same day airborne.
Problem solved.
Todd, good post.

TJ, you can list those things, but not understand the history and reasoning behind them.
Two wrongs don't make a right. They are not a justification for further abuse.

quote:

Really? I mean really? Rise to the challenge? I'll be a better person for it? I doubt anything I do on a hunt for an introduced species in NZ will have any bearing on my sense of self worth or will equal the challenges I've already risen to for that matter. Let's try this one on. Muzza, come to Texas. We have Nilgi and Black Buck introduced on some of our ranches. Come and hunt them but don't use a truck to get around the ranch. Just walk from the ranch house and find them on foot in the 110 degree heat. Work for your animal. You'll be a better person for it. Rise to the challenge of stalking and shooting the animal on his own terms. Come on man! Why can't we keep the hyperbole out of it?

I think we just have different definitions of hunting. Shooting Nigali and Black Buck in a pen in Texas is closer to my definition of farming than hunting.

Doesn't really matter how hot it is.

quote:

Originally posted by Sam Wise:

quote:

Really? I mean really? Rise to the challenge? I'll be a better person for it? I doubt anything I do on a hunt for an introduced species in NZ will have any bearing on my sense of self worth or will equal the challenges I've already risen to for that matter. Let's try this one on. Muzza, come to Texas. We have Nilgi and Black Buck introduced on some of our ranches. Come and hunt them but don't use a truck to get around the ranch. Just walk from the ranch house and find them on foot in the 110 degree heat. Work for your animal. You'll be a better person for it. Rise to the challenge of stalking and shooting the animal on his own terms. Come on man! Why can't we keep the hyperbole out of it?

I think we just have different definitions of hunting. Shooting Nigali and Black Buck in a pen in Texas is closer to my definition of farming than hunting.

Doesn't really matter how hot it is.

Sam, If you took my comment to imply that hunting exotics in Texas is a tough hunt, you missed the sarcasm.

I think your idea and mine of hunting vs farming is 100% the same!

I,m a Kiwi, damn near 62 years old and 6 months ago did my first hunt on Tahr and for me they are one hell of an animal. The buggers can climb stuff that give,s me nightmares, way outside my comfort zone.
Am I going back, hell yes. They impress me and I hope they impress other Kiwi hunters and visitors as well. I may have left it a tad long before chasing the hairy goats but at least there are still a few around.
This might not be the case in the future if this heli hunting really gets into gear

Todd - I'm going to assume you are taking the piss , mate . You obviously have no idea - none , nada ,zip , zilch , not one f*cking clue - on whats involved in hunting our alpine species on their own turf. Comparing it to hunting blackbuck on a fenced ranch in Texas tells me that information quite clearly.

I'm not sure what your angle on this is , other than attempt to confuse the issue here. My suggestion that you hunt a tahr or chamois in NZ , on foot and that effort will make you a better person for doing it is entirely my own opinion. If you feel that you would happily shoot an animal out of helicopter after you have chased it for half an hour and driven it to exhaustion then we obviously dont share the same set of ethics in regard to the word "hunt".I would hope that you didnt feel a sense of fulfillment in shooting your "trophy" that way , but maybe you would .Only you would know that answer....

By the way Todd - I'll be in the USA later this year. Send me your contact details and we will go do that Texas hunt together. I'm always up for a challenge , as long as its on a fair and equal footing. I'm 54 and not hugely fit , but I'm a starter if you are . I assume you will be paying ??????

Incidently - Ive also done the tahr hunt on foot , from the foot of the mountain. This one is not the worlds biggest specimen but he's mine and I earnt it the hard way.

Just as a matter of interest Todd, tell us about the NZ hunt you've booked.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Shankspony, Weathered,

May I suggest that both of you might visit the African Hunting Forum, and read some of the subjects that are discussed there regarding what one likes and deslikes?

Also, may I suggest that you try to change what you do not like in the hunting industry in your country, without putting the blame on either AUI and his PH?

"...Helihunting is a mechanical harvest that destroys any definition of hunt in classical terms..."

Very true statement, and not very different from shooting from the back of a truck in South Africa. Some would do it, others might not.

BUT, it is a practice that is in use in the country where the visiting hunter is hunting. And he chose to participate in it.

Where is the problem?

I know, neither of you gentlemen like this sort of a hunt, so why don't you try to change it?

Personally, I would not participate in this sort of hunt, just like I would not shoot a farm bred lion in South Africa.

It is MY choice, no one els's.

And I do believe in that old saying "when in Rome do as the Roman's do" if you heart so desires.

If your Department of Conservation has not done anything about it, your argument holds very little water.

Each of us has his own idea of what a hunt should be - just look at the diferent States in the US. One encounters things athat are practiced in one state, legally, while in tghe next they are outlawed.

Who is right?

And please don't even get close to the discussion of "ethics".

Each of us has his own ethics, and no argument on an Internet forum is going to change that.

Just bear in mind that this is exactly what the antis are using against us.

Every time you read one of their media spreads, you will always see the terms "killing with high powered rifle" as if we are required to wrestle the animal to the ground by hand and clobber it with a stone hammer.

Bow hunters sometimes snear at rifle shooters, rifle hunters sometimes snear at trappers.

Who is right?

Without quibbling over our individual definitions of ethics, I would argue that undertaking a type of "hunting" with such poor public perception is far more of a danger to hunters, than risks to hunter cohesion.

To the antis, all killing of animals by those calling themselves "hunters", is hunting.
Obvious lack of fair chase and documented stress to the animals are great material for the antis. Have you seen the youtube clips of helihunting?
How do we as hunters justify that as hunting to a public which tars us all with the same brush?

As far as class warfare: its understandable perhaps for some from overseas to not know our current situation locally of hunting in New Zealand or know our history. Our large game are all introduced and most of our hunting is on public land, with a reducing amount on private land.
As mentioned by others, hunting is readily available to kiwis for minimal outlay but we compete with commercial interests for the same game.
Helihunting/AATH confers preferential access to public land to those who can afford it, at the expense of others "wilderness" experience, it also picks the eyes from our small trophy tahr resource, hence the great deal of resentment it causes.

Thankyou to anyone chosing not to helihunt in NZ.

quote:

Originally posted by muzza:
Todd - I'm going to assume you are taking the piss , mate . You obviously have no idea - none , nada ,zip , zilch , not one f*cking clue - on whats involved in hunting our alpine species on their own turf. Comparing it to hunting blackbuck on a fenced ranch in Texas tells me that information quite clearly.

I'm not sure what your angle on this is , other than attempt to confuse the issue here. My suggestion that you hunt a tahr or chamois in NZ , on foot and that effort will make you a better person for doing it is entirely my own opinion. If you feel that you would happily shoot an animal out of helicopter after you have chased it for half an hour and driven it to exhaustion then we obviously dont share the same set of ethics in regard to the word "hunt".I would hope that you didnt feel a sense of fulfillment in shooting your "trophy" that way , but maybe you would .Only you would know that answer....

By the way Todd - I'll be in the USA later this year. Send me your contact details and we will go do that Texas hunt together. I'm always up for a challenge , as long as its on a fair and equal footing. I'm 54 and not hugely fit , but I'm a starter if you are . I assume you will be paying ??????

Incidently - Ive also done the tahr hunt on foot , from the foot of the mountain. This one is not the worlds biggest specimen but he's mine and I earnt it the hard way.

The Black Buck statement was meant to show you how ridiculous your comment was about hunting Tahr on foot making me a better person. It's a total crap statement just like the Black Buck comment is. You don't know what my background is or what I have or have not done. To tell me that a simple hunt on foot in your country will improve my standing as a person is a statement I find offensive as it assumes I've not accomplished much in this life. But you obviously got that point as my suggesting it back to you in that you would be a better person for hunting Black Buck on a fenced Texas ranch offended you. Likewise, my statement assumed you haven't accomplished much and that is why you are offended. Like I said, you got the point but didn't even realize it.

Yes, I have a significant clue of the difference between an alpine hunt and a hunt for introduced game on a fenced Texas ranch. I've done a significant amount of Alpine hunting for Elk on foot, with everything taken in and out on my back. Extended stays in the high back country wilderness areas. Packed out animals by myself that make your Tahr and Chamois look like little dogs, in terms of size. Do you realize a big bull elk takes a minimum of 4 trips to pack out for one person? I understand it very well as I lived in the mountains West of Pikes Peak in Colorado for 5.5 years at an altitude of 9,500'. Have hunted the high country 17 years in a row except for one. All but one were 100% backpack hunts. The other being a fully guided affair on horseback after accumulating 10 preference points over a 10 year period to hunt a specific "Trophy" area. Just to be clear, I've never hunted for exotic introduced species on a Texas ranch. Don't ever care to. It's not my idea of hunting. But none of this is anything I consider as accomplishments that have made me a better person!

Go back and read what I have stated in my previous posts. Here is a quick summary.

1) I do not intend to heli-hunt for my Tahr, as you Kiwi's have defined it. Only to use the chopper for access to the area. You guys have stated over and over that you feel that is acceptable. Not that I seek your permission or approval!

2) I have said over and over I support your efforts to ban heli-hunting where the animal is chased, herded, spotted from the chopper.

3) These ridiculous statements you guys keep coming up with such as "it'll make you a better person", "rich fat pricks from overseas", etc. are undermining the credibility of your arguments to get heli-hunting stopped.

4) IMO, you will get further with your goals of changing the laws and getting overseas hunters to understand the issues that are important to you if you stick with the facts.

As this discussion is taking a decided turn towards being antagonistic, I'm done here. I've tried to support you guys but there must be a cultural difference causing you to not see that. Good luck with achieving your goals on this matter.