Two major topics are currently galvanising the New Zealand hunting community, and whilst the use of 1080 poison is the more public, it is the legitimisation by stealth of ‘heli-hunting’ that demonstrates the Department of Conservation's (DOC) real contempt for the users of the public estate. Heli-hunting is a recently coined phrase for the practise of hunting by helicopter; the locating, including in some instances the pursuit or herding of the animal, hunter placement and recovery of a game animal.
For decades helicopters have been used to access DOC managed land for many recreational purposes such as hunting, rafting and hiking. Regulations restrict helicopter access to designated sites only, both to limit the impact on the environment and other users, and for safety. Landing people in designated wilderness areas is expressly forbidden in order to maintain the purity of the experience for those within these untouched landscapes. The notable exception to these regulations is Wild Animal Recovery Operations (WARO), the commercial recovery of deer (primarily), from DOC administered land, where operators with a concession may land as authorised within their permit to recover animals. Whilst individual hunters may grumble about WARO activities, within the hunting community as a whole it is accepted that WARO is a necessary part of population control and a sustainable commercial practise.
To the great surprise of the hunting community, when DOC were advised that a number of operators were exploiting a poorly worded clause in their WARO permits in order to heli-hunt, the department allowed the operators to continue the unlawful practise. Considering the legal might being applied by the commercial operators it is not surprising that this stance was adopted by DOC. It is however the following illogical steps taken by the department that pose a real threat to not only New Zealander’s enjoyment of these public lands but our global reputation as an environmentally aware nation as well.
Rather than modify the WARO concessions when they came up for renewal, DOC has instead decided to accept applications to heli-hunt on public land. When the Ass. Min. of Conservation stated that ‘applications have taken longer to process than was originally expected, because of the need to consider the effects on [other users] and the environment’ the departments original intent becomes clearer: DOC did not intend open consultation on the issue of heli-hunting.
In the past New Zealand hunters have provided evidence to both DOC and the Civil Aviation Authority of helicopter operators conducting unlawful trophy hunting from helicopters on public land. Having repeatedly denied the activity was even taking place, DOC’s hand was forced when the coroner's inquiry into the death of an American hunter during a helicopter accident led to an admission by the operator of heli-hunting activities. While DOC’s approach is surprising given their knowledge of public feeling towards heli-hunting, it is the subsequent actions by the Canterbury Conservancy that cast significant doubts on the motivation behind it’s legitimisation.
So far the department’s primary justification for authorising heli-hunting appears to be their recent admission that the activity was already occurring on public land, despite being ‘outside of the scope of the WARO permit’. The operators who wish to continue to heli-hunt provide evidence that there is an international demand, citing benefits to tourism and the economy, however this service is already available and has been provided to tourists for many years on private hunting blocks. The recent letter to Safari Club International by the Canterbury Conservancy indicates not only DOC’s desire to fund raise through the selling of individual trophy concessions to foreign hunters but also the Conservancy’s views on the likely outcome of the current consultation process ‘you should factor into your pricing for the 2011 season tahr and chamois hunts on public conservation land…a trophy fee of around $500 per animal’.
Heli-hunting will be a blight on the environmentally conscious image of our country, both within and globally. New Zealand will be the only developed country in which this form of hunting is accepted and the major international hunting bodies do not approve heli-hunting as practised in New Zealand as fair chase. The approval of heli-hunting on public land will expose both the natural environment and its users; the trampers, the fishermen, the kayakers and rafters, and the tourists, to repeated over-flight and landing of helicopters, having a significant impact upon the wilderness experience. Our unique public hunting resource will be severely impacted upon as the trophy animals are swiftly and selectively taken from public land by helicopter operators for a quick dollar, removing any incentive for New Zealand hunters to venture into the outdoors.
There is also no conservation benefit in the practise of heli-hunting. Trophy hunting removes only mature male animals, resulting in no appreciable impact upon population numbers. DOC do acknowledge that foot hunters play their part in wild animal control as a significant number of female animals are taken for food, and in the case of populations of Tahr in the Southern Alps, hunters recognise the importance of conservation and actively manage the populations while trophy hunting.
Sadly many American hunters are advised when shopping for safaris that heli-hunting is the normal practise in our country, and return to the US disillusioned regarding our concepts of morality and fair chase. These tourists are not given the opportunity to experience our wilderness from anywhere but the back seat of a helicopter and hardly make the best advocates for tourism in New Zealand.
The management of our public land continues to be a banner for the sustainable use of an ecological resource alongside man’s use of the environment for recreation, residence and income; through uses such as agriculture, power generation, mineral exploitation and of course tourism. There is little doubt that the legitimisation of heli-hunting in New Zealand will be a serious blow to this reputation, as the government department charged with the protection of our land for all New Zealander’s sell out for the financial benefit of so few. Any perceived benefits to conservation or the people of New Zealand are misguided in the extreme. New Zealander’s themselves do not heli-hunt, and the opening of our public hunting resource to this exploitation is a return to the elitism inherent throughout this sport in so many countries less fortunate than our own.
0 comments:
Post a Comment