Fishnhunt New Zealands main hunting and Fishing Forum. millions of posts on fishing and hunting, dogs, 4x4 vehicles, outdoors and much more Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 100 Replies) Hunter representation (Read 48508 times)
chilly
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love The FishNhunt Forum

Posts: 117
Joined: Jun 1st, 2015
Gender: Male
Re: Hunter representation
Reply #180 - Aug 19th, 2015 at 2:53am
Print Post  
whats the problem.After hi tops post and following everyone's
opinions i thought right it seems that joining nzda is also the right thing to do.I got there bank acc no from wherever went to town and deposited a hundy for a membership of the direct
branch.This was on the 28/07/15 well now the lady tells me,no
we haven't got a cheque from you,well no you haven't because
it wasn't a cheque, it was a cash deposit.If nzda cant work something this basic how the f--k are you going to do the rest.
IE represent hunters concerns.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
PORKCHOP
Online Forum Guide
Donor Member
Staff
*****
Offline



Posts: 7219
Location: Warkworth
Joined: Nov 12th, 2006
Gender: Male
Re: Hunter representation
Reply #181 - Aug 19th, 2015 at 3:18am
Print Post  
Yeah mate. If that lady thought you sent a cheque it proves the whole organisation is a shambles. Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Max
Donor Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 3974
Joined: Nov 9th, 2006
Gender: Male
Re: Hunter representation
Reply #182 - Aug 19th, 2015 at 9:38am
Print Post  
Quote:
sidney wrote on Aug 17th, 2015 at 2:30am:
Just a general comment about accountability and process...

Its often said... (and has been in this thread) that the only winners in legal challenge are lawyers.... now not only is that not true all of the time, its an absolute guarantee that those disadvantaged by power and resource, will always remain disadvantaged without legal challenge, if the party with that power and resource chooses to not meet its legal obligations.

DOC have ideological positioning that they instinctively use to interpret their legal obligation.  They are also not shy of ignoring their legal obligations if they conflict with that ideology.

They have proven not to be concerned with the rights of the recreational public, in much of their function, and they also have little willingness to incorporate the opinion of the wider community into decision making.  The mandate of accessibility, public access and usage, the facilitation of a public resource belonging to the public - is most often treated as an idealogical exercise in passive exclusion, deliberate isolation and a constant focus on the restoration of the environment to a pre-european state..

How do you work with such a group?  Will that change?  Every sound bite I have ever heard emitting from them is soothing PR, but soon betrayed by what they do...

If they don't get their hand smacked, they won't change...  you just got to work out how you can smack it...



This is sadly, correct. Its something we should all be angry about.


Yes....and perhaps add "and do something about" ?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BC
Donor Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6955
Location: Wellington
Joined: Mar 23rd, 2010
Gender: Male
Re: Hunter representation
Reply #183 - Aug 19th, 2015 at 10:09am
Print Post  
Tararua Hunter wrote on Aug 17th, 2015 at 1:18am:
Quote:
I have sourced a useful fighting fund trust precedent and have developed some thoughts about it. I think that it would need to have a close nexus with nzda to ensure that advocacy initiatives don't become too disparate.


BC, Lower North island hunters are going to be seeking funding soon, to legally challenge DOCs  removal of restrictions in WARO concessions.

The Liaison Group have engaged a barrister to do some initial correspondence with DOC, but it seems that a full judicial review will be needed to undo the flawed decisions made by DOC

the group believe DOC failed legally on 2 issues - contravene their management plan, and did not Notifiy the consent renewal as they should have (because the Effects were significant to hunters.
(in fct its been the biggest opening up of traditionally restricted areas for the last 20 years or so)

The is 14 or so NZDA branches and hunting clubs involved,

but interest from the general hunting population seem apathetic.
probably because DOC did the changes in secret and its difficult to tell where they were don't

so, regarding representation of hunters, it seems that something separate og NZDA national is need to deal with these sorts of issues.


So, perhaps a fighting fund trust could be set up and applications could be made to the trustees for funding according to the terms of deed. Applications could be from groups or individuals.
  

Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.......
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HiTop
Forum Font
*****
Offline


Tops by dawn, a day in
heaven

Posts: 3164
Location: Canterbury
Joined: Apr 15th, 2007
Gender: Male
Re: Hunter representation
Reply #184 - Aug 19th, 2015 at 10:43am
Print Post  
I think we would need to formally define exactly the role of such an organisation.
There are probably two ways of working it:

1, A body representing hunters across all functions including advocacy, policy analysis and lobbying government.  That essentially takes those roles away from NZDA with the associated impacts....

2, A fighting fund that employs fund raisers, policy analysts and professional advocates to provide independent professional guidance to hunter organisations like NZDA and Pig Hunter clubs etc. on what needs to be done in response to departmental initiatives or government policy changes.

Personally I think the second option is most likely to succeed and not consume the energies of the organisations that are currently struggling to get any traction with DoC and the government.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BC
Donor Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6955
Location: Wellington
Joined: Mar 23rd, 2010
Gender: Male
Re: Hunter representation
Reply #185 - Aug 19th, 2015 at 7:52pm
Print Post  
HiTop wrote on Aug 19th, 2015 at 10:43am:
I think we would need to formally define exactly the role of such an organisation.
There are probably two ways of working it:

1, A body representing hunters across all functions including advocacy, policy analysis and lobbying government.  That essentially takes those roles away from NZDA with the associated impacts....

2, A fighting fund that employs fund raisers, policy analysts and professional advocates to provide independent professional guidance to hunter organisations like NZDA and Pig Hunter clubs etc. on what needs to be done in response to departmental initiatives or government policy changes.

Personally I think the second option is most likely to succeed and not consume the energies of the organisations that are currently struggling to get any traction with DoC and the government.


I had in mind nothing more than a trust for the sole purpose of collecting public donations in order to fund the more immediate preservation of our hunting and associated rights, and ensuring that through the high quality of the trustees that funds are allocated only to the most robust and likely effective initiatives. Applications for funding could come from existing or future advocacy organizations or individuals.

I'm thinking the funding of legal action, advocacy and the real here and now sharp issues of the day. Not so much policy development, submission processes, research etc. Funding applications would be according to the trust deed.

People I think are more likely to donate money knowing it will be targeted to specific and well thought out initiatives that have a high probability of success.

Also, knowing that hunters have a decent amount of funding (a fighting fund of $1m is not impossible) available to them to fight silly decision making or policy will likely temper bad behavior by agencies etc.

- A dedicated fund to fight anti hunting policy and actions
- Independent from advocacy and hunting organisations, their own funding and their politics.
- Anyone or any organisation may apply for funds
- Funding application approvals only according to the specific purpose and terms of the trust
- Independent and wise trustees
- Large fund acts as deterrent
  

Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.......
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HiTop
Forum Font
*****
Offline


Tops by dawn, a day in
heaven

Posts: 3164
Location: Canterbury
Joined: Apr 15th, 2007
Gender: Male
Re: Hunter representation
Reply #186 - Aug 20th, 2015 at 12:03am
Print Post  
Some good points there BC but you need policy analysis to alert everyone to upcoming issues.  Those analysts will be shared with other organisations like Federated Farmers, Tourism operators etc. that have similar concerns.  All you are trying to do is short circuit the system and get to legislative changes before they even get to select committee level.  It is a hell of a lot more efficient and cost effective to nip things in the bud or propose changes that would meet the goal without negatively impacting hunters.
I would suggest to you also that the confrontational model is only effective when you can mobilise enough support to publicly  embarrass a government over an issue that they have the flexibility to alter.  As has been proven many times in the past getting alongside and making the odd non-critical concession is far more effective than stomping out of the room.  At the end of the day we are irrelevant to decision makers anyway.  It must piss them off entirely to have to take our views into account because we are part of a collective they answer too.
I would be keen to explore some of this a bit more with FMC and other players in the outdoor arena as some groups are quite effective whereas we seem to struggle at times.
Money is the key of course and having a trustee group that has the skills and knowledge to drive a fund forward is crucial to its success but it must also have the confidence of those it represents.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BC
Donor Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6955
Location: Wellington
Joined: Mar 23rd, 2010
Gender: Male
Re: Hunter representation
Reply #187 - Aug 20th, 2015 at 7:45am
Print Post  
The fighting fund trust as I see it would be a simple and discreet mechanism to take donations, invest for an enduring return and to release funds on application to fight serious events. The trust would ensure that there is always funds available to fight the major issues and events, and would ensure that the investment was spent wisely.

NZDA would continue just as it is funded through what ever subscription mechanisms they choose, as would other recreation hunter organisations. NZDA would continue to do the policy analysis, lobbying, having their comps etc and run boring meetings just as they do now.

And when something significant crops up that needs urgent funding (like a judicial review or an injunction for example), any group or individual (Weathered, even Smiley ) can make an application for funds.

I better stop, because I'm starting to sound like an advocate for the idea when it is really just a collection of random thoughts.
  

Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.......
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BC
Donor Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6955
Location: Wellington
Joined: Mar 23rd, 2010
Gender: Male
Re: Hunter representation
Reply #188 - Sep 9th, 2015 at 6:57am
Print Post  
I went to an nzda meeting last night. Haven't been to one for many years. There were about 28 people there. One introduced himself to me. One other I knew. Nothing changes.

They talked about WARO and the bird shooting incident. There was a free flow of uninformed speculation and the usual DOC blaming and bashing. Nothing constructive.

I despair. In terms of policy, most of these members need protecting from themselves.




  

Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.......
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
KiwiKenEff
Just Joined
*
Offline


I Love The FishNhunt Forum

Posts: 27
Location: Papakura
Joined: Aug 14th, 2015
Gender: Male
Re: Hunter representation
Reply #189 - Sep 29th, 2015 at 4:08am
Print Post  
There are some good thoughts here - if somewhat idealistic. Pardon my ignorance, but wasn't the GAC supposed to be taking this stuff in hand? What happened to the politician with the hair? Whatsisname? You know - the one conspicuous by his absence? The one who created a new bureaucracy for himself and has since done SFA? As for NZDA naaaah, enough.
When I win Lotto I promise I'll set up a fighting fund trust but in the meantime ..... well ya know.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HiTop
Forum Font
*****
Offline


Tops by dawn, a day in
heaven

Posts: 3164
Location: Canterbury
Joined: Apr 15th, 2007
Gender: Male
Re: Hunter representation
Reply #190 - Dec 27th, 2015 at 9:45am
Print Post  
Its been a while since we delved into this topic and I've spent quite a while assessing what has been written.  This thread has been quite enlightening and it certainly appears we have a serious problem charting a path forward that people would support and finance as well as being effective in the right places.

My summarising of views goes a bit like this:

Most see the need for an advocacy organisation to preserve and enhance hunter access to and management of game animals as a resource.

Acceptance of a charge for permits/hunting rights is mixed and which organisation would be advantaged by the funds is a concern to some.

Neither NZDA or GAC are the right organisation to carry out the role.

There is support for an alternative organisation that would be focused solely on hunters rights although many question the need for another organisation when NZDA, GAC and COLFO already exist.

Hopefully I have that mostly right.  If not I'd love to hear others assessments.
Moving along, as I don't think there is any time to waste:

Our new organisation is:
- Independent of statutory restriction and existing NGO's policies.
- Funded purely from voluntary contributions from the public and negotiated percentage contributions from hunting equipment sales.
- It provides oversight of government agencies, their actions and policies as they impact hunting through detailed factual analysis.
- It advocates and takes action, both practical and legal, to protect existing populations of game animals and enhance hunters access to those animals for harvest.
- It manages its financial performance to ensure it can become and remain perpetually self funding.

What did I ommit?
Bushwanderer suggested the structure of Legasea as a model and I think that has great merit.  You can read a bit about that here.
http://www.legasea.co.nz/detail.php

Much of what they highlight is what we will be faced with as the population increases.  Putting aside any safety issues without game our sport is finished.  GAC has an advisory role to the conservation minister and further roles that will not wield the weight we need in some areas.  Its not that GAC is a bad model it is just that it is severely constrained in any advocacy role through its statutory status by design.  Similarly F&G is constrained and there is need to address their ability to undertake work to protect rights and access.  An organisation that can work right across the spectrum would be a formidable force in addressing the inequity our sport/s have been subject to.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
toyota
Forum Senior
****
Offline


I Love The FishNhunt Forum

Posts: 500
Location: methven
Joined: Aug 22nd, 2010
Gender: Male
Re: Hunter representation
Reply #191 - Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:08pm
Print Post  
hairy wrote on Jun 22nd, 2015 at 12:42am:
Isn't the GAC supposed to be doing that?  Managing herds and protecting hunters rights.

Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
toyota
Forum Senior
****
Offline


I Love The FishNhunt Forum

Posts: 500
Location: methven
Joined: Aug 22nd, 2010
Gender: Male
Re: Hunter representation
Reply #192 - Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:13pm
Print Post  
hairy wrote on Jun 22nd, 2015 at 8:51am:
If I was going to pay money to an organisation I would be worried it would be dominated by the trophy brigade who seem far more organised and passionate that their meat hunting counterparts....  In saying that, if something isn't broke, why fix it?  Just thinking about it, since Xmas, I have been out about 6 times seriously to put something in the freezer (this doesn't count dragging weaners around), everytime I have shot something.  As soon as we have someone promoting hunting interests will we have regulation around taking animals, seasons, access.  At the moment I can do what I want and I like it that way... IMHO there are more animals around now than ever.  We have it pretty good.


for how long though ?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Carlsen Highway
Forum Font
*****
Offline


I Love The FishNhunt Forum

Posts: 2160
Joined: Feb 6th, 2012
Gender: Male
Re: Hunter representation
Reply #193 - Feb 8th, 2016 at 11:57pm
Print Post  
This new Organisation needs to have Sydney as President and Hi-Top the General Factor, and Oscar as Shogun. Only with these men could it prevail.
While BC needs to be on board to make sure the ethics of it all are right. An old Jedi-like Alec Guinness type role where he can softly say things like "Änd how would you feel if you won this battle my friend?"
It would also need a council of elders, consisting of EC, TJ and Bon, Alan and Toyota.
General members and financial supporters would all get a discreet ring, one that can be recognised, sort of like a Mason's handshake, only you don't have to learn the handshake, because you've got a ring.
The ring can only be passed from father to son or daughter, or earned through trial, a donation of money, or bestowed by the Council of Elder's. It would enable recognition between otherwise secret members when in negotiation with the enemy (seems to be everyone at DOC) and would be handy for the doormen to those anti-1080 Eyes Wide Shut parties with all the masks in the penthouses of the Auckland viaduct.
Shady under the table dealings and deniable wetwork which the Organisation cannot be seen to be involved in (trophy hunting for example) would be done by an expendable, like Chamois Buck. We will have to get him back in. 
.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Oscar
Donor Member
*****
Offline


Let Us Prey

Posts: 11280
Location: North Otago
Joined: Nov 9th, 2006
Gender: Male
Re: Hunter representation
Reply #194 - Feb 9th, 2016 at 12:33am
Print Post  
I'll only take part on one condition - that Carlsen is a paid up member.
  

Herbs before herbivores

Not all those who wander are lost
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 
Send TopicPrint
 

FishnHunt - New Zealands Famous Hunting and Fishing Forum Since 1995 » Powered by YaBB 2.6.11!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2018. All Rights Reserved.
Site Design By Alan Simmons - PRism and all rights are reserved from 1995 and onwards