Thread: FWF Ban for Non Attendance

I would doubt the extra six year year ban is actually enforceable

I don't see why it would matter if he was being a dick on the phone or not. Its bad form to throw out an arbitrary 6 year ban based on his perception of how the phone call went. Sounds unprofessional based on the information we've been provided here. But as stated by many, we only have one side of the story here.

Originally Posted by Husky1600

Has the FWF actually said that if you turn up for the briefing, then all is good, you wont/cant be banned? Nobody has been able to give me the answer. Or.....if you turn up to the briefing but then dont actually go hunting, can you be banned? Again. I dont know and nobody has yet to give a definitive answer. If you can be banned for not actually going hunting on your block, then theres a whole lot of other hunters that should be banned for turning up on the block and sitting in their tents and not going hunting, honestly where do we draw the line.

Yes I do know him personally, have hunted with him a couple of times, had the occasional beer with him over the years. And when my best mate of 38 years tells me he's a good bastard and stands by him, then I take his word that he's a good bastard. This young fella is more than capable of looking after himself when the shit goes down.

Hasn't been said but it doesn't sound like he showed up more that he called up to explain not showing up.
I think mentioning that money is a significant factor in why they didn't go and I understand its expensive.

Originally Posted by whanahuia

I think one piece of relevant info is the other party sharing the block has come forward and said they went in, and weather wasn't great, but still plenty of hunting and not dangerous.
it came across to me as if the cost of the trip may have been a deciding factor too.
FWF is in a no win situation here, they have rules for a reason and it get really hard to let those go on a case by case basis as it will look like favouritism.
As a north island hunter, if I commit to a trip such as this, I make back up plans. If the weather really is bad, go along and forfeit your obligations, then if you have to pull the pin for safety, head for a Tahr or chamois etc where its safer.
In the end if they pulled for safety, they made right decision and a 4 year ban is just part of the acceptance of that.

I completely agree the call maybe not given the due diligence it should have considering the demand and significance of Fiordland to NZ Hunters

Originally Posted by PerazziSC3

Nothing to debate about, I broke a rule so just accepted it even though I did think it was slightly harsh considering it's one little bit of paper that I would have just made up what I wrote down. I had done nearly 40 days hunting in the blocks over the previous 5 ballots and only pulled the trigger once, was due a break anyway.

Fair enough sounds you had a bloody good run of things leading up to it.

Originally Posted by bigbear

For me i would have to commit coming down that's the time slot i had time off work, ferry booked etc and worry about weather when i got down there. From north island its basically to days travel each way.
I would have gone to the briefing.
Then for me if the weather was looking real bad and the pilot said stuff that or local advised that weather worse then normal (never been to wapiti country) and had to pull pin
To me i had made a commitment of hunting that block.
but also be prepared to wait out a few days for weather to clear i wouldn't be flying in at the end of my time slot for couple days hunting.


Also coming from north island you do need a back up plan

This is how I look at it. I've not applied before as leave got denied for the day after the ballots and would have had to leave early. Didn't feel right applying knowing I couldn't utilise the opportunity.

Originally Posted by Moa Hunter

I would doubt the extra six year year ban is actually enforceable

I doubt it too. Think it was just a spur of the moment type. Shit when a temper gets the better of you.

Originally Posted by crocodiledavid

I don't see why it would matter if he was being a dick on the phone or not. Its bad form to throw out an arbitrary 6 year ban based on his perception of how the phone call went. Sounds unprofessional based on the information we've been provided here. But as stated by many, we only have one side of the story here.

I think it matters as we are only human and you don't know what else was going on at the time in his personal life. I don't think the ban should stick and we all know we should be professional all the time but life happens. Do I think that he should be banned as potentially Roger was having a bad day. No way I thinking the 4 year bans more than shit enough absolutely. I also don't blame Roger for loosing his cool but I think they should remove the extra 6 years ban for sure.

As I understand it, unreasonable contract terms are unenforceable. I'd have thought that the blanket 4 year ban (regardless of circumstances) would be approaching that.......and the 10 year ban to be completely out of order.

Imagine the circumstance where say one hunter in a party of 4 has his 3 mates bail on him a fortnight before they are due to fly in. Can he reasonably be expected to get from Kaitaia to Te Anau himself, and cop the heli bill himself? So does he get banned too.....sounds like it?

30 years ago the public land here in south canterbury ran a 2 week permit system and only 4??? permits at a time for the block...you could book a month in advance...now some folks booked permits and didnt hunt at all..they effectively locked up the block and went in later ,with hope animals had a spell and got quieter....it was a shitty system as was often hard to get block to hunt in time I had off to use it.
it was scrapped about same time as paper permits....now its open slather and 4 mth long permits....
guys buy duck shooting licence and tag area and buy licence for other family members and tag 90 yards away in each direction to give them a bigger buffer area....

FWF has to be seen to do something to stop this happening....as to how much they need to do...its never going to please everyone.

If old mates attitude is that he thinks he can throw his weight round and hand out ten year bans to hunt PUBLIC LAND I know I for one would be making a point of saying fuck you and your stupid organisation. Id be going in there and hunting up a storm. Fuck their ballot

Originally Posted by Ryan_Songhurst

If old mates attitude is that he thinks he can throw his weight round and hand out ten year bans to hunt PUBLIC LAND I know I for one would be making a point of saying fuck you and your stupid organisation. Id be going in there and hunting up a storm. Fuck their ballot

Rogee that!

Originally Posted by Ryan_Songhurst

If old mates attitude is that he thinks he can throw his weight round and hand out ten year bans to hunt PUBLIC LAND I know I for one would be making a point of saying fuck you and your stupid organisation. Id be going in there and hunting up a storm. Fuck their ballot

You must be joking? The fwf as an organisation has produced the most well balanced and productive herd we have in New Zealand and is the only place we have a solid management plan that is actually supported by DOC and works for all interested parties. You’re telling me that your solution to having a bad experience with one individual would cause you to go in and not only screw with their years of work but also screw thousands of your fellow hunters who apply for and go in there to try and reap the benefits of this work? I’ve seen through other things that you can be a real good bastard Ryan so as your fellow hunter who cares about the opportunities I have from the work the fwf does, I do hope you are indeed taking the piss.

Originally Posted by stagstalker

You must be joking? The fwf as an organisation has produced the most well balanced and productive herd we have in New Zealand and is the only place we have a solid management plan that is actually supported by DOC and works for all interested parties. You’re telling me that your solution to having a bad experience with one individual would cause you to go in and not only screw with their years of work but also screw thousands of your fellow hunters who apply for and go in there to try and reap the benefits of this work? I’ve seen through other things that you can be a real good bastard Ryan so as your fellow hunter who cares about the opportunities I have from the work the fwf does, I do hope you are indeed taking the piss.

I dont doubt one bit that for the most part they have done a great job, but like other organizations within the hunting space (ie: NZDA) there is a certain faction that seem to think that they are gods gift to the hunting fraternity and should be worshipped by all and sundry. I was also "banned" by one of their governing members who decided he could make his own rules after I got airlifted out of wapiti river with my knee blown to bits and my leg pointing in a direction that legs arent designed to point.
Theres definitely an "old boys association" within most of these organizations who seem to think their membership gives them some kind of special ability to make up punishments on the spot to preserve what they perceive as unwavering respect from all the peasants.

Yea I can understand that and I have heard a share of such stories. I don’t doubt there’s some bullshit involved, there is in everything everywhere. I just feel that the bullshit/person/issue itself is what should be targeted/resolved as opposed to threatening to do something that screws over everyone without actually directly addressing the issue/failing itself.

If old mate is out of line then work to put that line straight, don’t go and screw with all the other good parts of the organisation whilst screwing fellow hunters at the same time. I imagine we are on the same page and it’s just a case of trying to communicate through words on a keyboard.

Originally Posted by Maxx

As I understand it, unreasonable contract terms are unenforceable. I'd have thought that the blanket 4 year ban (regardless of circumstances) would be approaching that.......and the 10 year ban to be completely out of order.

Imagine the circumstance where say one hunter in a party of 4 has his 3 mates bail on him a fortnight before they are due to fly in. Can he reasonably be expected to get from Kaitaia to Te Anau himself, and cop the heli bill himself? So does he get banned too.....sounds like it?

No the whole party must show up anyway. You can't have any no shows and you cant enter as a solo

Originally Posted by Ryan_Songhurst

I dont doubt one bit that for the most part they have done a great job, but like other organizations within the hunting space (ie: NZDA) there is a certain faction that seem to think that they are gods gift to the hunting fraternity and should be worshipped by all and sundry. I was also "banned" by one of their governing members who decided he could make his own rules after I got airlifted out of wapiti river with my knee blown to bits and my leg pointing in a direction that legs arent designed to point.
Theres definitely an "old boys association" within most of these organizations who seem to think their membership gives them some kind of special ability to make up punishments on the spot to preserve what they perceive as unwavering respect from all the peasants.

That sounds shit but I fairness an individual being a cock head and saying I'm going to spot everything your whole organisation is doing is a bit shit. I know your a bloody good dude so not having a go just my opinion. As for the public land part doesn't mean you can do what you like on it. As everyone owns its thats why it's managed so the few don't ruin it for the majority. (not saying your ruining it but going in and hunting the shit out of a small heerd with huge resources put into improving it could take it back to square one and undo years of work.

Blanket statements about organisations are easy to make as it simplifies wading through the good and the bad but realistically it's never so black and white.

Originally Posted by stagstalker

Yea I can understand that and I have heard a share of such stories. I don’t doubt there’s some bullshit involved, there is in everything everywhere. I just feel that the bullshit/person/issue itself is what should be targeted/resolved as opposed to threatening to do something that screws over everyone without actually directly addressing the issue/failing itself.

If old mate is out of line then work to put that line straight, don’t go and screw with all the other good parts of the organisation whilst screwing fellow hunters at the same time. I imagine we are on the same page and it’s just a case of trying to communicate through words on a keyboard.

This is my exact thoughts. There can be issues in any organisation but this tendency to go straight to you did something I don't like screw you and everyone your associated with. Issue is all of a sudden you've told everyone to go fuck themselves.
You see it in politics that "won't" work with National, Labour, act, whoever because they do this once but realistically you've got to pick one and the only way to have any of them improve is tell them good shot when they do something you like and tell them to short there shit out when they don't.

In this situation I feel that maybe repremanding this bloke for inappropriate misuse of power, potentially sort the system to avoid this in future with clearer rules ie state you have to go to the briefing regardless as the intent is to have everyone give it their best go. No making up rules on the spot. If someone does something then add it to the rules to stop it happening again but this time just leave it.

Originally Posted by Ryan_Songhurst

I dont doubt one bit that for the most part they have done a great job, but like other organizations within the hunting space (ie: NZDA) there is a certain faction that seem to think that they are gods gift to the hunting fraternity and should be worshipped by all and sundry. I was also "banned" by one of their governing members who decided he could make his own rules after I got airlifted out of wapiti river with my knee blown to bits and my leg pointing in a direction that legs arent designed to point.
Theres definitely an "old boys association" within most of these organizations who seem to think their membership gives them some kind of special ability to make up punishments on the spot to preserve what they perceive as unwavering respect from all the peasants.

Out of interest what was the reason they cited for banning you? And was it the same bloke?

This whole story may have a twist now to it - see FB under Venison Hunters for more info.