Thread: Hunting on farm's heaith and saftey

PM sent

My experience is that mostly Farmers don't understand their legal obligations to recreational users so accordingly over react. Not that a belt and braces approach is unwise.

Unfortunately its being used as a reason to shut up farms.

Basically the farmer (and his staff) have an obligation to warn you about any unusual hazards that you would not usually associate with that sort of farming enterprise.

They do not have to warn about natural hazards.

Read this:

Health and safety responsibilities of farmers to recreational visitors » Walking Access Commission Ara Hīkoi Aotearoa

Originally Posted by Tahr

My experience is that mostly Farmers don't understand their legal obligations to recreational users so accordingly over react. Not that a belt and braces approach is unwise.

Unfortunately its being used as a reason to shut up farms.

Basically the farmer (and his staff) have an obligation to warn you about any unusual hazards that you would not usually associate with that sort of farming enterprise.

They do not have to warn about natural hazards.

Read this:

Health and safety responsibilities of farmers to recreational visitors » Walking Access Commission Ara Hīkoi Aotearoa

Bloody bureaucrats think that getting out of their chair is a hazard.

couple of farms i hunt have no H&S policy in place (wouldn't know what it is) If i am lucky enough i get a couple permits a year from a forestry company and for that i need a current firearms license and one block am not aloud to take a bike over the ONE wooden bridge as it is not weight rated (its a shit bridge) and they state tracks could be slippery and may have drop outs.

Originally Posted by bigbear

couple of farms i hunt have no H&S policy in place (wouldn't know what it is) If i am lucky enough i get a couple permits a year from a forestry company and for that i need a current firearms license and one block am not aloud to take a bike over the ONE wooden bridge as it is not weight rated (its a shit bridge) and they state tracks could be slippery and may have drop outs.

Thats pretty bad. I do think HSE is really overboard in some areas now days and peoples personal responsibility is diminished compared to what it used to be. But no one wants to go to work to be hurt or killed either.

From dealing with HSE at work and reading that article about what a farmers responsibility is.( the article actually contradicted what this work safe FAQ says, but did state that work safe has no intention to prosecute farmers for relational activities. So I assume it would take gross negligence for work safe to bring on some form of court action)
My understanding is hunting and shooting at a recreational level for the most part stays as a recreational activity and the health and safety at work act 2015 generally does not apply to them while they are out and about on the farm and out of key work areas like workshops and sheds and farm equipment etc etc. Except in a very few circumstances, IE when a hazard like a drain or other work has been carried out and left in the open and they hurt them selves there. So the farmer should already have some form of barrier or hazard ID etc in place for that drain already for their staff. Tripping over or shooting themselves would not count.
https://worksafe.govt.nz/about-us/ne...-myths-busted/

BUT if money exchanges hands either way, Ie guided client or pest control contractor then it applies to them.

2nd BUT The PCBU (farm, farm owner director etc etc) has a responsibility for the health and safety of its employees. So some level of care is needed to protect the employees from the visitors. So practical steeps would need to be taken to protect staff from hunters.
So understanding the risks hunters bring to the farm and the WORKING risks that the farm poses to the hunter and eliminating or managing those risks.
A sensible balance between taking practical and reasonable steps and not being super anal and crazy or super Blaz-e about things.
Very little extra work should be required on the farms part if they already have a decent HSE program in place.
Allowing hunting while no workers are on site, notifying all workers when and where hunters will be and letting hunters know what areas they are allowed to go. etc. would be simple additions.

Its not something to be dismissed with no care but not something farms should be afraid of and stopping hunters full stop for fear of ending up in court either.

TLDR: Long winded version of Thar's Post.

Originally Posted by Nugget connaisseur

...id state that work safe has no intention to prosecute farmers for relational activities....

Rightly so- what business is it of theirs to comment on a farmer's sex life?

I have never been made to do anything h and s wise, only sort of things I have ever been asked to do is shoot every pig you see or open such and such gate on your way back down but then generally farms I have hunted I knew very well with only a couple of exceptions.

HSE 101.

Originally Posted by Nugget connaisseur

Attachment 87281

HSE 101.

Geeze thats hardly good advice

How much are hi vis vests? You could ask the farmer how many staff he has and as good will, supply him with enough to cover his employees while your there.

Brother worked at Inghams chicken factory.
They found one of the Korean works on the floor of the toilets with blood flowing from his but then runs out he had an itchy ass so decided he would scratch it with his filleting knife guess that’s where the saying “Ass Saw”! comes from

A whole farm is not a work place, but where work is being carried out on the farm is. I would consider dangerous stock to be a hazard whereever that they are located, and should be notified as such to visitors. I would advise getting visitors to avoid working parts of the farm and areas where dangerous stock are.

Interesting that taking fees for access is likely to result in the property to be considered a workplace as a whole.... I wonder if those that do understand the significance of that..?

Originally Posted by Sidney

A whole farm is not a work place, but where work is being carried out on the farm is. I would consider dangerous stock to be a hazard whereever that they are located, and should be notified as such to visitors. I would advise getting visitors to avoid working parts of the farm and areas where dangerous stock are.

Interesting that taking fees for access is likely to result in the property to be considered a workplace as a whole.... I wonder if those that do understand the significance of that..?

Also that if the money being taken from a volunteer run organisation IE has no paid staff. For example tramping club or a shooting club with no paid staff. Its not considered a work plate.