Thread: Hunting in NZ, is it too easy?

Maybe it is a cultural difference but if someone pipes up with how foreign hunters should "keep their hands off OUR (KIWI) animals: because of the alleged wastefulness but does not propose a way for a foreigner to make the carcass useful, i.e., to allow for the meat to be utilized in some fashion b/c a foreigner is usually forbidden from exporting the meat because of governmental regulations, then that, in my book, is bitching without a solution.

Vietnamcam, I have no understanding of the ballot system or the locations for which it is applicable. I don't know if the locations are more highly prized because there is greater game population but I will assume that is the issue. Is that the case? Are there greater numbers of trophy animals in the balloted regions?

But to the topic of the thread, whether hunting in NZ is too easy and therefore attracts the wrong element of foreign hunters, would not requiring foreign hunters to hunt on private reserves hurt the local hunter? If the foreign hunters were only allowed to hunt on private land, wouldn't the private land owners want to expand there range for economic gain and eventually eat up the public land for the local hunter? While that may seem absurd at this moment look at the lands in California, which are roughly the same size as NZ. I cannot find many public lands to hunt wild pigs (which I think everyone will agree with are just as big as pest as rats with tusks) or Wapiti (Elk). In part because even the "public" land has been leased out to ranchers, who in turn have control to the access to the land. For me, as a CA resident, to hunt Wapiti in CA I would expect to spend $14K US for a tag and guide (that is unless I had a rancher invite me onto his property and he provided me with the hunting tag).

Scotty