Thread: Role of the Game Animal Council

well I put comments on the post about hunter training by the GAC and I will apologize to LarryB my comments were not directed at you personally - have I changed my view no - this is my personal view on their role - do we as NZ Hunters need GAC no - The GAC came about as a deal to get an extra MP into parliament - it was his little pet project and did not appear to be from any intensive lobbying from NZ Hunters -so we got GAC around 2013 and an act of parliament to give it some credence - now one of the ideas put foward by GAC was to declare herds of special interest - they state two in their web site the sika herd and the wapiti herd - but here's the rub - both are under existing foundations and they appear to be doing a very good job - do we need a third party involved ( DOC+ relevant Foundation being two ) no we don't and I would state likely to get very messy if GAC did put their oar in - I would ask GAC a number of direct questions given they receive tax payers money in regards to recreational hunting 1) what new access points have GAC negotiated into our public land for recreational hunting 2) what old access points now closed have GAC been able to reopen - 3) what hunting opportunities for recreational hunters have GAC been able to negotiate with private landowners to reduce animal numbers on their land -4) what lobbying has GAC carried out to ensure legal roads are not lost - all seem very valid to me and by far the most important issues for NZ Hunters - do we need any game management over most of our public conservation estate no we don't - some have said we need more Rangers out in the field to monitor offences such as vandalism of signs etc but that is not the role of GAC - we have enjoyed free and unrestricted hunting in NZ for well over 80 years +- I for one do not want to get to a road end to be told this area is now a herd of special interest and you can only shoot one stag 12 points or better - stuff that - we do not need it -the hunter training is a good idea but man it scares me - if I am told later down the track that I need the GAC course to get a hunting permit - look out me really will be on the war path if that happened ( it is the case in a number of overseas countrys that they have mandatory training for hunters ) - so do we need GAC no

You must be drinking DOC kool-aid, they love hunters who don't have an interest in the big picture of game management . ...

We dont need or want any more govt or politics in the bush..

I dont care what any corporation says, im going hunting

Originally Posted by Vault

We dont need or want any more govt or politics in the bush..

I dont care what any corporation says, im going hunting

thanks for that pleased to see another hunter thinks the same

Would the walking access commission not bear more responsibility for negotiating accesses than the GAC?

Originally Posted by hebe

Would the walking access commission not bear more responsibility for negotiating accesses than the GAC?

no unlikely they would get involved

this from GAC

What we do
The Game Animal Council is a statutory entity established under the Game Animal Council Act 2013. We provide expert advice to the Minister of Conservation on game animals, are a source of information and education to the hunting sector and take a science-based approach to everything we do. We promote hunter safety, enhanced public access, hunter-led conservation and seek to improve both recreational and commercial hunting opportunities

so access clearly in their professed portfolio so whats happened ???

Walking access, fmc, gac, all did a superb job with Waipakihi rd, didn't they.

Originally Posted by Barry the hunter

no unlikely they would get involved

this from GAC

What we do
The Game Animal Council is a statutory entity established under the Game Animal Council Act 2013. We provide expert advice to the Minister of Conservation on game animals, are a source of information and education to the hunting sector and take a science-based approach to everything we do. We promote hunter safety, enhanced public access, hunter-led conservation and seek to improve both recreational and commercial hunting opportunities

so access clearly in their professed portfolio so whats happened ???

Fair enough. If that’s what it says I can’t think of an example where the GAC have interceded on access.

Why not just go and ask them? Do an OI request

Barry,the trouble is ,as I see it.
if we bag the GAC as not wanted by hunters...we shoot ourselves in the foot....far better to try and get a better outcome from them,then to bag them and loose what little gains they are able to make on our behalf.
for years the hunting community has said we have no voice...well we have been given one..why not get in behind it and allow it to shout louder till we ARE HEARD and taken notice of.there are some really good people on there ,trying thier collective best to improve our lot.
its often said we hunters n shooter as a community are too quick to devide ourselves ,some even suggest others are put in way of a certain large people carrying automobile....be careful not to fall into same trap.
in places where we as a community have a good relationship with DOC...good field staff and office staff who know whats what..its great..that kind of relationship does everyone a whole lot of good..we need to foster it in all its shapes n forms.

all fair enough my concern is 1) for our dollar what are we getting i.e access -I follow Rec hunting closely - seen nothing on any format re any new access and 2 ) we do no need them to be warranted under that act - so what gains from them ??? they have been on forum promoting their hunting course hopefully they will reply or maybe not - if I saw real benefits I may feel differently but I dont

I've had a few interactions with the GAC while wearing a 'non hunter' hat and I have been really impressed with what they have been doing on behalf of the hunting community. Just remember that lack of outcome does not necessarily mean lack of quality action.

As has been said by others : be careful what you wish for.

If you are not happy with what's going on then get involved and be part of the solution.

If you are not happy with what's going on then get involved and be part of the solution.

Rich007 I was for over 30 years very involved - I have fought many battles for Rec hunters especially access - my main problem with GAC -what are we as Tax payers getting for our money simple

Originally Posted by Barry the hunter

If you are not happy with what's going on then get involved and be part of the solution.

Rich007 I was for over 30 years very involved - I have fought many battles for Rec hunters especially access - my main problem with GAC -what are we as Tax payers getting for our money simple

I'm pleased to hear that.

So are you asking this question as a concerned tax payer rather than a hunter?

I think it's a fair question that could be asked of most organisations - just look at when any government department or local council starts talking about 'cost recovery' from fees (firearms licensing and Immigration NZ as two examples) - you look at the proposed fees, at 100% cost recovery and wonder how on earth it could cost that much to perform a relatively simple process.

Regardless, GAC are a chance to recognise the animals we love to hunt as something beyond 'pests' and if that results in managing numbers so that there are not too many and not to few for future generations and perhaps most importantly stops them from being eradicated, then i'm all for it.