Thread: NZDA requires FAL number

Originally Posted by Tentman

Only a Fudd would label someone "boy".

Coming from someone with a shed full of Ryobi / Ozito and a pair of dress crocs

Does your Mrs still shop in her pyjamas?

Nope. She seldom wears PJs let alone leave the house in them. Why is you shed full of that stuff . . . Is it any good?

Originally Posted by Cameron92

Some of the attitudes on here are frankly frustrating for those volunteers, like myself, who put an extraordinary amount of effort into the NZDA branches.
I find it almost amusing that the opportunity to make submissions on these topics were available to you all, but some would rather sit here virtue signaling on the internet after the fact.

How do you know
a) that we don't also volunteer our time with the NZDA
b) what submissions any of us did or did not make

Seems like you're making a lot of assumptions.

Originally Posted by 308

Coming from someone with a shed full of Ryobi / Ozito and a pair of dress crocs

Does your Mrs still shop in her pyjamas?

Up until seeing this, I was starting to worry this thread was getting a bit touchy.

Originally Posted by Maca49

You won’t be able to use the range

Why wouldn't you be able to use the range if you haven't got a firearms license?
There are bow hunters that use the local range, they don't have a firearms license, we have parents teaching their kids to shoot, firearms license holders supervising others.
There are quite often people using our range that haven't got a license, always under supervision if using a firearm, but if you have to have a firearms license to use a range where are bow hunters supposed to go?

You shouldn’t need an fal to be a member of any club or Association for example you may be under age and shooting under supervision but still want to belong to the club
In the case of nzda you may be a bow hunter with no FAl
But still want to be a member for benefits such as public liability insurance etc

If you show up to a range to shoot a firearm you’re license should be checked apon entry by the RSO or other range official
Which is the way they all do it to my knowledge all the events and clubs I attend check on registration for the range day/event at the same time you pay the registration fee

If you’re not licensed obviously they are going to ask who is supervising you and my local nzda range asks unlicensed people to wear a hi vis vest so the RSO is aware you are under supervision I don’t think this is too much of an ask

Originally Posted by Tentman

Did you read the first line of the page link you posted? - the one about the Arms Act . . . Now read what GPM quoted from the Arms Act re land owner permission. Now tell me you are not committing an offense under the Arms Act. I agree the chances of getting caught are slim, but it's one cock up and there goes you FAL.

Not to add confusion.....but if we need to ask land owner permission on public land who do we ask..... being public means it's ours doesn't it? So I ask myself?, I know it's managed by DOC but they are not the owners......or is it the govt in power at the time......

I'm getting really confused

Is there actually a law that states we can or can't or is it a whole lot of interpretation on all of the above

H

Sent from my SM-S911B using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Greetings All,
IT IS ILLEGAL. Comprehension does not seem to be strong today. As I stated in an earlier post Your permit allows you to enter with a rifle, hunt and kill game with some exceptions. It does allow you to sight in a rifle. The Range Manual give the conditions for casual sighting in not on a range first of which is the permission of the landowner for the activity which a hunting permit does not provide.
Please read this carefully and regards GPM.

Greetings All,
It was getting late and I see that I omitted a small but important word in this post. To be clear a hunting permit does NOT allow you to sight in on DoC land. Public Land is a phrase that has been imported from the US recently. Formerly it would have been called Crown Land. Effectively this is held and administered by the NZ Government so for practical purposes the Government owns the land administered by DoC. Look up the DoC Management Plan for the land you are interested in.
GPM.

Originally Posted by HNTMAD

Not to add confusion.....but if we need to ask land owner permission on public land who do we ask..... being public means it's ours doesn't it? So I ask myself?, I know it's managed by DOC but they are not the owners......or is it the govt in power at the time......

I'm getting really confused

Is there actually a law that states we can or can't or is it a whole lot of interpretation on all of the above

H

Sent from my SM-S911B using Tapatalk

Get a legal opinion from a qualified legal practitioner if need be or get info. in writing directly from DOC , forest company or whoever manages the area you wish to hunt. Don’t waste time listening to opinions on a forum. At times individuals express opinions on subjects they profess to be knowledgeable on when they clearly aren’t. The internet and google are a cnut for this problem.

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Greetings All,
It was getting late and I see that I omitted a small but important word in this post. To be clear a hunting permit does NOT allow you to sight in on DoC land. Public Land is a phrase that has been imported from the US recently. Formerly it would have been called Crown Land. Effectively this is held and administered by the NZ Government so for practical purposes the Government owns the land administered by DoC. Look up the DoC Management Plan for the land you are interested in.
GPM.

For ease of all of us and not wanting to crash the permits system....can you please post the portion that states you are NOT allowed to sight in on DoC land.

That would be helpful

Sent from my SM-S911B using Tapatalk

It’s a hunting permit, not a shooting permit.

1 & 3 on the standard conditions make it crystal clear.

Originally Posted by HNTMAD

Not to add confusion.....but if we need to ask land owner permission on public land who do we ask..... being public means it's ours doesn't it? So I ask myself?, I know it's managed by DOC but they are not the owners......or is it the govt in power at the time......

I'm getting really confused

Is there actually a law that states we can or can't or is it a whole lot of interpretation on all of the above

H

Sent from my SM-S911B using Tapatalk

It’s owned by the crown and administered by DOC on behalf of the crown. The crown having delegated to DOC the right to give permission to hunters to enter the land to hunt.

As hunters we are must obtain permission from the owner/administrator or both before hunting on any land other than that which we own and fully administrate, in which case permission is implied.

The permit process on the DOC website is literally a tick box excercise that allows hunters to seek and gain permission, and DOC to give that permission.
In this way the formalities are covered off.

Think of it like the bottom of the Mukamuka valley. It is owned by Wharekahu but the tramping and cycling public have free access. If someone wants to hunt there, permission can be sought from a guy who is an employee of Wharekahu, he does not own the land to my knowledge but he can give permission.


As for sighting in a rifle or target shooting on crown land administered by DOC, thus this thread has discussed two different factors
1. The actual legality
2. The chance of anyone knowing/pursuing prosecution.

It is important not to conflate the two as being the same even though they are linked.

Looking at 1. In isolation, while the permit does not explicitly state that target shooting within the permit area is verboten, neither does it say it is permitted. Clause 5 of the permit applies as it states;

‘No firearm shall be discharged:
In the vicinity of huts, tracks, campsites, road-ends or other public places.
Within 500m of a Great Walk Hut or track. See Great Walks
In a manner that endangers, frightens or annoys members of the public, or that endangers any property.’

Target shooting on DOC administered land, could be construed by a prosecution lawyer as breaching the above, which is also a breach of the arms act.
This is just my opinion, but I wouldn’t bet the contents of my safe that I am wrong.



Looking at 2.
This will vary depending where we are, it’s a bit like the age old question of a tree falling in the bush. But by the time you do enough to be sure that no one is around to hear you, it would have been easier to just drive to the local range. Where there is probably a bench to shoot off and frames to put targets on. And no concerns about other people in the area when you are trying to concentrate on putting crosshairs in the 10 ring.
When you consider the inconvenience and the hassle of setting up targets in the DOC administered crown land, the consideration of getting caught becomes pretty much moot.

If it was illegal why wouldn’t it be listed on the permit, next to the other activities that are not allowed? One could argue that part of hunting is checking your rifle is shooting correctly.

Originally Posted by HNTMAD

For ease of all of us and not wanting to crash the permits system....can you please post the portion that states you are NOT allowed to sight in on DoC land.

That would be helpful

Sent from my SM-S911B using Tapatalk

we are ALL going around in circles with this point - just spent time studying all the relevant stuff on DOC site - it does not state anywhere on DOC permit that to sight in a rifle is illegal - but the permit only gives the legal right to hunt - sighting in is not mentioned -there is this statement
No firearm shall be discharged:
In the vicinity of huts, tracks, campsites, road-ends or other public places
thats clear enough even though public place could be all of the area -the permit gives the right to shoot animals on it - my reading of this is these would be specific places with high public use - but we are still not ahead - Woods223 is right a legal opinion is need to clarify this [U]- but do you really want to open a can of[/U] worms you may not want the awnser to - as an ex Ranger with over 30 years in the field if I had come across a hunter with a target up and putting a few check shots thru his rifle provided they past the common sense safety test I would have wished them well and driven of - I would not have considered it illegal if they had a permit - clearly permission is required - is a permit enough - I still have some good knowledgeable mates in DOC may ask a few very quietly what they think - but I also know the best would be a DOC Solicitor

Originally Posted by Barry the hunter

we are ALL going around in circles with this point - just spent time studying all the relevant stuff on DOC site - it does not state anywhere on DOC permit that to sight in a rifle is illegal - but the permit only gives the legal right to hunt - sighting in is not mentioned -there is this statement
No firearm shall be discharged:
In the vicinity of huts, tracks, campsites, road-ends or other public places
thats clear enough even though public place could be all of the area -the permit gives the right to shoot animals on it - my reading of this is these would be specific places with high public use - but we are still not ahead - Woods223 is right a legal opinion is need to clarify this [U]- but do you really want to open a can of[/U] worms you may not want the awnser to - as an ex Ranger with over 30 years in the field if I had come across a hunter with a target up and putting a few check shots thru his rifle provided they past the common sense safety test I would have wished them well and driven of - I would not have considered it illegal if they had a permit - clearly permission is required - is a permit enough - I still have some good knowledgeable mates in DOC may ask a few very quietly what they think - but I also know the best would be a DOC Solicitor

There are shades of grey in the activity too, 1-2 shots to double check zero after rifle takes a knock in the middle of a five day trip is on a different part of the spectrum to load development and testing. Both of which can be judged against clause 5 of the permit.