Game council wants role in national parks
The council yesterday released its submission to the select committee on the Game Animal Council (herds of special interest) Amendment Bill which closed last Thursday.
The Bill, if passed, would allow the minister for hunting and fishing to establish herds of special interest (Hosi) in a national park and therefore exempt the herd from extermination or eradication requirements under conservation legislation.
The council was fully supportive of the Bill.
It said in its submission to achieve effective and inclusive conservation, hunting needs to be integrated into "our conservation narratives".
"By engaging hunters as partners in conservation, we not only harness their expertise but also embody a more comprehensive approach to environmental stewardship.
"Hunters play a crucial role in controlling game animal populations, harvesting more than 350,000 big game animals annually (including deer), which exceeds government pest control efforts."
The council said hunters and conservationists were often seen as opposites, but they shared common aspirations for protecting nature — driven by different motivations, but united in purpose.
Current conservation law and policy did not recognise these different motivations or values that people held for conservation land.
The Hosi mechanism enabled game animal management while protecting biodiversity on public conservation lands. It aimed to support hunting while preserving conservation values, the council said.
Hosi were designed to focus on herds highly valued by hunters.
So far two applications had been made — for sika deer in the Kaimanawa and Kaweka Forest Parks and wapiti deer in Fiordland National Park.
Game animals were only currently referenced in terms of extermination.
Having a Hosi in a national park was a new way of thinking about conservation.
The council said recreational hunting supported about 2500 jobs and the guided hunting sector directly employed more than 530 people and generated more than $100 million in annual foreign sales.
"There is a growing interest in sustainable, wild-harvested meat. Using taxpayer money to remove a reliable source of high-quality protein undermines public benefit," it said.
"The management of the quality and quantity of game animals harvested by hunters has the potential to offer more effective control than an expansion of government control efforts."
The council in its submission said hunters were only permitted to reduce or exterminate the very animals hunters sought to access.
The submission also said game animals did not stay within mapped boundaries.
Without physical barriers, game animals would cross between land ownership boundaries.
Limiting Hosi management to one land ownership would lead to inconsistent and inefficient management.
The council wanted to adopt a more unified approach that spanned all land ownership types and it needed more power to assist the minister in establishing and managing a Hosi.
A Parliament spokesman said it was unable to say how many submissions were made to the Bill. The number would be released by the Environment Committee which would hear submissions. — APL
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
15 minutes ago
- Scoop
Greenpeace Turns On NZ First Over Its Support For Corporate Land Grab Bill
During today's public submission hearings on the ACT Party's Overseas Investment Amendment Bill, Greenpeace took direct aim at NZ First, highlighting the hypocrisy of NZ First's support for the Bill at first reading - despite its long-standing opposition to foreign ownership. The party's sole representative was notably absent for most of the hearing. Greenpeace accused the party of abandoning its values and backing a law that would see some of the country's most ecologically sensitive land sold to multinational corporations, even if those corporations have a criminal history and have broken environmental laws in other jurisdictions. "If NZ First does bend the knee to another of ACT's ideological policies then so be it," said Toop. "The voters' cards will fall as they may, and they may very well fall under 5%, but that will be the bed that NZ First makes for itself by signing up to a Bill that would see New Zealand being sold off to the highest bidding foreign corporation." The organisation opposed the bill on several grounds including that it removes the requirement that the Government check whether a foreign buyer of sensitive land has committed serious crimes abroad, such as breaking environmental or labour laws, or evading paying taxes. Sensitive land is outlined in Schedule 1 of the Bill and includes the conservation estate, offshore islands, lake beds, the marine and coastal zone, wāhi tapu and other culturally significant sites, and land adjoining these areas. "The Bill makes it harder for the government to decline the sale of lake beds, offshore islands and the conservation estate to multinational corporate cowboys," says Toop. "If this Bill is enacted the Government will no longer be able to impose the bare minimum of environmental conditions on the sale, things like biodiversity protection, heritage preservation, and allowing ongoing public access to public lands." The organisation also condemned the move to scrap the special tests for foreign forestry investment, pointing out that much of the devastation caused by the forestry slash and erosion, such as during Cyclone Gabrielle, is caused by foreign-owned forestry companies. Toop pointed out that Global Forest Partners, the 8th largest landowner in New Zealand in 2019 was registered in the Cayman Islands and asked whether the committee thought the forest industry had paid their fair share to rebuild bridges and roads destroyed by their industry. She suggested they hadn't and "were instead metaphorically - or literally - bathing in the Cayman Islands' warm, tax-free waters while New Zealand taxpayers footed the clean-up bill." "Greenpeace believes that all corporations, whether New Zealand owned or overseas owned, should be regulated to ensure that they don't harm the environment, but the Overseas Investment Act currently provides an additional tool that enables the Government to regulate overseas corporations, in particular, to achieve better environmental and community outcomes." "It is simply not reasonable to pass an amendment bill that says offshore forestry investments - which have already brought such demonstrable harm to the country - will receive less scrutiny and have fewer conditions imposed on them," Toop said. In a pointed moment during the hearing, Toop held up a placard reading NO, referencing Winston Peters' infamous "NO" placard and stated: "If the NZ First member of the committee had shown up he might recall that sign. Or perhaps it's been forgotten - as NZ First does seem to have forgotten a few things lately, like what it is they purportedly stand for." "This ACT party bill literally removes the benefit to New Zealand test so that it is easier to sell off New Zealand to multinational corporations. You'll have to forgive me for failing to see how that, by any stretch of the imagination, puts NZ First." Toop also criticised the Government's rushed consultation process - with the Government only allowing five hours of oral submissions on the Bill, all via Zoom. "It is undemocratic, but it's not surprising - especially from a Government who recently engaged in voter suppression. Add to that the new FBI office in our capital city, and you'd be forgiven for thinking you hadn't woken up in Aotearoa - you'd woken up in Trump's America." "Is it really too much to ask that this Government start governing for New Zealanders, not governing in service of foreign corporations and their offshore shareholders?"
Otago Daily Times
11 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Ex-minister hits out at pine carbon farming
A tree industry expert and former minister of forestry has condemned "lock and leave" carbon farming, but says you still can not tell farmers what to do with their land. Former Labour minister Stuart Nash said in his time with the portfolio he had a dream for how the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) would benefit the country. "With the ETS, for the first time ever there's been an economic incentive to plant up land that should have never been cleared in the first place," he said. But forestry conversions, since the incentive was introduced, where dense pines were planted with no plan to harvest the mature trees, were not good, he said. "You will end up with an ecological disaster in between 80 and 100 years," he said. He understood that some legislation was developing to help restrict the planting of pines, but said you still can not tell farmers what to do with their land and their money. "I don't know if that's the right route," he said. "Farmers get pretty p..... off ... because what it does mean is, their farm which may be worth, $10 million to a forester is now only worth $7m." The Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading Scheme-Forestry Conversions) Amendment Bill passed its first reading in June. It proposed restrictions to the quality and proportion of arable land that could be planted in trees. Mr Nash had a masters degree in forestry science and previously worked for construction, paper and forestry giants Carter Holt Harvey and Fletcher Challenge. His ideal for carbon farming was that pines would be planted low density, for no longer than 50 years, while at the same time seeding natives. Then after 50 years, the ministry would allow the grower to collect carbon credits of the native forest as the pines died off. In this ideal situation, carbon farmers would not be allowed to collect credits or money on pines past that 50-year cut-off. He said research by the sustainability charitable trust Pure Advantage showed that Mānuka could be a just as fast growing and carbon-absorbing alternative to pines. While he was the minister, he said the research needed more time to cook and the good thing about pines were that they were the most hardy. "It's the over-boiled Brussels sprouts of the trees," he said. "Not many people like it, not many [bugs and diseases] like it [either]." Coming from Napier, he had seen the devastation Cylone Gabrielle and Cyclone Hale had on the east coast of the North Island in 2023. This was where trees on farms would have come in handy, he said as roots made the ground more hardy, and would have prevented slips and other soft ground corrosion after the floods. A lot of New Zealand land should never had been cleared for farming and he said it was expensive to plant hilly, non-productive land, without incentive. He said despite seeing the benefit of forests and the ETS for the land, he by no means wanted to see highly productive farms and soil turned into carbon farms. "I'm really loathe to tell farmers what they should and shouldn't do," he said. "But I'm very happy to tell carbon farmers what they should do."
Scoop
17 hours ago
- Scoop
Have Your Say On The Public Service Amendment Bill
Press Release: Governance and Administration Committee The Governance and Administration Committee is seeking public submissions on the Public Service Amendment Bill. The Bill includes provisions relating to: the purpose and role of the public service responsibilities of public service chief executives performance review and conduct oversight functions of the Public Service Commissioner long-term planning and continuity requirements for public service agencies Tell the Governance and Administration Committee what you think Make a submission on the bill by midnight on 31 August 2025. For more details about the bill:
