Thread: Advocacy Alert: MPI's New Deer & Pig Programme

Originally Posted by Oscar

The law doesn't really apply to recreational activity though, just risks from work activity? Ie not natural features, hunting itself and so on

Exactly. The fault is farmers not understanding the Act and uncertainty about if they have actually met their obligations. Education is the key - maybe an air drop of leaflets by NZDA
In some instances denying access is an exercise in asserting power and control, but mostly it’s the fear of the consequences of the unknown.

I think it'd be pretty hard to find a farmer responsible for any hunting accident under HSWA2015

https://www.worksafe.govt.nz/laws-an...work-act-2015/



Is there any case law?

Originally Posted by SneedFeed

Didn't but it does now especially if there is some hazard on the farm that isn't 100% idiot proof. A lot of duck shooters lost access to their pond etc over it

That doesn't sound right at all, think that's a misinterpretation of what obligations actually are: https://www.worksafe.govt.nz/laws-an...work-act-2015/

HSWA only applies to recreational access when the land is affected by a [farmer’s] work activities or is part of a workplace.

This means a [farmer]whose land is being accessed for recreation is:

* only responsible for risks arising from the work or workplace, and is

*not responsible for the risks associated with the recreational activities.

PCBUs can usually meet their duties to recreational visitors in simple ways (eg using signs, emails, or verbal warnings to let people know about work hazards).

Originally Posted by SneedFeed

The Health and Safety Act changed a few years back and it terrified farmers, they were talking about it for months on rural radio stations for example.

Basically a farmer is more comfortable with a deer pinching some turnips vs a guest rolling a quad bike or tripping and breaking his leg etc.

So until the law loosens up on that they're not letting anyone in except commercial cullers with their own health and safety plans. Especially mature forestry owners where deer are basically beneficial (free law mowing of lanes).

Thats not really that case in my experience, most hunters just arnt prepared to shoot to waste to bring numbers under control.
Shooting one deer in a paddock does very little for control, shooting 10 now thats making a dent.
We seem quick to judge each other with words as Mickey aluded to earlier, 24 months ago I wrote a article about a trip into the ruahines were we shot to waste the huge numbers of animals in there, the general push back from others saying what a waste of meat etc i found hard ro fathom given the numbers ..now there choppers in there doing search and destroy.
I think the blame is sometimes on the farmer theres definitely some pricks about but mainly we have to stand up and take some blame for not walking further and hunting harder.
Would discounted helicopter access make a difference? No i dont think it would the same people would fly in and still only shoot one deer then drink beers.

Sent from my SM-S936B using Tapatalk

My take - arising from the lean years landowners of many land use types were happy to use the H&S thing as an excuse to keep hunters out wether it applied or not. Most would now understand that it's a "not applying" thing but old habits die hard. And if you can make your problem (tree or crop damage etc) someone else's with the possibility of getting someone else to pay for it ( the crown or local government, aka yours and my money) then so much the better . . . Is the way thier minds work.

Having a boundary with DOC etc was great when deer where worth something or hard to get . . . But look who's crying now it's a liability!

Originally Posted by Tentman

It's an interesting problem alright, and comes from some funny places. The experiences of those of us who grew up hunting in the "lean years" from the late 1970s to 2000 or so have given us some peculiar pespectives.
@Micky Duck seemed to be implying on the 223 thread that my shooting a red hind at this time of year was not acceptable because of fawning . . . But all culling is actually pretty repugnant with very unpleasant outcomes especially for young animals. I don't know any hunter who checks every wallaby pouch for a Joey, or who doesn't shoot nanny goats in the mob because you can't tell whose kids are whose in a fleeing mob . . . .

I value game animals as much as anybody but we need to have the conversations (both hunter to hunter, and with the wider public) about a new appoach to reconciling "management" with "hunting".

When I was younger, I was as unthinking as is average. But Ido tend to put quite some thought into my sport/culture/what drives me, and part of that I can honestly say was thinking about just such things as I got older. So My resolve because I can, is to check every possum pouch when Im shooting for fur, and while I dont stop shooting nannies with kids, I do ensure as far as possible that the kids get killed as well.
And I think under current circumstances that thats a fair option. I know it's harder with deer, but in a month or so when the fawns are running with mum, you can choose to shoot both as an acceptable option. And shoot mum first. The fawn won't go anywhere. Of course when you can't see a fawn with mum, mistakes will happen. My brother came home with a fawn a week or two back because he did that.

Originally Posted by gimp

I think it'd be pretty hard to find a farmer responsible for any hunting accident under HSWA2015

https://www.worksafe.govt.nz/laws-an...work-act-2015/



Is there any case law?

I doubt it.

And as a farmer, here's how I handle it, very simply. If there is a work activity or scenario thats potentially dangerous too farm visitors, I dont let people on while that activity is in progress. If theres a situation where visitors could potentially endanger staff, I dont let them on.

Simple examples are opening of duck shooting, staff are kept away from shooting areas. Staff working in areas where hunting is likely, No hunting in those areas during work hours.

Originally Posted by Tentman

My take - arising from the lean years landowners of many land use types were happy to use the H&S thing as an excuse to keep hunters out wether it applied or not. Most would now understand that it's a "not applying" thing but old habits die hard. And if you can make your problem (tree or crop damage etc) someone else's with the possibility of getting someone else to pay for it ( the crown or local government, aka yours and my money) then so much the better . . . Is the way thier minds work.

Having a boundary with DOC etc was great when deer where worth something or hard to get . . . But look who's crying now it's a liability!

Thats my take largely as well.

Originally Posted by Tentman

My take - arising from the lean years landowners of many land use types were happy to use the H&S thing as an excuse to keep hunters out wether it applied or not. Most would now understand that it's a "not applying" thing but old habits die hard. And if you can make your problem (tree or crop damage etc) someone else's with the possibility of getting someone else to pay for it ( the crown or local government, aka yours and my money) then so much the better . . . Is the way thier minds work.

Having a boundary with DOC etc was great when deer where worth something or hard to get . . . But look who's crying now it's a liability!

Thats about as far from the truth as possible I can assure you of that.
You'd wouldn't believe the amount of money farmers spend on pest control so I wont bore you on details.
Having a boundary with doc is no picnic, we recently fenced all ours its a big area doc contribution $0.
Possum control along the entire bush egde doc, council contribution $0....I should add we do get slightly discounted price on poison but bugger all.
Attitudes like this do way more damage than misunderstanding of h&s on access.

Sent from my SM-S936B using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by BRADS

Thats about as far from the truth as possible I can assure you of that.
You'd wouldn't believe the amount of money farmers spend on pest control so I wont bore you on details.
Having a boundary with doc is no picnic, we recently fenced all ours its a big area doc contribution $0.
Possum control along the entire bush egde doc, council contribution $0....I should add we do get slightly discounted price on poison but bugger all.
Attitudes like this do way more damage than misunderstanding of h&s on access.

Sent from my SM-S936B using Tapatalk

See what I mean about the differences of opinion.

Originally Posted by BRADS

Thats about as far from the truth as possible I can assure you of that.
You'd wouldn't believe the amount of money farmers spend on pest control so I wont bore you on details.
Having a boundary with doc is no picnic, we recently fenced all ours its a big area doc contribution $0.
Possum control along the entire bush egde doc, council contribution $0....I should add we do get slightly discounted price on poison but bugger all.
Attitudes like this do way more damage than misunderstanding of h&s on access.

Sent from my SM-S936B using Tapatalk

Amount of money some farmers spend on pest control. Certainly not all and depending on what part of the country you are in, many spend nothing.

I have done pest control full time professionally for over 20 years and have worked on hundreds if not into the thousands of properties.
For many years more properties that I worked on would have said no to shooting a deer or taking the kids to shoot a deer than would allow it, even though I often knew them really well. Some of those areas now have extremely high deer numbers.
There are plenty of properties that I have associated with since I was a kid that the deer numbers have not seemed to have increased over the years at all. All those land owners let on virtually anyone and they now are in a better position because of it.
Obviously bounding PCL, forestry or a property that doesn't let people hunt on it, makes things a lot harder.

I have partaken in quite a bit of deer management over the last couple of years and it is steadily increasing. Still a few things that farmers need to do to help themselves though. Firstly, stop using brodifacoum and encourage your neighbors to do the same. A 2km buffer for 3 years means those deer that the landowner would have been paid for now become deer that cost them. Secondly, if you want to potentially get paid for them don't put things in the too hard basket, such as poison declaration forms etc. Thirdly, it isn't actually that expensive. Come May after the roar when the nights are long and all of the animals are hitting the good feed you can seriously put the hurt on them. $3 to $6k is nothing if you sit down and work how much dry matter you are losing, especially if they are hooking into crops. Not only that, removing 100 deer for example, equates to a fair few stock units.

Food for thought.

Originally Posted by BRADS

Thats about as far from the truth as possible I can assure you of that.
You'd wouldn't believe the amount of money farmers spend on pest control so I wont bore you on details.
Having a boundary with doc is no picnic, we recently fenced all ours its a big area doc contribution $0.
Possum control along the entire bush egde doc, council contribution $0....I should add we do get slightly discounted price on poison but bugger all.
Attitudes like this do way more damage than misunderstanding of h&s on access.

Sent from my SM-S936B using Tapatalk

Why Didn't DOC contribute? I could be wrong but under the fencing act they are responsible for half and certainly when Ive dealt with them they have accepted that with one proviso it might not be immediate it might be in the next budget year if they have already allocated their fencing budget for the year.

Originally Posted by TLB

Amount of money some farmers spend on pest control. Certainly not all and depending on what part of the country you are in, many spend nothing.

I have done pest control full time professionally for over 20 years and have worked on hundreds if not into the thousands of properties.
For many years more properties that I worked on would have said no to shooting a deer or taking the kids to shoot a deer than would allow it, even though I often knew them really well. Some of those areas now have extremely high deer numbers.
There are plenty of properties that I have associated with since I was a kid that the deer numbers have not seemed to have increased over the years at all. All those land owners let on virtually anyone and they now are in a better position because of it.
Obviously bounding PCL, forestry or a property that doesn't let people hunt on it, makes things a lot harder.

I have partaken in quite a bit of deer management over the last couple of years and it is steadily increasing. Still a few things that farmers need to do to help themselves though. Firstly, stop using brodifacoum and encourage your neighbors to do the same. A 2km buffer for 3 years means those deer that the landowner would have been paid for now become deer that cost them. Secondly, if you want to potentially get paid for them don't put things in the too hard basket, such as poison declaration forms etc. Thirdly, it isn't actually that expensive. Come May after the roar when the nights are long and all of the animals are hitting the good feed you can seriously put the hurt on them. $3 to $6k is nothing if you sit down and work how much dry matter you are losing, especially if they are hooking into crops. Not only that, removing 100 deer for example, equates to a fair few stock units.

Food for thought.

Yeah I couldn't agree more
Different councils Different deals
Just like hunters Some farmers are the worst types of humans and some just spend there life's leaving the land way better than when they brought it for future generations.


Sent from my SM-S936B using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by whanahuia

Why Didn't DOC contribute? I could be wrong but under the fencing act they are responsible for half and certainly when Ive dealt with them they have accepted that with one proviso it might not be immediate it might be in the next budget year if they have already allocated their fencing budget for the year.

Come down to no money at the end, hollow promises of this and that been going on for years.
Fighting over if its a hawkes bay issue or manawatu issue......

Sent from my SM-S936B using Tapatalk

havent read all the comments. can imagine whos saying what. for what its worth. i work on a farm. pest control is part of my role. have not as yet been able to have a mate accompany me (i be guide rangi) to shoot anything...goat, deer, pig, rabbit etc.Dunno if its protecting the patch(aka spot) or H & S....