Mac for anti recreation terrorismQuote:
Originally Posted by ebf
Printable View
Mac for anti recreation terrorismQuote:
Originally Posted by ebf
All you can ask for is a fair ballot (Thanks Tommy, was starting to wonder about WFMC)
A ballot should be drawn in public under police supervision
First time I've gone along and participated. It's a very representative slice actually. Just under 1000 entries, just over 200 block days available. Now, you can enter multiple times but you can only win one day. So anyone who gets drawn more than once gets passed over for the 'repeats'. There were 12 people in as having multiple entries (could be 2, or could be a dozen), 8 got drawn, and 3 got drawn twice or more (these got put aside and a fresh ballot drawn). This married up very nicely with a 1 in 4 or 5 chance of being selected. It works well.Quote:
Originally Posted by sako75
Maybe this ballot could do with a bit more transparency, there should be no reason why they wouldn't agree with that unless it really is rigged or partially rigged. What would be the best organisation to approach the current guys and ask to watch/participate?
I think if it is done fairly and honestly then no need to monitor it.
When the odd sign of favoritism starts to show then is the time to do something about it.
Maybe all ballots should be drawn at a local NZDA meeting with members present as the scrutineers before the need arises. I recall the WFMC ballot use to be drawn at the Auckland clubroom in Pt. Chev
You can't bow hunt in Woodhill, the ballot draw there is straight up, my good mate is heavily involved on the committee & his name hasn't been drawn for about 5 years! A couple of banned people tried entering again this year & they were excluded.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommy
We alternate every year between Auckland and North Auckland Deerstalkers clubrooms and invite their respective members to come along and help with the draw. Anyone is free to come and watch/help.Quote:
Originally Posted by sako75
Transparency in ballots is essential as it not only allows those who apply to see the process, but it also provides the opportunity for new ideas to be floated.
Allgood
WFMC
Some really good ideas so far.
Having the draws supervised.
Having a stand down period if successful etc.
I have won ballots on blocks I never applied for and found that strange.
I just want to see it fair for everyone. Even overseas hunters.
I am wanting to address the current format with DOC but pretty sure if I do it alone my issues will be filed in the rubbish bin.
I have never petitioned or tried to change anything political and have no idea how to be taken seriously when I try.
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
It's interesting that the Haast & Wanaka ballots, both run by DOC are run completely differently, I wonder why that is??
With Wanaka you have to put all party member names/FAL down on the application form so that reduces the amount of entries people can put in & pay a success fee.
Haast roar ballot is open slather, any individual can put an entry in, nothing to stop you & your mates putting entries in under your cats & dogs names.... DOC Haast of course get $20 per entry so the more the merrier form there point of view I'm guessing?
I got the strong impression that the guys who came into our block after us get it 3rd period pretty regularly.....
Foreign hunters shouldn't be allowed to entry or be heavily restricted on how many are available to them.
Different conservanciesQuote:
Originally Posted by outdoorlad
Yep, still isQuote:
Originally Posted by sako75
Rigged? I'm not sure thats the word to use or not maybe more like system cheats? at the expense of kiwi hunters.
The problem with the tahr ballot is the system is very easily cheated same with Wanaka and Haast. You can enter without providing your party details so everyone thats in your party can put in for there own ballot with either your mums and dads names your cats whatever, as the hunters joining you knowing full well they wont go hunting. (not saying I do this but i know many that do exactly the above) Then your all your party members enter there own ballot application doing the same.
Then when all your party all gets there DOC letter in the mail guys simply pick the best blocks and ditch mum and dad and bring your real hunting mates (the ones that had entered there own ballot) The problem is obvious many genuine "one" entry hunters miss out and wonder why. Combine this with a heap overseas hunters the odds have severely diminished. Its sad but true, many hunters apply 3,4,5,6 even more ballots under names of mates or bow hunters that never intended hunting that particular ballot but are happy to hand over a block to there mate should they be successful. The problem is these guys will get maybe 2,3,4 blocks use the best one and keep the rest meaning many blocks sit empty throughout the best time.
To me the problem is the system... If every hunter had to have a full list of hunters joining them with the firearms licence number as well (same as the Wapiti ballot) and the on the application your name can only show up on one ballot form half the problem is sorted.
The next issue is kiwi tax paying hunters missing out to overseas hunters while i think its great that we have so many overseas hunters coming to this country every year i also believe they have it to easy. Guys entering the tahr ballot come once, like mentioned above with a NZ guide then turn up the following year with there mates. While i have no problem with overseas hunters hunting in NZ surely some loyalty towards kiwi hunters that have individually paid thousands and thousands towards funding in tax levys that goes into running this country and DOC should have first crack at hunting our own country.
Theres articles in Aussie and American hunting magazine on how to enter our ballots and how amazing the hunting is and its free. This is purely at the expense of genuine kiwi hunters they are the ones that miss out on hunting opportunities in there own back yard. I recently saw an Aussie hunting TV show running tahr ballot entry education nights teaching them how to enter and what blocks are best and charging them for it. Im not sure what the solution is for this but id like to see maybe some blocks set aside for overseas hunters and maybe the application fee $100 per person then if successful and extra charge of $100 or more with all money going back to running the system/program.
For me personally id be happy to pay extra in application fee if i knew it was a 100% fair system It just really frustrates me that the only person losing is your run of the mill hard working kiwi hunter who gets 10 days off a year to hunt and he's forced to miss out to an overseas hunter here for 7 days that then fly's home with his trophy.
And the biggest issue of all is DOC dont care anyway they just want animals dead...
just my 2cents :)
Happy and safe hunting.
Awesome post Topsy😆
FFS! Running a course on how to enter the ballot???
What a friggin Joke!!
That is bloody shocking.
Jaysus give em an inch and they take a mile. This bullshit has to be stopped..
I am going to use some contacts to find out how to go about addressing this.
Doc are an embarrassment.
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
well don't do it by yourself, surely there is someone on here or in the other pubs who could write a petition and get it submitted to the forum's and then we all get to sign. I'm sure this touch's the heart of a lot of our members.
It should touch every NZ hunter GA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gapped axe
A cobber of mine runs the mountain radios on the coast.
He has had 6 calls from Oz this week booking radios.
I really need some ideas how to fix it before we can approach anyone.
If we can get the overseas applicants squashed or limited that will be a big start.
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
What about a special IWI ballot?
just like local body and national body elections?
Give us a special chance eh.
That would-be racist.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild game havester
How does the ballot work? For instance is it open and above board? ie there is the disputes tribunal rather than full court. I just wonder if you can challenge the system via that? costs about $35 I think. You would have to present some real evidence of vote rigging to back up your claim however but if you can show a reasonable case over say 5 years you might get some leverage? dunno you can but ask.
Whether these ballots are rigged/ unfair or whatever, I don't know as I have zero experience on them.
However, I firmly believe that trying to exclude overseas visitors would be like farting against thunder, as tourism dollars are deemed far too valuable to put at risk.
It would also smack of racism in a lot of people's eyes.
Hunters coming here from overseas are hunting for free bar maybe food and helicopter costs.
They are getting this free because you pay for it.
Every other country must be racist as well because we have to pay thru the ass to hunt there.
I also get sick of seeing parties of overseas hunters with a dozen 11" bull thar heads coming out of their blocks thinking they are successful.
You have to see the mess left behind from some of these parties as well.
Making it user pays as some other countries do is fine. But excluding overseas visitors as suggested by some would be playing into the do gooders hands.
Pengy they flood the ballot with no consideration.
I'm not saying exclude them but limit them as they do overseas and charge more like fish and game has finally done for a non resident licence.
At the moment we as NZers are missing out on our own back yard because of the ballot flooding.
That is not right no matter how you look at it. They don't pay if they need rescue. They don't pay ACC.
Pay for a guide who has concessions and public liability.
That money helps the economy and employment better than just the free ride they get now.
I am not saying that I agree with the way things are R93, as I don't have experience on the ballots.
Maybe we we should be looking at how NZ is marketed to overseas visitors as a whole, not just hunters.
The powers that be tell the rest of the world how Wonderfull and freely available our great backyard is, so they come here expecting a free ride.
They get a big surprise to learn that it is going to cost them to use the great walks and huts I can tell you.
So maybe the marketing needs tweeking a bit.
I agree with making some insurance mandatory for visitors who are going to possibly need a chopper ride etc. But then this country doesn't even require road users to have insurance, so I don't think we will be seeing that one get off the ground any time soon.
Ban overseas people from the ballot blocks, they have plenty of other options to go hunt tahr, leave our wilderness areas for us, it's our back yard, we deserve to be able to use it
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Just limit them would be fine to say 20% blocks for overseas. Let's be honest tahr are dumb goats ballots only let you land a chopper in them. Just walk in amd go nuts when ever we like
All party members names to be listed amd show up. But it's not that policed you could turn up amd fly into any block almost after if no one got dropped in them.
Good thread topic, interesting read.Quote:
Originally Posted by R93
Petition what exactly?
The starting point is to establish what you want changed without any speculation, so asking for the protocols/ policy involved in the ballots is the initial move.
Then you need to ask specific questions such as the total numbers each year applying (10 years worth??) and the frequency that individuals are successful and perhaps the block allocations, and nationality. (privacy issues will be cited to deny actual lists/ names)
From there you may derive the information you require to come back to the hunting public seeking a cause for change (survey) An example statement and question might be- person A has won a block 5 out of 7 years while person B has not been successful in 12 years-
-Do you think this a fair distribution of the resource?
-Would you support a stand down period of 3 years after a successful ballot?
Another example might be- Of 62 block allocations 47 went to parties which contained people who did not contribute to the management of our public resource by way of tax.
-Are you happy international hunters remove opportunities from resident hunters?
-Would you support an international hunter ballot fee of 10 times that of a resident?
As far as ballot probity you might like to offer vulnerabilities in current policy and offer suggested changes to enhance the chance of equal distribution of opportunity. Once policy is obtained a group think tank like this is advantageous in identifying areas of exploitation.
Research. Give examples of fairer systems in place e.g. some US states do not allow non (state) resident hunters as they do not contribute to state taxes (let alone international hunters). How are block distributed elsewhere?
Collation of facts, public perception and suggestions may then be used to push for change (if that is the leaning). Remember there isn't a big base that would oppose a quest for the most integral fair system possible so resistance shouldn't be strong but government organisations often feel duty to oppose and draw out information gathering exercises or public led change. Be patient and smile.
***Note my example questions are based on information read on this thread and are not fact.
Good post Tim Allen.
Splittin hairs slightly here, but the question of nationality could be a tad tricky to police. I.E. I myself am a UK citizen with a uk passport, I could face exclusion on that basis, despite having resided in NZ for ten years as a house owner and taxpayer.
Semantics I know, but thought it worth a mention.
That would be a fair point of consideration for the think tank to structure into any new offering. Me personally I would make the rule 11 years of residency gives you residential consideration. Only a year to go Pengy :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Pengy
Ballot structure and transparency would be my start point- but I was just offering some constructive direction for those with the inclination to try and make improvements.
Don't worry Pengy I would happily take you Thar or Chamois hunting, even if you are an overstayer😆
Don't want to ruin your life mate .Quote:
Originally Posted by Pengy
But you have lived here for ten years ?
Sorry but you are a Kiwi.
A resident is a resident and is entitled if working and paying taxes or is the partner to a NZ citizen to hunt and enjoy our country.
A tourist should not be entitled to hunt or access our public land thru a ballot.
Let them pay for it thru a guide .
I think a few would disagree with that first paragraph mate :D
The point I guess I was making, is that the policing of such a policy would be tricky to say the least.
PS;I get reminded on a regular basis that it takes at least 50 years here before I even qualify as a Pomwi
I vote @R93 for Conservation Minister, why not start at the top.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pengy
At least we can understand you, some I have met (poms) speak something but it sure isn't English
I would second it but think he may have a bias toward venison recovery, which is preferable to 1080 and search and destroy but....Quote:
Originally Posted by Blaser
A valid, and New Zealand issued firearms licence would be simple proof of residency to some extent for the purposes of ballot applications.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pengy
Wouldn't help a bow hunters out much though.
You'd assume nearly every NZ hunting resident would hold a valid drivers licence too, no? In regard to vetting residency status.
Ha Ha......I wouldn't last a week!Quote:
Originally Posted by Blaser
After banning aerial 1080, helihunting during the Ballot period, closed off the Whakatipu whitetail area for a few years, reintroduced a possum bounty.
Then limiting Waro operators I would probably be shot😆
Alright I will second it depending on the conditions imposed on WARO and how you intend to enforce them? :D:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by R93
I have a euro driving license as well as a Kiwi one, but have not paid taxes in uk in over ten years. I think I am right in saying that even if one has residency in NZ, it doesn't always follow that taxes are being paid in NZ.
There would be plenty of kiwi passport holders out there who haven't paid taxes in nz for years. Would they still qualify to go into the ballot as per "resident" ?
Nah., too hard to police it in my humble opinion.
I am sure there is a fairer way around the issue (I don't know what it is though), without having to get politicians and govt depts. involved too much.
The kiwi passport/driver licence/firearms licence would be close enough IMHO, not trying to stop illegal arms/child slavery here just give Kiwis first go at their own back yard.
Yes, but to gain a firearms licence you must have had to prove that you physically resided here within the previous 10 years, which is better than nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pengy
I was referring to a Kiwi drivers licence before for the same reason.
In your case, you might also need to provide current telephone and power accounts.:D
Easy. Nz FAL holders or use an IRD number to be allowed in the ballot.
It is only 8 weeks that Helicopters are allowed to access most of the blocks. Overseas hunters can have the rest of the year to go in other areas. Or any unclaimed ballots or cancelations can be filled by overseas hunters that have a seperate ballot amongst themselves😆