Thread: FWF Ban for Non Attendance

Originally Posted by Husky1600

Has the FWF actually said that if you turn up for the briefing, then all is good, you wont/cant be banned? Nobody has been able to give me the answer. Or.....if you turn up to the briefing but then dont actually go hunting, can you be banned? Again. I dont know and nobody has yet to give a definitive answer. If you can be banned for not actually going hunting on your block, then theres a whole lot of other hunters that should be banned for turning up on the block and sitting in their tents and not going hunting, honestly where do we draw the line.

Yes I do know him personally, have hunted with him a couple of times, had the occasional beer with him over the years. And when my best mate of 38 years tells me he's a good bastard and stands by him, then I take his word that he's a good bastard. This young fella is more than capable of looking after himself when the shit goes down.

Hasn't been said but it doesn't sound like he showed up more that he called up to explain not showing up.
I think mentioning that money is a significant factor in why they didn't go and I understand its expensive.

Originally Posted by whanahuia

I think one piece of relevant info is the other party sharing the block has come forward and said they went in, and weather wasn't great, but still plenty of hunting and not dangerous.
it came across to me as if the cost of the trip may have been a deciding factor too.
FWF is in a no win situation here, they have rules for a reason and it get really hard to let those go on a case by case basis as it will look like favouritism.
As a north island hunter, if I commit to a trip such as this, I make back up plans. If the weather really is bad, go along and forfeit your obligations, then if you have to pull the pin for safety, head for a Tahr or chamois etc where its safer.
In the end if they pulled for safety, they made right decision and a 4 year ban is just part of the acceptance of that.

I completely agree the call maybe not given the due diligence it should have considering the demand and significance of Fiordland to NZ Hunters

Originally Posted by PerazziSC3

Nothing to debate about, I broke a rule so just accepted it even though I did think it was slightly harsh considering it's one little bit of paper that I would have just made up what I wrote down. I had done nearly 40 days hunting in the blocks over the previous 5 ballots and only pulled the trigger once, was due a break anyway.

Fair enough sounds you had a bloody good run of things leading up to it.

Originally Posted by bigbear

For me i would have to commit coming down that's the time slot i had time off work, ferry booked etc and worry about weather when i got down there. From north island its basically to days travel each way.
I would have gone to the briefing.
Then for me if the weather was looking real bad and the pilot said stuff that or local advised that weather worse then normal (never been to wapiti country) and had to pull pin
To me i had made a commitment of hunting that block.
but also be prepared to wait out a few days for weather to clear i wouldn't be flying in at the end of my time slot for couple days hunting.


Also coming from north island you do need a back up plan

This is how I look at it. I've not applied before as leave got denied for the day after the ballots and would have had to leave early. Didn't feel right applying knowing I couldn't utilise the opportunity.

Originally Posted by Moa Hunter

I would doubt the extra six year year ban is actually enforceable

I doubt it too. Think it was just a spur of the moment type. Shit when a temper gets the better of you.

Originally Posted by crocodiledavid

I don't see why it would matter if he was being a dick on the phone or not. Its bad form to throw out an arbitrary 6 year ban based on his perception of how the phone call went. Sounds unprofessional based on the information we've been provided here. But as stated by many, we only have one side of the story here.

I think it matters as we are only human and you don't know what else was going on at the time in his personal life. I don't think the ban should stick and we all know we should be professional all the time but life happens. Do I think that he should be banned as potentially Roger was having a bad day. No way I thinking the 4 year bans more than shit enough absolutely. I also don't blame Roger for loosing his cool but I think they should remove the extra 6 years ban for sure.