Thread: Game Animal Council (GAC) to be scrapped by Conservation Minister?

Originally Posted by Moa Hunter

Were our game animals introduced with the intention … that anyone should be able to hunt. No they weren't. That might be a nice 'feel good' thought however critically examining the evidence of history will show a different story. In fact licences were expensive and only the Gentry hunted in the prized areas. If the intention had been to allow the common man to hunt with the same opportunity then the licences would have been balloted and at a low cost. Tourist hunting by the English Gentry was very popular here and many of the top trophies shot were taken by Lords and Majors. In large part because of the Wars 1 & 2 Game animal populations got out of control and protection was lifted and licencing taken away from acclimatization societies. But now that the animals are under control there is no reason that they should not be protected and hunting licenced.
We have free hunting for the common person now on public land but that hunting is under the perpetual threat of poisoning, WARO and the likes, so it is perhaps not as much 'our right' as we might think it is. The truth is we are tolerated and treated as a fringe group
On the one hand I hate the idea of paying for a licence but on the other I know that there is only one way to unite and give a voice to big game hunters.

I disagree. Thats ok we can disagree.
Most "real" hunters I know are older than me, I know in that group not one of them would pay a license fee and they would hunt without said license to make a point.
I think the firearms owning/hunting population is generally older but have no stats on hand to back that up, feel free to backhand me with stats to the contrary.
I personally would not be happy with paying a hunting license fee and would resist it by any means I could but I value my FAL perhaps more than my older hunting mates so if forced to then I would comply up untill the point I could not afford it then I would become a criminal.