Wild big-game hunting crying out to be tamed

New Zealand could really boom as a premier hunting destination and attract millions more into the economy, reports KIM WILLIAMS

New Zealand hunters would probably want to knock someone's block off if they handed over $30,000 to hunt overseas and ended up stalking a squirrel - let alone a possum.

But our pesky possums have unwittingly landed themselves a fan club among visiting overseas hunters.

They are paying anything from $30,000 to $300,000 a week to shoot larger game on New Zealand's 25 game estates - private properties where animals such as deer, elk, chamois and tahr are kept for recreational hunting.

James Guild, chairman of the Association of Game Estates, says many hunters who come to his Canterbury property have shot trophy animals all over the world, but nightshooting for possums and hares is still a real buzz for them.

"It's something we consider to be a bit of pest control and a bit of a freebie, and they rave about it."

But small game are incidental targets in an industry that makes its money from larger animals deemed equally noxious by the Department of Conservation.

More than 400 tourist hunters from as far away as Western Europe and the Middle East came here to hunt last year, contributing $15 million to the economy.

There are estimates that this unregulated industry could earn up to $300 million a year if backed up by industry-specific legislation.

Game estate owner Shane Quinn says tourist hunters are a sought-after species here.

"They're the type of tourists that the New Zealand Tourism Board is now after - low numbers, high-dollar, low-impact type tourists."

Jim Hunter, owner of the country's largest game estate, Glenroy Lodge, says local industries benefit from money spent by visiting hunters.

"These people travel first class on Air New Zealand, then they go downtown and spend a few grand and not blink an eye."

And it's not just the hunters who spend the money, he says.

"Their wives go downtown and buy black pearls and fur coats."

Rural communities also benefit, says Mr Guild. "The hunters bring valuable dollars into some of the most remote parts of New Zealand, and most of them avoid the cities."

New Zealand is a small player by international standards. Estate owners here have collectively invested about $30 million in their properties, compared with South Africa's $500 million. Game estates are also big business in North America and Europe.

Most estates provide full lodging, food, premium local wines, and trips to nearby tourist attractions.

They also provide at least one professional hunting guide, looks out for the animals and looks after the hunters, says Mr Guild.

"If the wife wants to go shopping, he'll provide that. If the client wants to sit up to play cards and get drunk, then he'll have to sit and go along with that, too.

"It's a client-customer relationship and they have to work very hard at it. It takes a lot of people skills." But the industry has more than its fair share of logistical problems to sort out before it can carve a more defined niche in our tourism landscape - and members would like the Government's help.

A big issue is the lack of industry regulation. The association is the industry's umbrella organisation, but membership is voluntary and dependent on meeting certain criteria, and there is no way to enforce these standards on outside operators.

The industry falls under the loose jurisdiction of the Ministries of Conservation, Agriculture and Tourism and is subject to at least four pieces of legislation, none of which cater adequately to game estate operation, estate-owners say.

The association recently commissioned Wellington legal firm Chen & Palmer to draft a bill establishing a framework for the industry's operation and requiring the registration of all game estates.

It is a private bill backed by National Party agriculture spokesman and Otago MP Gavan Herlihy, who says it could boost industry turnover to many times its current annual value.

"There are estimates that this could be a $300 million market if properly managed within the not-too-distant future," he says.

"As an industry it has been pitched at the real quality end of the tourism market. You're getting some very powerful people who are attracted to New Zealand by exposure through game estates."

The bill would also clear up existing legislative muddles by classifying game estate stock as "managed game."

Under current legislation the animals are categorised as both "wild" and "farmed" under different acts, which creates some big hassles, a chief one being the disposal of deer carcasses after Tb testing.

Game estate animals cannot be subjected to conventional TB testing methods because they are not used to being handled (and their antlers can inflict serious damage on any human brave enough to try).

The only way to accurately test the animals is to shoot them and perform an autopsy.

But game packing houses will not take the carcasses because game estate deer are classified as "farmed" deer under the Meat Act.

So the animals must be buried - sometimes at a loss of thousands of dollars to estate owners.

Last year's Animal Products Bill laid out the means to solve the problem, but regulations still need to be developed to put the clauses of the bill in place.

"Cowboy" operators are another problem for the industry. At the moment, anyone can set apart a gully or paddock out the back of a farm, turn an animal loose and falsely - but legally - call it a game estate - a practice Mr Guild says reflects badly on New Zealand.

"The smart client may figure out that he's been flannelled, and if he does he's going to go back and say all New Zealanders are a bunch of cowboys and you'll all get ripped off over there."

Some estate owners also encounter problems with DoC's feral range policy, whereby certain animals are allowed only in certain areas.

Estate owners want to stock as many animal species as possible to appeal to clients, but are sometimes prevented from doing so if they happen to operate outside the feral range of a particular species.

Feral ranges are part of a long and expensive history of feral deer control by DoC and its predecessors.

Last year, the department spent over $1 million to control feral deer in areas that were supposed to be deer-free, including Northland and Taranaki.

DoC prosecuted a game estate owner last year for having sika deer on his property 25km outside the existing sika feral range.

Although that range was last reviewed in 1986 and feral sika had been seen recently outside its boundary, the court found against the operator. As a result, he had to get rid of his sikas, which are usually offered to hunters at $3500 each.

Then there is the ethical issue of shooting animals for sport, let alone in an enclosed space - no matter how large the area.

"The animals are confined. They are big places, but they are still enclosed whichever way you look at it," says SPCA chief executive Peter Blomkamp.

But estate owners say the animals have a fair chance of evading hunters, and guides do not let them shoot the animal if a clean kill is doubtful.

Government regulation of game estates would mean more rules and compliance costs. Yet estate owners say it is the only option if the industry is to grow at a stable rate.

"If we develop it properly we could be the favoured destination where anybody who wanted to shoot a red deer would go to New Zealand as a first choice," Mr Guild says.

"We find one of the biggest problems we have when talking to politicians is they just don't understand who we are and what we're about."