Game Animal Council - A squandered opportunity?
The Game Animal Council (GAC) has been in the news lately, our current minister of conservation Eugenie Sage recently announced that she is putting the GAC under review and given that she was very outspoken opposing the creation of the council in the first place, so it is not surprising at all that she has put it under review.
I strongly suggest watching these two videos (the 3rd reading of the bill in the house of parliament back in 2013). They set the tone from both sides and provide a decent context of what GAC was originally supposed to be, the concerns of the opposition and some context to where we find ourselves now.
Peter Dunne - WATCH HERE
Eugenie Sage - WATCH HERE
Peter Dunne delivers what we all hoped GAC would be. GAC is what hunters asked for and its what hunters/hunting in NZ needs, this is (was) a great opportunity to initiate some real management around specific game animal herds in New Zealand and a chance to work in partnership with conservation efforts where all parties would benefit. Essentially replicating the Fiordland Wapiti Foundation model.
Eugenie Sage, it all fairness, raises some valid points, especially in hindsight considering the GAC performance in the last 5 years and what they have spent their time and money on. She also raises some horrible points and indicates some really concerning ideas around eradication and a hard line on the term "pest".
This is a vast and complicated issue and the future of the GAC seems to be hanging in the balance with Eugenie Sage now in the position 5 years later to influence the long-term future of the council.
My main issue is that GAC is supposed to represent the voice of recreational hunters in New Zealand, it was after all that "voice" that allowed it to exist in the first place. Yet when I speak to the average hunter in New Zealand they either don't know of its existence, can't tell what GAC do, or have some kind of inaccurate summation of GAC's function based on one or two poorly written news articles.
The GAC has failed in my opinion to communicate with the recreational sector it was created to represent. GAC has communicated to the professional and commercial hunting sectors, who have continually lobbied their own interests over the last 5 years, but as far as recreational hunters are concerned simply having a member of the NZDA on the council does not even come close to being enough consultation or communication with the bulk of the sector GAC was formed to represent.
I can't help but feel that as a hunter in New Zealand I have had a viable and potentially effective representation at a political level that could benefit all hunters, hunting, conservation and game animals. Yet it has sat dormant, out of sight and mind, doing its own thing since it was created. Now, after 5 years, we're staring down the barrel of the real possibility of it been taken away. Once it's gone we may never get another opportunity as the "failed" GAC will forever be used as the negative precedence of "why it won't work" and hunters "had their chance".
Don't get me wrong, there are members of the GAC that have nothing but the right intentions, some of whom I know personally, that have worked hard towards what they believe to be positive results for NZ hunting and our game animals. My issue mainly lies in the lack of engagement and consultation with the largest group it was designed to represent, recreational hunters.
Further, I know that there are issues around long-term funding sources that have absorbed a lot of bandwidth of the GAC and continue to hamper and threaten the council's long-term viability. Also, in my opinion, GAC and its council members were handed a bit of a hospital pass when it came to setting up a viable funding source for the council and have had a real uphill battle on that front since.
All that said, the council is looking for nominations for 5 new members. I would love the opportunity to be involved and put my time where my mouth is!
I'm acutely aware that my opinions are based purely on what I can see from the outside looking in, I know for a fact that there are issues at play that I'm not privy too and that members of the council have to deal with in reality. It's very easy to stand up on my soap box and winge. So, in my opinion, if you're going to do that, you also need to be willing to step up to mark. I'm currently based in Canada so that will likely take me off the table as a viable candidate right now, but Kuran has also put his hand up so thats a huge win! The chances of being selected are likely slim but the demonstration of intention is improtant.
Thankyou
Matthew Gibson