Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire HUNTING FROM HELICOPTERS

What are your views on using helicopters for hunting wild animals on public estates?

Is it legal in the states for outfitters to use helicopters to drop off a hunter at a particular position and use the helicopter to muster animals towards the hunter and tire the animal out?

Aside from whether it's legal or not, I'm also interested to learn whether you find this activity ethical or not.

Unfortunately the New Zealand Department of Conservation is pushing to legalise HELI-HUNTING in NZ, which will allow for this sort of aerial assault to take place on public land for chamois, tahr, and red stags.

In your opinion do you think SCI will recognise animals shot by SCI members using "heli-hunting" methods?

I always appreciate your game management views

Regards
Jamie Carle
http://www.mountainman.co.nz/articles/article/36

The following heli-hunting related youtube links may disturb you...
But this unfortunately illustrates NZ's utter lack of game management principles; total disregard for other public land users; and complete disrespect of wild (albeit non-native) animals in New Zealand.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcDMX4tQTy4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vxr2EAZ5Og

Check out PART TWO of this link
http://www.alpinehunting.com/information/shane-quinn-alpine-hunting-i-62.html

I'm curious to know where some of you stand on the issue..

I am not aware of anyplace in the U.S. where it's legal to haze wildlife with the aid of an aircraft (or any other motorized vehicle). Alaska has a rule, I believe, that prohibits hunters from taking game the same day they fly when using aircraft to access remote areas.

Can't speak for SCI, but believe they already have restrictions on some activities (high fence enclosures), can't see them embracing aerial hazing.

Is it ethical sport hunting? I don't think so, but aerial shooting and hazing can be effective methods for controlling nuisance species.

Interesting rule that Alaska has for fly-in day.

Does this apply to all terrain such as heavily forested areas or typically open mountainous terrain (where flying in gives hunters the advantage of spotting animals on the way in)?

I'm not sure if heli-hunting can be argued as a form of population control (infact, in most cases it splits groups up and spreads them all over the place because their prime focus is a mature male). Heli-hunting targets trophy specimens and heli-hunters are therefor willing to pass up females in the process, educating them on ways to avoid aerial assaults..

Pest control generally targets females specimens to cost effectively control populations. IMO heli-hunting could almost have the opposite effect if they're constantly buzzing through groups of females to get to the male trophies...

But I do see your point, aerial culling can be an effective population control tool, however the scope of this activity serves quite a different purpose

Alaska's rule is statewide to preclude such activities as the one you describe or even the spotting of game through the air and landing nearby to put on a short stalk. Few here, if any, would consider such as sporting or ethical. Agree 100% that using aircraft of various types for reduction of nuisance species is occasionally called for and even Alaska sometimes allows for arial hunting of Wolves but an animal taken in this manner could not possibly provide the sense of awe and wonder and pride that taking a great animal in a more conventional manner of hunting provides.

No way It should be banned and made illegal. I would nver hunt from a helicopter as it is not even considered hunting.

CHANGE YOUR TITLE TO SLAUGHTERING FROM A HELICOPTER WITH BIG EGOS AND STUPIDITY and maybe you'll get the picture!!!

well put safariman

Call me a skeptic, but this type of talk, along with "disturbing" YouTube clips seems to be fishing for an anti-hunting viewpoint, hoping to get hunters to "agree" and "confirm" the unethicalness of "aerial assaults", "tiring animals out", "targeting trophy males", etc.

What's confusing though is the OP has a history of showing hunting pictures, etc.

I just disagree with the tone or angle the above post seems to be taking.

Check out his signature line, it may put your mind at ease a bit. Good thought though, and I'm glad you're vigilant.

That's why I posted my second note.

The wording certainly doesn't help us any, and that seeming disconnect with his history is what has me confused.

There are herd control, or cull hunts by helicopter, but no game hunts - and shouldn't be. I'm of the view that if you post your land, you should not be eligible for the permits to kill from the air either. Land owners do not own the game - one reason that high fencing should have a cost to the owner.

In skimming your website, it appears you stay involved in your passion. I was unaware of the 1080 flap, perhaps it's worthy of it's own thread. I have seen a couple other posters here from your part of the world, they might chip in as well?

We're good, I meant what I said about vigilance, if you see me as a sheep headed for the wolf - let me know!

Thanks for comments Coldbore and Mako25

Coldbore you have a fair point regarding my discourse being very emotive and very much against heli-hunting... Please forgive my passion and enthusiasm - it's an issue that strikes at the core for me and I do not want it legalised at all. In fact, I can't even believe NZ's let it get this far.. That's just my opinion, one of millions...

I guess from an international perspective, from someone outside looking in, I was curious to see whether overseas hunters viewed the issue with the same degree of passion (and detest)? And whether

a) you agreed with it; and/or
b) you would support it in terms of coming to NZ to use heli-hunting services

If it turns out that the majority of overseas hunters do wish to engage in heli-hunting on public land, then that would certainly add weight to the proposition. However my hunch was that more people would be anti heli-hunting.. and if that were the case, then the question begs what the hell are we doing it for??

Mako25 no wolf chasing sheep just yet - more like being shorn by the clippers!!

I agree totally - organised culls when animal numbers are high is completely justifiable. And if populations exceed a set threshold based on conservation values for that area etc, then a cull is necessary. But these culls are done by professionals, and not by paying Clients. And our govt refers to these as "management culls"

"Heli-hunting" on the other hand is purely for trophies and our New Zealand regulatory bodies are trying to dress heli-hunting up as legitimate form of "hunting"... as if it's part and parcel of the sport

I think you have it right.

Anybody who would display or even suggest that an animal killed by aerial means is a trophy, is not a hunter by my definition.

Once again the powers-that-be have it wrong, and normally you can trace their thought process back to $$$$.

Minus the helicopter, the scenary in your first photo is quite stunning by the way.

I'm firmly against it for anything that even remotely has the term "hunting" connected to it.

For a pure gov't sponsored (let THEM take the heat and answer the questions, not any group that the antis can hold against hunters) population control, or as a means to prevent disease spread, etc, I can see the point, but no way I can support it for any kind of "hunting".

I can understand your passion, just be careful on your choice of words and giving the antis free ammo to use in their propaganda.

SCI does not allow helicopter hunting since it violates their policy of fair chase. Recently a Virginia booking agency was charged by US F&G because some of his hunters allegedly used helicopters. My understanding is that bringing any big game trophy back into the US taken with a helicopter may result in charges from F&G. This is true even if the use of the helicopter was legal in the country hunted. I am told Russian hunts frequently use helicopters to allow guided hunters an easy shot. I would suppose using a helicopter to access a mountain in NZ & then hunting on foot would be legal. Several of my friends used this method to hunt Thar after being unsuccessful climbing mountains for several days. Despite using a helicopter to get to the top of the mountain one was unsuccessful, one shoot a Thar the first day, & the third took three days. I know the use of the helicopter added a lot of cost to the hunt. I don't think most American hunters would want to actually use a helicopter to shoot from, but a few will do anything to secure a good trophy. I do think predator control shooting from a helicopter would be a lot of fun. I have seen videos of shooters using helicopters to take hogs, coyotes, & wolves.

If they're gonna allow hunting from helicopters, they oughta legalize hunting from helicopters with Mike Dillon's mini-guns... in for a penny, in for a pound.