Big-game, small-game, and gamebird hunting in New Zealand: Hunting effort, harvest, and expenditure in 1988

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
A postal survey of 8639 licensed firearm owners in 1989 indicated that an estimated 117 200 ± 6300 New Zealanders (3.5% of the total population) did some hunting in 1988. An estimated 33 100 former hunters did not hunt in 1988 but thought it likely that they would hunt again in future. The survey provided useful estimates of 1988 national totals for hunting effort (4.4 million hunter days), gross expenditure ($NZ100 million), and harvest (6.5 million animals). Small-game hunting dominated, involving 81% of hunters, 59% of total hunting effort, and 86% of total numerical harvest: rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) and possums (Trichosurus vulpecula) each comprised 40% of the national bag. Gamebird hunting involved 48% of hunters, 19% of effort, and 11% of total harvest: ducks comprised 73% of the gamebird harvest. Although big-game hunting attracted the fewest hunters (42%) it ranked second for hunting effort (21%). Big game formed 3% of the total numerical harvest: pigs (Sus scrofa), goats (Capra hircus), and red deer (Cervus elaphus scoticus) were the most commonly taken. Big-game were estimated to comprise 49% of total harvest biomass, followed by small-game (47%), and gamebirds (4%). Most deer (nearly 60%) were taken for recreation, with helicopter-based hunting accounting for only one-third the total deer harvest. A quarter of those people hunting in 1988 hunted on five or fewer days that year, and a relatively small group of mainly professional hunters accounted for a disproportionately large share of the overall harvest Hunters reported spending an average of $851 each on hunting in 1988. Expenditure on big-game comprised 44% of the total, small-game 23%, and gamebirds 33%. Expenditure per animal harvested or per day hunted was greater for big-game animals (other than goats) than for gamebirds, which were more expensive to hunt than small-game. Total hunting effort was inversely related to the average expenditure per animal harvested, regardless of the type of game.

This publication has 4 references indexed in Scilit: