NZFFA Survey – Interim Results

The NZFFA survey is still ongoing, and results to date are presented graphically below. These results carry a 95% Confidence Level with ±4% Margin for Error.

To complete the survey if you haven’t already done so, your input can still be included in the final results and we urge you to take a few minutes to complete it HERE

Some of the Comments made by survey participants can be viewed HERE

The survey questions below ask members for the opinion Strongly Agree (5) thru Strongly Disagree (1)

Q1 That the Minister of Conservation be given additional power to amend a Sports Fish & Game Management Plan

, NZFFA Survey – Interim Results
(1) Strongly Disagree, (5) Strongly Agree

Q2 That the chair of the Fish & Game NZ Council be a Ministerial appointee, instead of being selected by elected Fish & Game Councillors

, NZFFA Survey – Interim Results
(1) Strongly Disagree, (5) Strongly Agree

Q3 Reducing the size of the national NZ Council from 12 to 8 members

, NZFFA Survey – Interim Results
(1) Strongly Disagree, (5) Strongly Agree

Q4 That of those 8 Councillors, 4 are appointed by the Minister of Conservation

, NZFFA Survey – Interim Results
(1) Strongly Disagree, (5) Strongly Agree

Q5 Reducing the number of Fish & Game regions from 12 to 6

, NZFFA Survey – Interim Results
(1) Strongly Disagree, (5) Strongly Agree

Q6 Reducing the number of elected regional Councillors from 12 to 4. with a further 3 members appointed by the Minister and 1 appointee by Iwi

, NZFFA Survey – Interim Results
(1) Strongly Disagree, (5) Strongly Agree

Q7 Councillors to hold position for no more than six years

, NZFFA Survey – Interim Results
(1) Strongly Disagree, (5) Strongly Agree

Q8 Hunter, Angler or Both

, NZFFA Survey – Interim Results

Q9 Age Range

, NZFFA Survey – Interim Results

Q10 Gender

, NZFFA Survey – Interim Results
This entry was posted in Home, News. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to NZFFA Survey – Interim Results

  1. Dr. Charlie Baycroft says:

    What are we paying for?
    I have purchased F&G licenses for decades in the belief that this helped to conserve and protect the fish and game for mine and future generations to pursue and enjoy.

    I stared to wonder when I noticed the lack of opposition by F&G to the pollution of the ecosystem with 1080 and other toxic chemicals and the Predator Free Agenda to eradicate the introduced species we hunt and fish for.

    Why, I wondered, am I paying to support an organization that is unwilling to vigorously oppose the destruction of the species that it is supposed to conserve and protect?

    The alternative might rationally be to become a self-appointed volunteer who is graciously helping DOC and whoever really controls our government to achieve their Predator Free ambitions.

    Maybe we should all be doping this?

    Perhaps they should even be paying US for the efforts on their behalf.

    Now I hear the people in F&G saying that if they do not co-operate the government will make them.

    In any event, the end result is going to be the same because F&G will no longer function as an advocate and protector of our customary rights to hunt and fish.

    If this government takeover goes ahead, I do no0t see any point in continuing to pay license fees to F&G for not doing what they are supposed to be doing.

    Perhaps some people are more concerned with keeping their jobs and incomes than doing what we are paying them to do?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 80 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded.