We need your help to oppose the Game Animal Council (Herds of Special Interest) Amendment Bill.
The Coalition Government proposes to put trophy hunting and invasive introduced species, such as deer and North American elk, ahead of indigenous nature in our national parks.
We need to take a stand for nature in our premier natural areas. National parks exist to protect our indigenous plants and wildlife and spectacular landscapes in their natural state.
We need to ensure that public access to national parks isn't placed at risk and restricted by private hunting interests.
The Government Animal (Herds of Special Interest) Amendment Bill would change that by scrapping fundamental protections in the National Parks Act to allow” herds of special interest” (HOSI) to be established in our national parks. Large parts of our national parks could then be managed for hunting purposes, including for trophy hunting.
Our national parks such as Fiordland and Aoraki Mount Cook are iconic places for tourism and international visitors.
They come to see kea, kākā and kākāriki and the plants and wildlife that make Aotearoa New Zealand special. Prioritising introduced species like elk, tahr and deer puts our alpine and forest habitats and people’s enjoyment of national parks, at risk.
Submissions on the Government Animal (Herds of Special Interest) Amendment bill are needed to persuade the Government to scrap it.
Please make a submission opposing the bill to the Environment Select Committee by 24 July 2025.
What the bill does
The Game Animal Council (Herds of Special) Amendment bill exempts a designated ‘Herd of Special Interest’ from the National Parks s 4(2)(b). Currently any exemptions to s 4(2)(b) require a determination from the New Zealand Conservation Authority.
This bill:
Removes an important check and balance on decision making in the public/national interest – a determination from the NZCA – on a potentially highly damaging activity in any national park, and places that decision in the hands of a Minister.
That decision is whether a species of introduced animal can be managed in a national park for hunting purposes if the animals are considered by the Minister to be of “special interest to hunters”.
The proposed amendment to the National Park’s Act would mean that the s 4(2)(b) requirement to preserve the native plants and animals of the national park as far as possible would not apply to the adverse effects caused by a “herd of special interest”.
Submission points
The bill violates fundamental principle of National Parks Act
New Zealand’s national parks are to be maintained in their natural state and the public have the right of entry.
This bill means national parks will no longer be maintained in their natural state, because introduced species will be allowed to remain there.
This bill could limit public access to national parks, by placing restrictions on access where trophy hunting is prioritised.
Undermines New Zealand Conservation Authority (NZCA) decision making
This bill:
Removes an important check and balance on decision making in the public/national interest – a determination from the New Zealand Conservation Authority (NZCA) - about a potentially highly damaging activity in any national park, and places it in the hands of a Minister.
Means that the decision about whether an introduced species can remain in a national park, if it is considered ‘special’ by that Minister, and be managed for trophy hunting purposes, lies with that Minister.
Has ramifications for all national parks (For example – North American elk/red deer Fiordland NP, Tahr Aoraki Mt Cook NP, Sika deer in Tongariro NP, White tailed deer in Rakiura NP)
Removes the opportunity for the NZCA to properly scrutinise a matter of national importance in relation to national parks, in the interest of all New Zealanders.
Ecological impacts
Ever-expanding populations of invasive species eat and destroy native habitat.
This bill legitimises invasive species for trophy hunting in national parks.
National parks are the last formally protected remaining refuges for native species; invasive species have no place there.
(Add in your own words about a national park, the native species that live there and why it is special to you)
Even at low numbers, invasive species like deer, tahr and North American elk eat tonnes of native vegetation every day, which has adverse effects on New Zealand’s native ecosystems.
(Add an example of where you have seen this happen – add photos if you have them)
Maintaining national parks in their natural state is an ecological bottom line that must be preserved.
What ecological evidence has been provided to support this bill?
Some national parks are UNESCO World Heritage Areas
Some of New Zealand’s national parks are internationally recognised as UNESCO world heritage areas for ecological and cultural values.
In addition to violating the fundamental principle of National Parks Act 1980, the bill ignores the threat of invasive species on native habitat in our internationally recognised UNESCO World Heritage Areas.
Te Wāhipounamu Southwest New Zealand World (WHA) includes Aoraki Mount Cook, West Tai Poutini, Aspiring, and Fiordland National Parks.
Te Wāhipounamu Southwest New Zealand World Heritage inscription identifies invasive species such as deer, North American elk and tahr as a threat to world heritage values:
Invasive species are the biggest impact on the property, despite their impacts being restricted to small areas of the property. Population increases of red deer as well as impacts from other browsing mammals such as wapiti, fallow deer, goat, chamois and tahr have caused severe damage in some parts of the property, in particular threatening the integrity of the forest and alpine ecosystems.
This WHA is recognised as New Zealand largest natural area and as the world’s best example of the ancient biota of Gondwanaland.
Tongariro NP is also WHA recognised for its cultural and ecological values.
Invasive species are a known threat to world heritage values; their protection is not appropriate in a WHA.
The bill ignores the known threat of invasive species in our world heritage areas.
Economic drivers over ecological bottom lines
National parks are to be kept in their natural state – economic drivers must not override this bottom line.
There is no economic imperative in the National Parks Act 1980.
Ecological bottom line set out in the law should not be overridden by economic imperatives that enable trophy hunting (see Ministers statement for tourism as an economic driver).
... and will allow hunter-led conservation groups to manage deer numbers in our national parks, creating opportunities for local hunters and tourism and driving more economic growth in the region.
What evidence has been provided to the committee to support this statement?
National parks in their natural state underpin New Zealand’s tourism.
Hunter led management hasn’t worked
There is no evidence that hunter-led management is successful. For example:
Implementation of the Himalayan tahr control plan (1993) is failing.
This is the model that is most similar to the kind of management plan which could be proposed for a HOSI.
Despite agreed limits on population size and range, the management approach has meant that these limits have not been complied with (https://www.doc.govt.nz/parks-and-recreation/things-to-do/hunting/what-to-hunt/tahr/tahr-and-conservation/ See Population Monitoring Reports).
The natural environment and the New Zealand public pay the price of too many invasive species.
Balloted areas for hunting also reduce public access.
Recommendation
In summary this bill is not fit for purpose.
Decline the Bill in its entirety.
How to make a submission
Draft your submission in word document and copy & paste or upload the page to the Environment Select Committee website HERE
The closing date for submissions is 24 July 2025.
Further reading
Read the Bill
Read the Hansard debate
Read the Minister's media statement on the bill 25 June 2025
Read Forest & Bird media release 26 June 2025.