News

Many of the documents on this site are available to be downloaded by Site Members only. This means that to access these documents, you will need to become a registered site member. To become a site member, please contact us but if you are all ready a site member, please log in and tick the remember me box so the Site will do its best to "remember you" next time you visit.

Follow this link to find the latest newsletter.

Become a corporate sponsor of the NZAAA. click here to find out more information

NZAAA 17th Annual Conference - 29/30 July Palmerston North Convention Centre. Click here to view the conference information

Debunking the scurrilous Mt Taranaki 1080 claims

“News media reports that 1080 poison had been sprayed on people and property and deliberately into drinking water are totally without foundation,” says Irene King, Chief Executive of the Aviation Industry Association.Evidence has been produced to the media which clearly demonstrated that the helicopter operated well within the consented application boundaries. This information was given to the media prior to the story going live.

The persons making the complaints and nearby householder were advised 48 hours prior to the event that the helicopter would be making the application – as we all know 1080 is not “sprayed” but dropped with care in a pelletized form. Drift is not an issue.

The video used by the TV station was selectively shot to distort the operation and create the illusion that the helicopter had breached the boundary. However the flight following and recording data very clearly shows the aircraft within the boundaries. For further information click here

Settling spray drift claims

Cases of suspected spray drift and spray damage claims from aerial application still occur, so how are they settled?

There are very few cases where you can conclusively show that claimed drift damage or loss was or was not from a specified source or activity, usually because either there was a lack of any evidence at all, or the evidence that was available was not suitable for some reason.  Evidence must be useful, meaning it must be suitable for producing in a courtroom, should you ever need.  A court room is the last place an aerial applicator should end up but the dispute needs to be settled.

The way a recent case of possible spray drift was resolved has a message for other operators who apply agrichemicals by air. . In this case some pasture damage was claimed by a neighbour to the sprayed area, but while there appeared to be some clover loss it was difficult to assess and the evidence for spray drift was a bit inconclusive.  In light of all this the operator made a goodwill offer to the person claiming pasture damage, in interests of maintaining good relations with their clients, which in turn includes people in neighbouring properties who believe they may have been adversely affected in some way by their operations.  It was a professional approach and the right thing to do, both for the reputation of that operator and the ag aviation industry as a whole.  It brought the matter to a close.

If you haven’t had a spray drift claim and you continue to apply agrichemicals as a spray, be assured that eventually you will have a claim.  The message is simple.  First, assemble the required evidence of good practice.  Then, communicate – talk to the affected party and work though the events and available evidence and, if necessary get advice.  Then, in some cases, you may have to as the operator described here did, offer an appropriate compensation to the party who claims they have been adversely affected.  It need not be an admission that you as the operator caused the claimed damage.  Also it does not send a message that you are a soft touch for anyone who feels like claiming damage.  Rather it recognises that there will always be some spray drift when an agrichemical is applied and you as a responsible operator are taking your responsibilities seriously.

Checkout the new Classified section in the Members menu - there might be a good deal for you.

November 09 Newsletter now available - Follow this link!

Pilot Chemical Ratings and Approved Handler Certificates

If you hold a current pilot chemical rating you are deemed to hold an approved handler certificate - but only for the "use" or application phase. If an agrichemical requires an approved handler certificate for storage for example, or the sustance is tracked (Class 6.1A, 6.1B and 6.1C), which means you need an approved handler certificate to take possession of it, then the deemed approved handler certificate will not be sufficient. You will need an approved handler certificate that covers other activities such as storage and disposal. One option is to have ground crew with the required approved handler certificate, but for tracked substances they must on site when the substance is used.

Fatalities on NZ farms

While this article does not reference agricultural aviation the message is no different.
Check it out here at this site.

Press release on price rises

Cost-cutting by topdressing pilots bidding for work from hard-pressed farmers has led to a cutting of safety corners that in turn has seen a "grossly unacceptable" 13 pilots killed since 2000. About a third of the industry's 115 topdressing planes need to be replaced. One business expert says prices will have to rise by up to 25 per cent soon if the industry is to survive.

James Lockhart, of Massey University's college of business, said the topdressing industry was in danger of self-destructing unless it raised prices to allow out-of-date aircraft to be replaced with modern and safer models. "But it cannot do this while continuing to charge prices from yesteryear," Dr Lockhart said. To allow that reinvestment to occur the industry would need to raise charges by 20 per cent to 25 per cent, he said. About a third of the fleet needed to be replaced immediately at a cost of US$1.5 million (NZ$2.2m) each.

Dr Lockhart said aerial topdressing was an essential tool for the prosperity of hill country farmers and the New Zealand economy so it must not be allowed to fail. Agricultural Aviation Association executive officer John Maber said topdressers typically charged between $80 and $110 a tonne depending on the aircraft type and size of job. "In some situations we have heard of figures getting down to $50 or even $40 a tonne. It just won't work." But farmers were like anyone else and would take the lowest price available, he said.

Federated Farmers president Don Nicolson said the rise would come as sheep and beef farmers, the heaviest users of topdressing, were starting to recover from their worst patch in 50 years. The fortunes of topdressing pilots would ebb and flow with the fortunes of farmers, Mr Nicolson said.

Association president Tony Michelle said under-pricing was leading to pilots cutting safety corners to make ends meet. The 13 pilots' deaths since 2000 were "grossly unacceptable" in an industry that had just 115 [fixed-wing] topdressing aircraft.

Last week a demonstration day to show the capability of the aerial application industry in New Zealand was held at the Omaka Aerodrome just out of Blenheim. We were blessed with good weather and with about 30 delegates representing regulators, policy makers and rule writers from around the country attending, we had a good day The picture below shows demonstration day delegates checking the collectors used for fertiliser spread patterns.

The aim of the day was to let the regulator see first hand how aerial operators went about their task, and what standards are set and followed. By doing this we hope that more effective rules and regulations can be written that achieve the required outcome while being practically based and achievable by the aerial operator.

The day included flying displays with helicopters and fixed wing, static displays of fertiliser handling and application spray application and vertebrate toxic agent (poison bait application) and a series of short lectures on related topics including Fertiliser and spray quality and GPS systems.

Have you seen Bob?

Geoff Taylor is looking for an old pal Bob Sharpe (Razor). They worked together in the UK and Africa. Bob is an ag pilot and may have come to NZ some time ago.

Geoff lives in Shropshire, UK but you can email him here if you know where Bob is now.

Interactive mapping

Tumonz 4 Pro is an interactive mapping programme. It allows you to create shape files for your on-board GPS. You can upload flight data to Tumonz and display it on an aerial or vector map.

Interested? Contact Kevin Young by email or 0274722186 for details

Aerial spraying under threat in New Zealand?

We received a note from the NZ Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) saying they are now under pressure to abandon aerial application of not only 1080, but also other agrichemicals - the latter cuts across health & safety priorities in hill country forestry operations, They say they will fight this hard.

With apologies for the translation errors the following text gives an idea of where the EU are headed with this:

"European Union: Prohibition of dangerous plant protection agents The EU Parliament was correct for a prohibition of dangerous plant protection agents and thus the strictest pesticide regulation of the world supported. For the first time forbidden in the European union in the future high-poisonous substances, which excite cancer, the genetic make-up to change or the Fortpflanzungsfähigkeit damage. The delegates were correct today in Strasbourg with overwhelming majority for the intensified rules over production, permission and use of pesticides. 22 substances are affected by the prohibition according to European Union data, by which two must be already pulled in the current year from traffic. For the remaining running off the permissions must be waited for, which can last with some pesticides to 2018. Rules are valid also for imported goods from third countries

Prohibitions become also hormonal effective substances. For active substances, which damage the development of the immune or nervous system, strict safety examinations are intended. In public plants such as parks, sports fields or playgrounds the use of pesticides is to be drastically limited. Besides it - with certain exceptions - will be forbidden spraying plants from air with pesticides. The strict rules are valid also for fruit and vegetable imported goods from third countries. "

FSC say they will latch onto any instances of overspray in NZ, regardless of whether it occurs in plantation forests or elsewhere, so we need to urge our operators to be very sharp, and have best GPS controls.

The message is pretty clear. Elsewhere on this site you will see details of the NZAAA Accreditation programme, and for aerial operators in NZ the message is that unless you have Accreditation or something equivalent then your future in this industry is likely to be short.

NZAAA Executive meeting May 26 and the AASR

The next meeting of the NZAAA Executive is on May 26 at the AIA offices 12 Johnstone St Wellington. One of the agenda items is the Agriculture Aircraft Safety Review (AASR). If you are an operator that has any concerns about the impact of this review on the industry you are welcome to attend this meeting. If you are planning to attend please let me know by the 22 May here.

This year the NZAAA Conference is in Blenheim on July 30 and 31 as part of Aviation Week. Full details for registration will be posted soon. A summary of the topics on the Conference programme is available here. On the 29th July there will be a Demonstration Day at Omaka airfield for invited guests. If you want more details on the Demonstration Day or the NZAAA Conference contact here.