I still have a difficulty seeing how flying into an high elevation location in a helicopter, spotting animals, "dismounting" and stalking them on foot is any different than driving to an area at low elevation {in Africa, Australia, New Zealand or Idaho} in a pickup or an ATV and then making the stalk. Difference in degree only, not in essence, unless there is some aspect of this I am missing.

As for "trophies", just my opinion, but ALL {from every continent} are merely specimens of a given species to me {and interesting for that reason} BUT indicative of no particular skill by the hunter until the method is proven to me. And even then, most trophies are proof of the skill of the GUIDE, not the hunter, unless, again, proof. Most fellows do not hunt in their backyards, they hunt under the apron of a guide/professional, and most rely on somebody else to make it all happen. Box blinds, treestands, scopes, nitrocellulose powder, jacketed bullets, rangefinders, hell, even modern boots and Gore-Tex clothing all fall into the category of technological skill-killers/advantage-givers. So getting to a high elevation on a chopper seems right in line with the Modern Hunter's way of doing things, and I don't understand the vehement disgust some have for this, especially if the fat chopper-guys are effectively and properly managing the game resource and a prosperous business for some enterprising chopper pilot is part of the result of the activity.

I 100% agree about the ease of various hunting methods making for silliness {that is a personal view and my own standards might be a bit more severe than many here I suppose}, but if the helicopter is eliminated from NZ hunting, then it seems only right to eliminate the 4x4 from Africa.