Thread: Tell 'em they're dreaming . . . Govt announces new policy, predator free by 2050

True gimp, but what's wrong with setting reasonable goals? Recently the govt said they would reduce reoffending by 25% by 2017...and that's where it ended. What's the actual plan here? Has their even been sufficient research done to know exactly how many pests we are dealing with and in what areas?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Dougie

True gimp, but what's wrong with setting reasonable goals? Recently the govt said they would reduce reoffending by 25% by 2017...and that's where it ended. What's the actual plan here? Has their even been sufficient research done to know exactly how many pests we are dealing with and in what areas?

It's all just headline-grabbing Trumpisms. "We'll build a wall", "We'll kill all the terrorists". Wonderful ideas that voters will love, with no plan on how to go about it, or the unintended consequences.


Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by stretch

It's all just headline-grabbing Trumpisms. "We'll build a wall", "We'll kill all the terrorists". Wonderful ideas that voters will love, with no plan on how to go about it, or the unintended consequences.


Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

The way I see it, @stretch, is what we, you know, me, them, you, us and a dog named Boo will do...get out there and do it ourselves...as many of us have been doing for many years...all the pontificating and bombastic wankerism does not protect anything...except someone's backside...

Originally Posted by Dougie

True gimp, but what's wrong with setting reasonable goals? Recently the govt said they would reduce reoffending by 25% by 2017...and that's where it ended. What's the actual plan here? Has their even been sufficient research done to know exactly how many pests we are dealing with and in what areas?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They have stated goals for 2020 and 2025 which seem relatively reasonable

2020 goals
• Develop a collaborative predator control strategy.
• Another 175,000 hectares in addition to the current
1 million hectares on conservation land and 7 million
hectares led by OSPRI are under some form of control.
• Five projects supported by PFNZ are making progress,
and sharing lessons.
• PFNZ and DOC will tackle larger scale operations.
• Collaborative results will show social and economic benefits.
• PFNZ will foster community participation in local
predator control activities.
2025 goals
• Increase by 1 million hectares the areas of New Zealand
where predators are suppressed.
• Demonstrate predator removal in areas of mainland New
Zealand of 20,000 hectares.
• Remove all mammalian predators from New Zealand’s
offshore island nature reserves.
• Develop science solutions that remove at least one small
mammal predator from the New Zealand mainland.

There is all kinds of monitoring of pest numbers that goes on. The question "how many" is the wrong question, and I wish they'd stop using absolute numbers like "25,000,000" because they're not measurable or accurate, but they're easier for people to take in than concepts like "relative abundance", because, as demonstrated by this forum's response to this, reading comprehension isn't a common skill

A little consideration and an open mind instead of a knee-jerk-burst-into-tears reaction at the idea of someone investing a relatively small amount of money in terms of government spending into trying to preserve our natural heritage might be a good idea

Originally Posted by gimp

They have stated goals for 2020 and 2025 which seem relatively reasonable



There is all kinds of monitoring of pest numbers that goes on. The question "how many" is the wrong question, and I wish they'd stop using absolute numbers like "25,000,000" because they're not measurable or accurate, but they're easier for people to take in than concepts like "relative abundance", because, as demonstrated by this forum's response to this, reading comprehension isn't a common skill

A little consideration and an open mind instead of a knee-jerk-burst-into-tears reaction at the idea of someone investing a relatively small amount of money in terms of government spending into trying to preserve our natural heritage might be a good idea

This isnt the GIMP I knew, what have you done with the cynical young aspiring soldier/boxer. Ahhaaa. .. DOC has got you under their spell, given you a side interest (Ladeeeees) and lured you in to using management speak, using long words and wasteful spending as all Govt Depts do, mine included plus saving NZ's natural heritage will do us all out of a lot of hunting opportunities, leaving us all to look for what little birdlife remains after by-kill decimates an '"acceptable percentage"

Originally Posted by Ernie

This isnt the GIMP I knew, what have you done with the cynical young aspiring soldier/boxer. Ahhaaa. .. DOC has got you under their spell, given you a side interest (Ladeeeees) and lured you in to using management speak, using long words and wasteful spending as all Govt Depts do, mine included plus saving NZ's natural heritage will do us all out of a lot of hunting opportunities, leaving us all to look for what little birdlife remains after by-kill decimates an '"acceptable percentage"

Not at all, I just actually have an open mind and don't approach things with a pre-conceived view. I'm gonna have to talk to you about this, you've been listening to the wrong people man


Besides which the focus of the trust that this new initiative is based on has largely been community based trapping programs and whatnot, not 1080.

Also you'd think the anti-1080 people would be keen on actually eradicating possums/rats/stoats or finding other methods to suppress them so we don't have to use it any more, which is one of the stated aims of this new programme

I know little about 1080, so went to google to find out more. There is very little info on the stuff that's backed up with science. Same info repeated over and over. I avoided the ban it /best thing sine sliced bread sites. NZ use 80% of the stuff so not many studies have been done elsewhere. In one paper it states possible links with cancer but no specific testing has been done. It can last for months in a carcass in cold conditions. I hope a lot of this money is going to find a alternative, as I can see agent orange type thing here in future.

Originally Posted by chindit

There is very little info on the stuff that's backed up with science.

What do you want to know?

Originally Posted by chindit

It can last for months in a carcass in cold conditions.

Yes, and DOC (and presumably other agencies, I don't know what OSPRI etc do) conduct bait and carcass monitoring after drops to monitor decay/breakdown of baits and carcasses in worst-case climatic areas inside treatment areas, to determine the end of caution periods.