Thread: Eugenie Sage

Admin please excuse this is if it's deemed political however in the interests of seeing Our conservation minister being brought to task I believe this would be quite good to see.

https://www.facebook.com/SarahDowieI...2447560356636/

Sarah Dowie Brings Sage to task

Still haven't really achieved much. Yes it has been brought up but was dismissed just ask quickly. The question that really needed to be asked was "will they review the current plan and make changes accordingly?"

where can it be found not on facebook

Originally Posted by gonetropo

where can it be found not on facebook

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6XNVKcfnzY

That's the question right there. Is the plan made in 1993 and largely ignored since applicable to today's range and population densities, and can we redress the balance and still active the ecological restoration which is the primary goal.

No argument here that we should cull some thar but 2/3rds of the population? Come the fuck on.

Originally Posted by Lukeduncan

Still haven't really achieved much. Yes it has been brought up but was dismissed just ask quickly. The question that really needed to be asked was "will they review the current plan and make changes accordingly?"

I would have thought what we are seeing as been one of the most positive things to happen in the history of our game animals , I don't recall the last time any government members were arguing with Doc about stopping any so called pests from being culled , pity Sarah didn't Question if the old Tahr plan was still fit for purpose , but good on her at least someone is listening !!

I see she has a petition as well.

https://www.national.org.nz/stop_the_tahr_cull

Originally Posted by Boaraxa

I would have thought what we are seeing as been one of the most positive things to happen in the history of our game animals , I don't recall the last time any government members were arguing with Doc about stopping any so called pests from being culled , pity Sarah didn't Question if the old Tahr plan was still fit for purpose , but good on her at least someone is listening !!

Yea fair enough! I wonder what happens from here

You lot know a lot more than I as I’m not in the Alps, well like ever atm but how sustainable are current numbers? One comment last week mentioned numbers were very high and he didn’t necessarily think the cull a bad thing? (Hope my recollection is at least half accurate).

A cull of sorts targets females and young animals? Or all and sundry?

I’d dearly love to tip one over on my next trip but I’d still struggle to pull the trigger on a small animal which is probably why people sitting in ivory towers say hunters aren’t or can’t keep numbers to below the ‘required level’.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Danny

You lot know a lot more than I as I’m not in the Alps, well like ever atm but how sustainable are current numbers? One comment last week mentioned numbers were very high and he didn’t necessarily think the cull a bad thing? (Hope my recollection is at least half accurate).

A cull of sorts targets females and young animals? Or all and sundry?

I’d dearly love to tip one over on my next trip but I’d still struggle to pull the trigger on a small animal which is probably why people sitting in ivory towers say hunters aren’t or can’t keep numbers to below the ‘required level’.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

30 percent of the tahr being culled are trophy bulls.

Rest are Nannie's and juvenile. 25000 will be shot. But there is debate as to just how many there are. And the confidence interval is 95% so not much hope.

Sent from my TA-1024 using Tapatalk

It's not been brought up yet. And my post is not the start of the fire. But what every we feel about this lady let's keep it civil!
Our we are going to look like a bunch of red neck women haters.

Love the first 8 posts. Keep it up

Most people will agree that a cull is needed but I also think the Tahr plan needs to be updated.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Boaraxa

I would have thought what we are seeing as been one of the most positive things to happen in the history of our game animals , I don't recall the last time any government members were arguing with Doc about stopping any so called pests from being culled , pity Sarah didn't Question if the old Tahr plan was still fit for purpose , but good on her at least someone is listening !!
I see she has a petition as well.
https://www.national.org.nz/stop_the_tahr_cull

Yeah +1 great to see some political focus on this issue. Just a pity that Sarah was not armed with more probing questions. Like what data do you have to demonstrate these Tahr numbers are causing real harm ? And why are you hiding behind 25 year old law that is questionable in relevance today ? What are the errors and assumptions in the count ? Why do you have to cull such massive numbers?have you accounted for the big increase in DIC land since retirement of thousands of hectares of high country grazing ? Etc
As it was Mz Parsley got off the hook all too easy

Some of the smart guys here should talk to Sarah to help the right questions get asked

Originally Posted by Lukeduncan

Most people will agree that a cull is needed but I also think the Tahr plan needs to be updated.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Be careful what you wish for. If it happens under her it would be worse than the current one.

Sent from my TA-1024 using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Russian 22.

Be careful what you wish for. If it happens under her it would be worse than the current one.

Sent from my TA-1024 using Tapatalk

I'll rephrase sorry was a bit broad. I think the plan needs to be updated to suit the increase of public land from retired grazing since 1993 and increase the number of tahr allowed within the range.

Originally Posted by Lukeduncan

I'll rephrase sorry was a bit broad. I think the plan needs to be updated to suit the increase of public land from retired grazing since 1993 and increase the number of tahr allowed within the range.

So do I. I just don't think it's likely that that will happen under the ideology over facts people.

Sent from my TA-1024 using Tapatalk