Printable View
Taking everything so far posted into account, it appears:
*That pest species are generally increasing, some dramatically
*That pest species have default "safe areas" eg spots where access for one reason or another is very difficult/impossible.
On a slightly different topic, is "Predator Free 2050" gonna be anything more than a nice slogan?
Well Max Headroom
You have seen by the response to the thread, the increase of pests mostly in some areas and a little decrease in others.
Also the response to methods of pest control are not agreeable with all, even among members here.
Public perception isn't backing cat control! as an example, I know someone who had to remove himself from Facebook because he went public on his numbers.
Then the threats and allegations to property and life over a cat. So some pests don't draw the attention and public outcry like others.
Personally I just go about doing what I can do, sometimes a post or two here on the what little pestie thread, where the hunters are and by way of encouragement.
So when the hills get to high for the old hunter, then there is always pest control in any given area of NZ.
Remember! if you aim at nothing you are sure to hit it.
Predator free, had a starting point, how it ends is depending on input. How's your back yard?
KH
Agreed, well done Max , and the thread has kept itself interesting and under control.
I'm generally the only predator in my back yard, apart from the neighbours cat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiwi-Hunter
On cats.
I believe they should have to be registered and chipped just as dogs do and contained on property or kept under control if off property just like dogs do.
Sent from my S60 using Tapatalk
Agree 100%, especially as most dogs don't go round chomping on wildlife (native and otherwise) or.......................................... infecting dolphins (A significant threat to Hector’s and Māui dolphinsQuote:
Originally Posted by veitnamcam
However I suspect the Govt is way more fearful of 1,000,000 mad cat ladies than they are od 1/4 that number of FAL holders
@ebf. In some respect you are correct. However I maintain that the "uneconomic for trappers" areas , even remote areas can be economically completed after initial trapping.Quote:
Originally Posted by ebf
Here is why I believe this: Trapping of possums and mustelids in areas of populations above around 8 / ha are economically viable for trapping without any cost to the taxpayer, doc or ospri.
Aerial 1080 was proven in 2011 to be averaging $57/ha. Today it is more and the "remote areas" are costing taxpayers and farmers up to and more than $80/ha. The operations do not successfully eradicate either.
If the approximate mean cost of aerial 1080 @ $70/ha was paid to trappers, even perhaps in easier trapping areas as well, along with a monitored qc audit in place then I believe vitually all terrain and strata of vegetation types could be successfully trapped and at less gross cost than taxpayers and farmers are currently (and historically) stumping up via treasury and levies.
The mindset and the self preservation of publicly funded agencies have long blocked this concept. Parts of Hawkes Bay Regional Council areas are an exception.
When farmers realise that they have forfieted over a billion dollars since 1998 for little real gain they may begin to question.
Bear in mind that 1 ha is only 100 metres by 100 metres. Evenbin really tough country a competent man can cover 10-15 ha per day. @$70 that is $3500. (5KM circuit).
Assume that trap line is visited three times he still grosses $1166 /day. In easier country he can double that.
In order to control pests,there has to be motivation for people other than professional pest controllers to destroy them.
I grew up hunting in the 90's when Deer were scarce because they were worth real money.
Before that in the 80's kids would trap possums for the price of the skins.
They have a problem with Mink over here in Norway,some animal rights activists broke into a Mink farm and let them all go 20 years back.Now the little bastards are all along the coast and they even swim out to Salmon farms to raid the nets! In the area's where they give 50 Kroner ($8) a Mink tail,Minks are scarce because the Kids have cleaned them out.Some Teenagers have not only paid for their drivers licences from shooting and trapping Mink,some of them have bought decent cars.
Put $10 tax free on a Possum tail and watch the problem disappear.
I've often had that thought too. The reality is though that a large portion of population who would benefit from a scheme like this would be too stoned, drunk, lazy to see it through. Why do the hard yards when the government can pay you money for doing nothing?Quote:
Originally Posted by norsk
I personally dont think the easy areas would be the only ones targeted but I see your point.
Taking only tails reduces the logistics hugely.As well as all Possums getting some heat,from the Bush block to the lifestyle blocks.
I don't think DOC is really all about conservation any longer it's about self perpetuation.
With pet food $10 a possum (body and fur value...in my area) is only pocket money at best...Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_H
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A possum bounty is a Waste of time.they are already worth good money. The problem pests are rats and stoats. They are far more difficult to control especially without aerially applied toxin. Biological control is probably the best way forward.