Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the NZ Hunting and Shooting Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Black Watch NZGR


User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 56
Like Tree46Likes

Thread: An open letter to Fish and Game

  1. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Taranaki
    Posts
    182
    being a bloke of average townie awareness, thanks for the viewpoints to further my education guys. truly.
    Rich007 likes this.

  2. #17
    Member Rich007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Levin, Horowhenua
    Posts
    505
    Quote Originally Posted by akaroa1 View Post
    Wow! So how do I have the misfortune of having absolutely all of the 1% that isn't fenced nationally all in my area.

    That's the trouble with statistics ... you can make of them what you want.
    This might be an issue around the definition of a 'waterway' - IIRC a 'waterway' is 3m+ wide and contains water year round.
    If my work annoys me, I cull them

  3. #18
    Member outdoorlad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    1,164
    So it's not 99% of water courses then.

    Can you explain to me how Fed farmers came up with when in fact 80% of New Zealand’s waterways are stable or improving, what criteria/ facts are they using for this statement? Because 60% aren't fit for swimming! I shudder to think what percentage aren't drinkable! You obviously think that's acceptable?
    Wirehunt likes this.
    Shut up, get out & start pushing!

  4. #19
    Member Rich007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Levin, Horowhenua
    Posts
    505
    No, as I said in an earlier post, an outcome of the clean streams accord was that dairy farmers would fence off their waterways, with a waterway being defined as something that (IIRC) is 3m+ wide and contains water all year round. So this does not include 'waterways' on sheep and beef land etc.

    In terms of the definition of a 'waterway', you have to draw the line somewhere. Is it fair and reasonable to require farmers to fence off depressions on their land that fill up with water after rain but are generally dry? Is it worth the cost and lost effective area for the potential gains in nutrient losses? Considering that these areas are covered in grass for most of the year, I'd consider the losses to be insignificant.

    The statement that "80% of New Zealand’s waterways are stable or improving" comes from regional councils water quality monitoring data. If you are interested, I suggest you go see your regional council. There are others, but the main water quality metrics are: Nitrogen, Phosphorus and E Coli.

    The 'swimability' argument is an interesting one which is used a lot by people with political motives. It largely relates to E Coli levels and how often they are over a certain level. The issue here it that E Coli levels are at their highest following high rainfall/flooding events (high levels of run off) - when you wouldn't want to go swimming anyway. Like I said, people seem to play with the definition to suit their political motives.

    Are you aware that waterfowl are a significant contributor to E Coli levels in waterways? No? Fish and Game miss that fact out eh

    I'd like to see our countries water quality significantly improved, I'm not quite sure how you can think anything to the contrary.

    I just can't see much being achieved unless we are all prepared to acknowledge our contribution to the current state of our water and be part of the solution.


    Quote Originally Posted by outdoorlad View Post
    So it's not 99% of water courses then.

    Can you explain to me how Fed farmers came up with when in fact 80% of New Zealand’s waterways are stable or improving, what criteria/ facts are they using for this statement? Because 60% aren't fit for swimming! I shudder to think what percentage aren't drinkable! You obviously think that's acceptable?
    Last edited by Rich007; 06-05-2017 at 09:49 PM.
    199p likes this.
    If my work annoys me, I cull them

  5. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Southland
    Posts
    445
    I agree with some of your points! But when it costs me 25K to install an surge system for my 4 bedroom x 5 person occupation home (2 week old quote) don't cry to me! 600 milkers, that's $3,000,000 at the same rate!!! Who is pulling their weight? Remember, the buy product of my shit is shit, yours is money! Don't Fxxx me off with short sightedness and greed!
    Last edited by Fireflite; 06-05-2017 at 11:28 PM.
    Wirehunt and EeeBees like this.

  6. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Southland
    Posts
    445
    We urge all Fish and Game licence holders to support the men and women who support you in providing access to great fishing and hunting experiences and encourage their organisation to work with, not against, the farming community. Don’t let the opportunities be lost by undermining farmers’ generosity.

    Actually this is another issue that pisses me off (Not Landholders Fault) as there should be legal access to All Public Land! Another, Government Cockup!

  7. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    South Waikato
    Posts
    1,893
    Quote Originally Posted by Fireflite View Post
    I agree with some of your points! But when it costs me 25K to install an surge system for my 4 bedroom x 5 person occupation home (2 week old quote) don't cry to me! 600 milkers, that's $3,000,000 at the same rate!!! Who is pulling their weight? Remember, the buy product of my shit is shit, yours is money! Don't Fxxx me off with short sightedness and greed!
    Compare your $25 000 with $840 000 for a 300 ha drystock property in the king country to meet the requirements of the first ten years of the proposed plan. The rules are to be reviewed at the end of ten years so who knows what the costs will be in the second term. This is going to go on for eighty years at this stage.
    This $840 000 is to reduce nitrogen leaching into waterways(very broad description) on a property which is leaching less nitrogen prior to the work being done, than some dairy farms (per hectare) are after they have been audited and passed by the "system".
    The result of this "clean streams" programme is large amounts of land, which we have paid for, and paid rates on for a number of years being confiscated. With no compensation. And a reduction in income due to less hectares to farm.
    This proposal and it's reliance on "Overseer" (a programme which was not designed for this purposed) needs to be taken back to the drawing board.

    The clean streams vision is a failure before it starts. Their aim is swim able, drinkable water 365 days of the year. The Maugatautari Mountain Enclosure (pest proof fenced area with all introduced species removed) is what the vision (clean streams) is aiming for all of New Zealands water to be like in eighty years. It has been reported that the water flowing from this mountain has a very high e coli level. All due to native birds.
    If their aim is swim able and drinkable, will should soon be able to swim in town water supplies. What's the likelihood of that?
    EeeBees likes this.

  8. #23
    Member Wirehunt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,357
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich007 View Post
    Fencing off streams is important as it as it limits phosphorus run off and stops cows from crapping in the streams, reducing e coli levels.

    In terms of the nitrogen, it's more a matter of it being applied at rates and times when the plant can uptake it.

    The biggest issue is we face is dealing with the high level of nitrogen in cows urine (depending on the time of the year/feeding etc), this is deposited in a small area at a rate that is too high for the plant to uptake. There has been a lot of research go into this over the last 10 years.
    So easily fixed it's silly. Don't over stock. Show me just ONE dairy farm that's not. Just ONE! Dairy is not sustainable farming, not they way it is done in NZ. Europe wouldn't allow the dairy farming practices we have here, why's that? Hell, even the yanks do it more sensibly.

    As for fencing off waterways, I can show you a major hole in that theory on some properties... Fence to a low water mark, except the river spending six months above that in the paddocks. But but but it's fenced. YeahRight
    EeeBees likes this.
    The main rule of firearms.....Always point firearms in a safe direction

  9. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,579
    One of the key outcomes of the clean streams accord was an agreement to fence off all dairy farm waterways in order to reduce faecal contamination (through stopping dairy cows having direct access to waterways) and reduced Phosphate leaching into waterway
    s (through the creation of riparian buffer zones). As of last year 99% of dairy farm waterways have now been fenced. It is now a condition of supply for all of the major dairy companies.
    I wouldn't have thought dairy cows having access to waterways is that prevalent[ givin the cost of a cow and a drowned or bogged to death dairy cow ]as most would fence them out because of them dropping calves in them or becoming bogged themselves??
    the access to waterways is more a beef and sheep farm problem aint it??.
    its a nice way to distract from the real issue of fertilizer and excrement run off tho but I applaud that they,re doing it anyway how ever selfserving
    [QUOTE When you shit and piss where does it go? Unless you have a modern sewerage system that has kept up with population growth, then whenever you have more than 5mm of rain there is a good chance that it will find it's way (in it's raw state) into the nearest waterway. ][/QUOTE]

    not in my front or back yard and not 6 or7 seven times a day do 600 of us turn up to piss and shit in my 1/4acre.
    Last edited by gsp follower; 07-05-2017 at 11:28 AM.
    Wirehunt, EeeBees and cmore like this.

  10. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,579
    Are you aware that waterfowl are a significant contributor to E Coli levels in waterways? No? Fish and Game miss that fact out eh
    ]
    well aware actualy but generaly not a problem as normal un sucked off or undammed water levels wash it away.
    and I remember that silly tory trout in hurinui trying to blame geese for the elevated levels that farming were causing in the waiau and the hurinui.
    she got slaped down pretty quick by science and the local council if memory serves

    The 'swimability' argument is an interesting one which is used a lot by people with political motives. It largely relates to E Coli levels and how often they are over a certain level.
    excellent can I pursuade you down for a swim in the Selwyn te waihora area this summer.??
    I wont include lake forsyth cos apparently that's all due to deforestation.
    E COLI WILL BE THE LEAST OF YOUR WORRIES.
    LAST NIGHT ON A SHOOT AT BOGGY CREEK, after we finished catching colds but f all else.
    my waders reeked my hands and decoys reeked and the water was some soupy shit with dead fish and Christ knows what else in it.
    This might be an issue around the definition of a 'waterway' - IIRC a 'waterway' is 3m+ wide and contains water year round.
    sounds like my my bladder tho I wish f&g saw it that way for my 12 g owning steel suffering mates
    Last edited by gsp follower; 09-05-2017 at 07:47 PM.

  11. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    South Waikato
    Posts
    1,893
    Attended another meeting yesterday regarding clean streams.
    There is now a push for all class 6c, 7 and 8 land (which is basically rolling to steep hill country) to be planted in forestry in some catchments.
    Much of this area won't be granted a resource consent to harvest these trees when the time comes.
    EeeBees likes this.

  12. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,579
    Quote Originally Posted by 7mmwsm View Post
    Attended another meeting yesterday regarding clean streams.
    There is now a push for all class 6c, 7 and 8 land (which is basically rolling to steep hill country) to be planted in forestry in some catchments.
    Much of this area won't be granted a resource consent to harvest these trees when the time comes.
    then constructively they,re taking or at very least devalueing a privately owned asset.
    nats wouldn't do that without compo or a avenue to it surely??

  13. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    South Waikato
    Posts
    1,893
    Quote Originally Posted by gsp follower View Post
    then constructively they,re taking or at very least devalueing a privately owned asset.
    nats wouldn't do that without compo or a avenue to it surely??
    The fact that you use a question mark suggests to me that you don't believe they wouldn't.
    At this stage it's being driven by Regional Council. Those bastards don't care about the collateral damage as long as they get their way.
    But you are right, it will devalue properties considerably. And also reduce the ability for that property to produce due to decreased area.

  14. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,579
    Quote Originally Posted by 7mmwsm View Post
    The fact that you use a question mark suggests to me that you don't believe they wouldn't.
    At this stage it's being driven by Regional Council. Those bastards don't care about the collateral damage as long as they get their way.
    But you are right, it will devalue properties considerably. And also reduce the ability for that property to produce due to decreased area.
    the farmers party say it aint so.
    but on the upside they've kicked in 400 mill so every sodbuster or goat rustler can irrigate
    At this stage it's being driven by Regional Council.
    damned elected officials always trying to fix shit and make money.
    be better if they were government appointed like ecan a???
    But you are right, it will devalue properties considerably. And also reduce the ability for that property to produce due to decreased area]
    I get that but does this come under areas that just shouldn't be farmed for the good of everybody???
    I'm sorry 7mmwsm but you find little sympathy from me that your party is directing you further down the dogs udder for a change.
    not after they,ve fucked just about everyone else over first.
    I'm sure you,l be right after all the pms a farmer to and several others to.
    Last edited by gsp follower; 16-05-2017 at 09:27 PM.

  15. #30
    Member mrs dundee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Dannevirke
    Posts
    886
    Went out for a duck shoot tonight with mr dundee,nice and peaceful out their,some swans flew over to high,,so miss our dog jess,all good.Name:  IMG_20170516_171339.jpg
Views: 71
Size:  509.8 KB
    gsp follower likes this.

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. Good on you fish and game.
    By sakokid in forum Hunting
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-12-2014, 08:53 AM
  2. Letter to game
    By GSP in forum Game Bird Hunting
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 03-12-2014, 01:59 PM
  3. Fish and Game Warning
    By Dundee in forum Fishing
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 25-07-2014, 07:48 AM
  4. Fish and Game
    By Wirehunt in forum Hunting
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 26-03-2014, 09:35 PM
  5. Got a game fish photo?
    By outinabout in forum Fishing
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-09-2013, 11:10 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Welcome to NZ Hunting and Shooting Forums! We see you're new here, or arn't logged in. Create an account, and Login for full access including our FREE BUY and SELL section Register NOW!!