@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.
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.
Bookmarks