Thread: The truth is out...

Watching TVNZ news tonight I noted with interest an article on the Mackenzie Country which informed us about a new area of special interest. It was a typical act of average journalism... gratuitous pictures of cute furry animals, DOC staff getting emotional over aforementioned cute furry animals... a bloke declaring "he likes seeing things caught in traps because it gives him something to do"... and a boastful announcement that DOC was going to have an all-out war on introduced preditors in this new area of special interest because of course these predators are responsible for killing all our cute furry native animals.

What a great idea.

I found the area of operations surprising. Generally speaking the new conservation effort covered a large area, including Aoraki Mt. Cook. I'm no expert and I admit I've not climbed Mt. Cook, but I've done a bit of walking around the hills and I'm not sure there are too many preditors living up there. I guess that's largely irrelevant. (Nothing like including a vast area of high altitude land mass that is permanently predator-free in order to make your statistics look spectacular.)

Now all me a cynic (primarily because I am) but this "new" plan smacks of being part of another initiative - extermination... errr, sorry... "lowering the numbers of Tahr in the area to an acceptable and sustainable number" - read: zero. For me the new initiative is just too closely related to the Tahr program to be an accident and it demonstrates a clear desire by DOC to clear out a significant area of our National Park of anything that isn't considered to be a small cute furry native animal.

Be very certain there is a bigger picture to be had. Compartmentalized declarations disguise the truth. Its a tried and true adage - divide and conquer.

I have climbed Mt Cook and I didnt see anything up there, just a few dickheads taking selfies

The target density for Tahr in Mt Cook and Westland NP is zero, so not much of a surprise

With current control methods they are dreamers end of story. Problem is they will waste shitloads of money trying to do it.

NZ doesn't have any cute furry native animals does it?

We have bats, but they aren't cute.
We have fur seals, but not many of them in the Mackenzie.

Well look at the "Big Picture" like this!
We need to keep keep an open mind to the eradication of introduced species and this is how it could be sorted by turning the clock back!


1, Stop/remove the latest immigrants!
2, Remove the Greenies
3, Remove Doc
4, Remove the introduced trees, crops, animals, technology etc
5, Remove the European invaders
6, Remove the Maori invaders
7, Remove the Moriori invaders

And then we can all enjoy this Fantastic Country!

Originally Posted by Fireflite

Well look at the "Big Picture" like this!
We need to keep keep an open mind to the eradication of introduced species and this is how it could be sorted by turning the clock back!


1, Stop/remove the latest immigrants!
2, Remove the Greenies
3, Remove Doc
4, Remove the introduced trees, crops, animals, technology etc
5, Remove the European invaders
6, Remove the Maori invaders
7, Remove the Moriori invaders

And then we can all enjoy this Fantastic Country!

Plus the species that were here before the "Invaders" arrived didn't consume any foliage?

Originally Posted by berg243

.soon you will need a permit to just look at it.

That's probably closer to the truth than we realize

Originally Posted by kidmac42

That's probably closer to the truth than we realize

I think I watched the news article on the goggle box a couple of days back and they were banging on about a little known black water bird that is extremely endangered that breeds in the area ad they were saying how including the mountain range as one boundary was a stroke of genius as no rats, mice or weasels could come over from the West side of the island into the area. It struck me as one of those "No shit Sherlock" moments.

You're correct Rushy.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for protecting the "little known black wading bird" from extinction. It was more just the connection between the seperate DOC policies I was referring to. On one hand we have a new area of special interest in which we are going to see 100% extermination of predators to save a wading bird while within the same area we are seeing a similar extermination of non-predator species that on the face of it seems to be a seperate subject. The two must be linked and that raises the question - what else are they not telling us?

It is probably a ground nesting bird, so once they have exterminated anything that might eat it they will then target anything that might walk on its nest.

The Black Stilts are pretty cool. They are strikingly black. Doc has a captive breeding and release programme so a predator free protected area in the Tekapo riverbed would make sense as this is where they mostly seem to head to for nesting. There are a LOT of cats in that area. I flicked the light around one night when fishing at the canals after I heard a rabbit screaming and saw 3 cats and 2 ferrets all heading towards the noise within about three minutes of the noise starting.

The irony is: it seems the people who are the most adament on manipulating ecosystems in the name of conservation, and who declare themselves to have natures' best interests at heart, are usually the people who are the most disconnected from it.

Whereas, the people who live closest to nature, (and yes, perhaps the humble bushman does smell a little funny and lacks the ability to perform quantum physics on the fly) usually acknowledge the inherent qualities of every species. Including pests.

I've seen stoats and possums in the bush, and I do not recall becoming hot and flustered and hell-bent on killing them. I simply stood in one place and observed them. And regardless of the 'nature crimes' they've been accused of, even they are a thing of wonder and beauty.

An interesting idea to explore is: Do our feelings and perspectives towards nature differ when we're immersed in it V.S isolated entirely?

I wonder if native tribes in various parts of the world (who truly DEPEND on the integrity of the wild places they frequent) ever entertain the idea of purging certain species to benefit themselves, or if they simply adapt.

I'll have to do some reading on that.

Sage keeps going on about whacking off introduced species and isn't too keen on the idea of "Herds of Special Interest"... I wonder when she's going to exterminate the Kaimanawa Horses.

I wouldn't call them an introduced species as such as they were a tool that helped the early settler before fuel driven engines were developed but the herd of horses was allowed to grow and have been in Waiouru for a long long time

Sage did say she wanted to wipe out ALL introduced species which brings me to NZ's biggest and most leathel and numerous predator... the domestic cat.

Imagine the uproar... well we all can when Morgan proposed the idea a few years back

Originally Posted by Seventenths

Sage did say she wanted to wipe out ALL introduced species which brings me to NZ's biggest and most leathel and numerous predator... the domestic cat.

Could argue that humans are the worst thing for the environment and need to be removed...