Posts by izogi
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Envirologue: Branding a Post-Predator…, in reply to Rich of Observationz,
I do think that by building wooden boardwalks a metre wide and fitted with handrails over a large chunk of the conservation estate, DoC have created an expectation that everywhere will comply with this minimum standard.
If you don't mind me asking, which chunks are you thinking of?
-
In related news, Simon Mercep interviewed Dr Mike Dickison a few minutes ago about the charismatic side of conservation, who pointed out some of the issues around us being obsessed with saving the cute birds at the expense of real biodiversity and uniqueness. He also makes some interesting points about how the current system of corporate sponsorship can potentally be unhelpful overall when it binds public funds to topping up the majority of a specific programme when that public money might be better spent elsewhere.
-
Envirologue: Branding a Post-Predator…, in reply to ,
We joined the Halo protect, which was set up by Gareth Morgan.
Do the traps basically kill stuff, or are there alternatives? We recently shifted to Crofton Downs (on the far side of Otari Wilton's) and I've been thinking about joining. The neighbourhood still seems to have a few cats, though, and I don't want to burn too many bridges too quickly.
-
Envirologue: Branding a Post-Predator…, in reply to Yamis,
My dad was on the DOC board in the late 90s. He left the board after a year saying to me that it was (to paraphrase) an under funded shambles.
I wouldn’t disagree with this, but DOC in the 90s was a mess as a whole. (It’s hard to say it wasn’t when it killed 14 people through an accident that revealed a disconnected shambles with incompetence for expected responsibilities at multiple levels.) I don’t know if it’s fair to judge today’s DOC on 90s DOC, though. I’ll never assume that DOC’s perpetually in good hands, but I quite like Lou Sanson’s outlook on things. He’s different from Al Morrison who he recently replaced.
There was that recent hammering of DOC by the Ombudsman for ignoring its own Management Plan, and all of the recent public consultation that went with it, but from what I’ve heard the culture from the top has been changing since then, even if it's still under lots of strain from Morrison's restructuring. I guess time will tell.
Admittedly though, pest control is WAY more important than poncy walker/ trail ‘joggers’ like myself. Jog on.
Is it? I think pest control’s more important overall, but as someone who spends a fair amount of time in the conservation estate, I don’t think DOC should be neglecting its other legislated responsibilities of fostering recreation, just to put pest control first. There are good reasons for fostering recreation, and DOC has it in its mandate because it inherited those responsibilities from other entities which were doing it until they were dissolved in 1987. To me it’s more a case of DOC simply being underfunded for everything it needs to do. If it’s appropriate to provide more resources for pest control, then we should be assessing everywhere it could come from – not just other sources within DOC’s existing budget.
On the recreation side, though, it’s good to see DOC taking some serious steps to let volunteers get involved again, like with its support for the Outdoor Recreation Consortium. Since building and workplace law changes in about the mid-90s and until recently, DOC’s been fairly paranoid about letting volunteers do anything significant on the conservation estate (track maintenance, hut maintenance, bridge maintenance) without mountains of paperwork and acceptance of liability, which for most potential volunteers made it completely impractical.
-
Envirologue: Branding a Post-Predator…, in reply to Lilith __,
Feral cats, cats in reserve areas (or adjoining reserves) are one thing, but city cats are another.
I guess it can also come down to what sort of environments people want to live in, with or without dedicated reserves nearby.
When living in Melbourne I noticed how common it is for municipalities to have strict rules about cat management, and that’s just an accepted part of life there. It’s not because there are reserves, but to create an environment where native wildlife can thrive in people’s back yards. Doormat sized dogs also seem very popular, perhaps (I’m guessing) to fill a gap which New Zealanders often fill with cats.
Anyway, I’m very fortunate to live in part of Wellington which, thanks to reserves and much town belt pest control, community back yard pest control, and habitat nearby, has a relatively thriving native bird life. We get Tui and Bellbirds and Kereru and Kaka frequently, and that’s something you don’t get anywhere near as much in other parts of town. But just around the corner from here, behind Ngaio, is a new sign noting how a kaka nest (still rare outside the fenced sanctuary) was attacked several weeks ago by a dog that wasn’t on a leash. Once again this whole thing really relies on people both understanding and wanting to participate.
-
Thanks for writing this, David.
I've become faintly optimistic seeing the recent proposals for a predator free New Zealand. As recently as a few years ago, even suggesting such an idea would immediately attract derision about it being an impossibility due to the scale. But now there are actual numbers being thrown around for particular outcomes (most recently about $9 billion), which can be analysed and criticised. A point being made behind that link isn't about reselling the dawn chorus so much as it is arging that $9 billion for eradication of "pests" is cheaper than the $16 billion which might be spent on fighting agricultural pests in more traditional ways over the same period. It's useful just to have a baseline for discussion.
But yes, it's far more complex than simply saying "do it", paying up and expecting some undefined consequence which everyone imagines in their own head. Gareth Morgan's also right to point out that the public really needs to buy into the idea in lifestyle as much as financially. That could take generational changes.
-
Access: Geoblocking, global mode and NZ…, in reply to Russell Brown,
I think they also know there's a distinct chance that they will lose if this gets to court. The Copyright Act seems reasonably clear on access vs copying, which is why we have parallel importing and region-free DVD players.
You may be right (and I hope so), but longer term I think I may wait until we see how the TPPA turns out before putting too much trust in the future of the likes of the Copyright Act.
-
Before then, we all assume Winston Peters will resign. But Peters is not required to resign, and has said he may not.
I didn't hear it but Stuff seems to be reporting this morning that he said on Morning Report that he'd definitely resign:
The NZ First leader, who convincingly wrestled National's strong hold on the electorate by more than 4000 votes, told Radio NZ's Morning Report that there was never a question that he would resign as a list MP.
"Of course I'll resign, I don't know why it was ever a material question."
-
Hard News: How about that cricket, eh?, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
…perhaps one could make a book on it?
<nudge, nudge>I think I'd give them the benefit of the doubt without more evidence. I'm just still struck by the way in which that innings seemed to unfold. It really was boring to watch, and not because they were trying and failing so much as not seeming to try at all after plan A didn't work. I guess teams have different qualities and personalities but I can't imagine any NZ team, or Australian team, giving up in the way that India seemed to last night, especially with such a crucial result on the line. Or maybe I'm wrong?
-
Hard News: How about that cricket, eh?, in reply to Russell Brown,
Maybe we’ll win on Sunday, maybe we’ll go down. But I cannot imagine the Black Caps going down like that.
I think you took the thoughts out of my head from last night. I stayed up to watch, only to see a run-rate of about 10 climbing increasingly higher while they just pushed the ball around for 4 or 5 singles an over, with no apparent urgency to even try to do anything (risky or not). Then to top it off, Dhoni ran himself out in a way that made it look as if he simply didn't want to ruin his 'finishing' record by being not-out in a losing game. It's as if they had no plan to adapt to the situation in front of them, and yet from what I've been reading it's apparently Virat Kohli's fault that the team didn't win, or something.
I think one of NZ's strengths is an ability for the rest of the team to adapt (or at least adjust) when individual performers fail (which will always happen), even if those attempts to adapt sometimes fail miserably. I don't care so much if they lose on Sunday, and hopefully it's at least competitive. More than anything, though, I'd feel very really sad if they simply give up 2/3 of the way through the game, as India seemed to do.