MrEd Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 Yes Hypocrites ..... and I don't mean boxes to transport fat animals! :-? ... that wasn't good was it! I just wondered why DOC are so active at preserving our Native Fish species when they'll happily through Rainbow trout into a river with them to compete for food and prey on the native young? It wouldn't be over something simple and special to them like the buck $? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HaNs Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 Elaborate please, what river is this? Im sure their decisions a mildly rational :lol: Wish trout where never here from the start, imagine if the rivers where filled with Giant Kokopu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrEd Posted March 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 Well my mate catches them and Browns in the Manawatu, my brother in the Otaki Forks, Brown Trout in the Ohau .... that's just directly around me! I've actually seen them released in Lakes around Rotorua and of coarse Taupo. If they were so into conservation why aren't they breeding Kokopu and other rare natives for release instead of trout! The rational behind it is simply money and nothing else! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanmin4304 Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 It is not only Doc, Maf are the same. It is all about trout and salmon because that is where the money comes from when people buy fishing licences. I have put traps in the local river to catch fish for turtle tucker and have had a few confiscated by fishing wardens. You can catch all the natives you want except if they think you are after whitebait or trout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrEd Posted March 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 And where does the revenue go from collecting license money? .... I'd say back into the breeding and release of more trout .... corrrct me if I'm wrong. Or does it go into funding the study of the effect of introduced species on our rare Natives??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryanjury Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 And then they go and change the import list exclude a heap of fish that would have no show of surviving in our waters? Unfortunately its the powers that be and you cant fight them no matter how much it doesn't make sense or is a complete contridiction.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxglove Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 I don't think it is only about the money - DoC has as part of it's mission the responsibility for Recreation, so they must appease recreational users as much as save native species. For DoC this means the headaches of balancing trout fishing vs natives, deer hunting vs natives, mountain biking and 4wd vs native reserves... I think it is better to support DoC in the work they do, and lobby for better work in the areas we care about - as the recreational groups are pretty powerful lobbyists too! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanmin4304 Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 I think that is the problem. It is all about the power of lobby groups and recreational fishers have a lot more say (and always have) than us. Overseas fish keepers can be a very powerful lobby. In Australia all hell let loose when they talked about extending quarantine etc. Here they just extended and there were only a few squeeks from the shaded area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navarre Posted March 2, 2008 Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 LOL at about recreation...is that why they pollute our water ways and forests with 1080...so we can gain recreational exposure? If we are not carfull shortly the possums that are left will catch TB from our Cows...especially since the largest vector of Bovine TB in New Zealand is the Mustalid and they dont eeat 1080 baits...go figure If it was about the $$$ then they woudl be putting in ground hunters to eradicate those pests as Possum fur is at $105 kilo thats $105000 pr tonne and wool is at what $4000 a tonne. So the simple answer to the question is ...Yes They Are. Navarre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrEd Posted March 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 2, 2008 I was going to bring up the 10/80 thing as well. After a drop in our town water catchment area (very safe drink the water still we're told) I went for a walk to check things out and there was not a sound from anything! The bush was usually alive with bird calls and fantails followed you every where. I went for an off the track walk and I followed my nose expecting to find mostly dead possums but there were plenty of dead birds and a deer also. Two of the dead birds were Wood Pigeons which probably didn't eat the bait directly but were eating berries covered in the dust, like the fantails eating contaminated insects and must be plenty of others going by the silence. Latter I read an article how concerned DOC were at the declining number of Wood Pigeons! :-? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navarre Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 When you thing that the residule 1080 n any insect it doesnt kill is enuff to sterilse a Tuatara or a kiwi then it does make a whole lota sense doesnt it. Let see Tuatara in pristine condition has a reproductive cycle that means it lays every 2 years maybe 10 eggs at a time...but only for 20 years or so out of its life span of about 100 years....very simular to Kiwi. Then we go and stop or slow that down even more. Oh you know I shot over 1000 possums last year and a dozen or so deer. Sold skins and meat from all or eat myself...kept friends and family in meat for ages. environmental impact is debateable but negliable compared to arial sprayiing of a posion that some suggest was designed to put in water ways to kill ememy troops but disapate after a few weeks so the "good guys" can then pilage whats left. Know what you mean about the Woodies...spent ages in Arthurs Pass few years ago as have family that live in Otria. Silent bush for 6mths as they had a very dry summer. Not to mention the dogs and horses that have died. Think what it does to our river beds, insects and plants then on up thru the food chain. Navarre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrEd Posted March 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Anyone heard of the impact of 10/80 on fish after a drop? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coelacanth Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Edited by Mod - Billaney, comment not called for. DoC has NOTHING to do with breeding or releasing trout or salmon!! Fish And Game are responsible for that. They are completely different organisations! MaF is also a different organisation with different responsibilities. MoF is also a different organisation with different responsibilities. Is this getting through to anyone? You might as well say that DoC are hypocrites because hobbyists like to keep African cichlids. I'm constantly amazed at the huge amount of anti-DoC and anti-MaF feelings commonly displayed on this forum. Its really pathetic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrEd Posted March 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 You have such a pleasant way of getting your message accross! DOC have "everything" to say in the release of introduced species of fish in our rivers and lakes! Where do you think Fish & Game get their authority from? I'm constantly amazed at the huge amount of DOC and MAF huggers feelings commonly displayed on this forum. Its really pathetic! Edited again by Billaney - trying really hard to keep this thread open, name calling is not needed to get a point across Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrEd Posted March 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Sorry Billaney I didn't think calling myself names would cause offense. Been reading info on 10 80 and its affect on fish and invertebrates and they look relatively safe or though its residual poison can cause weight loss in eels but its risk to eat is considered extremely low but also went on to say MAF won't allow it to be exported. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanmin4304 Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 I think the point is that Doc and Maf seem supportive of recreational fishers and therefore the trout and salmon populations because of the power of the recreational fishing lobby. This also applies to some other things like the hunting lobby (deer and ringneck pheasants etc). I took a long time to make salmon farming legal and still can't do it with trout but importing goldfish is banned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.