Varanophile Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 You know how in the US of A if you ask someone if they are a cop working under cover they supposedly have to say if they are or not, otherwise their evidence is invalid...or maybe I have watched too many 'b' grade movies... My question is does that apply in NZ, and if so, who on this forum works for MAF in any form? I have also heard that MAF can access PM's on this site, can an administrator shed some light on this please... I had a wonderful 3 hour interogation by MAF recently after returning from Asia, as did my brother when he returned from Thailand to Perth EDIT - Billaney Also under the 'freedom of information' act apparently a person can request to see the file on him/her held by MAF, is this true? Excuse my paranoia, but no dealing I have ever had with them has proven to me that they are anything but a bunch of dodgy bueracrats lining their own nests at the expense of the truth. If there was finally a decision on what species were legal and a proper permit system introduced than all would be well. I am sick feeling like my hobby is in the blurred grey area when it comes to legality, when MAF can not get their act together, and I know you DOC people agree here too, and a few of you wildlife enforcement people Say what you mean and mean what you say....your thoughts fellow herpetophiles??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
repto Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 yes to all that V,not hard to put a mark by your name and know when your due back,no point wasting the fruit dog on you bro??I know other hobbyists that have had similar treatment on their return to our wonderful country.maybe its time to head offshore to scaleier(sp?) pastures? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix44 Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 if there is a document that has your name on it, and it contains information about you - then you have the right to access that info - unless pending inquiries from the courts etc... I wouldn't think that any one can access PM's - surely the privacy act comes into play here. if PM's were to be accessed - you would need a court order. again I think it is best to confirm any matter of legalities with the admins and/or a legal professional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmsmith Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 You can get most information you want under the official information act. It can only be withheld if there is a good reason to do so - like national security, the advancement of democracy etc. If you want more information about how to access the information under the OIA, I can help you out. To access PM's, you would probably need a court order. It's like email - private and it stays private unless there is a good reason to disclose the information. I doubt MAF would bother accessing PM's on a site like this - there is lots of other ways to get the same information. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
repto Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 how can you get the "same information" if it is contained within a "Pm"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingart Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 was something brought up during your interrogation that suggested the pm's on here were being scrutinised varanophile? the new anti terrorism laws can be used in many ways they are so grey things can be construed as eco terrorism - smuggling etc, a matter of national bio security maybe big brother is watching you can request information on yourself but files can be lost or mislaid :roll: there is a new set of rumours doing the rounds at the moment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmsmith Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 The information contained in the PM is often in other places - straight away, someone else knows the information, and chances are, one of the two people it involves has shared the information in some way. In saying that, I'm not trying to say that you can't access PM's at all. Under the guidelines for the forums, it says that where something illegal is being done via the forums/PM's, action can be taken - that's a disclaimer to allow access by 3rd parties in the case of suspected illegal activity. If the information is "lost" there are legal channels you can go through to get it - our government has to be transparent. I'm not sure that the anti terrorism laws apply when MAF is the one implementing them, and it's really really hard to prosecute under them. Also, bio terrorism would only apply when there's terrorism involved - that is, an intent to create fear in the wider community. So, smuggling a snake, for example, wouldn't be bio-terrorism, but smuggling 200 with an intent to release them to cause fear in NZ would be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingart Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 the wheels of transparency can grind slowly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmsmith Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 the wheels of transparency can grind slowly That's for sure - no one said it was efficient!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanmin4304 Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 Don't forget that officers of Maf are creatures of statute and can only do what the parliamentarians have empowered them to do with the laws they have made. The time is fast coming where these things can be rectified. We are not all related to Freddy Angel but I guess they consider that the greater your interest in these critters the greater the risk of you smuggling them. The same would go for a druggy smuggling drugs. They wouldn't be doing their job if they ignored it--- provided they stick to the law and don't just do things because they think it is a good idea. With a court order any info can be obtained from PM, Email, mobile phone, computer etc. There is a court case going on here at the moment where text messages are being quoted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
repto Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 your are contradicting yourself there aren`t you smithy?you need a court order to access pm`s then they can be somewhere else "straightaway"?thats crap and offers them a way to use private information only written here?people can also put crap on here that could be taken as gospel,like my breeding colony of chameleons,not to mention my breeding pair of green iguannas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navarre Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 Firstly I DO NOT work for MAF. However I was in a life long ago an pro diver, and someone I dived with now works for MAF. Would you like me to ask them these questions? Navarre? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spoon Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 if u ask the police to veiw ane information they have on u u will get ur crimainal record and thats it if they have other information ie reports on suspected activivties they will deny they exist . so the privacy laws dont really exist because these documents on come into 'existance' when its court time. also remember some maf depts have more power than the police to seize equipment and conduct searches Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmsmith Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 I'm saying that they could get the information another way (like by taking to the person you were PMing with) but if they want the actual PM from this site, they need a court order. I get what you mean about people saying untrue things on here too, I guess that could be a problem, but if they suspect you for something, you're probably going to find out somehow and can set the record straight. Spoon, when you ask for information held by MAF, you can often get reports and current investigations under the OIA. Your criminal reports are always accessible (you can actually get the court to print them and post them to you!). Suspected behaviour wont always be released because that can prevent them from catching you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
museeumchick Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 OK so this might be a controvercial thing to say but while i think some MAF activities are a pain in the neck ( edit Billaney ) and all that (particularly those within the country), regarding bringing things into NZ or exporting our plants or wildlife i think to err on the side of caution is fine by me. the devastating effects of smuggling/ badly thought out or accidental introductions on our environment, outweigh (in my mind) a few hours of grilling by some officer at the airport (excessive ranting and appropriate actions when further travel is interrupted is fine). I have had my share of run inns with cranky airport staff (once leaving AUZ i had an extensive grilling followed by my dirty laundry being spread over the security office in the search for military grade explosives! but since safety was the concern i limited my reaction to relaying it as an amusing story to anyone who would listen) but in the long run i think it might be worth it? just my thoughts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stella Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 Museumchick, I am with you. I have been horrified at all the plants and animals I have heard of people having that they know is not allowed in the country. Really disgusts me at the lack of responsibility. Sure they think they can look after them in a way that the organisms 'can't escape', but do they have a plan in case of their death? Do you have an agreement with someone who can go in and contain/destroy this stuff, or will your death be the point where these things are released and become the next possum/old man's beard? And if something did escape (like a critter) I'll bet they wouldn't mention it to the appropriate people to contain it, they would just wait until it had established and someone noticed. :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insect Direct Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 one would assume if your pets are legit then no worries, but who really knows after the iguana slaughter :-? time for change in this counrty cant be tooo far away lets just hope its for the better of the country and the hobby :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navarre Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 Spoke to my mate at MAF They used to have someone monitor the Media. They have a search engine thingy that alerts the TradeMe site if a bio risk is listed on there. They do have "Persons of Interest" but these come so from many different sources its not funny. They dont monitor independant sites as a rule as they just dont have time. esp at this time of year with spring fishing and crays being soft etc. Also I agree with you MC and Stella. I feel very lucky to live in this country despite 1080. However....What we have and what we can get are very unrealistic. Also SOME species could be and have been well managed in NZ with little or no detremental impact...take RCD for existance....lol Pity tho some dont put as much value on our natives.....in the same breath some of the exotics that have been here are spectaular animals. And I would give all of my teeth and left nut for a pair of those iggies or some leps, shingles torts...and the list goes on. It perhaps is not what we are and arent that is the issue, but more the incongruencies of how what we have is being managed? I guess this will always be contentious tho espicially with what has happened in our recent past with reptiles in NZ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
museeumchick Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 even if we can keep exotics safely and effectively in captivity, do we need to? We have so many fantastic natives, i often wonder if we are justified in introducing 'pet' animals purely for our own enjoyment. also it is difficult to know what the long term effects of an apparently safe introduction will be (ie captice exotic parrots providing a pool of hosts for viruses attacking our native parrot species, who could know?!). r.e.1080, personally i am still on the fence on this one (yep its bad, but so is deet but when visiting the tropics i would rather use deet than get malaria/encephalitis etc.... lesser of evils?) -she says as she ducks for cover..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingart Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 t perhaps is not what we are and arent that is the issue, but more the incongruencies of how what we have is being managed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billaney Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 Your PM's are private , no one else but the person you send them too will read them unless one or the other of you makes them public. Can i now please politely ask this thread claim down a bit , I do not want to lock or delete it but if personal attacks even on a group of people continue it will be removed. this includes for bad laungage. Thank you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billaney Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 After being asked politely to return this topic edited I have done so , PLEASE respect the forum rules. Thank you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DantezGirl Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 thank you bill tis very interesting reading Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingart Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 i can understand the need to protect our native species, but some animals are entirely tropical and would not survive in our environment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David R Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 Museumchick, I am with you. I have been horrified at all the plants and animals I have heard of people having that they know is not allowed in the country. Really disgusts me at the lack of responsibility. Stella the problem lies with WHY they are not allowed into the country, and that the system was designed by a bureaucrat who knows nothing about fish/plants/reptiles. We bitch about it on a daily basis at work, as plants have an "allowed list" similar to fish. The survey of plants was done even less thoroughly than it was with fish and there are many species being grown commercially [that pose no risk to the environment] that are supposedly not allowed to be here. What Varanophile is saying is that the decision-makers need to either s*** or get off the pot, and make it clear in black and white what is and isn't allowed. BTW are you "horrified and disgusted" with all the people on this site who keep frontosa? They aren't supposed to be here, according to 'The List', but you can hardly claim that they are a big risk to the environment... 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.