by frog
United Future has again proposed splitting the Department of Conservation (DOC) into two organisations: one “responsible for ‘conservation’ aspects such as…pest control”, and the “other responsible for ‘recreation’ aspects such as…game management”. Therein lies the rub and the reason United Future’s policy is bad: ‘game animals’ are both pest and resource. E.g. Deer, pigs, chamois and tahr [pdf].
Where these animals threaten flora and fauna, they need to be managed as pests. Recreational hunting can help reduce game numbers to reduce the conservation impact. But to split DOC into two separate agencies would only increase bureaucracy and result in more damage to our natural heritage – splitting ‘game management’ and ‘pest control’ would be like trying to open a door with the right arm pushing and the left arm pulling!
However, having better coordination of hunting activity in New Zealand is not a bad thing, indeed it could aid conservation, increase firearms safety, and help encourage more people into the outdoors.
The only consensus recommendation of the ‘Game Animal Panel‘ set up to consider how to best accommodate the ‘resource’ bit while minimising the ‘pest’ bit, was for better representation and accommodation of game interests within the existing policy and planning framework – i.e. the legislative status quo!
[Oddly, someone has pulled the plug on the "Game Animal Panel" website]
Interestingly, National’s outdoor recreation policy also released late yesterday focuses almost solely on hunting (like trampers are not recreationalists too?) and proposes renaming Conservation Boards to include recreation in their name. Is this a cosmetic sop to the hunting lobby, or a sly hint at what restructuring is in store for DOC if National forms the next Government?
Hunters are of course a more compelling lobby group when they come knocking at your door than trampers!
Published in Environment & Resource Management by frog on Sat, July 19th, 2008
Tags: , conservation, Department of Conservation, hunting, recreation, united future
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
‘responsible for ‘conservation’ aspects such as…pest control?,… this is a bit of a joke. The govt owns APC that buys in, at vast expense, 1080 poison, where it is banned and the govt through DoC spread this across our land…. great monetary gain for our govt…. and DoC just continue the devastation… another govt department.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
DOC’s already divided into sections dealing with recreation and biodiversity (and a much smaller group looking after historical sites, which Dunne doesn’t mention) so it’s hard to see the advantages of further division.
“Hunters are of course a more compelling lobby group when they come knocking at your door than trampers!”
Dunno about that, as a lobby hunters seem to lose out against the FMC and tourist operators and so forth. It seems somewhat artificial for ‘game management’ to be set against ‘pest contro’ given hunters want to shoot animals that conservationists want shot. There are differences, but plenty of common ground too.
As a hunter/conservationist, it surprises me that politicians (Greens in particular) have preferred to play off one group against another, rather than reap the rewards of bringing them together.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
People should be aware that the Animal Health Board is setting it self along with the help of their friends in the regional Councils to take over all pest control. my concern is that the are not a government organisation but an Incorporated Society formed by the Federated Farmers that has become an in-house group of the ex pest boards that is a closed shop to most. Also as I said in the West-coast site that Animal Control Produces Wanganui is expanding their site in anticipation of an increased work load and it is my belief that this increase is to manufacture 1080 stock solution in NZ they may already be doing it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)