Comments on: Losing our Enviroschools

By: kjuv

kjuv — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 09:10:03 +0000

Greenfly:
Nice to see that there are people who tend to value other creatures for themselves (intrinsic value) rather than how they are, or can be made, of use to humanity (instrumental value). You must sometimes feel like the anti-slavers when they were trying to tell the world that no person, no matter what their race, should be the ‘property’ of another.
Our emphasis on individualism and our belief that we are somehow apart from (and superior to) nature could well be the seeds of our own extinction.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: greenfly

greenfly — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 09:02:43 +0000

Bring on the profiteers to profit the rhino then!

Now, to the whales.

I suppose the mananagers/marketers will drop the rhino like a hot potato, the moment the demand for horn stops. What then? Back into the wild for those now domesticated animals?
It gives me no comfort to know that the future of creatures other than those we’ve already domesticated, relies upon the value of its bits and pieces. Having seen so many varieties of apple trees sawn to the ground as the overseas market swings from flavour to flavour, I am not encouraged.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: Sapient

Sapient — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 08:15:21 +0000

Greenfly,
Yes, save the Rhino by privitising its management. The collective ownership is what we esentially have at present and it has failed. I would suggest that the role of kaitiaki would best be fulfilled by the privitisation approach.
Remmember that the privitisation approach and the common management approach are not mutually exclusive. It is insanly expensive to maintain near extinct species. By allowing the farming and hunting of these animals a profit motive is created and economies of scale can be acheived. The public institutions can obtain the species from the private bodies for preserve release at a price likely far cheaper than it would cost to run the expensive breeding and matenence programes. Given demand for as-wild animals there would be a profit motive for retaining such characteristics in atleast a portion of the farmed population, if the public institutions seek to purchase them as-wild or they are hunted then that profit motive will exist and the species will continue in entirity.
The wild nature of the animal is no more maintained in the public approach with farming prohibited than the private approach with farming allowed. But the combined public-private approach with farming allowed has the potential to easily retain this nature.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: greenfly

greenfly — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 07:52:04 +0000

Sapient – save the rhino by privitising its management? Some one must own the animal to save it from the rest of us? Hmmm. We could all own it as taxpayers contributing to state ownership of the beast, or we could all ‘own’ it in a kaitiaki relationship. Of course guardians have to have power to repell those who would profit from any resource, be it religious or military or social.

kiore1 – nice call on the possums. Reminds me of the habit of some pig hunters who transfer piglets into areas that have been hunted out. Inspirational. I’m with you on the value of wild animals in the wild – both getting more and more difficult to find now of course. The value of wild is inestimable and incalcuable as well, so there will be many who see no value in it.
Hooves eh! We don’t need ‘em!

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: kiore1

kiore1 — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 07:27:52 +0000

The problem is that the farming of animals actually causes more habitat destruction and extinction than it saves. Farming cows has made cows proliferate but caused wide spread destruction of New Zealand’s lowland kahikatea forests and the extinction of the buffalo in the United States, which is displaced.

the brilliant idea of farming possums has saved them from any threat of extinction but has caused widespread damage and threats of other extinctions.

The farming of any animal does not preserve the animal; it preserves a domesticated version of the animal. An animal is not simply a bundle of DNA it is a living being with distinct behaviour, and an interaction with other elements of its environment. Kiwi DNA may survive if they are farmed, but the native wild kiwi in its habitat, interacting with other animals and plants in its habitat will still be in danger of extinction.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 10:37:56 +0000

well as a ratepaying kiwi – i will work with local iwi to keep a mating! pair of rhino’s safe with me – they got smarts ‘umans ain’t figured yet…

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: Sapient

Sapient — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 09:12:06 +0000

Greenfly,
Ahh! I see what your getting at.
In this case it is the tragity of the commons, pure and simple. Sometimes this problem can be solved with privitisation, others it is best solved through regulation. In this case the regulation (the conscious intervention) has failed terribly and infact exacibated the problem (through hindering the more effective approach of privitisation) while the privitisation approach (hindered by the regulation) appears to work wonders.
Its a pity really, I am rather adverse to the privitisation approach in most cases.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: greenfly

greenfly — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 09:07:36 +0000

Kevyn – nothing beats rhino horn for knife handles. It’s literally the best material for the job on the planet (known). Its the combination of ‘quills’ and keratin form a composite that we have yet to replicate.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: greenfly

greenfly — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 09:03:32 +0000

Prim – re Enviroschools – I’ve long held the belief that you express.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: greenfly

greenfly — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 09:02:37 +0000

On reflection, the point I was trying to make was: that the situation where a rare animal looks due to become extinct as a direct result of it carrying a monetarily valuable ‘add-on’ (horn, feathers, whatever) indicates to me that there needs to be conscious intervention of some sort to save the beasts. The ‘natural’ process of a market that should not extinguish its raw material/resource, doesn’t work. I would cite the huia as a better example. It got ‘desired’ to extinction. Nice feathers – I’ll have some of those!

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 08:41:47 +0000

Losing our schools Period – is still a big issue – Who wants a dumbed down population that badly?
Btw, a friend of mine got a form letter from the PM today cancelling Superannuation cos ‘we’ can’t afford it – any feedback?
PS Save the Rhino !!!!

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: Owen McShane

Owen McShane — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 08:01:12 +0000

You mean “Better dead than bred?”

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: Prim

Prim — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 07:42:24 +0000

Perhaps Key was worried that Enviroschools would produce too many future Green voters.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: Sapient

Sapient — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 07:39:24 +0000

Greenfly,
The hunting that allows them to stockpile horns and attempt to eliminate the entire species is not a result of the legalisation of farming but rather a result of the rarity of the resource comparitive to demand, the greed of the hunters, and insufficent protection. This problem would actually be averted by farming the rhino for in the absence of a monopoly or cartel on the farming of rhinos that strategy becomes uneconomical and illogical as one cannot expect other farmers to do the same. If the other farmers do not do the same the price will not increase significantly and your would ahve effectivly nuked your source of income. Considering that the farming of rhinos would, according to supply and demand, decrease the price of rhino horn (assuming the absence of a same-degree increase in demand due to the ethical acceptability of the use of the horn when rhinos are farmed) this move could even prevent much of the motivations of poachers in the wild and the protection fo the farms by the farmers would effectivly eliminate poaching of the farmed animals. Also, not only does it empower african communities (in this example) but it elimiantes a source of income for one of the most significant causes of social hazard in africa.

Prohibition is dangerous, eh?

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: Kevyn

Kevyn — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 07:25:35 +0000

“sold to Yemini for knife handles”. That’s a crucial piece of information. Answering these questions should identify the key market (or democratic)failure and thereby the key market/democratic solution(s):
Why only Yemini?
Why knife handles?
Cultural?
Any other barriers to material substitution for Yemini knife handles? Cost? Import/export barriers?

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: Kevyn

Kevyn — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 07:15:10 +0000

Greenfly, Your assumption that the Rhino extermination is “The market at work” is seriously flawed as is assuming Rhino not being farmed is further evidence of market failure. The latter is a failure of democracy since farming Rhino is illegal.

The former problem is a combined failure of both the market and of democracy. In fact both systems share several prerequisites for successful operation, especially freedom of information and a need for ethical behaviour.

Hard righties are the worst enemies of the free market because they keep referring to the Theory of the Perfect Free Market as simply “the free market”. The perfect free market does not exist in the absence of perfect information, perfect competition and perfectly rational participants and, IMHO perfectly ethical behaviour. IMHO democracy has the same prerequisites, hence the change from FPP to MMP was a step towards the perfect competition prerequisite for perfect democracy. Now, if only something could be done about the information withholding and dubious ethics of most current and recent politicians at both local and national level we might end up with government that balance the free market with appropriate governance instead of the mish-mash of ideological interference in this bit nad hands off on that bit with no rhyme or reason.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: greenfly

greenfly — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 07:12:43 +0000

Well Peter, I was calling politely for your views. I’ve no suggestion re: the situation of ‘wild rhinos being actively extinguished by marketeers seeking to add scarcity value to their product’.
Your rather brief contribution, ‘Farm them’ will have to suffice then.

sapient – your proposals are, needless to say, sound but have you factored in the ‘we’re going to destroy the remainder so that our store of horns rises astronomically in price’ aspect? (Horn is usually sold to Yemini for knife handles – enormous prices are payed. Some go to the medicine industry). I’m not empathising with the animal here, just looking at the market at work.
If rhino farms are in fact redressing the balance and increasing rhino numbers without intervention of any sort (soft hearted animal lovers etc) then I’ve argued myself into a hole. if not, then I’ll have to continue to ponder the issue. In any case, I have to put my mouse aside for the night. Thanks guys.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: Sapient

Sapient — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 06:55:16 +0000

Greenfly,
Ahh, but better the genes of the auroch survive through their evolutions than be eliminated with the forests they call home. Better yet the forrests not be destroied, but meh. I dont personally see a reason why the animals we farm should enjoy their life, but my sentiments to such are probally well known by now.
I am not saying that we should domesticate the rhino or cage it up. Indeed, it would be irrational to do so as the financial value of the rhino comes from its trophy status more than its meat. While it is certainly true that if would be financially viable to domesticate the beast and kill it for its meat and horn. You are missing the point; the rhino is already farmed in such a way, atleast according to the program. apparently the population has increased dramatically and they are hardly kepts in sheds or small cages. It works, thats what matters. The utility of their genes and survival is retained and more utility is extracted from them, thats all I really care about. If you want them in the wild the enviros or governments can always buy live ones for release; if the demand is high enough im sure you will even get plenty of ‘farmers’ dealing in relaeasable stock as a side-venture. Its win-win-win The rhinos thrive, the jobs are created, and the preservation of the species now produces a profit rather than pure costs. its stops poaching; people protect that which they own.

It resonates fine with me: Its logical, it works, it acheives everything that could be hoped for; far more than any other program to date or even other theoretical approaches.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: BluePeter

BluePeter — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 06:46:32 +0000

>>prehaps the Kiwi better represents most NZ’ers

LOL

I think Kiwis are rather left wing…..

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: BluePeter

BluePeter — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 06:44:21 +0000

What do you suggest, Greenfly?

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)