Comments on: Forest & Bird double dating

By: Fred

Fred — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 05:04:21 +0000

One more post on this…

If Forest & Bird are an independent, “in good faith” organisation… not in DoC’s pocket… why are they in denial about the large number of bird deaths recorded after aerial 1080 drops? With and without the legendary repellant baits.

Lots of pictorial evidence available from the anti 1080 groups on this.

Why does Forest & Bird not insist on cheap manual bait stations designed for possums only?

Well, we know why and now so do you.

By: Owen McShane

Owen McShane — Sat, 23 Jun 2007 02:53:58 +0000

I havae the list of grants from the MfE environmental fund and it includes substantial grants to Forest and Bird to fund appeals in the Environment Court.
UNfortunately, because I am in the middle of moving house and office and library I cannot put my finger on the totals. But they typically get $15,000 for every appeal. They are normally supporting an appeal by DoC.
The last year I looked the Environmental Defense Society got grants of over 250,000.
So when a solitary rural or coastal land owner sits down to mediate to avoid an appeal he is likely to find himself on the opposite side of a table to DoC (with millions) F and B and EDS who are all funded by the taxpayer.
Its hardly a fair fight.

By: dad4justice

dad4justice — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 05:18:40 +0000

1080 kills New Zealand forests and wildlife and MP’s have business interests in the production of the killer poison -fact !!!!!!!!!!

By: Fred

Fred — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 01:03:30 +0000

Correct Owen….

If you want to hear some fine cognitive dissonance listen to F&B stroking DoC on the use of 1080….our national poison.

By: Helen Bain

Helen Bain — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 23:32:47 +0000

Owen McShane knows very well that Forest & Bird does not receive government funding. We are funded by membership fees and donations.

By: helmet

helmet — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 23:15:12 +0000

Hmm. Well good on Key for showing up and giving it a go. In principle, I think a blue-green alliance is a great idea. Unfortunately our Greens are red so there’s little opportunity for progress there. However, if the nats can become a little (or a lot) greener of their own accord, without capitulating to the socialist leaning green party, then that would be fantastic.
I personally don’t think much of Forest and Bird as an environmental organisation because of their hostile view towards trout and deer, among other things.
I would like them a lot more if they made all members kill their pet cats as a prerequisite for membership, just to be consistent.
I view their ethic as preservation, not conservation, I do not think it is a practical or desirable approach.

By: Owen McShane

Owen McShane — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 23:09:56 +0000

I suppose they want to keep an eye on where all the taxpayer’s money is going.
Forest and Bird are effectively an arm of DoC and are funded accordingly.