[The following article was written by Tigerquoll and first published on ^CanDoBetter.net  under the title ‘Brushtail Possums are a destructive pest in NZ – but is persevering with a backyard fur trade New Zealand’s ethical solution?   Comments have been included.]

.

Australia’s native Brushtailed Possum (Trichosurus vulpecula)

Click image to enlarge

[Image courtesy of Ákos Lumnitzer, ^http://amatteroflight.com/]

.

Australian Possums were introduced by New Zealanders to New Zealand in 1837

.

Brushtail Possums are native to Australia but a destructive introduced pest in New Zealand.

Yet is ‘Possum Merino‘ New Zealand’s ethical solution to its pest control or really just perpetuating a backward 1837 Fur Trade?

After all, it was New Zealander colonists in 1837 who sailed to Tasmania and to the east coast of Australia to poach Australian Brushtailed Possums and export and introduce them into defenceless New Zealand so as to establish a selfish fur trade.  Who else is to blame?

So thanks to colonists, Brushtail Possums have unquestioningly since become a destructive colonising pest to New Zealand, just like so many others –

• Stoats
• Domestic cats
• Chamois
• Deer
• Ferrets
• Goats
• European hedgehogs
• Horses
• House mice
• Rabbits
• Rats
• Himalayan tahrs
• Wallabies (also poached from Australia by colonial New Zealanders)
• Weasels
• and arguably all non-Maori humans.

.

Introduced New Zealanders and their descendants professing natural New Zealand justice need to frankly pull their imposive self-righteous heads in.

.

A Maori traditional Haka

.

Probably the most relevant and credible authority on this centuries old problem of human introduced possums into New Zealand should be New Zealand’s own Department of Conservation (DOC).  Yet DOC has no watchdog to vet its possum control policy, to evaluate the ethics of its indiscriminate aerial 1080 poison programmes, its budget decision making, its pest control methods.

New Zealand Department of Conservation is its own master, answerable to no-one.  It dictates possum control and culling only on the basis of it deeming it administratively cost effective and efficient. Perhaps this is a leftover culture of Rogernomics applied to lean management of New Zealand’s ecology.   On the New Zealand Department of Conservation website, the possum problem in New Zealand is clearly explained. An issue this author accepts as a serious ecological problem facing New Zealand.

Under the heading 3.3 Possum Damage to Native (NZ) Forests, the possum problem in NZ is explained as follows:

“Over the past 50 years, possums have emerged as one of the major threats to the health and wellbeing of forests throughout New Zealand. Many of these impacts are subtle and indirectly affect native birds and insects. Possums cause damage to native forests from the ground level to the canopy where, by concentrating on individual plants of their preferred species, they can kill trees by defoliation over several years. Possums preferentially feed on some of the tall canopy species – such as tawa, northern rata, kohekohe, southern rata, kamahi, pohutukawa and 20 Hall’s totara – while ignoring others. They also prefer some of the smaller trees, such as tree fuchsia and wineberry, along with mistletoe, forest herbs, some ferns, and a number of endangered shrubs.

It is difficult to imagine that possums, which are about the size of a large cat, can kill individual trees that have dominated forest landscapes for centuries before possums were released here. But when the number of possums is combined with the total amount each one eats, their impact on their preferred species is easier to appreciate. The amount of food consumed by an adult possum each night is about 160 gm of digestible dry matter. There are probably tens of millions of possums living in native forests. In total, possums are consuming thousands of tonnes of vegetation each night.

Possum populations have now modified many New Zealand forests. The rate and extent of these changes vary widely between different types of forests. Beech forests are the least affected, but in the vulnerable southern rata-kamahi forests of Westland many valleys have lost between 20% to 50% or more, of their canopy trees. In severe situations, possums have caused the complete collapse of the canopy within 15–20 years of their arrival. Tall forest is then replaced by shrublands.

While the impact of possums is most visible and dramatic when it involves canopy trees, their most pervasive impacts are often less visible. Possums have recently been described as “reluctant folivores”. This means that possums prefer to eat other forest foods than the leaves of trees. Flowers, fruit, leaf buds, fungi and insects are all highly favoured. The consumption of these foods has the largest impact on the healthy functioning of forests and the animals that rely on them. The consequences of possums concentrating on these foods are:

.

Loss of Flowers:

.

• Preventing the formation of seeds
• Removing nectar sources for birds and bats
• Reducing the food supply for many invertebrates
• Nectar loss reducing food supplies for chicks, e.g. kaka, tui.

.

Loss of Fruits:

.

• Reducing food supplies for birds and invertebrates
• Affecting bird breeding condition and nesting success, e.g. kakapo, kereru
• Reducing or eliminating seed dispersal
• Reducing the regenerative capacity of native plants.

.

Loss of New Shoots:

.

• Reducing the ability of plants to overcome leaf loss from weather and seasonal patterns
• Reducing numbers of new leaves, jeopardising plant health.>>

.

New Zealand Department of Conservation also states that “the damage to native forests can be seen all too clearly in many areas. Possums ignore old leaves and select the best new growth.  In some areas they have eaten whole canopies of indigenous Rata, Totara, Titoki, Kowhai and Kohekohe.

Possums also compete with New Zealand native birds for habitat and for food such as insects and berries. They also disturb nesting birds, eat their eggs and chicks and may impact on native land snails.

New Zealand Department of Conservation cites examples of natural vegetation damaged by possums at Pirongia Forest Park, and the upper canopy of NZ native forest trees on the slopes of Mt Karioi, south of Raglan.”

So, assuming New Zealand Department of Conservation’s account is correct, the introduced Brushtail possum is a serious pest to New Zealand (NZ) native ecology.

But what to do about it?

.

What should Australia responsibly do – repatriate back its possums?

.

It’s long overdue for the New Zealand Government to get serious about its self-caused possum problem and look to resolve it once and for all for the benefit of the New Zealand ecology and the possums themselves. It needs to look at the root causes.

The possum was introduced to New Zealand by New Zealand profiteering colonists.

Many New Zealanders conveniently forget:  

It is not the possum’s fault it is in New Zealand.

.
However, pouring $80 million a year of New Zealand taxpayers money into cruel indiscrimate aerial baiting is not working. If it was the possum problem would be reducing and there would not be a burgeoning possum fur trade.

Instead of perpetuating a 19th Century immoral fur trade, in order to control possums and other introduced pests in New Zealand, one option is to catch and relocate them back to their native home country habitat. This may seem highly expensive and labour intensive and far fetched, but what other option is both humane and effective?

It’s not the possums’ fault.  New Zealand colonists introduced them from Australia to New Zealand. The problem is an inherited inter-generational problem caused by New Zealand colonists. It shoud be solved by their descendants, not perpetuated as a fur trade.

Acknowledging the possum in NZ is an introduced pest, the question in this case is whether the possums in New Zealand are being killed humanely and whether this is being effectively monitored by a government watchdog worthy of the public trust?

By killing possums, humans have a moral obligation to do it humanely. Possums like all animals are sentient beings and so feel pain, fear and suffering.

.

New Zealand sprays 1080 poison over its native forests

.

New Zealand Department of Conservation’s official choice of death is aerial baiting with the the literally cheap and very nasty poison ‘1080’ (‘ten-eighty’, or Sodium Monofluroacetate).

New Zealand Department of Conservation’s argues it is humane and safe.

Heading out to drop 1080 poison across NZ forests

(a smiling assassin)

.

But The World League for Protection of Animals argues otherwise and offers the following explanation about ‘1080’ poison.
“1080 (sodium monofluroacetate) is a cruel and indiscriminate poison used to ‘remove’ unwanted populations of animals.

Banned in most countries, 1080 is still used liberally throughout Australia to control so-called ‘pest’ species, and reduce ‘browsing damage’ caused by native animals on private land.

1080 poison is a slow killer. When ingested (usually through baited food) the animal suffers a prolonged and horrific death. Herbivores take the longest to die – up to 44 hours, while carnivores can take up to 21 hours before finally succumbing to final effects of the poison.  The speed of death is dependent on the rate of the animals metabolism.

.

1080 Poison Causes a Slow & Horrific Death

.

Witnesses to the deaths of herbivorous animals, such as macropods, have reported:

“Affected wallabies were sometimes observed sitting hunched up, with heads held shakily just above the ground. Generally they appeared non-alert and ‘sick’, with shivering or shaking forelimbs and unsteady balance. Most individuals then experience convulsions, falling to the ground and lying on their backs and sides, kicking and making running motions with their hind legs before dying. Many individuals also ejaculated shortly before death, and, with others, exuded a white froth from their nostrils and mouth.”
Carnivorous animals such as dingoes, dogs, foxes, and cats become very agitated, as they tremble, convulse and vomit.

.

Animal symptoms of eating 1080 poison:

.

“…restlessness; increased hyperexcitability; incontinence or diarrhea; excessive salivation; abrupt bouts of vocalization; and finally sudden bursts of violent activity.

All affected animals then fall to the ground in teranic seizure, with hind limbs or all four limbs and sometimes the tail extended rigidly from their arched bodies. At other times the front feet are clasped together, clenched or used to scratch frantically at the cage walls.

This tonic phase is then followed by a clonic phase in which the animals lie and kick or ‘paddle’ with the front legs and sometimes squeal, crawl around and bite at objects. During this phase the tongue and penis may be extruded, their eyes rolled back so that only the whites show and the teeth ground together. Breathing is rapid but laboured, with some animals partly choking on their saliva. Finally such individuals begin to relax, breathing more slowly and shallowly and lying quietly with the hind legs still extended but apparently semiparalysed”.

From the above descriptions, it is without question that 1080 poison inflicts great pain and suffering on affected animals. Aside from the physical pain endured over the many hours before death, the terror, fear and anxiety felt by these animals is unimaginable.”>>

.

Read More:  The World League for Protection of Animals,^http://www.wlpa.org/1080_poison.htm

.

The main reason why the New Zealand Department of Conservation uses 1080 is simply because it is cheap.  Dropping it it indiscriminately by air is efficient and convenient.

Whereas setting caged traps for possums is expensive. Using poisons that act faster that 1080, such as cyanide is also more expensive.

So the New Zealand Department of Conservation’s key justification for its use of 1080 is one of cost.

It also justifies using 1080 because other countries use it for pest control, like Australian & the USA , so implying that 1080 must therefore be ethically acceptable.  But New Zealanders should make up their own mind and should recall that both the USA and Australia used Agent Orange in The Vietnam War.

The Department of Conservation also justifies 1080 use because NZ has no natural mammals so the risk to non-target species are nil. But this claim is FACTUALLY INCORRECT!

On 30 July 2008, The Dominion Post reported that after a Department of Conservation aerial drop of 1080, seven kea had died at Fox Glacier from eating the 1080 poison, wiping out almost half a group of the endangered and protected parrot being monitored by the Conservation Department. DOC came up with excuses, but with such an endangered bird with so few kea left on the planet, DOC cannot afford to gamble with the kea’s extinction.

Anti-1080 campaigner Mike Bennett said the kea deaths were the tip of the iceberg. “These are only the monitored ones. If that percentage is extrapolated for the entire population, that doesn’t leave many for the next drop” and has called for a ban on all aerial 1080 drops in alpine areas.

.

New Zealand is not reducing possum numbers, just perpetuating its 1837 Fur Trade

.

New Zealand’s own backyard fur trade has seen a recent resergence since the 1830s when New Zealand hunters first introduced the possum to the wilds of New Zealand. the traditional method of possum slaugher is by trapping. For nearly two centuries the cruel ‘gin trap’ with serrated jaws was used. Although the trapping laws have recently banned gin traps, leg-hold traps remain the method of choice for trappers.

According to the NZ Lifestyle Block website:

“Leg-hold traps such as the ‘Lanes Ace’ or ‘Gin Trap’ have been widely used for possum and rabbit control for many years. The gin trap is more than 10.5 cm across its open jaws, which are serrated, and it is powered by a flat metal spring, so it’s a “size 1½ long spring” trap.

Traps of size 1½ or larger are more likely than the smaller traps to snap shut across the belly or chest of an animal. Although larger traps have been banned, traps of size 1½ can still be used if they are powered by double-coil springs. From January 2011 they will have to be padded, and you can’t modify them yourself to make them padded…

.

Why are these traps cruel?

.

When the gin trap snaps shut on its victim, the teeth bite into the skin and can cause a lot of trauma and no doubt agonizing pain.

All leg-hold traps are indiscriminate about what they catch. If they are set in possum tracks or runs it’s more likely than not that any catch will be a possum, but it might also be a cat… rat, bird or small dog. Large dogs can sometimes pull out of them but they may be injured in the process.

.

Possum Trappers preferred weapon of choice:  the ‘Lanes Ace’ or ‘Gin Trap’

Widely used for possum trappers in New Zealand for many years.

.

Icing sugar or flour around traps is sometimes used to attract possums, but if used beneath a trap the animal is likely to be trapped by its snout or head.

.

What are the alternative leg-hold traps?

.

In New Zealand it is still legal to use size 1 leg-hold traps such as the Victor within the restrictions on location and setting described above. It is smaller than the gin trap and doesn’t have serrated jaws.

The ‘Victor No 1‘ can be bought with cushioned inserts that make it more humane. It tends to cause less frequent and less severe injuries than the gin trap and larger leg-hold traps, but it can still cause severe bruising, and trapped animals will sometimes cause themselves severe injuries in their struggle to get free.

Trappers favour the Victor No 1 because it is compact, light and relatively efficient. The changes in the legislation mean that it is likely to become even more popular.
There’s good advice for landowners on the most humane way to use leg-hold traps and their alternatives on the National Possum Control Agencies website (www.npca.org.nz), and not just for possums but for ferrets too.”>>

.

Rabbit caught and dead in Lanes Ace Trap. 

The steel jaws of the trap break the rabbit’s leg and it dies of pain and suffering over days.

These are used in New Zealand in the possum fur trade

[Image Source: ^http://www.animalwritings.com/archive/2004_08_01_blog_archive.asp]

.

Typical traps used in New Zealand for possums are the flat jaw/leg hold’ type such as the ‘Bushmaster‘. While recognised as more humane that the serrated jaw ‘gin trap’, it can still cause suffering to a trapped animal, and of course is indiscriminate.

The Hamilton City Council on the North Island prohibits the use of leg-hold traps such as gin traps in residential areas and within 150 metres of dwellings or places where there are likely to be pets. It instead recommends Cage Traps and Timms Traps for possums and other feral animals.

.

New Zealand’s 1837 Possum Fur Trade now globally profitable!

.

The justification spin:

.

<<…Possums were introduced into New Zealand by the caring, sharing Aussie cousins in the 1870s, to get the fur trade going. [Ed:  How do we know it was not New Zealand colonists returning to New Zealand that introduced the possum?]    Unfortunately what the possums did is have a fabulous time in the New Zealand climate, and aided by the decline in the fur industry, increased their numbers to over 70 million today.

Possums are a pest in New Zealand. Not only do they manage to consume approximately 21,000 tonnes of vegetation every night, but they are also killing native birds, and generally upsetting the ecological balance. Many native trees, plants and birds, including the Kiwi, are under threat of extinction because the possum is destroying their habitat. A possum will visit the same tree night after night and eat away until the point where the tree cannot recover. It has also now been confirmed that possums will eat both the eggs and chicks of the native Kiwi and Kokako. Where Australian plants have their own defences against the possum, NZ plants do not. The possum has no predator in NZ. Regular culling has been carried out under government supervision since the 1940s and it is estimated to cost around £20 million each year.

Very interestingly, the World Wide Fund for Nature does acknowledge that possums need to be controlled.

Although the culling began in the 1940s, it has only been in the last 30 years that good use was made of the resulting resource.

Kiwis (the human ones!), known for their ability to fix anything with a piece of no. 8 fencing wire, are a bit of an ingenious lot. They’ve managed to turn the pest into an export commodity. Possum meat goes to Asia (have you eaten ‘Kiwi Bear’?!), and the pelt is used for any number of commodities as it has properties that lend itself to both warmth and protection. New Zealand is the only place in the world where possum fur can be harvested.>>

[Source:  ^http://www.kiwikate.co.uk/]

 

.

Ed:   The British colonial New Zealander’s cultural inferiority complex with nearby Australia is manifested in a hatred for Australian Possums.

Proud in denial, the fact is that colonial New Zealanders in 1837 chose to sail to Australia to capture the species and voluntarily introduce the Brushtailed Possum to New Zealand. 

In 1837, Australian possums didn’t want to go to New Zealand.  Colonial Australians at the time probably took no interest in a few New Zealanders taking wildlife for their own gain.  Maoris atthe time probably were unaware, had no say then anyway, but would have challenged the introduction had they been duly informed.

Kiwi Kate’s reference to “caring, sharing Aussie cousins” sadly reflects bigotry out of her misinformed upbringing.

.

Use of Feratox (cyanide) Poison?

.

According to the Lifestyle Block website NZ veterinarian Dr Marjorie Orr, BVM&S, PhD, BA and lifestyle farmer on , the most humane method of possum control is to use Feratox capsules, which is an encapsulated cyanide.

The preferred baiting method is to use these in specially designed “bait stations or sachets stapled to trees, baited with peanut butter (possums like it and dogs and birds usually don’t). The pest control companies that put out the poison will usually on request remove the sachets after a few days, and this helps reduce the risk of accidental poisoning of other animals. The poison in the capsules, cyanide, is quickly destroyed on exposure to air.  Death is quick and relatively stress-free and there is no risk of secondary poisoning of dogs that scavenge poisoned carcases.”

The test of humane killing must be conditional on the absence of pain and stress caused to the animal and that the killing be very quick.

But the killing of a native animal is wrong, despite it being introduced by humans. It has become a convenient excuse for New Zealanders to kill possums. Possum control by either DOC or the fur trade is not effective and in both cases the chosen methods are inhumane.

.

New Zealand’s possum problem has been allowed to escalate into an immoral industry for profiteers. 

The New Zealand Government is responsible for failing to deal with the problem effectively and humanely.

It has perpetuated an immoral fur trade that begun in the 19th Century, and at the same time allowed much irreversible harm to be caused to New Zealand’s fragile ecology.

.

.

Possum Comments:

.

 ‘The legacy of human ignorance and delinquency is enormous’ 

(Vivienne 20091205) :

.

<<Research has begun recently into biocontrol of brushtail possums as the only long-term, cost-effective solution to the possum problem in New Zealand, where possums cause significant damage to native forests, threaten populations of native plants and animals, and infect cattle and deer with bovine tuberculosis.
see the abstract for the CSIRO report

Immunocontraception is a humane means of controlling possums with wide public acceptance.

Although several studies have investigated or modelled its demographic consequences, there have been few studies of the possible effects of the presence of sterile females on local males.

Implications for biological control

Cynanide kills more quickly than 1080, but no less violently. Researchers have called this death humane!

Food is provided in a feeder for a few of days to lull the animals into a false sense of security. Then their trust is betrayed with the food being replaced with encapsulated cyanide pellets. The animals die within metres of the feeding station.

Possums are endearing little animals and what they suffer is horrific!  The legacy of human ignorance and delinquency is enormous! Our colonial attitudes continue to haunt us today, with species continually threatened and made extinct by human expansion and self-interests.>>

.

‘Fertility controls the only longterm option for NZ possums’ 

(Pat, 20091207) 

.

<<Fertility controls the only longterm option for control NZ possums, anything else is only a bandaid. We have the technology to do this, it only needs some more research and it could proceed. Its crazy to allow unwanted animals to breed out of control, then cruelly kill them, 1080 or not.

40 years ago we put a man on the moon….and then bought him safely back….and yet we cant humanely solve the NZ possum problem? I dont believe it! The NZ DOC appears to be as incomptent and as useless as our own Australian wildlife bureacracies.>>

.

‘NZ possums’

(Possum lover, 20091208):

.

<<As always- the real pest is the human.

However, I can see from this article that the New Zealand environment would be better off without the Brush Tail Possum. Apart from the cruelty a possum fur industry makes little sense as it would rely on a sustainable population of the animals – and this would mean continued deleterious effects on the environment. Bringing millions of animals back to Australia seems extremely impractical as I think there would be a lack of habitat and how would one round them all up? Human population growth is continually robbing possums of habitat in Australia even though they are very good at sharing with humans.

The poisoning and trapping options are not acceptable at all- and anyway — it seems clear that whatever they are doing in NZ to reduce the population of possums — they are not being effective, anyway !

(As I write this I hear on radio National that a few hundred camels will be shot in central or northern Australia because their numbers have got out of hand and they come close to human settlements looking for water. Who brought the camels to Australia? Who put them to work in opening up the centre of the continent.? Who abandoned them to the wild when they had served their purpose?)

Back to the possums- realistically it seems to me that it’s a choice of either accepting the possums and a changed environment (just as humans changed the ecosystem by extinguishing the moa) or making a concerted effort to humanely totally eradicate the animals from NZ. There is no point in partially reducing the population as more possums will fill the available habitat.

More info on the practicalities of sterilisation would useful.  If only there was a measure of the suffering that humans inflict on each other and on other animals. All other suffering on the planet would be dwarfed by this measure.>>

.

‘New Zealand complacent about its wildlife’ 

(Tigerquoll, 20091208):

.

Yes, I agree the real pest is the human. Yes, I agree the New Zealand environment would be better off without the Australian Brushtail Possum.

To round up and try repatriating the many Brushtail possums in New Zealand back to Australia would be extremely impractical. Do we know the numbers and their geographic concentrations? Assuming the possum are on both islands, can one island be targeted first?

Where would they be repatriate to?  Possums are territorial mammals. Even in Australia native wildlife experts claim that it is not possible to relocate possums, which poses problems for both possums already in Australia and for the reintroduced possums. The cost exercise would highlight the extent of the problem and the real costs of New Zealand having neglected a serious pest invasion for nearly two centuries. This reinforces the scale and complexity of introduce pest problems when left ignored.

But what is the alternative that is both ethical and effective?

The sterilisation science sounds encouraging, yet even then ‘immunosterilization’ as it is formally labelled has questions about efficacy of fertility control, the means for delivering antigens. Then there are the potential legal and social concerns that relate to the possible future use of antigens.

But I do recommend this is where the $80 million of New Zealand taxpayers money should be diverted instead of indiscriminate 1080 drops by helicopter. Question is why has the New Zealand Government become so complacent about seeking a humane and effective permanent solution?

Australia’s feral camel problem in central Australia is comparable to New Zealand’s possum problem. I understand they will be shot, which suggests a faster clean kill (so long as the shooter is a trained marksman with appropriate knowledge of camel to effect a single round quick kill, rather than some recreational shooter), but what to do with the carcasses? Is shooting humane and ethical? Is shooting the only answer, or is it just the cheapest and nastiest quick fix coming from some staffers desk? Could these camels not be herded and shipped live back to their native country in the Middle East or North Africa or from wherever their ancestors originated?

Question again is, why has the Australian Government also ignored the feral camel problem for so long to allow it to build to becoming so numerous and widespread?
I am not in favour of New Zealand ignoring its possum problem, because such a defeatist stance would only perpetuate further destruction of New Zealand’s forest ecology and to inevitable local extinctions of native flora and fauna. It would also encourage the perpetuation of New Zealand’s immoral fur trade, which is no different to Canadians commercially clubbing fur seals.

Is the New Zealand Government just as complacent with its Biosecurity? Less than a month ago Queensland cane toad was found in an Australian tourist’s hiking boot in Queenstown on the South Island. All it needed was a mate and it would have been off and breeding. “A MAF biosecurity spokeswoman confirmed the toad arrived last Tuesday but was not spotted.”>>

[SOURCE:  ‘Cane toad evades Kiwi airport biosecurity’ , by Tamara McLean, AAP, 20091126.   Read More: ‘Cane toad catches ride to Queenstown’, by Will Hine, Fairfax NZ, ^http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/3098565/Cane-toad-catches-ride-to-Queenstown]

 

.

 

---

 

.

Footnote:

.

It makes it hard for New Zealand’s Department of Conservation to act to properly address New Zealand’s chronic feral possum infestation, when the government sacks 140 of DOC’s staff demanding it cut $8.7 million in operational expenditure…

.

‘DOC cuts 140 jobs’

[Source: ‘DOC cuts 140 jobs’, 20130326, by Michael Daly, Fairfax NZ, ^http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8471779/DOC-cuts-140-jobs]

.

<<The Department of Conservation (DOC) has announced plans to cut about 140 largely regional management and administration positions.  The job losses are part of a reorganisation under which DOC’s existing 11 regional conservancy boundaries will be replaced with six new regions.

DOC director-general Al Morrison says the new structure would maintain DOC’s own conservation delivery work while setting the department up to work more effectively with external partners.

“DOC must adapt if it is going to meet the conservation challenges that New Zealand faces – even if you doubled DOC’s budget tomorrow we would still be going ahead with this proposal.”

DOC would continue to operate out of the same number of offices as now with more than 1200 operational staff, Morrison said.  About 118 management and administrative positions would go as a result of the new flatter organisation.  A further  22 operational roles would be cut through efficiencies gained by setting up new support hubs for activities such as asset  management, inspections and work planning.

The size of the proposal was aimed at ensuring DOC met its $8.7 million savings targets and continued to meet its current delivery work.

.

[Ed:  This should pay for John Key’s $7 million funding to Immigration New Zealand to “increase visitor numbers by smoothing processes at the border”  ^http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10878911].

.

A conservation partnerships group would be set up focused on working with community groups, iwi, local authorities, private landowners and businesses to attract more resources to conservation, Morrison said.   Recreational and natural heritage field work would be the responsibility of a conservation services group.

Consultation with staff about the proposals had started and no final decisions would be made until staff feedback had been considered.   Any changes would not take effect for some months.

“I acknowledge this will mean a difficult period for many staff and we will be making every effort to ease the impact of these proposals,” Morrison said.

A freeze on hiring new staff had been in place and about 160 positions were filled with temporary staff.    “It is simply too early to say what impact these proposals will have on individuals – we will look at all options such as redeployment and relocation to minimise redundancies.”

.

‘GAPING HOLES’

The Green Party earlier today predicted the proposal was to axe 140 jobs.

“With the department already pared to the bone these latest cuts will mean less protection of our special native plants and wildlife,”  Green Party conservation spokesperson Eugenie Sage said.   “DOC manages more than a third of the land in New Zealand and the argument that volunteers and a few corporate sponsors will fill in the gaping hole these cuts and continued pressure on department spending create is nonsense.

“National is trying to turn DOC into a corporate entity focused on stakeholders and corporate sponsorship at the expense of its key role to to protect and preserve native plants and animals,” Sage said.   “This National Government is toxic to the environment and is polluting, digging up and selling our children’s future.”

Prime Minister John Key this morning said the department was over-staffed with middle management and bureaucracy.   “What you have seen is, over the good times under a Labour government a big buildup in kind of the middle management and bureaucracy, and in the leaner, harder times where the Government doesn’t have a lot of money to throw around, we don’t have that much money,” he said.

.

King of Overseas Holidays, John Key,

He flew first class with his wife to attend a foreign royal wedding on 20110429

Here he’s looking resplendent in his bespoke $6,000 suit washed with pounamu.

Total cost of Key Junket which did nothing for New Zealand, NZ$200,000?

.
.

“Government agencies now needed to be leaner, and more efficient”, Key said.   He compared the restructuring to a similar exercise at Telecom, which was expected to axe hundreds of jobs this year.

“If you go and look at what is happening at Telecom at the moment, on a different scale … but no-one is arguing that the chief executive isn’t doing the right thing trying to make sure that organisation is leaner and more efficient,” he said.   The Government had a responsibility to taxpayers, he said.

“The management at DOC have a responsibility to ensure that their resources are directed in the right place and that is what you are going to see today,” Key said>>

.

Ms Eugenie Sage

Green Party of Aotearoa representative:

.

“National is trying to turn DOC into a corporate entity focused on stakeholders and corporate sponsorship at the expense of its key role to protect and preserve native plants and animals”.

.

Wild Poporari River protected inside Paparoa National Park

Similar to nearby but unprotected cousin Pike River

Both inside Te Wai Pounamu (New Zealand’s South Island)

Note the Nikau Palms (Rhopalostylis sapida) endemic to New Zealand.

.

Poporari River is a wild river of New Zealand’s South Island that flows from headwaters and chasms below the rugged mountainous Paparoa Range, westward into the Tasman Sea.   Since 1987 the river and some of the range have been rightly protected within the Paparoa National Park.

But the Pike River flows from the other (eastern) side of the Paparoa Range, just outside the national park.  It is a tributary to Big River which in turn flows south of the Paparoa Range into the Mawheranui (Grey River) and eventually westward through the town of Greymouth and out to the Tasman Sea.  Yet of the Poporari River and the Pike River, their forest and riverine ecosystems are the same.

‘Paparoa‘ is Māori for ‘long place‘.     The Paparoa Range extends parallel to the west coast for about 50 km south-south-west from the lower Buller Gorge, between the Grey and Inanga-hua Valleys and Tasman Sea and the coastal plains.  The range aproximates heights of over 4,000 ft with the heighest peak being Mount Uriah at 4,925 ft.

The Paparoa Range bedrock is of granite formed during Earth’s pre-Cambrian Era (over 600 million years ago), and the range subsequently uplifted during the early Pleistocene Epoch (2.6 million years ago), was then carved by glacial action during the Ice Age 20,000 years ago, and since eroded by water and wind leaving sharp ridges, steep cliffs, cirques, and deeply incised rivers and streams.

[Source:  Frederick Ernest Bowen, B.Sc.(Durham), New Zealand Geological Survey, Otahuhu, New Zealand, in Te Aara – The Encylopaedia of New Zealand, 1966, ^http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/1966/paparoa-range]

.

Glacial action still evident further south in Tai Poutini National Park

[Source: ^http://www.duwal.com/en/travelguide/australia/new-zealand/westland-tai-poutini-national-park]

.

Limestone underlies most of the Paparoa National Park and it is responsible for the area’s amazing landforms – high coastal cliffs, impressive river canyons, delicate cave formations and the bizarre ‘pancake-stack’ coastal formations that the area is so well known for.  The national park is perhaps most famous for the ‘pancake rocks’ and blowholes of Dolomite Point, near the little settlement of Punakaiki.

The Park is also famous for Cave Creek which flows through a 30-metre chasm emerging from a limestone karts system deep beneath the Paparoa Range.

.

The Paparoa Range

above the Pike River

.

Paparoa National Park is characterised by luxuriant coastal forest, limestone cliffs and canyons, karst systems and underground streams, and an absolutely spectacular coastline.

Vegetation within the park is wide and varied, due to the mild climate and high fertility. With an annual rainfall of 350–500 mm, the Paparoa Range below 3,500 ft is dominated in thick Podocarp Hardwood Forest (broadleafed) canopy.   Above 3,500 ft, a thin narrow belt of subalpine scrub giving way to mountain grasses on the tops.

Podocarp trees belong to a coniferous family known as Podocarpaceae of which there are seventeen. The best known are rimu, kahikatea, miro, mataī and tōtara. In its natural state, a podocarp forest can be luxuriant with a dense undergrowth of shrubs, ferns and tree-ferns.  The few precious remnants of forest which survive often contain the highest diversity of plants and animals in the region. They are a left-over from an ancient forested time that dates back to Gondwanaland of the Late Cretaceous Period  (144 to 65 million years ago).

One of the significant understory elements is the Crown Fern (Blechnum discolor), which is endemic to New Zealand.

.

Crown Fern (Blechnum discolor)

Māori name is ‘Piupiu’

.

The koru (Māori for “loop”) is a spiral shape of a growing fern based on the shape of a new fern frond and symbolizing new life, growth, strength and peace.

.

The ‘koru’ of New Zealand’s endemic Crown Fern

[Source: ^http://blogs.arcadia.edu/impactmagazine/files/2010/10/Plant-Blechnum-discolor-koru_500px.jpg]

.

Forest birds such as Tui,  Korimako (Bellbird) and Kereru (New Zealand pigeon) migrate seasonally between coastal and upland forests.   The Titi  (Westland Petrel) colony south of the Punakaiki River is the only known place in the world where these burrowing seabirds breed.  The birds live mostly out at sea, but during the breeding season you can see them flying to and from the colony at dusk and dawn.  The nocturnal and secretive Great Spotted Kiwi (Roroa) is not often seen.

[Source: New Zealand Government, ^http://www.doc.govt.nz/parks-and-recreation/national-parks/paparoa/]

.

Great Spotted Kiwi, or Roroa (Apteryx haastii)

A rare species of kiwi endemic to the South Island of New Zealand – sadly classified as ‘nationally vulnerable’.

[Source:  ^http://true-wildlife.blogspot.com.au/2011/05/great-spotted-kiwi.html]

.

Finders Keepers or Might is Right?

.

Native Māori tribe, the Ngāti Wairangi, had traditionally lived along the Te Tai Poutini (west coast) including in the area around Greymouth (the mouth of the Grey River).

Ancestrally, the tribe apparently originated from Hawaii in the 15th Century.  But irrespective of ancestral authenticity, the native Māori Ngāti Wairangi lived around and called the river valley area Māwhera.  Thankfully, due to the natural mountainous terrain dividing the east and west coasts, Ngāti Wairangi territory was protected for generations from invasive tribes.

It is generally recognised by New Zealand historians that the arrival of Māori to New Zealand included the introduction of the Polynesian Rat (Rattus exulans) known to the Māori as ‘kiore‘, which being prolific breeders would have had a devastating impact on native ground dwelling birds and small animals and reptiles.  Similarly, it is generally recognised by New Zealand historians that the original eleven distinct species of Moa (endemic flightless birds) were hunted into extinction by the Māori by about 1400 AD.

A joint Māori and New Zealand Government sanctioned reported statement about the validity of such history would secure the truth, should such can be proven true.  Myths can be dangerous.

 

[Source: New Zealand Government,

^http://www.doc.govt.nz/publications/about-doc/role/policies-and-plans/conservation-management-strategies/west-coast/foreword/map-1/]

.

‘Māwhera‘ (Greymouth area) became known for its Pounamu (precious and rare ‘greenstone‘, like jade).    The unique nature of pounamu had a deep spiritual significance in Māori life and culture and was and remains highly prized.   It naturally is found along the river bed of the Upper Arahura River around Greymouth, particularly at Kaikanohi, Pahutani, and at Kotorepi.

A Māori Mere Pounamu

a Greenstone traditional Māori club or ‘patu’  (‘mere’ meaning ‘weapon’)

 The greenstone patu (‘mere pounamu’) is the most revered of all traditional Māori weapons and chieftainship.

[Source: National Army Museum Waiouru collection,

^http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/media/photo/greenstone-patu]

.

Over time, the Ngāi Tahu tribe from the north learned about the pounamu and fought the Ngāti Wairangi for control of the stone.  A number of battles ensued, and ultimately Ngāi Tahu wrested control of the resource from Ngāti Wairangi. This West Coast section of Ngāi Tahu became known as Poutini Ngāi Tahu, and it incorporated both Ngāi Tahu and the remnants of Ngāti Wairangi. Poutini Ngāi Tahu were then able to supply their eastern relations, and Kaiapoi became a focus of pounamu trading.

What happened to the Ngāti Wairangi and their land rights?

.

“There must be somebody there, because somebody must have said “Nobody.”

~ A.A. Milne, Winnie-the-Pooh

.

In 1846, English colonial explorer Thomas Brunner sailed to the area in 1846 and discovered coal along the Grey river valley.  The area was soon settled and exploited by the English colonists, usurping themselves as ‘The Crown‘, and with coal mining industry taking off in the 1880s as well as gold mining and logging of the ancient native forests.  Greymouth and the Grey River were duly named after a colonial governor of the British Empire.

By the 1860s, the English colonists, aserting themselves as ‘The Crown’, began intruding upon Ngāi Tahu’s access to pounamu.   In 1874, a Dunedin based lapidary (gemstone) firm was purchasing the greenstone from Greenstone Gully near Greymouth, at £8 per cwt.   In 1904, a Wellington Jeweller had paid to 5/- per lb for two tons of Westland greenstone to ship to lapidaries in Amsterdam, Holland, for shaping into Māori curios (tikis and the like) . In 1912, the amount of greenstone calculated as being able to be quarried at Tara Tame, Westland, amounted to 270,000 tons. Greenstone suitable for working was valued at from 1/-to 6/- per lb., or in bulk £56 to £672 per ton.

It wasn’t until 1997 under the Ngāi Tahu (Pounamu Vesting) Act that the New Zealand Government, asserting its absolute sovereignty, recognised the legal ownership of pounamu to Ngāi Tahu in its natural state and in Ngāi Tahu’s tribal area, including unsettled bits of the coastline.

[Source:  Victoria University of Wellington Library, ^http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-TayLore-t1-body1-d22.html;  Te Ara – The Encyclopaedia of New Zealand, ^http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/pounamu-jade-or-greenstone/]

.

Meanwhile, colonists had introduced rats, stoats, possums, goats and deer to New Zealand and they flourished and wiped out many native fauna.

.

The Paparoa Range – mining the pristine

.

.

The coal deposits in the West Coast area are referred to as the Paparoa and Brunner Coal Measures, concentrated at Greymouth, Buller, Inangahua, Pike River and Stockton ‘coalfields‘.   Two decades after Brunner discovered coal 7 km upstream from the mouth of the Grey River in 1864, coal mining begun at Coal Gorge (later called Brunnerton, then later just Brunner).

Once rail and ports were completed to Greymouth in 1882, large scale mining commenced and facilitated industrialised coal mining in the area.   Coal  mining has since been the dominant industry ever since, containing virtually all New Zealand’s bituminous (coking) coals.

On 26th March 1896, a tragic explosion deep in the Brunner Mine killed all 65 miners inside.

It seemed most likely that the explosion was caused by firedamp, a common hazard in bituminous (black) coal mines, where fammable methane gas accumulates under pressure in pockets in the coal and adjacent strata, and when penetrated accidentally ignites and explodes.

Extraction of bituminous coal demands the highest safety procedures involving attentive gas monitoring, good ventilation and vigilant site management.

The Brunner Mine Disaster was labelled the worst mining disaster in New Zealand’s history.

.

The 1896 mass grave for 33 of the 65 miners (men and boys) at Stillwater

[Source: Christchurch City Libraries, Ref. PhotoCD 2, IMG0073, ^http://christchurchcitylibraries.com/

.

Coal production peaked in 1914, when 1.3 million tonnes were produced with 2550 employees. Following World War II there was a significant production decline as hydro-electricity and diesel fuel became more available.  Loss of markets resulted in the closure of a number of mines.

Up to 1973, most coal was extracted by underground methods. In the Buller and Stockton coalfields, coal continues to be extracted by opencast mining, while underground methods are necessary for the deeper coal seams of the Greymouth Coalfield and more recently at Pike River.

.

Government Corporate Mining

.

.

Up until the 1980s, black coal from the Coast was used within New Zealand mainly for home and industrial heating (steam raising at dairy factories, as fuel at the Cape Foulwind cement works and in gas works).

Since 1987,  the Stockton Mine, 80km north of Greymouth, has been operated by New Zealand Government-owned coal-mining company, Solid Energy, in a partnership agreement with Downer Australia.

Stockton Opencast Coal Mine

Run by the New Zealand Government’s Solid Energy

80km north of Greymouth, New Zealand

.

Solid Energy remains New Zealand’s leading coal producer and the Stockton Coal Mine New Zealand’s largest opencast mining operation, with self-granted licence to operate for at least forty years to 2017 and beyond.  Since 1990 around 90% of West Coast coal production has been exported for use as metallurgical coke in the steel making industry mainly in Japan, with the remaining 10% sold to industrial users and for electricity generation within New Zealand.

[Sources: New Zealand Government, ^http://www.mineralswestcoast.co.nz/westcoast_coal.aspx ; ^http://www.coalnz.com/]

.

Coal deposits have also been found in the Paparoa Range, including extensive seams in both the Greymouth Coalfield and the smaller, isolated Pike River Coalfield.  Rail connections were built to provide access to the mines.

In 2009, New Zealand’s Government proposed opening up 7,000 hectares of high conservation land to prospecting for valuable minerals in the Paparoa National Park and in other parts of New Zealand, including on the Coromandel Peninsula and on Great Barrier Island.

Coal Seams along the eastern side of the Paparoa Range

targeted by the New Zealand Government

.

Pike River Coal – Carter’s flawed compromise

.

The marketing pike symbol

~ a symbol of socio-ecological arrogance above and beyond the River

.

In around 1996, Pike River Coal was set up by its mining founder, Gordon Ward, which became a subsidiary of  New Zealand Oil and Gas (NZOG) subsidiary at the time.

The company was formed chiefly to exploit the Brunner Coal Seam comprising lucrative hard coking black coal under the Paparoa Ranges situated 80 km north-east of Greymouth.  Hard coking coal is an essential ingredient in the steel making process and at the time the commodity price was high in international markets, particularly due to demand in booming industrial India and Japan.

Ward formed Pike River Coal for the business of mining and exporting at least 18 million tonnes of the 58 million tonne potential resource of the premium hard coking coal over a mine life of at least 18 years.  The reserves lying in the Brunner coal seam are estimated to be the largest of their kind in New Zealand.

.

Politically, Pike River Coal was expected to earn around NZ$170 million in export income annually.

.

In 1996, after successful exploration and testing confirmed the potential resource under the Paparoa Ranges, Pike River Coal applied to the New Zealand Minister of Conservation to mine up to one million tonnes of coal annually inside the conservation area under the Crown Minerals Act.

The application recognised the anticipated environmental pollution of acid mine drainage into the Pike River Catchment.  Such sub-surface mining progresses below the water table, so water must be constantly pumped out of the mine in order to prevent flooding.  After being exposed to air and water, oxidation of metal sulfides (often pyrite, which is iron-sulfide) within the surrounding rock and overburden generates acidity.  Due to the sulphur-rich chemistry of the coking coal, the acidity draining out of subsurface coal mines is sulfuric acid which is highly toxic to river ecosystems.

 

Example of Sulphuric Acid Mine Drainage in the Rio Tinto River (Spain)

What the New Zealand Government was keen to avoid by approving Pike River Mine

.

So Pike River Coal offered the New Zealand Government $1.5 million in ‘compensation‘ to fund local environment and conservation programmes as well as associated ecological and biodiversity studies.   This included setting up a pest control programme in the Pike River Catchment to help deal with the heavily infestation by the introduced pests – the Polynesian rats, stoats, possums, goats and deer.

[Source: ^http://www.proactiveinvestors.com.au/companies/news/9928/pike-river-coal-managing-director-gordon-ward-to-leave-9928.html]

.

Eight years later in 2004 the Minister of Conservation, Chris Carter, finally approved Pike River Coal access agreement to underground mine up to one million tonnes of coal annually from under the Paparoa Ranges.

Approval was granted despite the Department of Conservation Report to the Minister on the application indicating that the mining would be:

• inconsistent with objectives of conservation legislation
• inconsistent with purposes for which the land is held
• inconsistent with conservation management plans.

.

Further, there were concerns about adverse effects of acid mine drainage and the New Zealand Conservation Authority and the West Coast Tai Poutini Conservation Board objected to the mine.

To Carter, and the Labour Party Prime Minister of New Zealand at the time, Helen Clark, who had also held the portfolio of Conservation, clearly the money made it right – “…politics without principle, commerce without morality..”    ~  Mahatma Gandhi.

.

Pike River Coal was expected to earn around NZ$170 million in export income annually.

.

According to the Department of Conservation Report to the Minister, the upper Pike River Catchment on the eastern side of the Paparoa Range is very high in conservation values.

Pike River Mine  – located deep in high conservation value native forest

A pristine site for a coal mine

.

• Pike River Catchment “is a relatively intact catchment” with high natural character and high “landscape and scenic values”
• It has “high quality aquatic habitat for threatened species such as:

• Blue Duck  Māori name is ‘whio’ (Hymenolaimus malacorhynchos)
  
• Dwarf Galaxias  (Galaxias divergens)
  
• Long Finned Eel  (Anguilla dieffenbachii)

• “The catchment is the “habitat for ten known threatened species, including the Great Spotted Kiwi, Kaka and Kakariki”

(page 2)

.

New Zealand’s blue duck: Predators and habitat loss mean rapid decline

[Source: Photo by Jonathan Leach, World Wildlife Trust,

^http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2299547.stm]

.

New Zealand’s endemic Blue Duck recognised on the NZ 10 dollar bill

.

The vegetation cover consists of a mosaic of five distinct types:

• Tall red tussock grassland
• Pink pine
• Leatherwood and dracophyllum mixed shrubland
• 300 year-old mountain and silver beech forest
• Mixed beech-hardwood forest with Kamahi, Rata, Tawherowhero
• Lowland beech-podocarp forest of Kamahi, Red Beech, Rimu

(page 5)

.

Approval of the Pike River Coal Mine inside a highly sensitive conservation value area, placed environmental constraints on the design of the mining infrastructure which should have flagged a risk assesssment by the mining management.

The ecological environment issues required restrictive mine access arrangements outside Paparoa National Park and limited drilling of ventilation holes.   This apparently required the main drift tunnel to be drilled horizontally more than 2kms under the National Park in order to gain access to the coal resource.  Normally mines are built atop the mineral to be extracted, if normal mining operations are being undertaking, thus boring down onto the resource, but also allowing lighter than air gases such as methane to escape vertically.

 

So desperate was Pike River Coal to proceed that this horizontal access design became the only mine in the world to have its entrance below the coal resource and so to mine upwards to the coal resources. Methane, a lighter than air gas had nowhere to go.  There was clearly a degree of Titannic ego stubbornness in the venture, dismissive of the abnormal environmental conditions.

Approving Pike River Coal proceeed in high conservation, demanding high risk design was inherently flawed by compromise.

Was Pike River Coal’s decision to proceed an abject failure in operational risk management by informed qualified experts or by management overriding the operational risks in favour of the financial commitment and rewards. Another case of classic mining arrogance?

.

2004:  Simon Johnson protests to NZ Minister of Conservation, Chris Carter

.

<<The Minister of Conservation
Chris Carter
c/- Parliament Buildings
Molesworth Street
Wellington
Fax: 04 472 8034

14 March 2004

Dear Mr Carter

Approval of access for Pike River Coal Company to conservation land

I understand that you have approved the application of Pike River Coal Company for access for mining within Paparoa National Park and other conservation areas.

I have to admit to being completely dumbfounded as to how approving mining in national parks and conservation areas can possibly further the purpose of conservation, preservation and protection. How could you possibly have approved mining in a national park? Why did you not simply decline the application?

Can I please register my utmost disapproval of this decision. If a Minister of Conservation from a Labour-led government cannot keep mining out of national parks then who will?

I request under the Official Information Act 1982 a copy of the record of your decision under the Crown Minerals Act that gives the reasons for this disappointing approval.

Yours sincerely

Simon Johnson

.

---

.

Chris Carter’s ‘ministerial’ reply:

.

Office of Hon Chris Carter
Minister of Conservation
29 March 2004

Dear Mr Johnson

Thank you for your correspondence, regarding the Pike River Coal Company’s application for access to operate a coalmine in the Pike Stream catchment in the eastern Paparoa Ranges.

I have approved in principle Pike River Coal Company’s application for an access arrangement to mine the coal deposits in the headwaters of Pike Stream on the West Coast.

My approval, however, is subject to the company and my department reaching a satisfactory agreement on the terms and conditions of the company’s access arrangements to the area, including financial assurances such as bonds and insurances.

This approval is conditional on my being satisfied that the terms of the access agreement achieve the higest possible environmental safeguards so that the conservation values of the area are protected as fully as possible.

I am aware that this mine does represent a significant intrusion into an area of high conservation values and a decision on whether to allow it to go ahead has been a very difficult one to make. I have considered the fact that the mine is mostly underground and its visual footprint and its visual footprint above ground is small (10 hectares) compared with the large area of protected landscape surrounding it (88,000 hectares). The lesser environmental impacts of underground mining have been recognised by environmental groups. The Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society, while critical of the Pike decision, has noted that, compared to opencast mining, underground mining reduces the impacts on the landscape, wildlife habitat, vegetation and public access. I agree.

I appreciate and can understand your concerns for the protection of public conservation lands. I agree that the Paparoa Range is an important area for nature conservation, recreation, tourism and for landscape protection. The significance of the Paparoa Range has been recognised over the years by successive Labour governments. This has included the formation of the Paparoa National Park, gazettal of a number of ecological areas and the Paparoa Wilderness Area, and ending all logging of publicly owned indigenous forests along the range and protecting these areas as public conservation land. These decisions were often made in the face of strong local opposition.

Direct human impacts on the heritage values of the public lands of the Paparoa Range, and of the West Coast generally, are at the lowest they have been in more than a century. I believe my conditional approval of this underground mine needs to be seen in this wider context.

Yours sincerely
Hon Chris Carter MP
Minister of Conservation

.

---

.

Chris Carter sends the decision making report:

.

Office of Hon Chris Carter
MP for Te Atatu
Minister of Conservation
8 April 2004

Dear Mr Johnson

Thank you for your letter of 14 March 2004, requesting a copy of the record of my decision under the Crown Minerals Act 1991, to conditionally approve Pike River Coal Company’s access arrangement application at Pike Stream on the West Coast.

Please find attached a copy of the relevant paper, excluding the financial amounts related to the proposed financial assurances, and excluding the compensation amounts that were not referred to in my media release of 12 March 2004. These financial amounts have been deleted under section 9(2)(k) of the Official Information Act 1982, to prevent the disclosure or use of official information for improper advantage.

With regard to the information I have withheld, I do not see that my reason for withholding the information is outweighed by other considerations which render it desirable, in the public interest, to make that information available.

You are entitled to seek an investigation and review of my decision by writing to an Ombudsman as provided by section 28(3) of the Official Information Act.

I have also enclosed a copy of the media release statement that went with my decision.

In your letter you refer to mining within a national park. Please note that this conditional mine approval does not provide for mining in the national park apart from the provision of four emergency exits.

Yours sincerely
Hon Chris Carter MP
Minister of Conservation

.

---

.

My letter requesting Chris Carter’s reasons:

.

The Minister of Conservation Chris Carter
c/- Parliament Buildings
Molesworth Street
Wellington
Fax: 04 472 8034
12 May 2004

Dear Mr Carter

Access for Pike River Coal Company to conservation land

Thank you for your letter of 29 March 2004 and for your letter of 8 April 2004 which enclosed the document “Pike River Access Arrangement” being the record of your decision under the Crown Minerals Act 1991 to conditionally approve Pike River Coal Company’s access arrangement application at Pike Stream on the West Coast.

I note that page 15 of this report states “The key issue for you to decide is whether the proposed partial safeguards and the compensation package offered, are sufficient to outweigh our concerns about the matters covered by section 61(2)(a), (b) and (c),”

Obviously you decided that the s 61(2)(d) matters outweighed the s 61(2)(a), (b) and (c) matters as you chose the option on page 16 to approve access.

I request under the Official Information Act 1982 your reasons for your weighting of the s 61(2) matters and for deciding on the option of approving conditional access.
Yours sincerely

Simon Johnson

.

---

.

Chris Carter’s reply:

.

Office of Hon Chris Carter
Minister of Conservation
19 May 2004

Dear Mr Johnson

In reply to your letter of 12 May 2004, I can advise that I decided that the section 61(2)(d) and (e) matters of the Crown Minerals Act 1991 outweighed the section 61(2)(a), (b) and (c) matters.

My decision was based on the information set out in the departmental submission and froma site visit. No arithmetical weighting was given to the matters to be considered under section 61(2); rather my decision was based on the totality of the evidence before me. The details of the proposed partial safeguards and the compensation package are set out in the departmental submission.

Yours sincerely
Hon Chris Carter MP
Minister of Conservation>>

.

[Source:  ‘Letters to and from Carter about his softdoc decision to allow coal mines in the conservation areas in Pike Stream’, 20040313, by Simon Johnson, “Greenlight for new Coast coalmine”, in The Press, ^http://www.kapiti.co.nz/simonjohnson/mine5.htm]

.

---

.

2007:  Pike River Coal cashed up and mining

 

Miner Gordon Ward, ahead of public listing on the New Zealand Exchange, became managing director and chief executive officer from May 2007 until significantly 1st October 2010, afterwhich Peter W. Whittall became Director and Chief Executive Officer of Pike River Coal Ltd.  Two months later came the Pike River Mining Disaster.

The timing of Ward’s departure is interesting.    Until his departure, Ward had led Pike River Mine from its initial conceptual design for some fourteen years since 1996, so why leave?

Other company directors included John Dow, Stuart Nattrass, Arun Jagatramka, Raymond F Meyer, Roy Antony Radford, and Dipak Agarwalla.

In July 2007, Pike River Coal Co Ltd launched on to the New Zealand Exchange to raise revenue through an Initial Public Offering (IPO), afterwich Pike River’s largest shareholder NZ Oil and Gas maintained its 29% stake, with Gujarat NRE Coke (7.14%), Saurashtra Fuels (5.5%) and the remaining equity spread across public stakeholders.  Over $100 million was invested into the West Coast mine development and coal production commenced in October 2008 making Pike River Mine the second largest hard coking coal export mine in New Zealand.

It is located about 50km north-east of Greymouth in the west coast region of South Island. The mine is owned by Pike River Coal, the only listed coal mining and export company in New Zealand. The company is owned by New Zealand Oil & Gas (29%), Gujarat NRE Coke (7.14%) and Saurashtra Fuels (5.5%) and the remaining by public stakeholders.

The mining on Pike River Coal reserves was started in October 2008 by digging a 2.3km access tunnel under the Ranges for two years.  The Brunner coal deposit seam runs 6.5km north-south (length), 1.5km east-west (width) and has a thickness of about 7m. The Brunner seam has estimated in-ground reserves of 58.5mt. The estimated recovery from the seam is 18mt over its 18-year mine life.

Paparoa seams lie about 200m beneath the Brunner seam. Initial drilling estimated an additional potential recovery of 8mt from this seam.

Pike River Mine in operation

.

The Pike River used two mining methods which include creating roadways in the Brunner seam through large cutting machines and using hydraulic monitors to break the coal face. The mining was initially done using a NZ$5m road-header machine with tungsten tipped blades.  The water cannons use high pressure blasting with water to break coal at a rate of 2,000 tonne/day. The crushed coal is then washed downhill through a 10km-long, low pressure, slurry pipeline to a processing plant.

A 10 km access road to the mine site was constructed in August 2006.   In June 2008 TNL Group was contracted for trucking the hard coking coal processed at the Pike River coal preparation plant to the rail loadout facility at Ikamatua.

In late 2008, the mine’s ventilation shaft partially collapsed, delaying production and further production issues occured afterwards. An underground trench or ‘graben‘ was encountered immediately to the west and north of the pit bottom and Pike had to drill and blast through non-productive rock to get to the coal seam.  Work began on a ventilation shaft that was 100 m deep, 4m diameter wide in 2008, but ran into ‘difficult rock conditions’.  Before reinforcement of the shaft could be completed, the walls of the shaft collapsed.

At coal mine working faces, simultaneous application of three basic elements reduces the methane explosion hazard: (1) adequate ventilation, (2) regular monitoring of gas concentrations, and (3) the elimination of ignition sources.  [Source: ^http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/mining/works/coversheet1682.html]

Still, within a month in January 2009, a NZ$20 million coal preparation plant was constructed and by mid-2009 production of hard coking coal from Pike River Mine had started.   By February 2010 the first export shipment of 20,000 tonnes was made to coking plants in India for steel production.  Mining financial management had overruled mining operational management absolutely and irresepectively.

[Sources: ‘Pike River Mine, New Zealand’, ^http://www.mining-technology.com/projects/pikeriverminenewzeal/; [Source:  ^http://www.proactiveinvestors.com.au/companies/news/9928/pike-river-coal-managing-director-gordon-ward-to-leave-9928.html; ‘The making of Pike River’, by Alistair McKenzie, Q&M  Vol.7 No.1  February-March 2010, Contrafed Publishing, ^http://www.contrafedpublishing.co.nz/QM/February-March+2010/The+making+of+Pike+River.html]

.

May 2010:  New Zealanders stand against mining Paparoa Range

.

The people of New Zealand protest along Queen Street, Auckland on 1st May 2010

Some 40,000 New Zealanders very publicly were prepared to challenge government

for its flawed compromise between conservation and mining.

  “No Mining Pure New Zealand”!

[Source: ^http://lucylawless.net/events/2010/marchagainstmining010510/]

.

In May 2010, 40,000 New Zealanders protested a “No Mining” message to ask their government to simply respect New Zealand.   This was the largest grassroots protest by New Zealanders in a generation.

.

.

Nov 2010:   Tragedy

.

Later that year on 19th  November a methane explosion inside the mine trapped 31 miners and contractors.  Two managed to escape.  The remaining 16 miners and 13 contractors  ‘the  twenty-nine‘ didn’t.  

Following a second explosion five days later, the 29 remaining men were believed by police to be dead.  They remain there.

.

Tui 

(Prosthemadera novaeseelandiae)

An endemic honeyeater of New Zealand

[Source: ^http://msf2011.blogspot.com.au/2012_03_01_archive.html]

.

[The following article was initially posted by Tigerquoll under the title “Basically a Fur Trade…”SKIN THE BEST and PLUCK THE REST” and published on 20091209 on ^candobetter.net]

.

Brushtail Possum (Trichosurus vulpecula) a native to the Blue Mountains, Australia

(Photo by editor in winter, 20100606, click image to enlarge, © ^Creative Commons )

.

<<When the Australian Brushtail Possum was first released into New Zealand in 1837 (becoming successfully established around 1858) with the express purpose of establishing a fur trade, our colonial New Zealand forefathers had no idea of the terrible impact that possums would have on the delicate natural balance of the native New Zealand ecosystem.>>

[Source:  ‘The history of possums in New Zealand’,

^http://www.gorgeouscreatures.co.nz/NZ+Possum+Fur/Possum+History.html]

.

On New Zealand’s North Island at the Bay of Plenty, a backyard possum fur trader, BASICALLY BUSH, runs a thriving business slaughtering Brushtail Possum for profit. It’s just like the good ol’ days of the 19th Century.

It seems the preferred kill method is by shooting…“Be careful not to get rubbish into the bag, and that you don’t end up dropping bullets or spent shells in.”   But then they sell traps to possum poachers as well, so take your pick.   Check out the possum trap called ‘Bushmaster No 1’:

Steel Jaw Cruelty – NZ style

.

A good sound trap, leg hold. Freight Costs incl GST: 1 – 12 traps: $6.50 12 – 24 traps: $17.00 24 – 48 traps: $25.00 48 – 96 traps: $65.00 Please add the cost of freight to your payment.
Basically Bush’s motto is “SKIN THE BEST and PLUCK THE REST”

It claims “this exciting raw material that has revolutionised the knitwear industry in New Zealand. Possum fibre is referred to as ‘possum merino’ and is promoted as ‘lighter than cashmere’.”

And profits are healthy. Back in 2007, “there has been a marked increase in fibre availability since we raised the price to $105/kg. “This increase was necessary to make sure that there was enough raw material to meet the needs of domestic production.”

Not eradicating a feral animal population

But instead profiting and perpetuating an 1837 NZ Fur Trade

.

These pest controllers have now gone international, making trips to India to promote fur sales, with brands like ‘Snowy Peak’ and ‘Woolyarns’.
Click here to meet the poaching team.

Colonial New Zealanders relocated Australian Brushtail Possums to New Zealand from the early 19th Century. Kiwi possum poaching currently just perpetuates the slaughter for the same reason as then – possum fur, not to eradicate them at all.

Anyone who takes exception to killing possums in large numbers (i.e the definition of ‘slaughter’) should be contributing alternatives. But profiteers like Basically Bush seem to be condoning the poaching practice. The numbers are not reducing, but the profiteers are making a killing. How backward!

What is the right way to remove introduced animals?   It remains an avoided Kiwi ecological problem.

.

Illegal traps discovered in Makara bush

.

[Source:  ‘Illegal traps discovered in Makara bush’, 20120731, Dominion Post, Wellington, New Zealand, ^http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/northern-suburbs/7384752/Illegal-traps-discovered-in-Makara-bush]

.

SPCA Inspector Ritchie Dawson with a banned inhumane possum trap

found in Makara Forest

(Photo by Maarten Holl)

.

Inhumane possum traps were discovered dotted throughout a Makara forest.  A dead possum in an illegal trap dragged home by a family dog leading to the discovery of inhumane trapping on the block.

Brent Lyell Still, of Upper Hutt, was yesterday convicted of using the illegal traps.

Guy Holmes’ called the SPCA after his dog came home dragging a leg trap in August last year.  Mr Holmes told the animal welfare inspectors he found 10 possums in traps and had to kill them. The SPCA found traps had been set on Mr Holmes’ land and his neighbour’s to catch possums.

Carcasses taken to a vet showed crush injuries that would cause distress and significant pain before death.

Mr Holmes had planted pine trees on his Makara Rd property intending to mill them and had never given permission for the traps to be set on the property.

Still, 45, yesterday pleaded guilty and was fined $300 and ordered to pay costs of $353.22 for illegally using size 1.5 leg traps, which were banned at the beginning of last year.

It was the first time someone has been prosecuted for using the illegal traps.  The traps grab a possum, most often by the leg, which can be crushed.

A further charge of setting traps that could entrap companions animals like dogs and cats was withdrawn.  Still had been asked by the neighbour to do the trapping but had laid several traps on Mr Holmes’ property as well.   In three days he killed over 600 possums.

Still’s lawyer Tim Blake said Still had been trapping for 20 years and had not known the law had changed.  Wellington District Court judge Bill Hastings agreed with Mr Blake that there had been little publicity about the recent law change but said ignorance of the law was no excuse.

Judge Hastings said despite possums being pests, there was still an obligation to treat them humanely.   To set the traps in place, a nail is driven into the tree.

SPCA prosecutor Liz Hall said any nail found in a tree at a mill would result in all logs being rejected by a mill because of the dangers of metal going through machinery.  Blake disputed there would have been any problem, saying the nail was set only a couple of inches from the ground and the trees would be cut down higher than that.>>

.