Open mike 27/07/2016

163 comments on “Open mike 27/07/2016 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Paul 1

   27 July 2016 at 6:38 am

   The most important news.

   Earth Just Experienced The Hottest June Ever Recorded

   The heat wave continues.

   Last month was the hottest June ever recorded, according to both NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). This marks the 14th month in a row that global heat records have been broken. It’s the longest streak of record-breaking temperatures since reporting began in 1880.

   Global average temperatures in June were 0.9 degrees Celsius hotter than the average for the 20th century. These temps broke the previous record, set last year, by 0.02 degrees Celsius.

   The planet is well on track to surpass 2015 as the hottest year ever recorded.

   http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/june-2016-hottest-month_us_578f07f9e4b0f180da639fdf
   • idbkiwi 1.1

     27 July 2016 at 7:52 am

     That’s what (relatively short) modern records show, proxy records don’t agree.

     “reconstructions based on only the longest records (R2 and R3 networks) indicate that single 30- and 10-yr periods of similar or slightly higher temperatures than in the late twentieth century may have occurred during the first half of the millennium”

     http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00781.1
     • Pat 1.1.1

       27 July 2016 at 8:00 am

       “The reconstructed twentieth-century warming cannot be explained by natural variability alone using GISS-E2-R. In this climate model, anthropogenic forcing is required to produce the rate and magnitude of post-1950 warming observed in the Australasian region. These paleoclimate results are consistent with other studies that attribute the post-1950 warming in Australian temperature records to increases in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations.”

       http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00781.1
2. Ffloyd 2

   27 July 2016 at 7:17 am

   What can we, as everyday citizens do to help halt global warming? Reduce consumerism? Live sustainably? I’m getting more and more concerned! We live a lot out of our garden, don’t eat two animals a month, try not to buy any processed food, by that I mean canned goods such as tomatoes, sardines etc. Our last car lasted at least ten years, we fix things when we can instead of buying new and nearly all our clothing is sourced from recycling shops, as is a lot of our furniture. I get really angry at this throwaway society that has a constant need to replace things every six months or so. I know people that have four TV’s in their home. It’s ludicrous.
   • Paul 2.1

     27 July 2016 at 7:25 am

     Watch this film.
     ‘Tomorrow
     It was at film festival and provides lots of solutions.

     http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NUN0QxRB7e0
     • weka 2.1.1

       27 July 2016 at 7:38 am

       Looks interesting but doesn’t appear to be available in NZ.
       • Paul 2.1.1.1

         27 July 2016 at 7:45 am

         If you live in Wellington, it’s on at film festival there
         • weka 2.1.1.1.1

           27 July 2016 at 7:51 am

           Cool!
   • weka 2.2

     27 July 2016 at 7:50 am

     Great list of things you are doing Ffloyd. What do you mean by the two animals thing?

     I think it’s a good question, what do we do when we’ve practically reduced our consumption as much as possible and can’t do a lot more without without societal change? I’m looking at driving a lot at the moment, thinking through what it will be like to not be able to drive whenever I want. It’s unlikely there will public transport where I live to replace that so it means considering being less mobile. I think about how prior to the mid 90s and cheap Japanese imports we didn’t all have cars, so how did that work? What can I change about my life and expectations so that I drive less but still feel good about my life? This is my particular challenge because I already don’t drive a lot and am very dependent on my car because of disability.

     The frustration about what other people are doing… I try and take the opportunities to have micro conversations with people in ways that don’t get their backs up eg at the moment there are lots of opportunities to talk about CC because of the unusual mild winter. I’m going to think now about how to bring consumerism into that conversation, so thanks for bringing that up.

     Having The Standard as a place where it’s ok to talk about CC is very import to me sanity wise re the level of ignorance elsewhere but I also thing there are more people wanting to change that need encouragement. How to focus on those people.
     • marty mars 2.2.1

       27 July 2016 at 8:05 am

       here we have hitching posts, rides listed on net and various email lists, friends, friends of friends and so on. Very little public transport so community has to help when help needed.
       • weka 2.2.1.1

         27 July 2016 at 8:45 am

         Nice one marty. I think where you live is leading the way on many of these things.
     • Ffloyd 2.2.2

       27 July 2016 at 9:14 am

       Two animals thing. Yes a bit obscure, just saying that we don’t eat much meat but know people that consume way more than nutritionally needed. If we could reduce meat and dairy consumption to a nutritional minimum and encourage more vegetarianism,would it follow that we could reduce herds and would this be beneficial to our environment?
       • Draco T Bastard 2.2.2.1

         27 July 2016 at 10:49 am

         If we could reduce meat and dairy consumption to a nutritional minimum and encourage more vegetarianism,would it follow that we could reduce herds and would this be beneficial to our environment?

         Yes, it would. Massively so in fact.
   • Colonial Viper 2.3

     27 July 2016 at 8:16 am

     Ffloyd, your goal is not to stop global warming. It is to develop and support a self supporting home, family community situation which is going to withstand the turmoil and upset of the next 50 years.
     • weka 2.3.1

       27 July 2016 at 8:44 am

       Halting* global warming seems like not only a worthy goal but an imperative one. The most important one. Fortunately preparing for living with the reality of global warming can be part of that, because there are big overlaps in what is required.

       *by which I mean doing everything we can to limit the human contribution from now on (mitigation).
       • Colonial Viper 2.3.1.1

         27 July 2016 at 9:02 am

         Doing everything we can would mean being willing to face prosecution, court action, unelectability, unpopularity, increased unemployment and loss of property including businesses, investments, homes and cars.

         Tell me, how many Green MPs have taken air flights in the last 7 days? Most of them?

         Clearly, we’re not seriously talking about ‘doing everything we can’ are we.

         Lanth’s position is still very sensible. If you are already a bottom 50% burner on the NZ scale of things, then sit back, enjoy your life, burn carbon sensibly, gradually prepare for a tougher future, because nothing we do in NZ is going to shift world CO2 concentrations by more than 1ppm.
         • weka 2.3.1.1.1

           27 July 2016 at 9:14 am

           I think that people reading that will also take away these messages,

           1. there is no point in trying to mitigate, because no-one else is. So le

           2. it’s ok to criticise other people’s carbon consumption while not changing.

           3. we are stuck and cannot change, therefore why bother trying.

           4. NZ is special and doesn’t need to change as much as other places.

           To my mind all those are defeatist. I don’t see any reason why we should stop working on mitigation. Doing what Lanth is doing en masse guarantees us runaway climate change.
           • Colonial Viper 2.3.1.1.1.1

             27 July 2016 at 9:23 am

             As you know I have a different political position on climate change to you.

             My view is that the more people are distracted by quarter measures, the more their anxiety is relieved by pretend and extend non-solutions, and the more political parties get away with lying to the nation as to our true climate predicament, the less effective change will be possible.
             • weka …

               27 July 2016 at 9:30 am

               It’s good to hear you describing your political position clearly 🙂

               I would see Lanth’s position as a quarter measure so I have to admit I don’t fully get it yet. But I do think it’s useful to change to explain your thinking behind what you do.
               • Colonial Viper …

                 27 July 2016 at 9:39 am

                 Lanth (if you’ll excuse me pretending to know what your thoughts are Lanth…) clearly suspects the severe extent of the climate change crisis we are in. He also clearly suspects that nothing effective will be done about it. So why should he give up his minor comforts of life when he is already a low emitter (by western standards).

                 And he’s not one of the ones running around claiming that 2 degrees C warming is avoidable.

                 That ship so sailed. Early or mid 1980s I think.
                 • weka …

                   27 July 2016 at 9:49 am

                   “And he’s not one of the ones running around claiming that 2 degrees C warming is avoidable.”

                   I don’t understand the relevance of that bit. Are you saying that because some people are ignorant or in denial it’s ok for the aware people to not do as much?

                   “So why should he give up his minor comforts of life when he is already a low emitter (by western standards).”

                   Because, it leads the way and increases the chance of change. Because the situation is so serious and urgent that everyone needs to be reducing. In NZ I mean that literally. Because saying that others need to change first is a losing strategy.

                   btw, I agree about the thing about using Lanth as an example Maybe we could change it to a generic position without having to second guess his position further?
             • marty mars …

               27 July 2016 at 9:35 am

               How does your support of trump who lies about CC fit with that?
               • Colonial Viper …

                 27 July 2016 at 9:40 am

                 I justify that by saying that there isn’t even 5 ppm difference between coal digging Trump and free trading pro-Saudi Clinton.
         • marty mars 2.3.1.1.2

           27 July 2016 at 9:22 am

           cv you have given up and pretend care now and you want the rest of us to agree with you so you will feel better. You are wrong and misguuded. Giving up is weak and part of the problem but who cares right?
           • Colonial Viper 2.3.1.1.2.1

             27 July 2016 at 9:56 am

             Given up? No dude, definitely not given up. But I ain’t pretending that a tea spoon is going to successfully dig through a mountain of greenstone. Neither am I going to keep up the typical left wing moaning about how stupid and uncaring Kiwis are, how biased the Granny Herald is, how incompetent National’s Ministers are, how NZ suddenly turned to shit end of 2008 etc. etc.

             and you want the rest of us to agree with you so you will feel better.

             Why on Earth would I need you to feel better?
             • marty mars …

               27 July 2016 at 10:01 am

               You tell me.

               You said yourself that you advocate for trump even though he is a denierLiar and if elected will do nothing or worse to help people prepare. You have given up mate.
               • Colonial Viper …

                 27 July 2016 at 10:15 am

                 Do I need to repeat myself? I think Trump will be a better POTUS for NZ because he will be less likely to start a neocon led military confrontation with China and Russia in the Pacific, he will shitcan the TPP asap, and he probably won’t be asking NZ troops to help out in more middle east regime change wars because oil and gas pipelines.

                 Also there isn’t even 5 ppm difference between coal digging Trump and pro-Saudi free trader Hillary Clinton.

                 Given all of this, I think Trump remains the better POTUS for NZ.

                 Read this analysis as me “giving up” if you like but that’s solely your own imagination.
                 • marty mars …

                   27 July 2016 at 10:30 am

                   Now THAT is an accurate analogy to shuffling chairs on the titanic.

                   Edit- potus doesnt care about nz not even slightly.
                   • Colonial Viper …

                     27 July 2016 at 10:43 am

                     Of course POTUS doesn’t care about NZ in the slightest; the three points I raised aren’t about caring for NZ, but they are very helpful to us

                     1) No superpower military conflict in the Pacific
                     2) No TPP
                     3) No NZDF supporting wars of regime change.
                   • marty mars …

                     27 July 2016 at 11:00 am

                     Fair enough you are consistent. I don’t trust trump and probably never will based on his history and personality. I think he is bad bad news for everyone. You disagree, all good. I am a left person you are not I’m pleased in some ways that we have very different views.
                   • McFlock …

                     27 July 2016 at 11:43 am

                     1) No superpower military conflict in the Pacific

                     I think that’s more likely under an impulsive, ego-driven blowhard that it is under someone who, at worst, wants to continue with business as usual.

                     2) No TPP

                     In direct contradiction to his VP’s free trade wishes. Even if Trump opposes it, he’d sacrifice it for a “deal” at the first opportunity. Expect TPP under Trump.

                     3) No NZDF supporting wars of regime change.

                     At odds with Trump’s repeated desires to project US power through the use of allies in NATO and beyond.

                     If Trump is for real and intends to actively govern, expect instability and demands for NZ to do more overseas.
                     If Trump wants to just be a figurehead with the VP doing most of the work, expect the TPP but at least it’s unlikely there’ll be a war in the South China sea.
     • Ffloyd 2.3.2

       27 July 2016 at 9:27 am

       Why can’t one be dependent on the other? Sometimes it is the will of the people that can change things. We are doing our best to live in a way that has little detrimental impact on our earth (husband has just had live worms delivered by courier) just thought I ‘d throw that in there , we live in a small village so don’t use car much, don’t buy what we don’t need (except for wine) but hey, you gotta draw the line somewhere.
       • weka 2.3.2.1

         27 July 2016 at 9:32 am

         Yep. What you are doing is both mitigation and adaptation. No reason we can’t do both.
       • marty mars 2.3.2.2

         27 July 2016 at 9:39 am

         Good dtuff. By the end of the year we will be in a tiny house, 4 of us. This is anothrr way to build resilience – downsize and reduce.
         • weka 2.3.2.2.1

           27 July 2016 at 9:50 am

           Cool! I’m in the process of doing some major downsizing too, over the next year. Lots of benefits from that process already. It just seems to make sense.
3. Garibaldi 3

   27 July 2016 at 7:36 am

   From zerohedge these are some excerpts from a book by David Stockman……

   “The baby boom generation which started with so much promise when it came of age in the 1960s has ended up a colossal failure. It has turned America into a bloody imperial hegemon abroad and a bankrupt Spy State at home.
   Like the generation she represents Hillary Clinton has betrayed her grand ideals over a lifetime of compromise, expediency, self-promotion and complacent acquisition of power, wealth and fame. She thinks war is peace, deficits don’t matter and that the Feds serial bubble machine is leading the nation back to prosperity.”

   I see strong parallels to our own country in this ( and it is only fair to confess that I am a baby boomer ).
   • Paul 3.1

     27 July 2016 at 7:43 am

     Fair comment about Clinton.
     The politicians who sold our countries to corporations however were 1 generation higher …Thatcher, Douglas and Reagan.
     What Blair, Clinton and Clark failed to do was reverse the changes when the boomer generation came to power.
     They lacked the courage to change, they lacked the strength to change and they had benefited personally from the changes so they pulled up the ladder.
   • BM 3.2

     27 July 2016 at 7:52 am

     I’m not and I don’t care or blame baby boomers for anything.

     This baby boomer finger pointing is horse shit and who ever is promoting it should get done for inciting hatred.

     Especially the media, people need to start complaining and taking action against some of these news outlets.
     • Colonial Viper 3.2.1

       27 July 2016 at 8:11 am

       You don’t blame the top 10% baby boomers for the massive Auckland house price rise of the last 15 to 20 years?
       • BM 3.2.1.1

         27 July 2016 at 9:01 am

         Nope, they were the ones with the money when this property boom kicked off.

         Also it’s all the baby boomers who are copping shit, do you think it would be acceptable to blame all Maori for being over represented in all the bad statistics?
         • Colonial Viper 3.2.1.1.1

           27 July 2016 at 9:06 am

           You don’t blame the country’s economic leadership of the last 15-20 years for it? Most of these people were born in the 50s.
           • BM 3.2.1.1.1.1

             27 July 2016 at 9:14 am

             I think Labour and National should have done more to keep a lid on property prices or at the very least pressured councils to keep land supply up.

             Problem is a booming property market is good for the government of the day, people employed, people buying stuff, people making money, this equals happy voters.
             • Kevin …

               27 July 2016 at 9:23 am

               Nothing to do with land supply.

               As has been stated countless times before, Auckland has a 6 year supply of land waiting to be built on and there are 20,000 unoccupied dwellings in Auckland.

               Greed and selfishness still rules.
               • CC …

                 27 July 2016 at 10:41 am

                 Added to you last sentence Kevin, lousy planning and profligate use of land have created problems that don’t afflict much of the world that didn’t aspire to quarter acre paradises that depend on vehicle ownership.
               • Instauration …

                 27 July 2016 at 6:13 pm

                 Yep – supply is not the problem.
                 Developers will manage the supply (despite re-zoning or SHA requirements) to maximise return (aka price).
                 If Developers make a mistake and transiently appease demand, the Banks will step in and Blacklist developments for lending to protect existing arrangements – just like with Sydney multi-tenancies ( the same Banks ! )
                 RNZ yesterday had good exposure of the SHA developers reticence at providing the “affordable” component. Will always be time managed to maximise return.
                 The Supply/Demand mantra is a a tale.
4. lprent 4

   27 July 2016 at 8:20 am

   For those who are interested, I won’t be fixing the search until the weekend.

   I’ve just spent a couple of hours going through my hacked up version of the Percona Sphinx plugin version 0.4 code from 2009 that got the backend engine to work the way that we needed it to do with the screen interface. However their code had some major use of deprecated features of PHP back in 2009, and which now simply don’t work in PHP 7 (which is why you get the blank screen).

   The backend produces stuff like…
   
AH01071: Got error 'PHP message: PHP Fatal error: Uncaught Error: Call to undefined function mysql_real_escape_string() in sphinxsearch_frontend.php:676
Stack trace:\n#0 sphinxsearch_frontend.php(210): SphinxSearch_FrontEnd->insert_sphinx_stats('test')
#1 wordpress-sphinx-plugin/sphinxsearch.php(188): SphinxSearch_FrontEnd->query()
#2 plugin.php(291): SphinxSearch->posts_request('SELECT SQL_CALC...')\n
#3 query.php(3544): apply_filters_ref_array('posts_request', Array)

   So far I have seen about 15 deprecated and/or removed features.

   The current version, Percona 3.9.8, has a whole lot more customisation points with callbacks and no longer insists on running the sphinx serach engine and removes some of the rigidity reasons why I had to hack their code in the first place.

   For instance, their original code ran the search pretty much when each comment got made. But we get so many comments, that what it meant was during the day the sphinx was being asked to run continuously. I prefer simply running the deltas about every 4 minutes during the day (and 15 minutes overnight).

   It also didn’t provide good support for changing options in the search box or for changing the layout of different types of elements (comments / posts) in the results.

   But since my code is embedded, I’ll have to extract my code and make it a plugin on top of their plugin which runs on top of the sphinx search engine…. Weekend job.

   Sorry folks.
   • marty mars 4.1

     27 July 2016 at 8:23 am

     mate all good – no sorry necessary, thank you for everything.
5. Jens 5

   27 July 2016 at 8:51 am

   The “Predator Free by 2050” announcement is such a FARCE. It is nothing more than an excuse to drop 1080 all over the valley in the Kaharangi National Park this week, apparently the initiative starts this week, loolz.

   One wonders if they will leave the poison unattended in the paddock. while they go back and forth in the chopper like last time. Soon the local paper will be issuing warnings again, not to hunt or fish up the valley, and the animals will come down out of the park, their insides fried, just like last time, the bird song will fade away for a number of months, just like last time.

   The rat plague of biblical proportions seems to make a return every couple of years. Someones making money from the 1080

   I’m all for a predator free NZ, but lets start with ‘Poison Ivy’ who appears to be an anti environmentalist posing as a gardener. A nasty nasty piece of work that one.
   In 2010, a petition by anti-1080 activists found 93 per cent of Westland residents were opposed to the poison, based on canvassing of 1500 people.
   1080 poison is banned by most of the world.

   The timing of this announcement is just an excuse for more poison to be dropped. Bring back the trappers, start up some trapping workshops, train the public to become more active with pest control and ditch the 1080 it’s doing more harm than good around here. Come and live by a national park for a month during the drops and you will understand.

   Anyone need some work? After the drops they send people in to make sure no 1080 pallets are visible from the walking tracks, bloody farce, winter is the preferred drop time, less tourists to notice the damage, don’t want to poison the tourists, let’s poison the locals instead.
   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11472942

   Hows that 1080 factory going?
   http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/business/80636881/1080-factory-given-West-Coast-Regional-Council-investment-still-not-making-1080-three-years-later
   • weka 5.1

     27 July 2016 at 9:25 am

     that Herald link is interesting. Apparently it’s the powder/residue from the hoppers that is the problem. NZ has a pretty lax culture around poison application, this instance looks entirely preventable. I hope those two women have success with ACC, but there should be wider consequences including for the regional counil (and DOC if it was involved) and the contractor.
   • weka 5.2

     27 July 2016 at 9:27 am

     “The rat plague of biblical proportions seems to make a return every couple of years.”

     Beech mast seed spikes and the consequential rise in mouse then stoat/rat numbers is a pretty well understood phenomenon. I’d be interested to know if it’s happening more often and whether that’s a climate change issue.
     • Robert Guyton 5.2.1

       27 July 2016 at 9:30 am

       It’s a matter of propaganda, imo. Panic stations, everyone, rat plague ahead, buy my story, buy my product FOR YOUR OWN SAFETY!!!
       • weka 5.2.1.1

         27 July 2016 at 9:40 am

         That’s probably true. But it’s also true that beech masting and rat/stoat spikes as a result is a real thing. I remember it from before it was part of the modern 1080 push, and I saw it in the bush as well. It’s a sad day that we can no longer rely on pretty basic research to tell us about such things. I find the issue so polarised now that I don’t trust any source of information that’s coming from DOC, the govt, allied groups, or the people opposing. Which doesn’t mean they’re all untrustworthy, just that it’s too hard to tell now.
         • marty mars 5.2.1.1.1

           27 July 2016 at 9:57 am

           Maybe it is now a regular reaction from nature to cc
           • weka 5.2.1.1.1.1

             27 July 2016 at 10:00 am

             Possibly tied into El Nino and La Nina cycles too?
             • marty mars …

               27 July 2016 at 10:12 am

               Yep

               We know plants have started acting strange – fruiting, flowering etc at non-normal times. I worry a bit about a real antartic weather front blanketing everywhere with snow at the wrong time of year, destroying a lot. Another long term adaption area I think.
   • Draco T Bastard 5.3

     27 July 2016 at 11:21 am

     Bring back the trappers

     Trapping didn’t work which is why 1080 was brought in and even that’s not working.

     In 2010, a petition by anti-1080 activists found 93 per cent of Westland residents were opposed to the poison, based on canvassing of 1500 people.

     Which just proves that those people don’t actually know why 1080 is used.

     We’ve essentially got two options:
     1. Use 1080 to protect our environment as it is while causing some minor damage
     2. Let our environment evolve around the imported pests which is going to mean that a whole lot of native flora and fauna will go extinct
6. Robert Guyton 6

   27 July 2016 at 9:24 am

   “Someones making money from the 1080”

   Indeed.
   • Psycho Milt 6.1

     27 July 2016 at 9:37 am

     Someone’s making money from the groceries I buy, too. What’s the government going to do about it, I’d like to know!!?
     • Robert Guyton 6.1.1

       27 July 2016 at 9:43 am

       No one’s calling on the Government to do anything in response to the news that someone’s making money from selling 1080. Your interpretation seems knee-jerky.
       • Psycho Milt 6.1.1.1

         27 July 2016 at 10:16 am

         The commenter did appear to be calling for the government to do something about it. In any case, unless something is being inferred by commenting that someone is making money from 1080, it’s just a random, irrelevant fact, like “Someone is making money from groceries.”
         • Robert Guyton 6.1.1.1.1

           27 July 2016 at 10:24 am

           If a Government Minister was making money from 1080, it’d be very pertinent to the discussion.
7. Robert Guyton 7

   27 July 2016 at 9:28 am

   Key is encouraging all New Zealanders to join the drive to kill millions of small mammals. Become a small-mammal killer, New Zealanders, invest in the killing of small mammals, cheer on the killing of small mammals, come on, Kiwis, show some guts! This will define us, this will make us great on the World Stage.
   • The lost sheep 7.1

     27 July 2016 at 9:53 am

     You would rather see the introduced small Mammals live and completely wipe our taonga native species Robert?
     • Robert Guyton 7.1.1

       27 July 2016 at 10:06 am

       “Taonga”, lost sheep? You’ll have a view on kiore then. That rat is taonga for tangata whenua and it’s a small mammal. Key’s calling for the destruction of a taonga species. Very un-New Zealander that.
       • The lost sheep 7.1.1.1

         27 July 2016 at 10:22 am

         Pretty crude attempt at avoiding the question Robert.

         You are well aware no doubt that Kiore are a destructive introduced mammal and although they do have a cultural value to some Iwi, there is by no means a widespread agreement that they should be left to flourish and plunder the species that were there before them.
         You will also be aware that kiore is now very restricted in habitat because they have been largely eaten by the other small mammals that were introduced by humans later. Their future survival is in fact only guaranteed in places where the later small mammals are excluded.

         So with that red herring out of the way…straight answer thanks – do you want introduced mammals not to be killed and allowed to go on to wipe out the species that were here before them?
         • Robert Guyton 7.1.1.1.1

           27 July 2016 at 10:37 am

           “Crude”, lost sheep? I thought nuanced, but okay, you addressed my point quite well. Not to my satisfaction, but that’s not required. You make the point that kiore have been controlled to a significant extent by Rattus rattus and/ or Rattus Norvegicus, along with various mustelids, though Rattus exulans have not been stoately eradicated; that’s not weasely done by any means – so, I guess I can infer from your comment that you support the use of a better predator to control a mammilian pest, and would therefore support Tim Flannery’s proposal to introduce the Papua NewGuinean eagle Harpyopsis novaeguineae to our forests. They scoop possums out from their hidey-holes and deal to them most efficiently and don’t eat anything else, promise. You for that idea, or not? Straight answer.
           • The lost sheep 7.1.1.1.1.1

             27 July 2016 at 11:13 am

             No. (Straight enough?)
             Introducing a further predator to resolve the issue of introduced predators is as daft an idea as you are intending it to be!

             I support the retention of the native natural heritage that has evolved in Aotearoa over the millennia.
             In order to achieve that goal I support the killing of the mammalian predators that were introduced by man over the last few hundred years.

             Straight answer (yes or no will do as I answered you above) – do you support the killing of those predators Robert?
             • Robert Guyton …

               27 July 2016 at 11:43 am

               I don’t support “killing” as the primary control of any unwanted organism, lost sheep. Much of the state of affairs we humans find ourselves in presently arrises from our adoption of the “kill what we don’t like” philosophy and I believe the way out of the mess is to change that mindset. The general consensus here (by my reckoning) is that the proposal to rid New Zealand of mammalian predators is a nonsense and that it cannot be done. As I agree with that opinion, I’m enjoying poking holes in what is to me a pretend proposal, and have no compunction about doing that. I’ve worked on rodent-free islands, and seen how well the plants, insects and birds recover once the predators have gone. I’ve also been on offshore islands where rats and stoats have returned, after the blitz. They breed quickly, those wee mammals. The idea that the whole of NZ could be rid of rodents is, to my mind, preposterous and spending vast fortunes on a destined-to-fail idea seems to me foolish, given there are far more pressing issues that require funding. You, lost sheep, say you believe the goal is achievable. Care to explain how it might realistically be done? I’m genuinely interested.
               • The lost sheep …

                 27 July 2016 at 1:12 pm

                 You say you believe the goal is achievable. Care to explain how it might realistically be done? I’m genuinely interested.

                 Absolutely it is technically achievable.
                 We already do have one technique that is well proven as being capable of achieving eradication over large area’s. Aerial Poison.
                 Within the last couple of years there is clear evidence building of a second method that can achieve eradication. C02 Powered traps.
                 Looking forward there are promising lines of further development in poison and traps, and then there are many possibilities opening up with genetic methods.

                 So no issues on whether it could be done, but given the effort, cost and combined social will required to do so, I’m not bold enough to say it will be done.

                 My starting point is this: Many citizens are willing to support this goal and attempt to achieve it, and every step towards this goal is a gain
                 If we set out with a goal of a 100% Predator Free NZ, and in the end only achieve 50% that will still be a great achievement and Aotearoa will be a far better place for our descendants to live because of that.
                 If we achieve 100%, then I hope you are still around so I can remind you no great advancement would have ever occurred if those with the vision gave up because of the negativity of the nay-sayers!

                 Straight answer? So back to you…
                 ‘I don’t support “killing” as the primary control of any unwanted organism…. and I believe the way out of the mess is to change that mindset.’
                 I am genuinely interested in exactly what you mean by this?
                 Are you proposing controlling introduced predators, and if so, how?
                 • Robert Guyton …

                   27 July 2016 at 2:02 pm

                   Aerial poisoning does not achieve eradication over large areas, where there are adjacent ‘large areas’. It’s doable on a small island, but mainland New Zealand? There’s no example to show that can be done. In fact there are innumerable examples of re-infestations in situations where there’s no wide stretch of water protecting the cleared area. It’s theoretical. You believe it’s do-able, I believe it isn’t. Precedence is in my favour (there is none). Therefore, your claim,
                   “every step towards this goal is a gain” is wrong, as those steps are futile, in regard the final, illusory goal of total eradication, imo. That energy and funding would be better spent elsewhere. A 50% eradication would be a waste of money. That 50% would rapidly re-infest the cleared land, rendering the effort pointless. If you think even for a moment about climate change and the demands that’s going to make on us and our resources, you’ll join me in saying the attempt is nothing more than a pipe-dream. Your ” if those with the vision gave up because of the negativity of the nay-sayers!” is not a useful statement either; the same could be said of those who say building a ladder to the moon isn’t do-able. The money wasted in building the tallest ladder possible, would be wasted. Those with that vision, should give up.
                   As to my “killing” comments, I’d invite you to picture a paddock on any farm in New Zealand and try to imagine what you are not seeing; the complex, diverse, multides of organisms that were there prior to “our” re-purposing of that space into food-producing land. Where have those organisms gone? We killed them, in order that we could run our two or three favourites: grass, cows, whatever. It’s that way of doing business that has at its core, killing other organisms, that I don’t support. It’s easy to “what if” using specific examples of troublesome creatures, but the general principle, don’t employ killing as the default interaction with the rest of creation, is my advice. Am I proposing controlling organisms, including introduced ones? Yes, by cultural methods modelled on successful natural processes. It’s a long and complex story and probably not suitable for this thread, unless you’re super-keen 🙂
                   • The lost sheep …

                     27 July 2016 at 2:33 pm

                     ‘It’s a long and complex story’
                     Just to keep it short then, just give me a very brief outline of a ‘cultural method modelled on successful natural processes’ that would prevent rats and Mustelids from exterminating Mohua from the Eglington Valley?
                   • weka …

                     27 July 2016 at 2:46 pm

                     I don’t think there are any Mohua left in the Eglinton. edit, ah, google tells me they’ve been reintroduced. Good for them. The Eglinton would be a relatively easy valley to do pest control in without using 1080. Can’t eradicate pests there for the reasons that Robert has stated. In that sense there is no one step closer. With the tech we have currently we should be moving towards optimal control not eradication.

                     @Robert,

                     I agree on the eradication bit. It’s madness.

                     A 50% eradication would be a waste of money. That 50% would rapidly re-infest the cleared land, rendering the effort pointless. If you think even for a moment about climate change and the demands that’s going to make on us and our resources, you’ll join me in saying the attempt is nothing more than a pipe-dream.

                     But we know that control does work and increases native species, so that seems worth some effort. I’d prefer that we didn’t use 1080 or minimised it to extreme need.

                     In terms of CC, any reason we can’t have people living in the bush doing the control via trapping?
                   • Robert Guyton …

                     27 July 2016 at 2:56 pm

                     The lost sheep@ 2:33pm, your answer is provided by weka@2:46.
                     Weka, yes to trappers where there is purpose beyond eradication, which won’t happen anyway. Trapping for food and fibre, why not?
                   • The lost sheep …

                     27 July 2016 at 3:55 pm

                     @ Weka / Robert.
                     If trapping worked and was cost effective for multi-species control, we’d be using it. Why wouldn’t we?
                     But over large areas and/or difficult terrain it simply isn’t, whereas aerial poison is.

                     ‘Optimal control’ over even large areas of NZ would be a major improvement on the present situation, and as I implied above, if that’s where we get to then I’d be happy with that.
                     But the big point to consider is that over time ongoing control is far more expensive, and far less successful than eradication. That is why those who are thinking long term think it worth aiming for the ability to eradicate.

                     How far each of us thinks we should actively protect our unique natural heritage, or allow it to degrade, is of course largely a subjective call based on our personal values….and obviously we differ in that respect.
                     There is also an increasing emphasis on the long term economic value of conserving what we have that is unique, and certainly I know that has been a major factor in the Nats support for this project.

                     I do find it disturbing that someone in your position Robert should be so reluctant to express any commitment to serious predator control, but happily, National, Labour, and The Greens are all reflecting both my personal values and the building public determination to achieve this goal, so I can’t see any reason why the momentum won’t keep gathering.
                     I’ve spent many decades working towards this aim, so very happy indeed with how things are shaping.
                   • Robert Guyton …

                     27 July 2016 at 4:02 pm

                     Serious predator control and predator eradication are two very different beasts, Lost Sheep. An almost-success in the latter is not a success at all, when the predators flood back in, as they are biologically programmed to do. It’s all or nothing and as I believe “all” is impossible, I support other approaches. Localised efforts for specific gains can be valid. A pan-Aotearoa eradication of predatory mammals is a nonsense, in my view. Next topic, wilding pines 🙂
                   • The lost sheep …

                     27 July 2016 at 4:29 pm

                     An almost-success in the latter is not a success at all, when the predators flood back in, as they are biologically programmed to do
                     If your goal was eradication, but you feel short, why would you just give up and let predators flood back in and take the situation right back to where you started from? Where do you get that presumption from? It would be stupid in the extreme!

                     Wilding Pines? If i took your logic i might argue that you need to eradicate them completely or not at all, as there would be no value in just eliminating most of them and then keeping them under optimum control.
                     I wouldn’t argue that of course. Bugger all would ever improve if everything had to conform to that standard.
                   • Robert Guyton …

                     27 July 2016 at 5:11 pm

                     I think you are close to getting it, Lost Sheep. “Almost eradicate then maintain” isn’t a reality, when it comes to rats, mice, stoats and possums, all of which are very, very mobile. They run, they climb, they swim; there’s almost nowhere they can’t quickly return to. Any stalling of a total eradication programme would result in a return to the original state of infestation, imo. It’s all or nothing, unless you are planning on building some very, very good fences, which, as you know, can nevertheless be breached. Your “optimum control” is reliant on so much and very vulnerable to forces such as economic downturn and adverse climatic conditions; if/when there’s a Global Financial Crisis and a Global Warming Crisis, it’ll be game over for any programmes that aren’t basic “protect and feed the people”. What do you reckon the chances of either of those things happening before 2050, Lost Sheep? High, Very High or Extremely High? Same for wilding pines.
                 • The lost sheep …

                   27 July 2016 at 8:04 pm

                   You’ve shown your true colours in 7.0 above Robert, and your ongoing attitude of trying to find every straw man reason why it can’t work speaks clearly of someone who simply has no enthusiasm for the conservation of our natural heritage.

                   Luckily, those of us who are not willing to stand by and see your cute and fluffy small mammals slaughter our natural heritage have a far more determined resolve.

                   And zero chance of everything coming down to merely ‘protect and feed the people’.
                   Unless those tackling the challenges of climate change adopt the kind of fatalistic and negative attitudes you are displaying to conservation…
                   • weka …

                     27 July 2016 at 8:20 pm

                     I think you’ve missed the central point lost sheep. ‘Eradicate’ isn’t possible with the technologies we have now (or that are emerging). So lots of people are arguing against National’s proposal, because it doesn’t make sense. That’s not the same as saying don’t do pest control.

                     Robert has explained why working towards eradication when eradication is a nonsense doesn’t make sense. Unless you can remove all of the species, they will keep expanding into the newly vacated niche. This is basic ecology. So the issue isn’t one of eradication, it’s about controlling populations sufficiently to enable ecosystem and species health. Robert has said that he supports this.

                     (the obvious exceptions to that are island sanctuaries and mainland pest-proof fenced areas).

                     He’s also pointing out the realities of CC etc, and that having big, high tech dependent plans and systems going into a resource depleted future is not a good strategy.

                     Let me put this another way. The only chance that native species and ecosystems have of surviving the age of CC is if humans become predators and use low tech, low carbon methods to harvest unwanted species.

                     edited.
                   • Robert Guyton …

                     27 July 2016 at 8:24 pm

                     My true colours, Lost Sheep?
                     I’ll pass that on to my team that manages Te Wai Korari wetland here in Southland. It’s 6 hectares of harakeke wetland we bought to prevent it being turned into dairy pasture, and developed waterways to assist native fish in spawning and planted native plants to give extra shelter to the fernbirds and bittern there. I’m the chairman of the group that I initiated 15 years ago, so they’ll be a little puzzled, I guess, by your view. I’ll think too, of your message as I walk past the native plantings I’ve done over those 15 years, alongside of the estuary and up several of the creeks that flow through the village and into the estuary. When I get home, I’ll shush the grey warblers, tui, bellbirds, brown creepers and other native birds that flit about the kotuku, kowhai, kahikatea, rimu, totara and tarata-tree lined creek in my forest garden and share your view with them, though they’ll not understand what I’m saying, mostly. The giant kokupu swimming in the spring I re-formed from it’s mud-filled state 25 years ago, when I converted the gorse covered hectare I’ve lived on since then, into a mixed forest garden, won’t know what I’m on about either, but no matter. They’re safe in their spring, though the kotare take them if they can. Predators, those kingfishers! I’m pretty keen on native flora and fauna and have a number of other projects underway to recreate habitat for them all. I like to be involved with projects that are realistic and do-able. Pie in the sky’s not really my scene, especially when it’s nothing more than deception-politics 🙂
       • Draco T Bastard 7.1.1.2

         27 July 2016 at 11:27 am

         http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/kiore-pacific-rats

         Kiore travelled across the Pacific to New Zealand in the canoes of Polynesian seafarers, the ancestors of Māori. These hardy rodents found plenty to plunder in their new home – and became a threat to many native plants and animals.

         Are you sure that they’re taonga?
         • Robert Guyton 7.1.1.2.1

           27 July 2016 at 11:47 am

           Mahi nga kai – kiore taste good and doubtless kept early travellers alive. An animal that aided you in surviving during a major shift like that could easily become revered as a taonga, and did, in this case. Better though, to ask those whose ancestors were involved in the transfer. I doubt kiore arrived unnoticed, tucked away in the bowels of a waka. They’d have been purpose-brought for their value as a food stuff, imo.
           • Draco T Bastard 7.1.1.2.1.1

             27 July 2016 at 12:04 pm

             They’d have been purpose-brought for their value as a food stuff, imo.

             Perhaps but live meat requires more food than simply carrying enough vegetables. That said, meat does provide nutrients that vegetables don’t and doesn’t keep as well.

             And there escape into the natural environment does indicate that they were actually stowaways.
             • Robert Guyton …

               27 July 2016 at 2:04 pm

               Kiore were kept in captivity long after Maori arrived here. Escapes would have been common. They were brought here on purpose.
         • The lost sheep 7.1.1.2.2

           27 July 2016 at 12:24 pm

           Almost, if not all the remaining Kiore are in Ngāi Tahu territory, and although there is a range of opinion regarding their taonga status or not, generally Ngāi Tahu have been very active supporters of mammal eradication efforts.

           Of particular note was the fierce debate within Iwi around the clearance of Taukihepa / Big South Cape Island by aerially applied Brodifacoum in 2006.
           However, after the positive results became apparent over the next few years, debate died away, and subsequently Iwi eradicated rats on all the other tītī Islands.
           • Robert Guyton 7.1.1.2.2.1

             27 July 2016 at 2:10 pm

             Tuakihepa and Putauhinu across the water (I’ve spent weeks there, counting titi burrows), didn’t have a kiore problem. Their rats were ship rats, a totally different beast altogether. The important factor there was do-ability; those islands are small. Te Wai Pounamu and Te Ika a Maui are not. On that note, do you remember the accidental dumping of Brodifacoum into a bay near Kaikoura when a truck crashed, and the accidental dumping of the same chemical into a lake in South Westland from a helicopter? Multiply those mistakes by the factor needed to cover the whole country and you’ve got a serious environmental violation, right there 🙂
   • marty mars 7.2

     27 July 2016 at 9:54 am

     Watch out Robert someone might say you’ve forgotten what it’s like to be a New Zealander for that scorn.

     Why not make it an Olympic event get the black singlet brigade into it. Maybe give people a house if they are good small mammal killers. This would help some into a house, kill the vermin, build survival skills and community – if it was a top town thing.
8. Psycho Milt 8

   27 July 2016 at 9:31 am

   I’m all for a predator free NZ, but lets start with ‘Poison Ivy’ who appears to be an anti environmentalist posing as a gardener. A nasty nasty piece of work that one.

   Seriously? Whatever you’re taking, reduce the dose.

   In 2010, a petition by anti-1080 activists found 93 per cent of Westland residents were opposed to the poison, based on canvassing of 1500 people.

   So what? That word “national” in national parks, and that acronym “DoC” in DoC land, mean that the personal opinion of someone living in Westland is irrelevant.

   1080 poison is banned by most of the world.

   Because most of the world has in its conservation areas a lot of mammals that it doesn’t want killed. In our conservation areas, we’re happy to kill off anything that ever sucked a tit (also possums), so 1080’s a great poison for us to use.

   Bring back the trappers…

   We totally should – as well as dropping shitloads of 1080.
   • One Anonymous Bloke 8.1

     27 July 2016 at 9:39 am

     Bring back the trappers

     They never went away. Bounties, on the other hand…

     A bounty places a value on the existence of possums. They have been tried before in New Zealand but failed to reduce possum numbers. During the era when bounties were in existence, possum populations continued to expand in Coromandel and Northland as hunters deliberately introduced the pest to those areas in order to have a local population to ‘farm’.
     • Puckish Rogue 8.1.1

       27 July 2016 at 9:55 am

       Yeah its a tricky one, would increasing the bounty but putting in an end date work or would that just make people not bother?
     • weka 8.1.2

       27 July 2016 at 10:03 am

       That’s also an issue if the state imposes predator-free on communities without their agreement.
     • b waghorn 8.1.3

       27 July 2016 at 11:41 am

       The doc method when I contracted for them was effective. By memory we got $32 ha to for a first round knock down to 5% trap catch in the monitor.
       They just needed to sharpen up their time management around getting in the plotters and paying.
       It would not have been much more work to leave set and forget poison for rats etc.
       • weka 8.1.3.1

         27 July 2016 at 11:43 am

         How many traps is that per hectare roughly?
         • b waghorn 8.1.3.1.1

           27 July 2016 at 12:49 pm

           We and most hunters trap in what we called a rolling front (ie starting at one end and leap frogging trap lines as the stop catching) instead of trying to cover the whole block at once. depending on the type of country one man can manage 120-250 traps all though 250 is to much if you want to recover the fur
   • weka 8.2

     27 July 2016 at 9:44 am

     “So what? That word “national” in national parks, and that acronym “DoC” in DoC land, mean that the personal opinion of someone living in Westland is irrelevant.”

     1080 gets used far more widely than just in National Parks (or conservation estate).

     And all areas where it is used are bordered with non-use areas and that affects locals.

     And, National Parks are for everyone, so it’s completely valid for people who spend time in them to object to 1080.

     For reference, my own position is that we should be using other tech and keeping 1080 for areas that are too hard to manage any other way, or for periodic ‘top up’ drops (eg 15 year cycles), instead of the increasingly ubiquitous use that is happening now. I also think that the people who object to 1080 need to organise and come up with realistic alternatives. Protesting isn’t enough.
     • Puckish Rogue 8.2.1

       27 July 2016 at 9:58 am

       huh look at that, we agree on something
     • marty mars 8.2.2

       27 July 2016 at 10:18 am

       Don’t the possums build resistance to 1080. The small percentage that don’t die, breed. Do they change the formula or accept 97% or whatever kill rate.

       So doing the same thing each year becomes less and less effective, so diversified solutions that mix it up are better.
       • weka 8.2.2.1

         27 July 2016 at 11:33 am

         Yeah I was wondering about resistance too. Diversity is always good.
     • Psycho Milt 8.2.3

       27 July 2016 at 10:19 am

       For reference, my own position is that we should be using other tech and keeping 1080 for areas that are too hard to manage any other way…

       I used to live in South Westland – just about every bit of forest in there falls into that category. It’s up to the people who want use of 1080 stopped to propose an alternative that would actually work.
       • weka 8.2.3.1

         27 July 2016 at 11:26 am

         Why do you say that about South Westland? My memory of somewhere like Haast is that it’s relatively accessible. If there is road access and ridges, then you can trap, bait etc. Too difficult is some of the really steep places like the Gulliver Valley, although those places still have valley floor access, so if we are talking control rather than eradication, that’s doable.

         And let’s not forget that the Gullier Valley steep slopes is where the last of the Fiordland Kākāpō were found, so it’s possible that those places are less ammenable to mustelids anyway.
         • Psycho Milt 8.2.3.1.1

           27 July 2016 at 12:44 pm

           In “too hard to manage any other way,” I’m thinking of the number of square kilometers of it rather than accessibility. It would be possible to control pests via traps and bait across that much land area, but only in the sense that it’s possible to build roads using shovels instead of machinery – possible, but hugely expensive and just not worth it.
           • weka 8.2.3.1.1.1

             27 July 2016 at 2:40 pm

             It depends on what the goal is. If it’s to get rid of possums, I agree. If it’s to control them enough to put the bird and other species a jump above replacement rate, then that’s a different thing. Because then you’re talking about finding the sweet spot between keeping labour costs low and being effective.

             Government departments have done research on that sweet spot for some species at least, so it shouldn’t be too hard to figure out in different locations. Maybe the trap line only needs to be done once month, or every few months. Do a big push every few years, and then keep on top of it periodically. It’s going to vary from place to place, but all of that is just a matter of organising a good system.

             The solution to the large area is to let people live there. Lots of people would love to live in the bush if they were allowed and could make a living. That requires some cultural change eg DOC have this idea that people shouldn’t live in National Parks unless they’re supporting tourism. But hunters and trappers could be given blocks and occupancy rights in various forms.

             Let’s not forget that there are also a lot of people already doing pest control voluntarily. Again plenty of people that would maintain a stoat line if it meant they could live in that valley and go climbing or whatever.
9. Robert Guyton 9

   27 July 2016 at 9:47 am

   Bats, btw, our special, precious, unique native bats, are small mammals.
   • mauī 9.1

     27 July 2016 at 5:40 pm

     Our bats have almost been made extinct by other small mammals. The bats themselves have caused how many extinctions of other species?
     • Robert Guyton 9.1.1

       27 July 2016 at 5:46 pm

       Bats have also suffered enormous population decline through the destruction of their habitat by the alpha mammal.
10. Robert Guyton 10

    27 July 2016 at 9:50 am

    The New Wild -Why Invasive Species Will Be Nature’s Salvation

    Fred Pearce

    https://www.amazon.com/New-Wild-Invasive-Species-Salvation/dp/0807033685

    Free your minds.
    • weka 10.1

      27 July 2016 at 10:07 am

      Lots of useful ideas and lots of shortcomings to that general debate too (which I know reasonably well, although not that specific book).

      One is how to reconcile the theory with the reality of species extinction and how that affects the ecosystem.

      I think it also works better when looking at plants (native bush will replace gorse) than animals (in the NZ situation stoats will reign supreme).

      I also think that putting humans back into the food chain is important. We’re top level predators and should act as such (i.e we should be harvesting possum, deer, stoats etc).
11. adam 11

    27 July 2016 at 10:24 am

    Portia Boulger, the legend. Speaking truth to power.
12. adam 12

    27 July 2016 at 1:00 pm

    I wonder now that h.r.c got the nod.

    If we will get a post today full of condescension, and my favorite line – if you don’t vote h.r.c then you’re voting for trump? Funny how that feels just like the texan presidents line,” if you’re not with us, you’re against us.”

    I wonder if the calls will go out for h.r.c. to be recalled. I mean she can’t win an election, just look at the numbers, and she can’t unify the party. Under current right thinking on the left, that is the death knell right?

    Obviously a loser who needed bucket loads of money, and the whole establishment to rig the election for her. Well done them, it worked!

    My hope, if they keep her, and I think they will. Is that can keep the whole dirty tricks campaign going, and rig the presidential election. Because God knows she won’t get in other wise.

    One final point, don’t blame bernie supporters if they don’t get behind her. It’s her job to get them to vote, and the blame game just makes you look condescending and arrogant. And the other thing, with the Libertarians at 13%, you can’t blame the Greens either. Who will the left blame, blame the anarchist, because we want fair, open, and honest elections, so we must be the scum to blame, I mean – is it not obvious?

    So supporters of this demagogue, good luck. God bless, and I hope you know what you are in for supporting another corporate morte canard.
    • Colonial Viper 12.1

      27 July 2016 at 1:04 pm

      Word circulating is that all 700 Bernie delegates will be stripped of their convention credentials and barred from all official convention events now that they are no longer needed.
      • adam 12.1.1

        27 July 2016 at 1:17 pm

        That would throw many bernie supports straight into trumps hands, they can’t be that stupid.

        I’m not willing to think they would support trump that way, I know I never would.

        However, if they do, it’s something to talk about, until then it’s pure speculation.
      • Sabine 12.1.2

        27 July 2016 at 1:21 pm

        link or it did not happen.
        • Colonial Viper 12.1.2.1

          27 July 2016 at 1:36 pm

          Only reports on twitter so far. Also hundreds of Sanders delegates have walked, and Sanders supporters are staging a sit in of the convention media centre.

          Do you want links to those as well because it didn’t happen otherwise?
          • Sabine 12.1.2.1.1

            27 July 2016 at 1:41 pm

            i answered that below.

            about 150 sour loosers walked out with a bit of black cloth in front of their faces and the remaining 1600 Sanders Delegates are busy having a good convention with Bernie Sanders.

            ahhh, tarty little children throwing away their marbles cause no one wants to play with them.
            • Colonial Viper 12.1.2.1.1.1

              27 July 2016 at 1:52 pm

              Hi Sabine, that’s the true arrogance of an establishment loyalist you are showing there. Treating the rebels like little immature kids while the serious grown ups at the big table with the champagne flowing and food served keeping cheering the status quo on.

              Yes, Sanders capitulated and yes, the DNC establishment and the Clinton empire has won. But rubbing your hands with glee at the crushing of a dissident force by the establishment machine doesn’t really become you.

              [Adding “establishment” and “loyalist” to the mod bin. They’re meaningless terms of abuse as they are being currently used in this debate. TRP]
            • Ad 12.1.2.1.1.2

              27 July 2016 at 3:56 pm

              Curiously, it’s a close mirror-image of the Republican Convention last week.

              Overall the contesting and protesting is good for the Republicans, good for the Democrats, and good for democracy as a whole.
              • Sabine …

                27 July 2016 at 4:11 pm

                it is. i don’t have an issue with it.
      • Sabine 12.1.3

        27 July 2016 at 1:27 pm

        let me guess you are talking about the 150 delegates that tied black gags around their mouth, left the convention and occupied the media tent?

        And they are somehow more representative then the other 1600 delegates that stayed in the convention and are having a ball/

        oh dear.
        • McFlock 12.1.3.1

          27 July 2016 at 1:32 pm

          And the Anderson’s Bay branch of the Democrats, lol
          • Sabine 12.1.3.1.1

            27 July 2016 at 1:34 pm

            who are the anderson’s bay branch of the democrats?
            • McFlock 12.1.3.1.1.1

              27 July 2016 at 1:36 pm

              I was flippantly alluding to CV’s own little “so loyal to the party you’ll try to burn it down” escapade with NZLabour
              • Sabine …

                27 July 2016 at 1:38 pm

                ah who cares.
        • Colonial Viper 12.1.3.2

          27 July 2016 at 1:40 pm

          let me guess you are talking about the 150 delegates that tied black gags around their mouth, left the convention and occupied the media tent?

          And they are somehow more representative then the other 1600 delegates that stayed in the convention and are having a ball/

          oh dear.

          Support that warmongering woman, Sabine, I don’t care. But you of all people understand how the establishment careerists have screwed Sanders – the one left wing candidate who can actually beat Trump – yet here you are dissing his supporters and backing the pro-Clinton crowd like the rest of the establishment.
          • Sabine 12.1.3.2.1

            27 July 2016 at 1:49 pm

            oh well you should raise your complaint with Bernie Sanders. Not with me.

            https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/758073231748259840?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
            • Colonial Viper 12.1.3.2.1.1

              27 July 2016 at 1:54 pm

              No, I am raising it with you. Don’t avoid the issue now that you have shown yourself as an establishment loyalist happy to see the dissident political movement sidelined and crushed.
              • McFlock …

                27 July 2016 at 2:10 pm

                dude, he lost a vote.
                chill the fuck out.
                • Colonial Viper …

                  27 July 2016 at 2:19 pm

                  McFlock, sabine can speak for herself.
                  • McFlock …

                    27 July 2016 at 2:22 pm

                    I was only speaking for myself and to a goddamn drama queen. “dissident political movement sidelined and crushed” my arse.
                    • Colonial Viper …

                      27 July 2016 at 2:28 pm

                      Don’t use sexist, transphobic language McFlock.

                      You’re a disappointment under pressure, as usual.
                    • McFlock …

                      27 July 2016 at 2:33 pm

                      Don’t co-opt the interests of people you encourage bigotry against just to promote your own narrow self-interested point scoring. Even if your hero trump does it.

                      Nothing I said was sexist or homophobic, douchebag. “Drama queen” implies neither gender nor sexual orientation, except through your own blinkers.
                    • Colonial Viper …

                      27 July 2016 at 2:35 pm

                      Firstly drama queen. Now douchebag?

                      Geeezus McFlock. You can’t even stop yourself when you try.
                    • McFlock …

                      27 July 2016 at 2:49 pm

                      The collection container for the products of a redundant device that was invented by men to “cure” imaginary problems in parts of women they didn’t understand in the slightest and is, in fact, harmful.

                      Seems to suit you.
                    • weka …

                      27 July 2016 at 6:28 pm

                      I consider ‘douchebag’ to be sexist. But I agree with you McFlock about CV’s coopting politics he hates to further his own agenda that is anti-those politics. He’s probably being ironic, but it still comes across pretty fucked up.
                    • McFlock …

                      28 July 2016 at 1:27 pm

                      @Weka I did have another think on it, but I still disagree about d-bag depending on context.

                      If the use is all “ew, woman bits”, as it used to be, then I agree. But really the thing only exists because of ignorance and sexism.
              • Sabine …

                27 July 2016 at 2:30 pm

                Yes. dear.
              • Olwyn …

                27 July 2016 at 2:35 pm

                I think that running as a Democrat carries an obligation to support whoever the party ultimately chooses. It would be out of character for Bernie to ignore that obligation and also counterproductive – those who are keen to see the back of him would welcome any action of his that could be construed as devious or dishonest. So unless something unforeseen happens, I think Bernie will now focus on getting his people into congress. Bringing about real change is a long haul struggle, and Bernie’s not getting the nomination is a setback within a broader context.
                • Colonial Viper …

                  27 July 2016 at 2:39 pm

                  Bernie is old Olwyn. 75 this year. He’s got a few more senate years left in him, maybe. If he was going to make his move and take a stand, this was the year, this was the month.

                  As for the obligation to follow the rules of the Democratic Party. In at least some way I think that responsibility was thoroughly negated by the rule breaking behaviour of the Democratic Party itself.
                  • Olwyn …

                    27 July 2016 at 2:52 pm

                    In at least some way I think that responsibility was thoroughly negated by the rule breaking behaviour of the Democratic Party itself. I agree, but rule-breaking is always more costly to the good than the wicked. I know Bernie is old, but I still think he will do what he can to render the movement as useful as possible within the time he still has. There is more to it than a bid for becoming the Democrat’s candidate for the presidency, although I myself would have taken heart from it had he won.
                    • Colonial Viper …

                      27 July 2016 at 2:58 pm

                      I think Bernie needs to become the Greens candidate (on the condition that the Greens are not on the ballot in marginal states), and take his whole movement with him.
                    • Colonial Viper …

                      27 July 2016 at 3:02 pm

                      I will add – I think that we have very little time left to take really strong political action before things start to go seriously topsy turvy. And in all honesty, its already starting on the rocky road there.
                    • Olwyn …

                      27 July 2016 at 3:33 pm

                      I agree with you about the urgency of the situation. I do not have the kind of “on the ground” knowledge to make a judgement as to whether or not Bernie should break ranks and stand as a Green, although it seems likely that he would have done that by now if he was going to. Looking at the ructions that are currently going on in UK Labour, building up the numbers in congress may actually prove more useful than having the presidency with more opponents than supporters on deck with you.
                  • Halfcrown …

                    28 July 2016 at 8:06 am

                    “Bernie is old Olwyn. 75 this year.”

                    Do you mind Colonial, 75 is not old these days. Not giving my age but I can remember where I was when George VI died and Liz 2 was crowned, and when Kennedy was shot in Dallas. and I still do work (part time) for one of my old clients
                    75 is the modern 60/65 these days.
    • Justathought 12.2

      27 July 2016 at 1:50 pm

      I think Mr Sanders might be best advised, in sporting parlance, to keep warmed up. Julian Assange is promising much more material to come which will embarrass Clinton, she may be facing death by a thousand cuts, whoever is feeding this stuff to the public seems to be timing it to maximise harm, she may even have to withdraw from the presidential race ultimately as a result of her own silly decisions, and that may be a good thing, or a bad thing, who knows?

      http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/26/politics/julian-assange-dnc-email-leak-hack/
      • Sabine 12.2.1

        27 July 2016 at 2:07 pm

        the sad thing is that they are all flawed and bad choices.

        Bernie Sanders should have stayed and run as an independed, and he would be the next president.
        Hillary Clinton is Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump is Donald Trump. Both are products of their ego’s, of their money and their influence.

        In saying that, were i to vote in the US i would vote for Hillary and if only because I like having sex without getting pregnant every time i look at a bloke.
        And while some may say that Trump loves himself some women, he also does not care enough about them to not have their bodily autonomy curtailed re abortion, access to female centric healthcare and access to reproductive healthcare.
        And his running mate Mr. Pence is one of the more militant ‘pro lifers’ or rather forced birthers that would at the same time force a women to carry the child of her rapist while granting full visitation rights to the rapist while also cutting food stamps and medicaid to the children.

        So while some may be all manly about the issues that don’t affect them, and who could blame them, in the words of the imortal Trump ‘she bleeds out of her you know what” these things matter greatly to women. Especially those that don’t want to be reduced to live a live of Gloriavale.

        So there is no winning here at all. As for the ones that say Mr. Kaine VP nominee for the Democrats is pro life, that is true, he has however not enacted nor sponsored legislation that would force a women to under go a vaginal ultrasound, or a 72 hour waiting period, or a closing down of all planned parent hood clinics and so on and so on.

        So maybe just maybe, some of the blokes take of their blinkers in regards to issues that impact women more then man and then may realise that this is precisely what will decide this election.
      • Gabby 12.2.2

        27 July 2016 at 6:00 pm

        I don’t think HC is embarrassable.
13. adam 13

    27 July 2016 at 1:23 pm

    Abby Martin talks about her illegal arrest at the DNC. And also about the mass arrest at the conference.
14. Ad 14

    27 July 2016 at 1:34 pm

    Straight from the front page of the NZHerald:

    How to become a millionare in Auckland through property.
    Naturally, it’s all about him.
    No support from anyone in his life other than right at the beginning.
    Did it all himself. apparently.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11681336

    Can I say the obvious:
    he got help every month the mortgage was due by sucking money off the poor.

    And of course the less obvious:
    how much did this pyramid scheme rely on the income off his wife?
    • Sabine 14.1

      27 July 2016 at 1:36 pm

      are all the mortgages paid in full?
      if not, than he is only a millionaire of debt.
      a paper millionaire but probs cash poor.

      the bank however owns his arse every day of the year until he has paid off all his mortgages or sold his houses to pay one or two in full.
      • Ad 14.1.1

        27 July 2016 at 1:49 pm

        No, there is multiple millions of debt still to pay.
        He is cash poor – but still gets to skite that he’s a millionaire.

        He has already sold a couple of houses – one to put more equity in, and one to simply “pay” himself a salary.

        If only people knew how he is using people.

        Such people are worse than tow-truck drivers.
        • Sabine 14.1.1.1

          27 July 2016 at 1:50 pm

          yep, thats what i thought, a millionaire on paper with not a steak nor salad in the fridge.
        • adam 14.1.1.2

          27 July 2016 at 8:04 pm

          “Such people are worse than tow-truck drivers.”

          Nah mate he makes tow-truck drivers look like saints. *cough, splutter, tiny piece of bile in my mouth*
    • McFlock 14.2

      27 July 2016 at 3:51 pm

      So he “paid” a 20% deposit on his first investment home (the rules now require 40%), but actually he only had a 5% deposit and borrowed the rest. Is that even legal?

      And happened to be on the lucky side of the bubble – that bubble is now ready to pop.
    • Paul 14.3

      27 July 2016 at 4:54 pm

      The Herald as usual celebrates people with no sense of society.
      These characteristics are sociopathic
15. Gangnam Style 15

    27 July 2016 at 1:51 pm

    “I support a Royal Commission into the number of Royal Commissions which have had their recommendations ignored by successive governments” – Celeste Liddle on Twitter.
16. Macro 16

    27 July 2016 at 3:39 pm

    Australia desperately needs a Human Rights Act. Under currently legislation there is no freedom of speech and no protection of whistle blowers. Authoritarian government rules over all.
    • McFlock 16.1

      27 July 2016 at 3:43 pm

      Didn’t they recently make whistleblowing about conditions in the refugee camps a crime? Last aussie pm, or the one before.
      • Macro 16.1.1

        27 July 2016 at 3:49 pm

        Yes they did, and the doctors for refugees are now contesting that in court. It is a long shot however because, as I point out above, Australia is the only western power now without any formal legislation protecting human rights.
17. Ad 17

    27 July 2016 at 3:54 pm

    For those who want to see Bill Clinton’s
    speech at the DNC:
    • Paul 17.1

      27 July 2016 at 4:56 pm

      Is it full of the usual lies?

      http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LZ6oY4dMeYo
      • Sabine 17.1.1

        27 July 2016 at 6:23 pm

        it is,
        he forgot to mention the day Hilary Clinton bit of the head of babies before going ahead offering burned meat to baal.
        • Paul 17.1.1.1

          27 July 2016 at 8:09 pm

          You have seen this haven’t you?
18. Robert Guyton 18

    27 July 2016 at 8:34 pm

    Another day under National, another pest

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/cropping/82524279/straw-infested-with-pea-weevil-potentially-distributed-across-north-island
    • weka 18.1

      27 July 2016 at 8:40 pm

      hmm, where did that come from?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS