Special report
Hunting and Fishing Minister James Meager will consider formally designating Fiordland National Park’s wapiti herd as a “herd of special interest”.
However Forest and Bird is appalled.
The organisation’s chief executive officer Nicola Toki accused the concept as letting “a North American deer species use the national park as a glorified veggie patch – eating away at the very natural heritage that these sanctuaries have been legally designed to protect.”
But Forest and Bird’s strong opposition to the wapiti being managed as game animal received a similar backlash.
Laurie Collins convenor of the Sporting Hunters Outdoor Trust said Forest ands Bird’s opposition “bordered on the ideologically idiotic.”
“The strident rhetoric shows Forest and Bird is out of touch with reality,” he said.
Laurie Collins has visited the Fiordland wilderness on numerous occasions since the 1970s with his last visit just a year ago.
He described Fiordland’s vegetation as particularly aggressive under the warm, very wet environment which has seen the highest recorded annual rainfall in Fiordland, specifically in Milford Sound, is around 9 metres (29.5 feet), making it one of the wettest places on Earth. Normally the rainfall is about seven metres.
Cockayne
“Even Forest and Bird’s founder, amateur botanist Leonard Cockayne, acknowledged New Zealand’s vegetation is aggressive in growth and regeneration,” he said. “Management of a special wapiti herd embraces management of numbers and quality.”
Hunting and Fishing Minister James Meager said a managed special wapiti herd represent an opportunity for economic growth in regional New Zealand.
“Better, healthier deer herds provide opportunities for domestic and international visitors to hunt the only free-range wapiti herd outside of North America,” said James Meager.
But Forest and Bird were adamant.
“Undermining the incredible landscapes and habitats of Fiordland National Park so that a few hunters can shoot a small number of deer each year, is catering to a handful of vested interests at the expense of all New Zealanders,” said Nicola Toki.
“We are equally clear that putting precious time and taxpayer money into a Herd of Special Interest is not a priority.”
Laurie Collins said Forest and Bird’s opposition ignored that New Zealand’s vegetation had evolved under intense browsing over 50 million years by large moa numbers and other vegetarian birds such as kokako, takahe, kakapo and wood pigeon (kereru).
Several Million Moa
“One eminent New Zealand ecologist Dr Graeme Caughley estimated the several moa subspecies totalled several million, meaning high browsing pressure,” he said.
Council of Outdoor Recreation Associations spokesman Tony Orman said Forest and Bird was simply basing its opposition on it’s long-held ideology of “anti-introduced phobia.”
There was ample scientific evidence that Forest and Bird did not acknowledge or selectively chose to ignore and he cited the 1949 New Zealand-American Fiordland Expedition which out researched the relationship of red deer/ wapiti and to the environment.
“The scientists pointed to a change from the natural vegetation (as after moa and before deer) towards a new vegetation still composed of native species but more stable in the face of animal browsing and grazing, was in progress,” said Tony Orman. “What they said in essence is that vegetation species palatable to the browsers become less but are replaced by non-palatable species. It would’ve happened with moa, now it’s happened with wapiti and deer.”
Deer Okay
The 1949 Fiordland scientific research concluded that although the composition of the forest is somewhat altered, “no changes of economic consequence (through the continued presence of wapiti and deer) can result. Large areas of forest will remain in their pristine condition through inaccessibility despite the continued presence of deer and the number of animals present cannot increase too any extent since the numerical strength of herds is vigorously controlled by the limited area of good browsing range available.”
Tony Orman said the late 1940s when the scientific expedition carried out their extensive research was significantly acknowledged as the peak population years of deer.
Research in the late 1950s by eminent biologist Thane Riney examined an “unhunted” red deer population in Fiordland and found animal numbers naturally low and had attained balance with the habitat’s carry capacity.
“Nature achieved ecological equilibrium on her own. There’s no reason for Forest and Bird’s hysteria over deer management and in this case of wapiti as a managed herd,” he said.
Forest & Bird have shown that they are no longer a credible voice for Conservation. Unlike the Fiordland Wapiti Foundation, F&B are your typical “all talk, no action” wokesters with no practical answers to conservation issues. Seems like they have dropped the “Royal” before their name too, which is a good thing as I doubt the Royal Family would want to have anything to do with the woke F&B these days.
The Fiordland Wapiti herd IS a very special group of animals and deserves to be treated as such. Why is Forest & Bird so consistently wrong on important matters, is it because their ideology is always more important to them than the protection of ALL our diverse wildlife?
What a great move from Minister Meager, finally some vision and dash from Wellington! Sure to be a great vote winner with the outdoor sector, next we need Sika in the Central North Island to be awarded similar levels of protection. Given the thousands of hunters who chase the Grey Ghosts I am certain this also would be a very popular move. I would be equally happy removing any protections in place for the “Twig and Tweet” flat earthers, they have proved themselves to be drab, dull witted and visionless. What a great day!
There should be a practical test before people can represent organisations like Forest and Bird.
I’m reminded of the observation that while doctors and other professional people have to pass stringent exams before they can practice, politicians can rule our lives, often with no relevant skills whatsoever – as is becoming very obvious today.
There is so much research and published studies that show when introduced species exist in an environment for as little as a few decades they become a crucial part of the food chain.
Removing wapiti would do more harm than good. Forest and bird know this but refuse to back down for fear of looking the bigger fools than they already look.
Leave the wapiti alone. They are managed, the local environment is stable and flourishing, to remove could start a reaction that wipes more species into extinction.
Forest and Bird are nuts.
Akin to Flat Earth Society.
This is great news. I listened with great hope for our country at Cam Speedy’s interview on RNZ. There is a practical middle ground, an achievable one that respects the cultural, social and economic value and interests of these non-native taonga species. https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/afternoons/audio/2018986948/protecting-a-herd-of-fiordland-wapiti-causes-controversy
I wonder how many F&B squawkers have ever spent time in the same environment as Wapiti hunters many of whom are environmentalists. Drop Toki in there for 10 days and see how she goes.
The benefits for conservation in the wapiti area are immense. DoC locally are very happy with the predator control that we do over there & this will continue. The Whio population is very healthy & will likely keep improving over time. Forest & Bird would be very unlikely to continue the trapping we do so they should be very grateful of the work that costs the taxpayer nothing.
As mentioned elsewhere, the Foundation has been treating the wapiti herd as a herd of special interest for over 20 years so getting government recognition will not be a step backwards.
Paul
Would Toki accuse browsing moa or takahe of damaging native plants and label them “browsing pests”? Moa fossils have been found dating back almost 4 million years. NZ’s Vegetation evolved under moa and other birds browsing.
Wapiti are an asset to be managed.
Management embodies monitoring populations and ensuring both animals and habitat is healthy and in balance.
Incredible really, Forest and Bird in opposing this proposal to create HSI status for the Wapiti herd,are opposing the group (Fiordland Wapiti Foundation) that are arguably contributing the most to biodiversity values in fiordland ( trapping ,culling deer, monitoring pest species) HSI status to the wapiti will add to the Nat park,not detract from it.
Great work from Min Meager. The trick is now how to lock in the benefits – what are the Opposition’s policies in this area? Given the policy pressure that Iwi can bring to bear on issues, what is Ngai Tahu’s stance? How to ensure the bureaucrats continue to play ball and work collaboratively and not just in Fiordland but across the nation?
Like the Green Party, F&B have long since given up any presence at conservation. Lunatic left-wing elements dominate all out so-called environmental groups from F&G through Forest & Bird, SPCA etc
Like the Green Party, F&B have long since given up any presence at conservation. Lunatic left-wing elements dominate all out so-called environmental groups from F&G through Forest & Bird, SPCA etc
Agree about most, not sure about SPCA though
According to my friendly AI, and i agree “These challenges stem from a variety of factors, including public distrust, lack of funding, and misunderstandings about the SPCA’s role in animal welfare.”
Nicola Toki doesn’t understand the ecological evolution of NZ’s plants, shrubs trees defence mechanisms to browsing. Thorns, toxins, divaricating growth, bitter tasting foliage are evolved defences against bowsing by moa from alpine areas to forest to lowland.
DoC r akin to murderers but thats alright dont mention them here. we have little deer and no birds now. no kea in the last four years on the West Coast. Franz had 16 dogs recently die from 1080 poisoning. Humans are affected. Youd be thick to think they wernt. Thank you to all that shout out against 1080.instead of fighting for a morsel of land, how bout fighting for all NZers!