Marty you really are a mine of misinformation. Where do you dredge it all up from, Hans Willems articles?

Bon wrote on Jul 10^th, 2018 at 9:17am:


Nope....I had to look up Hans Willems to find out who you are talking about.

Try personal experience in the bush and many years of dealing with DOC, AHB/TBFree/OSPRI, Regional Councils and their aerial application company offspring, F&B spokespeople, real-life bushman and hunters, etc.

Many of my leads come from people working within the government owned poison industry, that will talk to me because I will never dob them in by using information that can be traced back to an individual.

All I do then is ask questions and make OIA requests until I can get to the truth about what is going on.

Pretty simple really, even if it is time consuming and frustrating at times. The poisoning industry has built a set of rules about how to make sure information is not readily available and they use arguments, that distract people from the problems they are creating, in a way that people only see what the poisoning industry want them to see, even if that sight is not the real truth of what is happening.

Quote:


Tell me then TH....Why the EPA reports I quoted from show a deliberate attempt to distract the NZ Public from the fact that the aerial 1080 programme was not "saving" Orange-fronted parakeet.

For 3-4 years DOC recorded that there "was no substantial decline in the OFP numbers". It was only in the last year reported that it became obvious that DOC had not been able to find any OFP for a number of years.

The DOC reported statement, about no substantial decline on OFP, was correct, except DOC failed to report that there can be no decline, what-so-ever, substantial or not, if the population was already at zero.

DOC was even dropping 1080 over rat populations that were less than 5%, when the target was 5%, and then DOC claimed that the 1080 control was successful because the post-1080 result was below the target of 5%.

See what I mean?....DOC paints a mental picture that they know is not true and when someone comes up with some well thought out alternative thoughts, backed up with facts created by DOC monitoring results, DOC does, what you are doing, and ridicules the messenger and starts painting another false picture to be consumed by the naive and unwary.

Quote:


It wasn't that long ago that you were complaining about me making comment without facts, created by DOC, to back them up. After months and years of sending OIA requests into DOC, I am receiving the documentation that you wanted me to present. NOW, you are the one that is making comment without supporting documentation and you are not even addressing the information, contained in the DOC documents, that I am presenting.

Another interesting thing, about the Orange-fronted parakeet recovery plan, is that in the introduction it goes into some detail that the plan is a document written in order to promote public discussion. DOC then doesn't publish the plan and, therefore, public discussion cannot happen as the public doesn't have access to the document that was written in order to promote public discussion.

Your whole approach seems to be to shut down any public discussion that doesn't agree the work that you did when you were working within the government owned poison industry.