Kauri tree

Forums › Off topic › Kauri tree

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

28185 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256622 11-Mar-2015 21:06

I think a helicopter and a monsoon bucket to drench the guy would help solve this problem quickly.

Richard rich.ms

ripdog

548 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1256629 11-Mar-2015 21:27

I should have known better than to read Geekzone comments on a matter of environmentalism. Hordes of national voters with axes to grind against 'greenies' who have never affected them personally once.

"Eco-terrorism" - do you even know what terrorism is? Who is being terrorised here? Who is being blown up? Who is being beheaded? Who being shot? Nobody. Death threats are not terrorism.

"His property, his rules" - that's what the bloody RMA was designed to prevent. There's a reason people can't build skyscrapers or rubbish dumps wherever they want. How one person uses their land can affect us all. Ancient trees deserve protection, and the damn owner should have purchased a piece of land without beautiful old Kauri on it. He followed the rules, but he still did wrong because the fricken rules were gutted to a useless state.

And then smartasses advocate the use of violence to resolve the situation. "A flood bucket would resolve the situation"? Well, a swift punch to your face would resolve your situation too, luckily we live in a civilized society where that is illegal.

I award this thread no points, and may god have mercy on your soul.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29763 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256651 11-Mar-2015 21:50

no one has axes to grind. at least not that i know of. i thought we are talking about cut the tree down or not. how is that an attack on greenies. ok maybe i'm thick?

Batman

Mad Scientist
29763 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256653 11-Mar-2015 21:55

PS if people want to be pro-environment etc ...

then i suggest these are the bigger fish to fry
- deforestation: i see forests being flattened in Dunedin ... to plant more or to grow houses?
- getting rid of polluting things - old busses, old trains, old cars, trucks, airplanes, helicopters, ships
- trawl fishing
- older fireplaces/log/coal burners
- coal power

... that guy on the tree? he wants to be famous.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256655 11-Mar-2015 21:59

Jase2985:
joker97: as i said. if you want to cut it, cut it down. if you don't want to cut it down, don't cut it down.

it won't be the end of the world either way.

hard to cut it down when there is a man in it :)

It's no harder to fell it with a man in it than it is without - Stihl don't care...!

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256658 11-Mar-2015 22:02

ripdog: I should have known better than to read Geekzone comments on a matter of environmentalism. Hordes of national voters with axes to grind against 'greenies' who have never affected them personally once.

"Eco-terrorism" - do you even know what terrorism is? Who is being terrorised here? Who is being blown up? Who is being beheaded? Who being shot? Nobody. Death threats are not terrorism.

"His property, his rules" - that's what the bloody RMA was designed to prevent. There's a reason people can't build skyscrapers or rubbish dumps wherever they want. How one person uses their land can affect us all. Ancient trees deserve protection, and the damn owner should have purchased a piece of land without beautiful old Kauri on it. He followed the rules, but he still did wrong because the fricken rules were gutted to a useless state.

And then smartasses advocate the use of violence to resolve the situation. "A flood bucket would resolve the situation"? Well, a swift punch to your face would resolve your situation too, luckily we live in a civilized society where that is illegal.

I award this thread no points, and may god have mercy on your soul.

Are you suggesting that NZ had no form of planning control until the RMA?

scuwp

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#1256661 11-Mar-2015 22:07

Yeah, I am kind-of in the "its in his property he can choose to do what he wants with it" camp. If it was on council or government land then I may have a different viewpoint depending on the reason for felling the tree. I don't think it is right that external people that have nothing whatsoever to do with the property can have a say in something like this. Sure there needs to be some moderation to ensure the use of the land doesn't impact on neighbours etc (isn't that what the RMA is for?) but other than that a man should be able to do what he wants with his own land without zealots coming out of the woodwork just to make a point.

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256669 11-Mar-2015 22:12

scuwp: Yeah, I am kind-of in the "its in his property he can choose to do what he wants with it" camp. If it was on council or government land then I may have a different viewpoint depending on the reason for felling the tree. I don't think it is right that external people that have nothing whatsoever to do with the property can have a say in something like this. Sure there needs to be some moderation to ensure the use of the land doesn't impact on neighbours etc (isn't that what the RMA is for?) but other than that a man should be able to do what he wants with his own land without zealots coming out of the woodwork just to make a point.

If it was the only Kauri tree left in NZ, or King James hid in it, or some such other notoriety attached, then preserving it may be sensible and the permission to fell would presumably not have been granted.

Since none of those things apply to this tree, I agree entirely. Boot the nutter out and fell it. If he won't go, fell it anyway - it might discourage the next nutter.

Lias

5589 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256681 11-Mar-2015 22:39

"His property, his rules" - that's what the bloody RMA was designed to prevent.

The RMA is one of the worst pieces of legislation in NZ, It needs a huge overhaul, and many many rights need to be given back to the landowners. It's getting to the stage where if you want to so much at cut your lawn you need your neighbours consent in triplicate and 20k in fees to the council thank you very bloody much. Burn the damn RMA with fire I say.

I'm a geek, a gamer, a dad, a Quic user, and an IT Professional. I have a full rack home lab, size 15 feet, an epic beard and Asperger's. I'm a bit of a Cypherpunk, who believes information wants to be free and the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. If you use my Quic signup you can also use the code R570394EKGIZ8 for free setup.

mattwnz

20162 posts

Uber Geek

#1256707 11-Mar-2015 23:27

Lias:

"His property, his rules" - that's what the bloody RMA was designed to prevent.

The RMA is one of the worst pieces of legislation in NZ, It needs a huge overhaul, and many many rights need to be given back to the landowners. It's getting to the stage where if you want to so much at cut your lawn you need your neighbours consent in triplicate and 20k in fees to the council thank you very bloody much. Burn the damn RMA with fire I say.

I do wonder how effective the RMA is, as I don't think it is doing what it is intended to do. Really it just wraps up everything in red tape, and creates jobs for lawyers, but I don't think the environment is much better for it existing. But there do still need controls to prevent pollution, as much of NZs wealth now is gained from our clean green image, and natural landscapes and forests.

JimmyH

2886 posts

Uber Geek

#1256709 11-Mar-2015 23:32

scuwp: Yeah, I am kind-of in the "its in his property he can choose to do what he wants with it" camp. If it was on council or government land then I may have a different viewpoint depending on the reason for felling the tree. I don't think it is right that external people that have nothing whatsoever to do with the property can have a say in something like this. Sure there needs to be some moderation to ensure the use of the land doesn't impact on neighbours etc (isn't that what the RMA is for?) but other than that a man should be able to do what he wants with his own land without zealots coming out of the woodwork just to make a point.

^^^ This

NZ seems to have a surfeit of bossy, annoying shrill people with a penchant for trying to harass and intimidate into doing what they want, irrespective of property rights, individual rights, and the costs of accommodating their pet causes.

For virtually anything that you want to do now (fell a tree, build a house, paint the house, drink a sugary soft drink, eat a burger, smoke a cigar, watch Jeremy Clarkson, drive a car, watch an adult film, build your kids a treehouse, eat meat, concrete your driveway, invest your savings in a rental house, go outdoors without sunscreen .......) there seems to be collection of self-important self-appointed busybodies banging on pot lids and loudly shouting about why you shouldn't be allowed to do it. Then demanding a law is used to stop you doing it. Regrettably, politicians and public agencies seem to think that they should be taken seriously and humoured.

It is time for a bit of a swing back towards property rights and personal responsibility, and paying a lot less attention to these turkeys.

If they value the tree so much, they should dig into their own pockets and make the landowner a generous offer to buy the land (with tree attached).

As for the guy up the tree, tempting as it is to propose in jest, violence isn't the solution. Leave him up there and just put a temporary fence around the tree with security guards and prevent anyone bringing him food or water. He will come down of his own accord soon enough. If it doesn't rain, three days without water is probably the best he can do (5-6 if he took some up with him). Then arrest him, and charge him with trespass, and seek civil recovery of the cost of the fence and guards from him.

bakewells5856

72 posts

Master Geek

#1256714 11-Mar-2015 23:51

nathan: Get the fire hoses out and flush out the trespasser off his property

Get directional speakers out and blast his ear drums with high pitched music 24/7

Chop the tree down with him in it. See if he is a martyr.

I think we can do better than that. Start off with playing chainsaw sounds to give a good scare. Once the initial shock value is gone, proceed to play other unpleasant sounds such as dentist drills, fingernails on a chalkboard, Harvey Norman ads... the possibilities are endless!

Do this on and off with about an hour in between each session to prevent adaptation, and set it up to continue automatically through the night. Eventually he will become sleep deprived enough that something interesting is bound to happen.

And best part about directional speakers is that no one else can hear them, so for bonus points they could be hidden and any knowledge of them denied. See if the media can even be convinced that he's going insane

Aredwood

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#1256717 12-Mar-2015 00:08

The environmentalists in this country are literally "mental". Some examples: They protested against and blocked the construction of the Project Aqua Hydro power scheme. This means power prices are higher and more power is generated with fossil fuels - higher carbon emissions. They (green party along with labour) Introduced subsidies for air conditioning systems (heatpumps). More power usage during summer - higher carbon emissions. But wait carbon emissions are now too high. So lets introduce a carbon tax. But now power prices are too high. So lets purpose more regulations in a already heavily regulated industry.

Gareth Morgan wanted to Help the native birds, lizards ect by getting rid of wild cats. And by trying to discourage domestic cat ownership. Where were the environmentalists to give him some support? If anything they were protesting against him. Presumably they are happy with the status quo of wild cats living outside in the wind and rain, mostly without proper food or vet care. Slaughtering native animals. The unregulated puppy and kitten mills that don't care about animal welfare. And the SPCA that is forced to kill (put down) lots of unwanted cats and dogs. Which are the "output" of the puppy and kitten mills.

They said that vehicle emissions are too high. So they decided to adopt the European emissions rules. Problem is these rules place restrictions on Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) emissions. But to reduce NOx emissions means that fuel usage increases - More carbon emissions. UK motoring forum sites have lots of threads on removing / disabling EGR (exhaust gas recirculation). Which is the main system for reducing NOx emissions. When you look at how expensive petrol and diesel are in the UK. You can see why people do that. And every Diesel engine I have disabled EGR on has given worthwhile gains in fuel economy. (And corresponding lower carbon emissions).

[Edited to add]

That protester in the Kauri tree and the others on the ground have probably spread kauri dieback disease to that tree. And all the other ones on the property. So even if they succeed in saving that tree in the short term. The propery owner will them be allowed to cut it down along with all the other ones on his property. Due to them dying and becoming safety hazards.

k1wi

484 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1256750 12-Mar-2015 04:23

I have an opinion. Because I have it, I'm am pretty confident it is the only right opinion to have, therefore I'm going to tell you it.

You have an opinion, but I am going to interpret it as I please. If it is different to mine it is probably wrong, because I know my opinion is right. I'll probably even misinterpret it, particularly if doing so could help my argument. That way I don't have to pull in too many logical extremes as examples of why your opinion is so wrong. I'm certainly not going to listen to what you say, consider what you truly mean or attempt to understand why you reach your conclusions, because that will just slow down my own rebuttal!

We're both going to debate each others positions ad infinitum. Even though there is actually no real point, because neither of us is going to modify our position (if anything we will simply reinforce our own beliefs). And you know what? I'm probably not even going to realise that this method of proving my position and destroying yours is the least successful tactic to effect change on your way of thinking. It is certainly not going to bring you thinking more in line with my own, because I have zero understanding of how psychology actually works.
--

Is it hardly any wonder that the RMA is a screwed process. It is hamstrung by preconceived positions and has become a war zone where both sides are compelled to destroy any opposition, rather than a place of compromise and mutual benefit. I am not being specific to this case, but anything less than a desire to see the destruction of your foes simply makes you a sucker. I doubt any piece of reform will be any more successful.

If only we spent as much time gathering and disseminating accurate information about actual cases at hand and investigating inaccurate facts as we do espousing and framing them within our own ideological constructs. As the internet increases the speed of communication and accessibility of information, it only serves to increase even higher our expectations as to how fast we should receive information and how much is sufficient. Opinion, ideology and misinformation spreads faster than the collection of detailed and accurate facts, to the point where the conversation increasingly becomes about the former rather than the latter and it is increasingly impossible for our expectations to be met.

kiwitrc

4123 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1256754 12-Mar-2015 06:04

ripdog:

I award this thread no points, and may god have mercy on your soul.

Um a lot of us are atheists as well if you want to add that to your list :)

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8