Jump to content

NRC on fan worm


Recommended Posts

Yep, hull inspections were underway at Gulf Harbour last week. Using a ROV.

AT GHMV marina (The village private one) the committee was asked for access permission. This was denied. We saw no point in looking at hulls only, and also that it could lead to our members being required to lift and clean for a pest that is already prolific.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Look carefully and it is not feedback, it is some spiel then it askes you to decide between what is effectively -

A - The status quo

B - Have your genitals ripped off by a angry dog

C - Shoot your mother

 

It's what passes as 'consultation' in the Auckland Super Shitty. Utter bullshit, they have already decided and WILL screw whatever and whomever they need to to get the result they want. After that they will proudly proclaim it a victory for democracy. This council couldn't recognise genuine consultation if their kids lives depended on it.

 

Options B and C above will cost us all a LOT in many many ways, all of them bad. They want us to say it's OK to spend a sh*t lad of money to stop the unstoppable. Typical spending a fortune to close the gate everything has already gone through.

Point taken. The below is nothing to do with this subject but well illustrates the arrogant attitude of AC "Council Controlled Organisations" to the public

https://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2019/04/kia-kaha-st-heliers/

who was threatening their safety - old dears with walking sticks?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep...I got asked leaving a supermarket of all places. The guy offered the options and I told him its BS. asked him if he had ever been to Opua marina when he raised the issue and said he hadn't. This is another fait accompli by Regional Councils. Once they get in sync watch out for the hidden agendas. No anti foul will be on the list. Notwithstaning all the ships being anti fouled and bringing in the pests in ballast water. Which of course they all discharge at the 200 mile limit. But The RC's can't get at them !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we not ask to be shown the science of what they are trying to do and how it will work??? A bit like Peter Gluckman putting Housing corp to the torch over "p" contamination.

I know the Northern marinas are? / were challenging it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we not ask to be shown the science of what they are trying to do and how it will work??? A bit like Peter Gluckman putting Housing corp to the torch over "p" contamination.

I know the Northern marinas are? / were challenging it.

I do really appreciate your optimism.

There isn't any science involved at all.

This is entirely based on the requirement to be seen to be doing something. To be fair to the bureaucrats, that is due to a line in some legislation somewhere that say Regional Councils are responsible for pest control in their areas (or something to that effect). That worked great when everyone was worried about rabbits...

Now I fear it is more around the development and control of power and budgets, rather than anything remotely useful.

It would be great if we could get an effective challenge going on a scientific bases. The number of people chucked out of houses, and the cost of needlessly refurbishing houses was a massive cost to society, and took a long long time for someone to show what a sham it was. I may be a bit pessimistic, but the plight of a boatie having to put up with a few more regulations may not trigger the same level of action. Even less so if the marine farm lobby start having a cry (or making political election campaign donations).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Have your say on better ways to stop marine pests in the top of the North Island.

Biosecurity want feedback from boaties.

 


 

There is a discussion at Auckland council in Henderson on Thur 2 May, 6:30pm here: https://ourauckland.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/articles/events/2019/04/better-ways-to-stop-marine-pests/
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a discussion at Auckland council in Henderson on Thur 2 May, 6:30pm here: https://ourauckland.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/articles/events/2019/04/better-ways-to-stop-marine-pests/

 

 

I see from that link that there was also one at RNZYS on April 18. Anyone here go?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fan worm found on a yacht in Waikawa marina, having recently come down from Auckland.

Regional Council now have their tits in a tangle, as they believe the fan worm may have sporned. (Fornicated without a permit)

 

How many cruise ships and log ships does Marlborough host? Sure the photo looks bad. But do Regional Councils have any power to inspect cruise ships and log ships? Ignoring all the usual places fan worm can grown on a ship, such as the sea-chests, I would have thought cruise ships put on and take off ballast water, at the very least to balance the fuel burnt. What are the chances of a cruise ship taking on spores in ballast water around Auckland, and introducing it to Marlborough completely un-noticed.

 

It is very well documented how fan worm first turned up in Lyttelton and then spread to the other major sea ports in the North Island. It is very clear to anyone with half a brain it was introduced by commercial shipping, and spread to each major sea port by commercial shipping.

 

PS, does that look like a keel bulb? i.e. on a T keel?

 

eight_col_Yacht_Waikawa_6_May_2019_-_Fan_Worm_x_1.jpg

https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/389087/fanworm-poses-serious-threat-to-marlborough-marine-environment

Link to post
Share on other sites

apart from the stupidity of whomever did that, who would sail it down with that anchor on the bulb? Muppets....

Yes, it is a known spot, both for issues, and to check for. The bit where the antifoul is missed, because the boat sits on it whilst being antifouled.

But that said, unless the photo is taking with zoomed in, that growth is significant...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The photo isn’t zoomed in, that’s almost the full length of a bulb on a 50’ boat. I don’t think any fan would has been found where the ships dock in Picton, but I believe it was 150 odd found in the marina under this boat, and a handful at one other spot in the marina - this boat triggered a new search. They find a few on different boats each year, but at the moment it seems to be under control. They dive all marinas and mooring fields every 6 months. The council have taken the GPS track log from this boat, and are having all ares the boat went / moored inspected - luckily only a couple of trips out.

As the boat was hauled out (no one aware of the issue at that stage) you could see the worms coming out of the tubes and falling into the water.

The marina normally advise people of the new antifoul within 6 months or wash within 1 month rule for incoming boats, but this owner already had the berth so the marina didn’t know he was arriving (from Auckland). Boat was effectively brand new.

IT, having boats in your marina checked may not stop it being in the marina, but how about stopping it spreading every time a boat goes out? Is it literally everywhere in the Hauraki? I guess so.

Be a bit sh*t if it turns out to smother scollop beds or something similar. It must compete for food with the natives?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Side note, if cruise ships are taking sea water to make up for burnt oil, they won’t be letting it out in Picton as they don’t refuel here. The only other ships we get are log ships, which arrive empty and leave full, be interesting to know what they do re ballast, I think I recall seeing ships pumping water out in Tauranga as they load? Either way, the only fan worm I’ve heard of here is from pleasure boats, I know the guys who do the diving and the head of biosecurity at the council, was talking to him about it last week.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I made this submission on the current discussion document:

"I am being charged for a pest monitoring program because I own a mooring. I find this grossly unfair.

  • I did not cause the introduction of the pests, the pathway for fan worm has been clearly identified

  • The likely pathway for further pest introduction is not likely to be local vessels- as clearly described in the documents discussing marine pests.

  • I regularly antifoul and clean my vessel, if it becomes infested, it is from a source out of my control or causing.

  • The benefits to monitoring are the same for the whole population, all I get is additional costs, I pay to get less net benefit than the general population. I receive no direct benefit from the charge or “service”

  • Charging me is inconsistent with other pest monitoring and eradication programs nationwide

     

I submit that any monitoring program costs need to be born by all beneficiaries of the program, ie the general population. Possibly supplemented by charges (fines) against those actually proven to be introducing pests, or breaking the rules.

 

The likely hood of a vessel becoming fouled and therefore transporting a pest is greatly increased due to the recent banning of previously effective additives to the bottom paints and restrictions on the facilities or techniques for cleaning hulls, this was intended to make the environment “cleaner”, I would suggest we are now suffering to a certain extent from unintended consequences.

There are modern additives that are likely effective against current pests, approved for use in a number of areas worldwide, however the paint suppliers in NZ are in no hurry to attempt to obtain approval for use in NZ due to cost, difficulty and free benefit to competitors. Again the desire to protect the environment is actually preventing the introduction of beneficial measures.

Please consider very carefully the costs of any changes, against their likely effectiveness. If it is proven that there is a net benefit of any spending, charge the beneficiaries of that spending and not a captive target guilty by association."

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...