Matices del relato como dispositivo semiótico

– Cover potential re-introductions – meeting of recovery plan targets. – Cost vrs benefit to the community

– Economic, social and environmental benefits – a triptage?

It is expected that there will be both costs (social as well as financial) and benefits associated with this proposed eradication. While it is recognised that there will be some unexpected costs and benefits, this section attempts to describe some of the potential effects in the ecological, social and economic sectors.

ECOLOGICAL

Benefits

The ecological benefits of the eradication will be indubitable and profound. One only needs to look at our existing pest free islands, such as Ulva Island and Codfish Island / Whenua Hou to realise the potential ecological benefits.

Not only would the species and forest already on Stewart Island / Rakiura benefit, but other species that have been missing for some time could be re-introduced, securing them from extinction. Potential introductions include: kakapo, saddleback, mohua, kokako, and brown teal; not to mention numerous seabirds, invertebrates, etc. Some examples of measured ecological responses to rodent eradication are listed in Table 2.5.1.

Table 2.5.1: Ecological response to rodent eradication. Island Size

(Ha)

Species Response Reference

Korapuki 18 Rattus

exulans

30x increase in Shore skink numbers 6 years after rat eradication.

Towns 1996

Mana 210 Mus

musculus

Increased abundance of geckos following mouse removal.

Newman 1994

Nukuwaiata 242 Rattus

exulans

20x increase in seedling numbers and 7x increase in diversity in six years. 80% increase in tree weta (a large invertebrate) population in two years. Brown 1997 Aviss 1997 D. Brown, pers obs. Kapiti 1970 R. norvegicus & R. exulans

Parakeet numbers increased by 152%, robins by 103% and bellbirds by 53% three years after rodents were eradicated.

Empson & Miskelly, 2000

Red Mercury

225 R. exulans Increased abundance of saddlebacks.

Robertson et

al. 1993

Campbell Island

11000 R. norvegicus Snipe self reintroduced from

Dent Island, CI teal re- introduced and expanding in number.

McClelland, pers obs.

Ulva Island 250 R. norvegicus Five species reintroduced.

Both saddleback and robin increased from less than 30 to over 200 within five years.

Jamieson 2007.

Costs

The only ecological cost that can be imagined is the unintentional poisoning of native species from the eradication operation. This is covered in detail in Section 3 and Appendix 1. These losses can be minimized with careful planning. The overall effect on the species’ population is short term in nature, with any lost individual expected to be more than compensated for by the long term increase in survival and reproductive output of the species concerned.

SOCIAL

• Further work required on this section – need feedback from community.

Benefits

• Reduced damage potential e.g. recent house fire thought to be result of rats

chewing through wires

• Increased productivity of local gardens

• Potential to enhance social benefits by including community in giving direction

for tourism, involvement in eradication itself, etc.

While it is hard to predict what the actual benefits would be, benefits are likely to arise from a strengthened economy. More tourism dollars flowing into the

community will strengthen the local economy, resulting in more jobs and potentially more families.

A suggested social benefit of the eradication is the resultant community pride that could result from living in the best environment in the country.

Costs

• Get from spreadsheet • Increased cost of living • Loss of control

• Loss of hunting opportunity?

• Would need more investment in infrastructure

• Would increase property prices making it hard for working families

ECONOMIC

The main economic driver affected by the eradication will be tourism. It is expected that a pest-free Stewart Island / Rakiura would substantially increase its desirability and demand as a tourism destination. This has subsequent benefits and costs that would need to be carefully managed.

Benefits

Nationally, tourism is a large and growing part of New Zealand’s economy. With total tourism expenditure of $17.5 billion, it is our biggest export sector accounting for 18.7% of all exports. It contributes 9% to national GDP, employing 1 in every 10 people in the national workforce.3

The New Zealand Tourism Strategy (NZTS) envisages “a sustainable tourism sector by 2015, requiring a balance to be achieved between ensuring the financial success of our business and the satisfaction of our customers, protecting our physical

environment and supporting our communities. A sustainable tourism sector means that the natural environment will be protected and enhanced, and the environmental footprint of the tourism sector will continue to shrink. Our communities will benefit from tourism and value its contribution. Our natural attractions are treasured by New Zealanders and renowned throughout the world. New Zealand’s network of national parks and world heritage areas have international standing.”

Obviously, a “pest free” Stewart Island / Rakiura is strongly aligned with this vision. The eradication is also consistent with and contributes to the national tourism strategy in the following ways:

1. Enhances and naturally markets the “100% Pure New Zealand” brand.

2. Demonstrates Kaitiakitanga. The New Zealand Tourism Strategy defines this as the guardianship and sustainable management of natural, built and cultural resources for the collective benefit of current and future generations.

It is recognized that New Zealand’s natural environment is the pimary motivation for travel by our international visitors and plays a major part in domestic leisure travel. It is the cornerstone of the NZ experience and the basis for thousands of tourism

businesses. The idea that enhancing this natural asset will benefit tourism is a bit of a “no-brainer” really.

Tourism has been a significant driver of regional economic growth supporting the revitalization of towns and communities. The development of local visitor products and experiences has helped build regional pride and resulted in the beautification of

3

towns. People have been attracted back by employment opportunities in areas where traditional industries have experienced decline (e.g. Kaikoura, Otago Rail Trail, etc) The financial return from tourism to Stewart Island / Rakiura, was estimated as $8.1 million in 1997.4 The community and local government receive considerable benefit from tourism, but this is often not ‘visible’ and therefore not clearly understood. Examples include:

• Visitor spending (e.g. meals, accommodation, souvenirs, services, etc.) providing economic benefit;

• Employment, supporting jobs and lifestyles;

• Facilities, retail outlets and services that the resident population alone could not sustain;

• A vibrant, active community – tourism can drive the revitalization of small towns engendering local pride and ownership

• Events establishing communities as desirable destinations with iconic characteristics, such as the Hokitika Wild Foods Festival.

Costs

• Loss of income while operation occuring

As well as all of the benefits, increases in tourism potentially threaten the “island lifestyle”. It is essential that the community plays an active role in creating the type of tourism sector that they want, to meet their economic, social, environmental and cultural needs. Communities that take an active role in planning for and managing tourism stand to gain substantial benefits, and are more likely to satisfy visitors and deliver on the vision.

The SI tourism strategy is well out of date and ill-equipped to manage the potential tourism growth associated with a post eradication environment. It is with some urgency that this strategy should be redrafted to guide sensible and sustainable tourism that suits Stewart Island / Rakiura’s unique setting and lifestyle.

CARBON CREDITS

• Look at the effects of pest removal on carbon storage in native forests. • David Combs, Peter Bellingham, Larry Burrows

• Carbon trading initiatives – will this fit in?

4