6 ms·

Why New Zealand is releasing a rabbit-killing virus

20 points by farseer 9y ago

ggm 9y ago
I was disappointed by the partial/early release of RHDV1 back in the 1990s in Australia. Quite apart from being terrible biosecurity (that somehow it got released from secure facilities before time) I belive it kind-of backfired, establishing partial immunity in the wild before the official release. Maybe the news of the time sensationalised it, but it felt like a mis-managed situation. I hope this RHDV2 release goes well. (I know rabbit owners, I realize how stressful and upsetting this story may be, but feral rabbits are huge problem)
- farseer 9y ago
  Enough of a problem to resort to bio warfare?
  - eesmith 9y ago
    Yes. This is also a country which wants to eradicate rats, possums, stoats, feral cats, and several other predators by 2050. See New Zealand aims to become predator-free by 2050 , linked to from this article. See also "The Big Kill - New Zealand’s crusade to rid itself of mammals." https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/22/big-kill https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/22/big-kill ("mammals" here does not mean "all mammals").
    - robin_reala 9y ago
      New Zealand ridding itself of sheep and people would be an interesting choice.
  - PhasmaFelis 9y ago
    In New Zealand, non-native animals have driven several of the unique local species into extinction, and are working on more. The people there take it very seriously.
  - aplummer 9y ago
    Globalisation is basically constant bio warfare on so many Australian species. The cane toad being the most notable on its slow march into Kakadu, we really do have to kill all the rabbits and all the toads for the ecosystem. From what I understand it’s the same in NZ.
    - taneq 9y ago
      Cane toads are a terrible example because they were deliberately introduced as a biological control that backfired spectacularly. Many Australian species are dying out because simply terrible at being animals. (It's not a matter of being overspecialized, because imported generalists like rats, mice and cats are outcompeting the native animals even in their specialized niches. They're just ineffective at surviving and reproducing.)
  - Lazare 9y ago
    Biowarfare is what's already going on with invasive non-native species wiping out the native ecosystem.
    - taneq 9y ago
      Or, alternatively, evolution is what's going on and trying to maintain the status quo is unnatural.
      - xerophyte12932 9y ago
        But arguably, these species weren't supposed to be here "naturally", so isn't this unnatural? Doesn't this make an unnatural method to stop something unnatural okay? Also, if introduced/invasive species taking over a region is "evolution" etc, then the virus will just be another invasive species and the rabbits will have to face the consequences of evolution
- toomanybeersies 9y ago
  Was it an accidental release in Australia? Because in New Zealand it was smuggled in by farmers and released without government approval, in an attempt to keep rabbit numbers down. It did work, but it was no where near as effective as if it was released at the correct time. It was released shortly before mating season so the rabbit kits apparently gained immunity.
  - ggm 9y ago
    Was it an accidental release in Australia? You know, I always believed somebody deliberately jumped the gun. It was a long time ago, and I can't find a definitive statement, but that was my memory of the national news at the time. So I went looking. The language is more considered. it tends more to 'unplanned accidental release' than 'guy goes off-piste and carries virus out the door bypassing security' But.. maybe you can dig harder?
- sametmax 9y ago
  A huge problem they caused in the first place, but having the unsubtle mentality they are demonstrating right now with the release of the virus. I predict that this second release will unwind even worst consequences that they will endure, while saying they couldn't have predicted it.
  - quixoticelixer- 9y ago
    Would you care to predict for us what consequences this will have?
    - sametmax 9y ago
      That would be pretending I can do what I just say they can't, wouldn't it ? If you let a child play baseball in a museum, you can predict something will go wrong. That doen't mean you can say which statue or painting is going to be destroyed, or in what way.
sddfd 9y ago
Depends on what they expect to happen. This has been done in Australia at least twice with different agents. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myxomatosis https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myxomatosis
- kylorhall 9y ago
  They've done it in New Zealand before as well, illegally (or something similar at least). It worked a bit, in one region, then failed. The result was farmers wound up fighting a massive population growth of rose hip plants which took over as much as the rabbits did. At least that's what some old guy told me when I was walking through the South Island on the TA.
  - eesmith 9y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_rubiginosa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_rubiginosa points out that the rose hip plant is an "environmental weed" in NZ, and that "Growth from seed is aided by the reduction in competing pasture by rabbits." It links to http://www.massey.ac.nz/massey/learning/colleges/college-of-sciences/clinics-and-services/weeds-database/sweet-brier.cfm http://www.massey.ac.nz/massey/learning/colleges/college-of-... which says: > Pasture competition prevents new plants from establishing, though established plants are very competitive. Rabbit infestations have helped the spread of sweet brier by reducing pasture vigour. Cattle, possums and birds spread the seed by eating the fruits ("rose hips") produced around the seeds.
blunte 9y ago
They say hunting is not adequate to solve this problem, but I would think a few boat loads of hunters from SEA could not only measurably reduce the population of rabbits but also provide a lot of food and fur. I'm not at all advocating killing rabbits for food or fur, but it's at least more human (and less wasteful) than sickening them and having them suffer 2-4 days before they die.
- kirrent 9y ago
  It wouldn't. New Zealand already has plenty of hunting and it's not close to enough.
- Taniwha 9y ago
  I don't think you understand exactly how many rabbits we have, remember they have no native predators - NZ didn't get land mammals until humans showed up in ~900AD
  - blunte 9y ago
    Well, let's hope the virus does exactly and only what it should. It would be a shame for it to mutate and wipe out something else accidentally.
    - quixoticelixer- 9y ago
      It would probably be a good thing for it to do that.
- toomanybeersies 9y ago
  We've tried hunting for years. You don't understand the sheer scale of the problem. Not only are the numbers of rabbits just astounding, they're spread over some of the most inaccessible terrain in the world, covered in dense forests and steep mountains. To give you an idea of the scale. Over Easter, there is the Great Easter Bunny Hunt in Otago, a district at the bottom of the South Island. They shoot 10,000 rabbits over 24 hours.
crististm 9y ago
Beware of messing around with large systems! Your proposed "solution" will most likely backfire in ways you don't even imagine!
- mixmastamyk 9y ago
  NZ is experienced in the subject.
- kirrent 9y ago
  This isn't a Michael Crichton book. The impact is heavily studied, including in model areas and other countries. The most likely backfiring would be for it to not kill as many rabbits as hoped like in the early 90s in Australia.
  - noselasd 9y ago
    You mean there is no chance of it ever spreading outside New Zealand, or infecting similar species ?
    - toomanybeersies 9y ago
      It is already outside New Zealand. It's a naturally occurring variant of the virus from Korea. The only similar species in New Zealand that it could spread to would be hares. If that did happen, that would be an added bonus. Hares are also considered a pest animal in New Zealand.
      - hvidgaard 9y ago
        It does not affect hares, but they can spread it to other rabbits.
      - farseer 9y ago
        Deliberately spreading a virus on a large area may give the virus more hosts and more opportunities to mutate itself into something undesirable. The natural occurring variant only spreads via transmission on 4 legged creatures, not via crop dusters and other flying machines!
pankajdoharey 9y ago
This is a bad news, we dont understand ecology enough to toy with it with viruses. Killing and Trapping is a much safer choice, we never know what mutations the virus might acquire and become a larger threat to ecology and us. This is why capitalism could be bad when a Biosecurity company backs such attempts. I am surprised who suggests such ideas to the government.
- chris_overseas 9y ago
  Killing and trapping doesn't even scratch the surface of the problem, it is truly immense. Rabbits have no native predators in NZ and they breed like... well, rabbits. There has been huge amounts of debate, research and approaches taken to reducing their numbers, some more controversial than others (e.g. have a look at the ongoing debate around 1080 poisoning). The introduction of a virus is not something that is done lightly here. Bear in mind that NZ has one huge advantage compared to most countries here in that the only native land mammal is a bat, so there's not a big risk of the virus spreading across to other native species (this is the reason why 1080 is effective too as it generally only kills mammals). Note that the myxomatosis virus was introduced (illegally) by farmers to NZ in 1997 and it proved pretty effective at reducing the rabbit population for the next 10 years or so, until resistance built up.
- quixoticelixer- 9y ago
  You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, killing and trapping, will not and do not work. It is all but impossible for the virus to mutate to infect a desired species.
  - farseer 9y ago
    Are you telling us this particular virus cannot mutate? Because spreading it to a large population of target host species confined on an island would present plenty of opportunity for mutation.
    - quixoticelixer- 9y ago
      And to what animals would it mutate to?
toomanybeersies 9y ago
There seems to be a lot of FUD about releasing calcivirus to kill rabbits. Calcivirus has been released in the past to control rabbit numbers without any ill effects on the greater ecosystem in New Zealand. Rabbits should not be a part of the ecosystem in New Zealand, they are an introduced species with no natural predators (and very few introduced predators) that destroy the habitat for native birds and cause soil erosion problems. RHDV1-K5 is not genetically engineered, it is a natural strain of the virus from Korea. Rabbits in New Zealand, having not been exposed to this strain before, have minimal immunity to the virus. The estimates for knockdown in Australia are up to 40%, they'll probably be more modest in New Zealand, due to the more varied terrain and isolated populations. As cute as rabbits may look, they are a disaster for the environment in New Zealand, along with possums, stoats, ferrets, pigs, goats, wallabies, tahr, and to a lesser extent chamois and deer.
zoltrain 9y ago
It's seems brutal, but what introduced species have done to NZ's ecosystem is far far worse. Would anyone knowingly sit back and watch one species that shouldn't even be in an ecosystem wipe out many native species that exist no where else on the planet. The Takahē is holding on by a thread, at one point in a the 1980's it's population was down to 118, in a remote part of New Zealand (Fiordland). It was thought to be extinct, now conservationist have gone full send on the effort to protect them and set up sanctuaries on small remote islands that are pest free (you can never visit this island because they're rightly super paranoid). They were in a position of, if the hedgehogs weren't eating their Takahē's eggs, the Stoats were eating their chicks, or the Rabbits, Deer, and Goats were eating their food supply. This is just one case, since the introduction of man the vertebrate species native to NZ has halved, as in half the species are extinct, if anything they're still not doing enough. The Moa is just one of many species we'll never get to see, the Haast Eagle is another, they were starved to death. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haast%27s_eagle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haast%27s_eagle they also hunted Moa's which is pretty epic, largest bird of prey to have existed on earth.
skc 9y ago
I'm surprised that there is not a big enough market for rabbit meat to take care of this problem elegantly. I haven't had rabbit since I was very young but I do remember it being absolutely delicious.
- eesmith 9y ago
  "Elegantly"? Economics and ecology have never worked together in an elegant fashion. We would need orders of magnitude more hunters in order to eradicate rabbits from NZ. That's expensive. Rabbits simply aren't tasty enough to justify that effort. If the market demand for rabbits were to increase drastically, one market response would be to raise more rabbits on rabbit farms, which is cheaper than game rabbit. An increase demand would also result in increased rabbit hunting in Australia. So long as Australian rabbit meat is cheaper than hunting down the last of the NZ rabbits, NZ rabbits will remain in the ecosystem, ready to, ahem, bounce back once the economics changes again. Nor are people stupid. If rabbit hunting brings in huge amounts of money, landowners in NZ are not going to eradicate all of their rabbits for the sake of short-term profits.
krick 9y ago
Maybe it will actually help, but self-righteousness of the proponents of such methods never ceases to amaze me. It actually makes the plots of all these stupid sci-fi movies seem somewhat plausible. You know, the movies where some technocratic forces (usually military or research group) always do something so obviously stupid, that it just couldn't happen in real life, with security protocols and all. You know what happens next. It's borderline hilarious and terrifying. I mean, first you (well, your grand-grand-…-grandfathers) introduce new species to the land. They are absolutely harmless, you have plenty of them at home and would like to have even more. What can go wrong? When you learn the answer, you try to fix your fuck up while your parents don't see and introduce some more new species that apparently fought off these first species back at home. After all, you are smarter now, you know biology and stuff, you know how one animals eat the others and can play with this stuff knowingly. Well, this does the trick, your first little fuck up gets eliminated, but now that second animal dominates the whole new continent and overall situation got just much worse. You try this several times and it gets trickier every time, but you are so sure of yourself, so educated and smart that you just cannot let go, you are sure you can fix it this time. So you artificially construct a virus to wipe off the harmful population. It seems to help at first, but soon they get immune to that virus and really good at spreading this virus around. Then the virus mutates. Scrolling forward, there's no single kangaroo left alive on the continent, rabbits now can produce nuclear weapons and you still have a new, final solution that surely will fix the situation this time. Like artificial kangaroo immune to radioactivity or something, idk…
- eesmith 9y ago
  While entertaining, your description doesn't come close to matching what's going on in New Zealand. Rabbits were first brought to NZ in the early 1800s. They caused problems by the 1870s. http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-DruExot-t1-body1-d9.html http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-DruExot-t1-body... . In 1947 the Rabbit Destruction Council was formed. So this isn't a "when you learn the answer" but when your g'g'grandparents learned the answer. It does not appear that any animals were introduced to NZ in order to kill the rabbits. Perhaps I'm wrong? Ferrets can be used to hunt rabbits, but from what I gather they are not effective as a population control method. The RHDV1 K5 virus is not artificially constructed. "It is a naturally occurring variant of RHDV1, originally found in a rabbit breeding farm in Korea." - https://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/science/plants-animals-fungi/animals/vertebrate-pests/biological-control-of-rabbits/faq https://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/science/plants-animals-fu... . More likely, you are thinking of Australia, since NZ isn't usually considered a continent and since it doesn't have kangaroos.

20 points by farseer 9y ago

ggm 9y ago

I was disappointed by the partial/early release of RHDV1 back in the 1990s in Australia. Quite apart from being terrible biosecurity (that somehow it got released from secure facilities before time) I belive it kind-of backfired, establishing partial immunity in the wild before the official release. Maybe the news of the time sensationalised it, but it felt like a mis-managed situation. I hope this RHDV2 release goes well. (I know rabbit owners, I realize how stressful and upsetting this story may be, but feral rabbits are huge problem)

farseer 9y ago
Enough of a problem to resort to bio warfare?
- eesmith 9y ago
  Yes. This is also a country which wants to eradicate rats, possums, stoats, feral cats, and several other predators by 2050. See New Zealand aims to become predator-free by 2050 , linked to from this article. See also "The Big Kill - New Zealand’s crusade to rid itself of mammals." https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/22/big-kill https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/22/big-kill ("mammals" here does not mean "all mammals").
  - robin_reala 9y ago
    New Zealand ridding itself of sheep and people would be an interesting choice.
- PhasmaFelis 9y ago
  In New Zealand, non-native animals have driven several of the unique local species into extinction, and are working on more. The people there take it very seriously.
- aplummer 9y ago
  Globalisation is basically constant bio warfare on so many Australian species. The cane toad being the most notable on its slow march into Kakadu, we really do have to kill all the rabbits and all the toads for the ecosystem. From what I understand it’s the same in NZ.
  - taneq 9y ago
    Cane toads are a terrible example because they were deliberately introduced as a biological control that backfired spectacularly. Many Australian species are dying out because simply terrible at being animals. (It's not a matter of being overspecialized, because imported generalists like rats, mice and cats are outcompeting the native animals even in their specialized niches. They're just ineffective at surviving and reproducing.)
- Lazare 9y ago
  Biowarfare is what's already going on with invasive non-native species wiping out the native ecosystem.
  - taneq 9y ago
    Or, alternatively, evolution is what's going on and trying to maintain the status quo is unnatural.
    - xerophyte12932 9y ago
      But arguably, these species weren't supposed to be here "naturally", so isn't this unnatural? Doesn't this make an unnatural method to stop something unnatural okay? Also, if introduced/invasive species taking over a region is "evolution" etc, then the virus will just be another invasive species and the rabbits will have to face the consequences of evolution
toomanybeersies 9y ago
Was it an accidental release in Australia? Because in New Zealand it was smuggled in by farmers and released without government approval, in an attempt to keep rabbit numbers down. It did work, but it was no where near as effective as if it was released at the correct time. It was released shortly before mating season so the rabbit kits apparently gained immunity.
- ggm 9y ago
  Was it an accidental release in Australia? You know, I always believed somebody deliberately jumped the gun. It was a long time ago, and I can't find a definitive statement, but that was my memory of the national news at the time. So I went looking. The language is more considered. it tends more to 'unplanned accidental release' than 'guy goes off-piste and carries virus out the door bypassing security' But.. maybe you can dig harder?
sametmax 9y ago
A huge problem they caused in the first place, but having the unsubtle mentality they are demonstrating right now with the release of the virus. I predict that this second release will unwind even worst consequences that they will endure, while saying they couldn't have predicted it.
- quixoticelixer- 9y ago
  Would you care to predict for us what consequences this will have?
  - sametmax 9y ago
    That would be pretending I can do what I just say they can't, wouldn't it ? If you let a child play baseball in a museum, you can predict something will go wrong. That doen't mean you can say which statue or painting is going to be destroyed, or in what way.

sddfd 9y ago

Depends on what they expect to happen. This has been done in Australia at least twice with different agents. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myxomatosis https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myxomatosis

kylorhall 9y ago
They've done it in New Zealand before as well, illegally (or something similar at least). It worked a bit, in one region, then failed. The result was farmers wound up fighting a massive population growth of rose hip plants which took over as much as the rabbits did. At least that's what some old guy told me when I was walking through the South Island on the TA.
- eesmith 9y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_rubiginosa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_rubiginosa points out that the rose hip plant is an "environmental weed" in NZ, and that "Growth from seed is aided by the reduction in competing pasture by rabbits." It links to http://www.massey.ac.nz/massey/learning/colleges/college-of-sciences/clinics-and-services/weeds-database/sweet-brier.cfm http://www.massey.ac.nz/massey/learning/colleges/college-of-... which says: > Pasture competition prevents new plants from establishing, though established plants are very competitive. Rabbit infestations have helped the spread of sweet brier by reducing pasture vigour. Cattle, possums and birds spread the seed by eating the fruits ("rose hips") produced around the seeds.

blunte 9y ago

They say hunting is not adequate to solve this problem, but I would think a few boat loads of hunters from SEA could not only measurably reduce the population of rabbits but also provide a lot of food and fur. I'm not at all advocating killing rabbits for food or fur, but it's at least more human (and less wasteful) than sickening them and having them suffer 2-4 days before they die.

kirrent 9y ago
It wouldn't. New Zealand already has plenty of hunting and it's not close to enough.
Taniwha 9y ago
I don't think you understand exactly how many rabbits we have, remember they have no native predators - NZ didn't get land mammals until humans showed up in ~900AD
- blunte 9y ago
  Well, let's hope the virus does exactly and only what it should. It would be a shame for it to mutate and wipe out something else accidentally.
  - quixoticelixer- 9y ago
    It would probably be a good thing for it to do that.
toomanybeersies 9y ago
We've tried hunting for years. You don't understand the sheer scale of the problem. Not only are the numbers of rabbits just astounding, they're spread over some of the most inaccessible terrain in the world, covered in dense forests and steep mountains. To give you an idea of the scale. Over Easter, there is the Great Easter Bunny Hunt in Otago, a district at the bottom of the South Island. They shoot 10,000 rabbits over 24 hours.

crististm 9y ago

Beware of messing around with large systems! Your proposed "solution" will most likely backfire in ways you don't even imagine!

mixmastamyk 9y ago
NZ is experienced in the subject.
kirrent 9y ago
This isn't a Michael Crichton book. The impact is heavily studied, including in model areas and other countries. The most likely backfiring would be for it to not kill as many rabbits as hoped like in the early 90s in Australia.
- noselasd 9y ago
  You mean there is no chance of it ever spreading outside New Zealand, or infecting similar species ?
  - toomanybeersies 9y ago
    It is already outside New Zealand. It's a naturally occurring variant of the virus from Korea. The only similar species in New Zealand that it could spread to would be hares. If that did happen, that would be an added bonus. Hares are also considered a pest animal in New Zealand.
    - hvidgaard 9y ago
      It does not affect hares, but they can spread it to other rabbits.
    - farseer 9y ago
      Deliberately spreading a virus on a large area may give the virus more hosts and more opportunities to mutate itself into something undesirable. The natural occurring variant only spreads via transmission on 4 legged creatures, not via crop dusters and other flying machines!

pankajdoharey 9y ago

This is a bad news, we dont understand ecology enough to toy with it with viruses. Killing and Trapping is a much safer choice, we never know what mutations the virus might acquire and become a larger threat to ecology and us. This is why capitalism could be bad when a Biosecurity company backs such attempts. I am surprised who suggests such ideas to the government.

chris_overseas 9y ago
Killing and trapping doesn't even scratch the surface of the problem, it is truly immense. Rabbits have no native predators in NZ and they breed like... well, rabbits. There has been huge amounts of debate, research and approaches taken to reducing their numbers, some more controversial than others (e.g. have a look at the ongoing debate around 1080 poisoning). The introduction of a virus is not something that is done lightly here. Bear in mind that NZ has one huge advantage compared to most countries here in that the only native land mammal is a bat, so there's not a big risk of the virus spreading across to other native species (this is the reason why 1080 is effective too as it generally only kills mammals). Note that the myxomatosis virus was introduced (illegally) by farmers to NZ in 1997 and it proved pretty effective at reducing the rabbit population for the next 10 years or so, until resistance built up.
quixoticelixer- 9y ago
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, killing and trapping, will not and do not work. It is all but impossible for the virus to mutate to infect a desired species.
- farseer 9y ago
  Are you telling us this particular virus cannot mutate? Because spreading it to a large population of target host species confined on an island would present plenty of opportunity for mutation.
  - quixoticelixer- 9y ago
    And to what animals would it mutate to?

toomanybeersies 9y ago

There seems to be a lot of FUD about releasing calcivirus to kill rabbits. Calcivirus has been released in the past to control rabbit numbers without any ill effects on the greater ecosystem in New Zealand. Rabbits should not be a part of the ecosystem in New Zealand, they are an introduced species with no natural predators (and very few introduced predators) that destroy the habitat for native birds and cause soil erosion problems. RHDV1-K5 is not genetically engineered, it is a natural strain of the virus from Korea. Rabbits in New Zealand, having not been exposed to this strain before, have minimal immunity to the virus. The estimates for knockdown in Australia are up to 40%, they'll probably be more modest in New Zealand, due to the more varied terrain and isolated populations. As cute as rabbits may look, they are a disaster for the environment in New Zealand, along with possums, stoats, ferrets, pigs, goats, wallabies, tahr, and to a lesser extent chamois and deer.

zoltrain 9y ago

It's seems brutal, but what introduced species have done to NZ's ecosystem is far far worse. Would anyone knowingly sit back and watch one species that shouldn't even be in an ecosystem wipe out many native species that exist no where else on the planet. The Takahē is holding on by a thread, at one point in a the 1980's it's population was down to 118, in a remote part of New Zealand (Fiordland). It was thought to be extinct, now conservationist have gone full send on the effort to protect them and set up sanctuaries on small remote islands that are pest free (you can never visit this island because they're rightly super paranoid). They were in a position of, if the hedgehogs weren't eating their Takahē's eggs, the Stoats were eating their chicks, or the Rabbits, Deer, and Goats were eating their food supply. This is just one case, since the introduction of man the vertebrate species native to NZ has halved, as in half the species are extinct, if anything they're still not doing enough. The Moa is just one of many species we'll never get to see, the Haast Eagle is another, they were starved to death. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haast%27s_eagle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haast%27s_eagle they also hunted Moa's which is pretty epic, largest bird of prey to have existed on earth.

skc 9y ago

I'm surprised that there is not a big enough market for rabbit meat to take care of this problem elegantly. I haven't had rabbit since I was very young but I do remember it being absolutely delicious.

eesmith 9y ago
"Elegantly"? Economics and ecology have never worked together in an elegant fashion. We would need orders of magnitude more hunters in order to eradicate rabbits from NZ. That's expensive. Rabbits simply aren't tasty enough to justify that effort. If the market demand for rabbits were to increase drastically, one market response would be to raise more rabbits on rabbit farms, which is cheaper than game rabbit. An increase demand would also result in increased rabbit hunting in Australia. So long as Australian rabbit meat is cheaper than hunting down the last of the NZ rabbits, NZ rabbits will remain in the ecosystem, ready to, ahem, bounce back once the economics changes again. Nor are people stupid. If rabbit hunting brings in huge amounts of money, landowners in NZ are not going to eradicate all of their rabbits for the sake of short-term profits.

krick 9y ago

Maybe it will actually help, but self-righteousness of the proponents of such methods never ceases to amaze me. It actually makes the plots of all these stupid sci-fi movies seem somewhat plausible. You know, the movies where some technocratic forces (usually military or research group) always do something so obviously stupid, that it just couldn't happen in real life, with security protocols and all. You know what happens next. It's borderline hilarious and terrifying. I mean, first you (well, your grand-grand-…-grandfathers) introduce new species to the land. They are absolutely harmless, you have plenty of them at home and would like to have even more. What can go wrong? When you learn the answer, you try to fix your fuck up while your parents don't see and introduce some more new species that apparently fought off these first species back at home. After all, you are smarter now, you know biology and stuff, you know how one animals eat the others and can play with this stuff knowingly. Well, this does the trick, your first little fuck up gets eliminated, but now that second animal dominates the whole new continent and overall situation got just much worse. You try this several times and it gets trickier every time, but you are so sure of yourself, so educated and smart that you just cannot let go, you are sure you can fix it this time. So you artificially construct a virus to wipe off the harmful population. It seems to help at first, but soon they get immune to that virus and really good at spreading this virus around. Then the virus mutates. Scrolling forward, there's no single kangaroo left alive on the continent, rabbits now can produce nuclear weapons and you still have a new, final solution that surely will fix the situation this time. Like artificial kangaroo immune to radioactivity or something, idk…

eesmith 9y ago
While entertaining, your description doesn't come close to matching what's going on in New Zealand. Rabbits were first brought to NZ in the early 1800s. They caused problems by the 1870s. http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-DruExot-t1-body1-d9.html http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-DruExot-t1-body... . In 1947 the Rabbit Destruction Council was formed. So this isn't a "when you learn the answer" but when your g'g'grandparents learned the answer. It does not appear that any animals were introduced to NZ in order to kill the rabbits. Perhaps I'm wrong? Ferrets can be used to hunt rabbits, but from what I gather they are not effective as a population control method. The RHDV1 K5 virus is not artificially constructed. "It is a naturally occurring variant of RHDV1, originally found in a rabbit breeding farm in Korea." - https://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/science/plants-animals-fungi/animals/vertebrate-pests/biological-control-of-rabbits/faq https://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/science/plants-animals-fu... . More likely, you are thinking of Australia, since NZ isn't usually considered a continent and since it doesn't have kangaroos.