New Zealand Immigration Officer Making Wild Claims

[Wand]

Originally Posted by NoTies

I think it's great the US posters on here seem to hate NZ so much. Your forefathers enjoyed our hospitality though. They were welcome.

Strewth! That's a bit ugly as well as being demonstrably untrue. Must be a south islander Anyhow, I reckon the mods ought to have deleted that one in the name of world peace

[Wand]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

Discussion of alleged rule violations and criminal activity against a member of CF is inappropriate. That members are prepared to make these allegations in a public forum, that can be read by authorities is disappointing.

I guess, hundreds of posts later, I can draw satisfaction from the fact that no-one has taken the slightest notice of this most bizarre comment from one of our esteemed mods. Some great argy bargy here, and very entertaining; keep it comin...

[Wand]

Originally Posted by Delfin

Careful Wand. For the 'Nanny Staters' who will set their hair on fire rather than acknowledge that a sovereign state has every right to enact the laws it sees fit, especially ones that protect the lives of their own citizens...

Yo, those who rant against the nanny state are passionate - give them that - but luckily for us all they're usually not that clever...

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by Wand

Strewth! That's a bit ugly as well as being demonstrably untrue. Must be a south islander Anyhow, I reckon the mods ought to have deleted that one in the name of world peace

Too late. The Stealth bombers have already been dispatched.

[GMac]

Originally Posted by Captain Bill

It seems to me that the OP stated about 8 pages back that the improvements were in fact donated by generous private individuals and not the NZ taxpayers. Do you know something different?

Yes there was a bit of both.

No NZ doesn't stamp passports 'Ex-Over stayer' but as all countries are connected by wires if Aussie or the US or whomever wanted to look deep they would see he had. Will it affect him getting into Aussie? No idea but they are more anal than you'd think so maybe.

[slipstreamcat]

Originally Posted by GMac

Yes there was a bit of both.

No NZ doesn't stamp passports 'Ex-Over stayer' but as all countries are connected by wires if Aussie or the US or whomever wanted to look deep they would see he had. Will it affect him getting into Aussie? No idea but they are more anal than you'd think so maybe.

Sorry but we do,Non Gratis.barred from entry.Most country have & use this.
Not often for overstayers but neally always if conviction for drugs once a conviction has been served & its posted through interpol & when they punch your passport number in or as the USA does scan a nice bright red flashing light comes up bingo.Then they run a check no time at all.

[charliehows]

he's most likely headed to Tonga or Fiji. Dont know if nz put anything in the passport but he'll have to be very careful how he answers Immigration's questions if he turns up in Oz. Guess he cant be too bad if the people on the spot in nz thought to help him out.

[Wand]

Originally Posted by scoobert

Thank God for America, where we can be stupid and get killed if we wish, without government permission.
I can set out in a leaky oil drum with a broom as a sail if i should wish!
Things like this remind me how free we are relative to other countries.

Try that over here and you'd likely be "sectioned", which refers to S.34 of the mental health act and provides for the detention and treatment of maddies for their own health and safety. With your talk of drums and brooms, seems like there might be a need for such law over there

[monte]

yeah a leaky oil drum, no problem for the fish, no hazard to navigation, $%^& the fish and other sailors, may as well take a gun along with you as well

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by Wand

Try that over here and you'd likely be "sectioned", which refers to S.34 of the mental health act and provides for the detention and treatment of maddies for their own health and safety. With your talk of drums and brooms, seems like there might be a need for such law over there

We used to have such laws but civil libertarians objected on the basis that it infringed on the rights of the homeless to drink themselves to death or hurl their feces at passing tourists.

[JPA Cate]

Originally Posted by Wand

I guess, hundreds of posts later, I can draw satisfaction from the fact that no-one has taken the slightest notice of this most bizarre comment from one of our esteemed mods. Some great argy bargy here, and very entertaining; keep it comin...

Hi, there, Wand,

I did write back about that, right after it was posted, but perhaps it was deleted. Basically, I said that I thought it was indeed a proper subject, that of flouting the laws whilst cruising.

Ann

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by Ann T. Cate

I did write back about that, right after it was posted, but perhaps it was deleted.

Before the conspiracy theories start emerging, you can relax Ann.
Nothing of yours has been deleted.

[fjwiley1]

Wow..this has been quite a Thread...hopefully it will end with everyone still friendly sailors. "Boat Alexandra" must have "shift colors" and got under way with all of the advice given. I wish him well in whatever his adventurous decisions may be as long as they don't endanger others lives.

Peace to all

S/V Water Wings

[Richard5]

Originally Posted by sctpc

I understand, if it is in the sea for 6 months and drifts naturally it would be unlikely to have Unwanted bugs if it is bought on a boat it could verywell have something that could harm our natives.

I agree. But I have in mind the regulations, as example, the state of California forbids the placing or removal of a stone, shell, driftwood, etc from the beach. But if it should be by natural cause then it is okay? Sometimes the law seems onerous and in defiance of common sense.

[Richard5]

Originally Posted by Delfin

Non native invasive plant species cost the state of Florida alone about $1 billion annually. We don't have American Chestnuts anymore because of imported chestnut wood containing a non native pathogen.

The reason the world is becoming a nanny state is because there are so many selfish children like you and the OP out there who think that laws designed to limit and control problems like this aren't worth paying attention to. Selfish children require a lot of supervision because they're always breaking things and making messes on the carpet.

Whilst I'll abstain from comment to the pejorative tone of your writings I do call your attention to the fact that invasive species are a huge problem quite often because govt regulation allows it.

F'rinstance, the Burmese Python, a ravenous invasive species, has populated the FLA Everglades due to the fact that govt allows exotic reptiles as 'pets'. Within one year these 'pets' become too large for the owners to care for so they dump them into the environment, an environment which closely mimics their natural habitat. Even the govt agencies charged with eradicating the invasive species will, by policy, act to promote the population of that invasive species as they practice a 'catch and release' program in the name of research. Example; a female python is captured during mating season but then released after tagging. So this female python will likely lay a clutch of eggs and the govt agency has full knowledge of that. Even then, following a "pet amnesty" event where reptile owners can turn in their unwanted 'pets', the govt agency will try to place these animals with other owners. What then when the python grows to 16' or larger and that owner decides they can no longer afford the snake? BTW: this species of python is a prolific and well adapted hunter. Alligators, Crocodiles, large mammals, including pets, not to mention endangered species have all been found in the bellies of Burmese Pythons.

Another example, the state of California spends a huge sum to eradicate an invasive species, a pampas grass, yet the very same govt allows for garden nurseries to offer for sale that same invasive species. On the beautiful Big Sur coast (a coast so beautiful it is often labeled as one of the top ten in the world) the bedrock is highly fractured. That's the geology of it (Fransican melange, for a primer). This non-native pampas bush so loosens the overlying soil that it degrades the stability of the terrain which often results in erosion and mass wasting (landslides). Then, following a landslide, what is the first species to appear is the non-native pampas.

Also, to stabilize vertical terrain and as erosion control, the state of California seeds a non-native grass following a brush fire. This due to the fast growing tendencies of that species of grass. Yet the sale of that grass to the common folk are prohibited in order to effect eradication of invasive species.

Even along most of the state highways, aka freeways, in California, a non-native species is planted to stabilize embankments.

The point of my earlier comment, in response to a comment made by another poster, was to illustrate the dichotomy of govt regulation. The right hand not knowing (or caring) what the left hand is doing, as it were. And the hapless taxpayer is on the hook in both accounts. But God forbid he should place or remove a piece of driftwood on the beach.

A bit closer to home. As a diver I have made many beach dives in California. I have seen the bottom littered with hundreds, if not thousands, of Abalone shells. All the shells, larges and small shared a characteristic which was a hole smashed into the shell. This was the Sea Otter at work. So while one agency of the govt bans even sport divers from harvesting these mollusks, another agency promotes population growth of the Sea Otter.

There have been many stories bandied about but several point to as yet inconclusive evidence that the current population is larger than the historical population which the tree huggers wish to recreate. All the while this leading to a dearth in Abalone of all species. The Sea Otter is too cute for what it truly is; a ravenous, always hungry predator of mollusks.

Then there is the Salmon fishery and I am not talking of only the commercial harvest. The Salmon has been negatively impacted by commercial fish farms. The impact has been significant and by many accounts shows to be longlasting.

File this under govt regulation. Not all regulation yields negative results but, in agreement with my earlier comment, what I post here are but a few examples of a lack of common sense in regulation.