this post was submitted on 24 Nov 2025
355 points (97.3% liked)

World News

51389 readers
1577 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

New Zealand has announced plans to eradicate feral cats by 2050, as part of efforts to protect the country’s biodiversity.

Speaking to Radio New Zealand on Thursday, conservation minister Tama Potaka said that feral cats are “stone cold killers” and would be added to the country’s Predator Free 2050 list, which aims to eradicate those animals that have a negative impact on species such as birds, bats, lizards and insects.

Cats had previously been excluded from the list, which includes species such as stoats, ferrets, weasels, rats and possums, but Potaka used the interview to announce a U-turn.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Given Australia and New Zealand's proximity to one another on the map, it makes sense to assume that the latter was originally settled by explorers from the former; and, indeed, Aboriginal Australian people can be credibly dated back more than 50,000 years, when they were able to walk to the continent from what is now New Guinea.

But no! There's no real archaeological sign of Aboriginal Australians (or anyone else) settling on the island that would become New Zealand until the Maori arrived from Polynesia, around 800 years ago.

I didn't leave out a zero; human habitation on New Zealand has a history of less than a thousand years. In fact, the Maori only beat Europeans to New Zealand (which they called "Aotearoa") by about 300 years, and archaeological records indicate that they brought invasive species with them, too. They also caused the extinction of at least two bird species before European colonization even began.

Maori are great, great people. But I don't think that they've "proven [themselves] capable of co-existing with the local ecosystem" any more than the European descendants have.

(As a side note, the word "aborigines" in that part of the world carries a potentially problematic connotation. Some Aboriginal Australians see it as a holdover from that country's colonial era.)

[–] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

human habitation on New Zealand has a history of less than a thousand years

I know. My point is that cats (or the Maori) have a minuscule impact on the environment when compared to settlers.

the word "aborigines" in that part of the world carries a potentially problematic connotation.

I see. What would be a more respectful alternative?

[–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Most of the birds on New Zealand are flightless, because they evolved without natural ground-based predators (they only had threats from birds of prey). Cats' impact on the avian population is actually pretty dramatic.

Meanwhile, a significant percentage of the islands remains undeveloped. The population of the entire country is only five million, on a landmass larger than the British Isles (population 65m+). Human settlement in NZ is actually pretty light-touch, which is why a ton of movies that need lush outdoor sets are shot there.

What would be a more respectful alternative?

As I understand it, most of that group prefer "Aboriginal Australian."