Initially I thought I might keep count of the number of times the word “fuck” was used given I had seen part of a previous episode (at which time the censor’s ratings were still a mystery to me) but quickly realised that this was an exercise in futility- not because it was a wait between instances of use but because it was the most over-used of expletives on the program. This is not to say that there weren’t others, but I would assume our censor didn’t have any issue with them if he didn’t have an issue with “fuck” or its various permutations!

I thought that if our censor cleared a programme for our youth it would probably have maintained certain standards of decency but when one of the male stars spoke to another about an exhortation to “suck him off” it became obvious that the censor’s sense of decency and mine were very much divergent.

I thought that in a programme considered suitable for our youth there would be a sense of setting standards of behaviour and retaining some sort of perception of ‘right and wrong’, but in this program a significant number of the stars smoke heavily, consumption or over-consumption of alcohol is the norm,  pregnant women smoke and drink, and children in the programme are confronted with violence, drunkedness and totally amoral behaviour (including extreme verbal and physical spousal abuse). [Note- I make no mention of the morality or lack of such in a programme that is about a group of criminals and their families, their very questionable ‘honour’ system, what qualifies as ‘justice’ in their murky world.)

The censor’s warnings are for ‘violence’ and ‘language’ but there are no warning for ‘nudity’ despite the fact that in the episode I am referring to a woman (the wife of the star’s closest friend/associate) is seen in a bath, and then is forcefully dragged from it, completely naked by the psycopathic star.

The same psychopath then proceeds to violently rape her on screen and then submits her to degrading verbal insults and groping.

It is little wonder that we are having various issues with our youth if these are the standards that the public watch-dog of decency in this country espouses.

The programme disgusts me but what disgusts me more is that our censor considers such a programme is suitable for 16 year olds (albeit with guidance.) DISGRACEFUL!!
Follow @macgibbons

It was so great, then to read this story about a young man

who was lucky to survive one of those dreadful youth road fatalities and who is making the most of the new life that he was he was confronted with. I have the utmost respect for this young man, despite the fact that at some stage in 2010 I would probably have had the most profound feelings of condemnation for his irresponsible actions, and held little respect for him as a human being. Chaz, you are, in the words of the popular TV ad against drink-driving, “LEGEND!”. I wish you all the very best in life and commend your story to other youth who find themselves at a potential cross-roads. We need more of you to hold up as examples of what can be achieved.

What saddens me, though is that it took the death of a mate for this young man to turn his life around.
Follow @macgibbons

The personality traits of a ‘Dog’ are that they are loyal, faithful and true. People born in a Year of the Dog make the best of friends. As such they often inspire confidence in others and are always willing to help those in need. The Dog is not showy and can even sometimes be shy at social gatherings! Their role is more likely to be a good listener and they will usually make good companions for the more demonstrative or gregarious personalities of the zodiac. A born worrier the Dog people can sometimes bark and bite at those around them, or become highly critical of others who do not share their same highly developed sense of honour and duty. Conversely Dogs can become quiet, cool and judgemental with loved ones who arouse their anger, but they will always remain devoted. Although young dogs (should we call these pups?) are apt to find fault at every passing injustice, the more mature will grow less anxious and take matters much less seriously as they age. Their basic ideal of guarding against the wrongs of society as a whole stays with them, however. It is certainly always the Dog who can be relied upon to speak up for the disenfranchised and downtrodden. Dogs do not consciuosly seek out riches but neither do they want for creature comforts. With their considerable talents and innate qualities Dogs usually excel as effective social activists, teachers, nurses or doctors.

Dogs are most compatible with Horses, Tigers and Rabbits.

A Dog’s element is Earth (as it is for this year’s animal, the Dragon.)

I don’t know what this means, if anything, but my children are a Sheep, a Rooster and a Pig. My wife (of almost 40 years) is a Tiger!!

A few famous Dogs from history are Winston Churchill, Bill Clinton, Benjamin Franklin, Gold Meir and Socrates.
Follow @macgibbons

Why? Because I am ashamed to say I saw something in my local pub last evening that blew me away! No, it disgusted me.

Friday nights I pop down to my local pub and have a few convivials with a few mates, and we talk a lot of crap and generally put the world to rights. It’s a pleasant interlude and more so because we have finished a week and feel we deserve this bit of ‘social intercourse’ and ‘imbibication’- don’t look it up, just accept it to mean ‘having a few beers’.

Of course it would be unusual for any session at your local to go without some sort of minor incident that ‘ruffles the waters’ and so it was on this night. But ‘ruffling the waters’ just didn’t cover it. It was nothing that 95% of the clientele even noticed but, as I said it disgusted me.

A group of 3 women were having drinks at a table across from me, and that was fine, and while I cast an eye their way very occasionally, there was nothing out of the ordinary about them- if anything they were a wee bit extraordinary in that they were all in good shape and clearly took care of themselves. After a while they were joined by a couple of males and 2 children. Obviously a spouse or two and childer of one of the women (I decided one of the women because of the interaction between the pair rather than any obvious physical similarities- although within a year or two of each other the 14? year old boy was a blob while his 13? year old sister was a stick.)

And so to the disgusting bit.

The Dad of the crew decided it was time for some sustenance so two ‘mixed platters’ were delivered to the table. Mixed platters? Deep fried- chips, fish pieces, sausages, crab-sticks, chicken bites and possibly one or two other ‘yummy things’.

Now!!! without a word of a lie the already overweight and out-of-shape youth spent the next 12-15 minutes it took for the group to finish the platters with one or another of the nibbles or chips in his mouth and/or in his hands. His jaws did NOT stop working for the whole time, and as he delivered whatever he was holding into his mouth he was reaching for the next item. THAT disgusted me. And not only was his eating non-stop, his reaching was wide-ranging, from the platter nearest him to the one waaay over there!

What amazed me was that all of the adults accepted this without the blink of an eye- it seemed that this was perfectly normal (and would go no short way to explaining why the boy was so over-weight.) What bemused me was that the youth dipped everything he ate into the tomato sauce that came with the platters!

I happened to be watching a sports telecast this morning that had ex-president Bill Clinton talking about new initiatives in the US aimed at encouraging ‘healthy eating’ and better food habits. While most of what was proposed in the various initiatives sounded great and they identified where things can best be done (schools, businesses, etc.,) not once did I hear the word ‘parents’ mentioned! I am a bit simple, probably, but I believe any and all solutions to youth problems generally have a very good chance of succeeding if they are either implemented or supported by parents. Children need the guidance of their parents as they need good modelling. I happen to believe putting a full plate of deep-fried food in front of a child and letting them scoff to their heart’s content (but to their heart’s detriment) is niether responsible guidance nor good modelling. Good luck, young man- I hope you live to see your twilight years.
Follow @macgibbons

Danny Lee is New Zealand's newest and currently greatest hope on the USPGA Tour. Good luck, Danny.

Yes, the conditions they  play under are as near to perfect as they can be, yes, they have the best equipment available and yes, they have have a caddy (often a very accomplished golfer in their own right) to ease their burden and to provide them with the very best data and advice to aid in decisions about any particular shot, BUT to maintain the standards they do day after day and week after week is real testament to their commitment, ability and athleticism. They are GREAT!

Watching the ‘Humana Challenge’ (I think used to be the ‘Bob Hope Classic‘) from LaQuinta in California on TV this morning I was struck by the dis-service the coverage of golf in the US does to these great golfers. You might think my use of ‘dis-service’ to be unreasonable but perhaps this will help me justify that. I decided to take note of how much live golf is actually shown so I kept a tally sheet for exactly 15 minutes. This is what I discovered-

IN THAT 15 MINUTE PERIOD I SAW 6 LIVE STROKES – (Tee-shots, fairway shots, shots from rough or hazard)
IN THAT 15 MINUTE PERIOD I SAW 8 LIVE PUTTS

Some might think that 14 separate bits of live action isn’t all that bad, but if you consider that the average time spent showing a stroke ranges from 5 to 8 seconds (less for a putt, perhaps more for a stroke down the fairway) that gives a total live coverage of just 1min20secs or so! LESS THAN 10%!! That’s a joke!

The remainder of the time is not taken up with adverts, as you might imagine, rather it was to do with descriptions of the courses being played (we can probably work that out watching the play), leader-boards (but seldom showing more than the top 20!), trumpet-blowing of sponsors or administrators, history (flash-backs) and unrelated ‘journalism’ (what a notable did on their holidays, what this personality or that thinks of this or that), and so-on. Oh! and that interminable Fedex Cup stuff.

As this morning’s coverage unfolded they also showed segment’s of an interview with ex-president Bill Clinton, repeated vignettes of a notable in the field- for this tournament it seems to be Phil Mickleson (it doesn’t matter that the chosen notable isn’t one of the leading performers, you get to see stats, profiles and ‘oh what a good boy am I’ quotes, etc..)

What a breath of fresh-air the European Tour events are to watch. Admittedly the USPGA  tour is the richest and no small amount of this is due to the level of sponsorship, but you don’t get to be a euro-millionaire playing for peanuts. The European tour events still carry (increasingly) good purses yet they are able to be presented on television as largely non-stop live golf (still of a quality just as good as the USPGA). If I had a choice I would be watching the McIlroys, Donalds, Poulters, Himinezes, Garcias and their European buddies rather than the Woodses, Micklesons, Furicks, Villegases, Watsons and theirs. Pity the opportunity doesn’t exist until the odd WGC event or The Open Championship- maybe Sky could do me a favour and broadcast more live European golf and I can utilise the dinky wee black box with the sexy blue eye!!

Oh! Did I mention the blardy awful background music they use when away from live coverage (and as they are away from live coverage on a regular basis it isn’t something you can really ignore!)

A wee post-script. I am NOT one of those golf-geeks who sidle into shot behind an on-air interview with a player, stand around looking like an absolute dork and (I bet) in their own mind by association project themselves into the pro’s world. I think the TV company should choose ‘sets’ to do post-round interviews that don’t include such gormless looking wannabes.

A wee post-post script. I said “this morning” but the sad thing is that this is going to apply tomorrow morning, the next morning, and every other morning USPGA coverage is on! Annoy-making.

A final post-post-post script. To check the accuracy of my data I did the same exercise this morning. Over another timed 15min period I saw 8 live shots down the fairway and 8 live putts.
Follow @macgibbons

The reasons these marine reserves have been established all around New Zealand’s coast is to enable over-fished areas to recover and become the wonderful under-sea recreation areas they once were. As they once were before the greed and total disregard for the environment that far too many displayed through the latter third of the last century. People would go to a beach and gather sea-food with no consideration that the hundreds of paua, kina and crayfish were a finite resource. One would have thought that they might have realised when those remaining were getting smaller and smaller, or even previously productive areas were no longer ‘easy pickings’ that there was a problem and some degree of self-regulation might have prevailed- but no. This pillaging was so bad that over time formerly productive reefs were totally denuded of these fish.

The rapid recovery of stocks in these protected areas has proved the worth of the scheme and thus many are being established up and down the coasts of our beautiful country. There is a degree of ‘kaitiakatanga’ (guardianship) practiced in some areas by Maori at various times, too, and this process (including imposing ‘rahui’ or ‘no-fishing’ on zones) has also shown how well our natural resources are able to recover if they are left alone.

The penalties for breaching protection laws are severe- big fines, confiscation of the gear used (including boat and car!) in aiding the illegal taking, even jail, and rightly so. People who involve themselves know these penalties (as much as they know the purpose of protection)  and so I am quite incredulous that the ‘powers that be’ have in this case taken these men at their word, have quietly returned the fish to the sea, and everyone’s gone about their business!

This is a great lesson learned as part of the rehabilitation process- that if you go fishing in protected areas go with someone in ‘authority’ who is going to have his word taken by the police or rangers who you may come to meet with a boot load of illegal catch!
Follow @macgibbons

Rakaia River between Rakaia township and the river mouth.

How lucky it was that an aerial image similar to this one took out the supreme accolade of Digital Globe’s “Top Image Of 2011“. Why lucky? Quite simply there is every likelihood that the river is going to become less and less of its former majestic self due to over-extraction of water for irrigation on the Canterbury Plains that it flows through. I hesitate to think exactly how majestic the river actually was in pre-European times, and particularly pre-farming times when all of the water that entered into the headwaters either as rain or as snow-melt actually reached the sea, but suffice it to say it would have carried vastly more than the 203 cumecs claimed in the picture’s blurb.

The Canterbury Plains are under intensive cropping and grazing, both of which require reliable water supply and as a consequence water rights have been granted that have not only lowered the mean flow of the river but also significantly affected the underground aquifers, both effects permanent if the farming is to continue. To add to the problem a number of farmers are choosing to convert from their current production to dairying due to the greater financial returns they are able to achieve, and dairy farming is a thirstier land-use.

What has also been alarming is that as part of their election promises our National Government promised $1b of asset sales money was being tagged for Canterbury irrigation. Anybody who thinks a billion dollars isn’t going to mean even less water in these beautiful braided rivers is, quite frankly deluding themselves.

I wonder whether the public who chose this picture as “the best” would have done so if they knew a bit more about the circumstances the river finds itself in. Personally I couldn’t, in good conscience choose such a picture almost irrespective of how good I thought the picture was. It annoys me somewhat, having read some of the comments that people have posted to the image that all they are considering is how the picture looks rather than what it is and whether there are underlying issues. If this post strikes a chord with you, please go to the website below and have your say.

View all of the competition images posted by Digital Globe here.
Follow @macgibbons

It’s laudable that the youth felt some remorse and that this should be reflected by him (supposedly) writing a prayer, but I am very skeptical about this given (a) he actually didn’t read or recite the prayer in court, and (b) he didn’t pray for his victim but rather for his own forgiveness. If I’m wrong and he truly felt remorseful, so much the better but this smacks of his whanau (belatedly, it would seem) stepping in and being/looking supportive.

Further, and perhaps even more worrying if we are considering whether and how justice might prevail is the presiding judge chattily commenting on the accused’s natty dress and allowing (inviting) his mother to do the communicating with God thing! Of course this hearing was only an early stage of the pursuit of justice for the wee lady who suffered the horrendous mental and physical hurt but does it set a tone? Should the hearing be about the accused’s state of mind or actually establishing he has a case to answer and putting the victim/s in a place where they know their best interests are going to be served?

There actually seems to be a lack of remorse shown here if it is true, as is apparent by the words of the girl’s parents, that despite the reassurance that the accused appears to have received from the judge he has not made an apology to the girl or her family in spite of the fact that he has indicated he will plead guilty. Is there some point to leaving such an apology to the day he is officially found guilty and sentenced, or would it better serve him if he actually showed his (apparent) remorse by addressing himself less to his own  selfish feelings and more to the incident itself and the irreparable damage he has done to an innocent and defenseless visitor to this, the ‘friendliest’ country.

I must admit here that I have not read or heard the full content of the ‘prayer’, rather I have based my opinions on newspaper reports, but if these are full and to be believed I would share and sympathise with the views of the parents and hold the hope that something happens sooner rather than later to assure them that there is remorse and justice will be done, even though nothing that can be done can undo the horror of that awful day part way through a restful holiday in a country that to all intents and purposes is one of the most beautiful, peaceful and safe places on Earth to be.
Follow @macgibbons

The track wasn’t a track in a number of places, sometimes crossing rock-falls, sometimes defaulting to ‘rock-hopping’ on the river bank, sometimes disappearing into the river and sometimes requiring scrambling over side-streams that tumbled through huge boulders and over flat stones. It was at two of these side-streams that the rescues were called for.

At one, as I made my way across the side-streamI almost stepped on this handsome fellow who was partly submerged in the clear water tumbling down to the Styx. Even though I had recently seen that dragonflies had a very short life expectancy after a particular activity I still felt this guy needed should have a chance so I eased him out and placed him on an exposed rock to recover. Job done.

Some way further on and another side-stream to negotiate, this happened and the rest is history!

But on the same day our national emergency air rescue services were called on for another winch recovery in the Wairoa Gorge (near Nelson) which involved a seriously injured tramper who had lost his footing and fallen a total of 10m to a rocky stream-bed. In this case, as with as ours the rescue helicopter crew carried out their job efficiently and another (I’m sure) grateful tramper was delivered quickly to base hospital services that could well have been life-saving.

New Zealand’s Rescue Helicopters have been seen for many years in New Zealand’s skies and people will have wondered, at least for a moment as they fly overhead,  ”I wonder where they’re off to [this time]?” and possibly mused on a range of scenarios before getting on with their own lives and barely giving a second thought to the drama signaled by the passing chopper. There are, of course hundreds of people who know exactly where they were ‘off to’ and are thankful that the service was available to come to their assistance.

The joke that the policeman had with Monica on her arrival at the Greymouth Hospital on Sunday does touch on a very important issue, of course. How are these services funded? Because of the growth in ‘user pays’ as a philosophy in New Zealand many people would be of the view that if you use it you should pay for it. That’s probably fine until it actually involves one personally then this seems a terrible idea. It’s an idea that loses its flavour if anyone in your immediate family or circle of friends requires their help, too. I would imagine many take the view that it is a service that should be funded by the government but as many would probably feel this isn’t an appropriate use of their tax dollar because they don’t go tramping, or skiing, or similar out-of-doors activities that involve risk and comprise a decent chunk of the most public call-outs the rescue helicopters make. What does this leave? Donations and public fund-raising. Good idea but who’s going to man the raffle tables, who’s going to carry the buckets up and down our towns’ and cities’ streets- the aircrews? police who co-ordinate SAR operations? family members of and those who have been saved? All possibilities but truthfully these amounts would be peanuts and would hardly fund the uniforms let alone the hi-tech hardware and software that our ‘air-angels’ use (and this stuff is both VERY impressive and VERY costly.)

Fortunately the government DOES stump up with funding, but only in part. The other part is comprised of sponsorship and public funding (donations). The list of business sponsorships is long and doubtless with various tiers of funding and the roll-call of public donors is, I’m sure extensive but there is always a need for more. I know I’m going to stump up and add this service to the (short) list of charities I donate to- I hope that you might, too.

Again huge thanks to Diane, Stu and Angus. Job done.
Follow @macgibbons

If I am inconvenienced by another on the road I will swear a bit or call the ‘other’ names (with appropriate expletive deleteds!) but I fall back on the advice my father gave me years (many years!) ago when I was learning to drive. He said “always treat everyone else on the road as an idiot,” and it would be uncharitable to beat up someone who fits that mould, now, wouldn’t it?

Obviously the answer to motorist-on-motorist road rage is developing patience and respect for other road users. Nothing is so important that it had to happen five minutes ago, no place you’re going to visit isn’t going to be there five minutes after you impatiently aim to be there, no job you have to do is any more important to you than the job I have to do is to me, and nothing about you or your life makes you any more deserving of a place on Earth, or on this road, than anybody else. (Of course closer attention to what’s happening around you couldn’t hurt either- the prime task when driving is driving and not attending to gadgets, passengers or presentation so if you’re one who does any or all of the above you probably deserve anything but approbation!)

I DO, however think that many cyclists who find themselves the target of aggression from drivers of vehicles can take sensible steps (cyclists/steps? -sorry!) to avoid such confrontation. Obviously keep as far left on the sealed shoulder as possible (even though some apologies must be made to cyclists for the atrocious condition of said shoulders on many roads throughout the land!) Cyclists should be aware that even though they have the same rights and privileges on our roads as licensed motorists they need to understand and accept that the pace that they achieve on the road can be an inconvenience issue for faster 4 (or more) -wheeled users. Nowadays motorists can be issued with infringement notices for travelling too slowly and creating a problem for other motorists, (and I can guarantee their speeds would be in excess of what cyclists manage) so in the interests of equity and fairness bikelists must ensure they don’t appear as a sudden obstruction which could cause the driver to take dangerous (to other vehicles) evasive action [I'm thinking particularly here about situations with limited visibility such as winding and narrow roads]. Finally, even though our gregariousness may bubble to the surface bike riders need to get into the habit of shouting conversations rather than riding several abreast in the interests of enabling chat-fests.

Now THIS is how to deal with annoying incidents on our roads- a tweet by someone I follow… “I look upon cycling favourably, but Mr LycraCycleWarrior – even YOU need to GIVE WAY on a single lane bridge to me as I had the white arrow.”
Follow @macgibbons