There’s nothing I dread more than waking up to an inbox full of messages.

As a single dad, I don't usually wake up; instead, I have a little ball of energy come running into my room around six am. He bounces up and down on top of me until I get out of bed.

Sleep-deprived, I make him breakfast, grab a coffee, and open my phone. If my inbox has a couple of messages, that’s normal. It’s usually people engaging with the content I’ve posted. It can be a fun way to start the day, working together with my son as we discuss the answers to their questions about wildlife.

If my inbox is full of messages, a little piece of me dies.

It means something I included in a post or video is upsetting a group of people, and there’s nothing I can do except address it. It can be heartbreaking to read pages full of abuse from readers over a turn of phrase or a piece of information. So with that in mind, if something I ever post upsets you, I’d like to share a few thoughts you might want to consider before you send your message.

This page has similar engagement to the Predator Free NZ, Kakapo Recovery Team, and The DOC Instagram page. It has considerably better engagement than most other conservation pages in NZ and many abroad. It has reached more than ten million people since its launch. That's not meant to suggest it's better than them. But instead to highlight that it's all been achieved without a paid social media manager.

The success of this page has come from thousands of hours of my time invested in running it. Yet, I’m a single dad who runs his own business. This page started as an outlet and until November 2023 I had never earned a cent from it. It began as a way to educate my son and evolved into an outlet to educate the public on conservation in a way that draws them in.

I recently launched an online store. It is my intention to use the money from that to allow me to devote about five hours a week to creating more educational content, building some resources, and creating some tools to further the Predator 2050 vision. 

However, it comes at a real cost. I’ve made the decision to so far not accept marketing sponsorship in an attempt to maintain the integrity of this page. That has involved turning down tens of thousands of dollars in money that would have dramatically improved my life. I believe it’s right to prioritise the integrity of a mission over fast money.

What that means, though, is I’m not a professional organisation, my resources are limited, and I make decisions based on those limitations. More on that in a moment…

Those lack of resources compound. One of the biggest ways is I simply do not have the capacity to engage and connect with every conservation group in NZ in the way I’d like to.

It means I rely on publicly available information more than anything else. If you see that I’ve made a mistake, it often comes from either citing a source that’s outdated, from incorrect information that’s available online, or that the information may be locally known but not widely available online.

I’m always open to new information. But remember, I usually post something for a reason. Typically, it’s because I'm relying on the best available information to me given the resources I have.

If I’m making this mistake, it actually highlights an underlying issue, which is that many other people will be making it too. It serves as an example of where drop-off happens and should give pause to conservation organisations around NZ about an underlying educational issue we face.

A fantastic example actually happened recently. I grabbed a photo of an NZ sea lion for an article. The only issue? It was an NZ fur seal. I shared the post at six am in the morning and missed that I’d grabbed the wrong photo.

.

Why? Because while you may disagree, to most of the world, fur seals and sea lions look very similar. If I can make that mistake, the public can too. It should highlight the need to help educate the public on their differences, not for anger. 

You may not like that I make public mistakes. But until such a time as the funding exists to improve the resources I have they will still happen. We make do with the best we can. 

You’re welcome to disagree with anything I post. I welcome conversation, and I’m always learning. If you’ve got more relevant information, please pass it on. You may even disagree with the conclusions I draw—that’s fine. We’re allowed to disagree.

But everyone make mistakes including you.

I’ve had a handful of organisations reach out over the years angrily stating that I’ve shared incorrect information. In a number of those instances, I’ve had to point out that their own website is what I’m quoting. 

Another common issue that they are unaware of other information in their sphere.

I recently published an article on why conservation is so inefficient that tackles the root causes behind these problems - but my present take is that most of it seems to come down to poor information sharing between conservation communities in New Zealand.

Additionally, some organisations just simply don't check their inboxes. It's been disheartening to have messages from representatives from organisations demanding to know why I haven't consulted with them prior to posting. Only to explain I have repeatedly and they never responded. 

Again this isn’t meant to be a critique of them, but instead, I hope it’s helpful to understand that I have done my due diligence to reach out and factors beyond my control have limited my ability to gather information. Which is worrying because if our paid frontline teams don’t clear their inboxes, it indicates that there's a significant drop-off when it comes to connecting with the public.

I methodically research all my posts before I publish them. On average, I spend 2 - 3 hours reading before I write a post. I’m not an expert - but I guarantee that I'm sharing more accurate information than the majority of media in our country. (side note - it’s been very frustrating to see several of my posts reworded and republished online without credit - or for newspapers to credit me for things that I told them not too).

I don't represent DOC. Nor any other agency. I’m allowed to draw conclusions (and I try to make clear my opinions are my own where I do). I believe many of the issues we face in conservation come from poor information sharing between conservation communities in NZ. I see this page as a part of the solution to resolve that. But it may mean I’ve got a source you’re unaware of - instead of being wrong.

So please take time to ask questions first. It might surprise you who I have spoken to.

Nothing causes more controversy on Instagram than misusing photos.

I understand why too.

Photography is an amazing talent, and our photographers put a huge amount of themselves into the art they create.

I do make mistakes, but please know that if I’m getting credit wrong, it probably isn’t through a lack of effort to do the right thing.

I reach out to photographers to get credit before reposting. However, at times, people share work that they either claim or suggest is theirs. I try to do my due diligence before posting, but it’s simply not possible to vet every photo online to determine if the author owns the rights. It’s why I encourage photographers to add a logo or insignia to their shots in Lightroom before posting.

However, I’ve had a number of scenarios that are genuinely unique that I’d like to share.

Firstly, ownership of photos of Taonga (sacred) species seems blurry. I’ve received conflicting advice from a variety of sources on who can authorise their republishing (especially for commercial use) in NZ. Frankly, I’m at a loss as to the truth of this and the necessary legal advice on this matter seems out of my price range.

Just be aware that I’ve had conflicting advice from almost everyone I've spoken too and to this day I remain unclear as to what best practise should be. I've had different representatives from government departments at various times state that they have final say, an iwi has final say, or the photographer has final say.

Things can get messy quickly, and I’ve been involved in deeply frustrating situations where I’ve had directives from members of government departments to do one thing, and an upset photographer who has not been consulted by the department.

There just seems to not be a consensus out there as to how to handle photos of Taonga Species, and this poses real problems to how we handle republishing.

Presently my solution is that I deal with photographer unless someone is prepared to put in writing that they present either an Iwi or government department and that they have an overriding say on how the photo is used. In the past, I’ve not used this method and felt burned by the outcomes.

If you feel that I’ve misused your photo, it may be because someone else claims they have ownership or the rights to it.

Secondly, your image may be from a stock source. In which case, I have made the decision to credit the stock source not the photographer. I’ve purchased the photo and want to credit where it came from. If you see your photo as credited as from a stock source, and you do not believe it was authorised, I’m happy to pass on where I purchased it from but until you get it removed from the stock source, I will not treat it as yours.

This may not sound pleasant, but it comes from experiences where I’ve had multiple photographers claim ownership of an image I’ve legally purchased, and it’s not possible to determine who actually owns it or who has the rights to it. Again, best practice is to get your logo on the photo prior to publishing.

All I ask is that we keep things in perspective. Which leads into the next point.

It’s helpful to understand the scale at which this impacts me.

I’ve made the decision to focus on what I see as the difficult topics in conservation. That comes at a huge emotional cost. Sixty percent of this page's followers do not reside in NZ. Difficult conservation topics are often not familiar to them. I frequently receive threats of violence in my inbox against me or my family.

I’ve had death threats running this page, and as it grows I'm taking more steps to protect my own personal information given the abuse I do receive.

I just want you to stop and think for a moment what it’s like having someone you’ve never met threaten to kill you. To say it’s emotionally draining isn’t an

understatement. At times it’s downright scary. Especially when people start sending threatening messages with deeply personal information they’ve managed to sleuth online.

I’ve made the difficult decision to remove the majority of images of my son online to protect him. Much of this comes from the unique position this page sits online (which I believe is its greatest strength). Most of the people connecting with this page have no conservation background and therefore these issues are alien to them. Unfortunately, it also means that they’re more likely to be volatile when something like the Predator Free NZ videos are shared.

If you feel I’m defensive or short with you, it’s not because I try to be, but because running this page takes an incredible toll on me. I deal with abuse I wouldn’t wish on anyone. It’s why I stop posting for weeks or months at a time because I have to take mental health breaks from the abuse some of these posts stir up.

I reckon no one ever changed the world without confronting difficult issues. It’s a price I believe in paying. But I’d be lying if I didn’t say it takes a toll.

So even if you think I've made a terrible mistake and I'm doing the absolute worst I could be doing. Start your message off pleasantly. Gently explain where you think I could improve and be respectful. Let’s assume the best about each other.

Everyone views the world in a different way.

I very firmly feel this page should serve to fill a gap. I see that as a focus on drawing the public who have no interest in conservation into the field through engaging content.

That means I can shift between using almost bubble gum-like high click engagement photos to in-depth analysis of topics you may not like. The proof is that this page has the second-highest engagement rate of any conservation page (I’m aware of) in NZ. The messaging works, it connects with the right audience and presently it does it for free.

Personally, I feel that there’s some significant issues we face nationally in how we approach aspects of conservation. That’s not intended to be critical of those who work in the field; they’re often doing an under-resourced thankless task.

But my experiences have given me a feel for some of the strategic gaps in our national organisations. That’s not to say I’ve got all the answers, but at times I share my opinion on how to resolve them. They seem reasonable and fair to me, and I’m happy to explain why to those who are respectful.

Yet you may disagree. That’s okay. We live in a diverse nation, and our strength should be our differences. We’re all unique and have different views that have shaped how we view the world. You may just feel I’m wrong. Or I may feel you’re wrong. Or both of us may be!

Even if you vehemently disagree with a stance I’ve taken. That’s fine. You’ll live. So will I. The whole world does not need to agree with you (or me) Diversity makes us stronger, and robust conversations on difficult topics should be encouraged, not shut down.

So at times, we may need to agree to disagree.

When we do, that’s a victory in itself. The world is big enough for both of our views, and better for us both being in it. I wish you all the best and hope one day you’ll feel the same.