Enough of this nest-feathering politics

If there's any justice, there will be one deserving loser.

The results were not known at the time of writing and still may not be at the time of reading, but we must make an emphatic call on the question dividing the nation. Not to proclaim a deserving victor. We would not be so self-important.

But if there’s any justice, there will be one deserving loser.

The black-billed gull must not be the New Zealand Bird of the Year. The dynamics of this contest have been unedifying.

We’ve seen voter fraud, ‘‘moron’’ taunts, alleged drug dealing and sex pesting, fat shaming and disability mocking. Most of which has emanated from certain parties supporting the black-billed gull.

They are not the sole offenders, given the voting scandal of a fraudulent 112 votes on behalf of the white-faced heron. But the online attack site gullforglory has been, Putin it plainly, even more intolerable.

This site assails the shore plover as a ‘‘beach breeding moron’’, the wide-eyed morepork as a ‘‘speed dealer’’, the whitefaced heron as ‘‘racist’’, the kereru¯ wood pigeon as an ‘‘overweight tree rat’’ and the brown kiwi as a ‘‘fat, flightless f .... ’’

It unfairly accuses the entire ka¯ ka¯ po¯ species of being a ‘‘sex pest’’ on the basis of just one solitary offender, the southerner Sirocco, filmed in the Stephen Fry TV series Last Chance To See, behaving no better than a Hollywood film producer around the innocent cranium of zoologist Mark Carwardine.

As for the colourful stitchbird, the site declares that David Bain wants his jersey back.

The risk is that politicking on this level, if tolerated in the realms of a bird contest, might one day start to creep insidiously into the realms of human politics.

We can’t be having that. In any case, the gull is among the birds the Bible itself identifies as despicable.

There’s a case to be put that our Lord is a bird-watcher. He has a lot to say about sparrows and is clearly quite fond of doves. But in Leviticus he sets out a blacklist. ‘‘And these you shall detest among the birds . . . ‘‘ It includes falcons and hawks of any kind. Stacks of different owls. Herons. And, yes, the seagull.

Would voting for such birds imperil our immortal souls? Not for us to say.

Some biblical scholars out there may minimise the risk on the grounds that the list is merely describing birds that aren’t to be regarded as good eating.

In which case, given that so many of the birds in this year’s contest are endangered or threatened, a bit of human detestation just might not be such a bad thing. -