RaceCafe..#1...Tipsters Thread.... Share Your Fancies For Fun...Lets See Who The Best Tipsters Here Are.
hedley

P O I S O N I N G~~PARADISE

Recommended Posts

a recent post on the facebook page

 

 

I remember a interesting caller on Radiolive one day saying he was employed by the NZ Forest Services. He went onto say that when the NZ Forest service was dissolved by the new DoC,  every document was shredded and all files destroyed. He also went on to say the new departments govt policy was to ensure that no free meat was made easily available to the average NZ citizen. It was a shame the caller phoned in so close to the news hour as I would have liked to hear all he had to say.

They also vowed and declared that they would take down the wild venison industry as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Money talks,some powerful people must be cleaning up over this disgrace,hard to believe this is still going on......I picked up a penguin with a broken wing at mangawhai,contacted DOC and they told me to put it back on the sand to die,i gave it to a couple and their two kids on a kayak who took it to the vet,couldn't do it

 

 

Do our politicians have shares in the companies making this crap?

 

..a recent post on the facebook page

 

" They are making money in manufacturing pure 1080 into pellets and two government ministers through successive governments are the sole shareholders in 1080's ACP try finding the money trail after them the Minister of Finance and Agriculture......it does not exist. "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..a new N.Z. political party has formed :ohttp://ban1080.co.nz/

 

http://www.greystar.co.nz/content/1080-political-party-proposed

 

 

1080 political party proposed
By Laura Mills

A political party is planned to try to have 1080 poison banned.

Its facilitator, Golden Bay mussel farmer Bill Wallace is racing to get 500 paid members within a fortnight so he can register his party in time.

If Mr Wallace can gather enough names, the words ‘Ban 1080’ could appear on every ballot paper in New Zealand at this year’s general election.

Mr Wallace said he decided to act in response to the upcoming increase in mass poison drops to combat a beech forest fruiting and pest plague.

Once he had 500 members, the members would vote in an executive.

“I’m trying to create a vehicle for all the people who hate 1080 ... from conservationists to dairy farmers, on all sides of the political spectrum,” Mr Wallace said.

He hoped to muster a lot of support from the West Coast, and that a well known person may come forward to run for the West Coast-Tasman electorate.

“By keeping a single issue I’m hoping to attract people from the left, Greens, and right-wing dairy farmers who don’t believe (1080) is the only way to control Tb.”

The party’s website www.ban1080.co.nz went live today, and a lawyer has drawn up the constitution.

Mr Wallace said he had been a “complacent Kiwi” until the so-called ‘Battle for the Birds’ poison drops were announced recently.

“I always just thought this is necessary for Tb — and we have to be realistic, dairy farming is a major income source — but then the increased (1080) plans were announced in February.”

He said 700,000ha would be doused with poisoned pellets, an area the size of Taranaki.

“We want ‘Ban 1080’ on every single voting paper in New Zealand.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an opportunity to push the 1080 issue. The more people who register this issue the more chance of it becoming a TV debate........

One News is running a pre election poll to find out what election issues matter to New Zealanders.

They say they will use the results of the poll to determine the level of coverage various issues get.

If you also think that 1080 poison needs to become a political issue then take a minute to tell One News at http://tvnz.co.nz/vote2014

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brodifacoum
This is the same chemical that they want to drop on Stewart Island. It kills 10,000 kids per year in the States. Now being banned in the States but DoC think it's a "useful tool". http://earthjustice.org/news/press/2014/d-con-agrees-to-pull-super-toxic-rat-poisons-from-stores

 

Owl = Moreporks it'll kill :o

 

and it'll halt all game cull too., seems like a wanton programme to poison our great outdoors :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

http://www.greystar.co.nz/content/1080-political-party-proposed

 

 

1080 political party proposed
By Laura Mills

A political party is planned to try to have 1080 poison banned.

Its facilitator, Golden Bay mussel farmer Bill Wallace is racing to get 500 paid members within a fortnight so he can register his party in time.

If Mr Wallace can gather enough names, the words ‘Ban 1080’ could appear on every ballot paper in New Zealand at this year’s general election.

Mr Wallace said he decided to act in response to the upcoming increase in mass poison drops to combat a beech forest fruiting and pest plague.

Once he had 500 members, the members would vote in an executive.

“I’m trying to create a vehicle for all the people who hate 1080 ... from conservationists to dairy farmers, on all sides of the political spectrum,” Mr Wallace said.

He hoped to muster a lot of support from the West Coast, and that a well known person may come forward to run for the West Coast-Tasman electorate.

“By keeping a single issue I’m hoping to attract people from the left, Greens, and right-wing dairy farmers who don’t believe (1080) is the only way to control Tb.”

The party’s website www.ban1080.co.nz went live today, and a lawyer has drawn up the constitution.

Mr Wallace said he had been a “complacent Kiwi” until the so-called ‘Battle for the Birds’ poison drops were announced recently.

“I always just thought this is necessary for Tb — and we have to be realistic, dairy farming is a major income source — but then the increased (1080) plans were announced in February.”

He said 700,000ha would be doused with poisoned pellets, an area the size of Taranaki.

“We want ‘Ban 1080’ on every single voting paper in New Zealand.”

 

 

 

Here is an opportunity to push the 1080 issue. The more people who register this issue the more chance of it becoming a TV debate........

One News is running a pre election poll to find out what election issues matter to New Zealanders.

They say they will use the results of the poll to determine the level of coverage various issues get.

If you also think that 1080 poison needs to become a political issue then take a minute to tell One News at http://tvnz.co.nz/vote2014

 

This week 104 people have liked our page hence our fight to stop 1080 ! this is going to be a long hard fight , but we will get there . Great news that the "Ban 1080 " political party has 500 members !

We have 13k likes now so this issue is obviously majority not minority !!!

To all the people that have been with us from the start to the people who have just joined us , you are awesome !! Please SHARE our page with everyone!

Grab your stickers , t-shirts .... Wear them with pride , pride of being a careing Kiwi!!!!!!! Cant wait to meet my first stranger wearing a t-shirt .

Cheers guys n girls,

Duncan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wild Animals Wrongly Blamed for TB

Tuesday, 24 June 2014, 12:15 pm

Press Release: Sporting Hunters' Outdoor Trust

 

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK1406/S00512/wild-animals-wrongly-blamed-for-tb.htm

 

 

Waikato TBFree is wrongly blaming wild animals in a forlorn attempt to justify topdressing countryside with 1080 poison says a national hunting advocacy.

Laurie Collins of the West Coast, convenor of the Sporting Hunters’ Outdoor Trust (SHOT) said the attempt by Waikato TBfree Committee Chairman John Bubb revealed ignorance about Tb testing, wild animals and the history of bovine TB.

Laurie Collins who spent a lifetime from his early career in the 1950s with the NZ Forest Service when 1080 was first introduced and then subsequently through pest board work and private trapping said of the “many thousands” of possums he handled, not one had Tb.

“Some obviously sick possums were sent away for diagnosis but not one had TB,” he said. “Possums suffer highly in wet weather periods contracting pleurisy and pneumonia. Mortality can be as high as 50 percent.”

He said Waikato TBfree spokesman John Bubb seemed unaware that the skin test for stock which formed the bulk of TB testing had a 20 percent error rate.

“That means by simple arithmetic, the probability is one in 10 stock tested, is infected but not identified by skin testing, known as a sleeper. Sleeper animals can then be sold, transported and infect a new herd and area.”

Laurie Collins said last year the Animal Health Board spokesman John Deal admitted potential sources for TB outbreaks included the movement of animals or the possibility that it has been in the herd some time, but not shown up in testing.

 

“Deal was referring to Taranaki which had several recent TB outbreaks but has no possums,” said Laurie Collins. “So much for the possum TB myth.”

Laurie Collins said New Zealand bovine TB rates were exceptionally low about 40 times less than the UK.

He dismissed John Bubb’s claim that “in TB risk areas, possums cause the majority of new herd infections in farmed cattle and deer.”

“This is absolute nonsense. To the contrary most TB outbreaks can be traced to transport of stock. In a number of cases the authorities knowing this have not prosecuted.”

Laurie Collins cited cases such as King country farmed deer transported to Wairoa introducing the disease to a TB-free region and in Marlborough where cattle transportation introduced the disease to the TB-free Wairau Valley’s Northbank.

“In any case with an error-prone test, TBfree wouldn’t have a clue if disease had come aboard a cattle truck or not.”

Laurie Collins rejected any claims hunters were only concerned about wild deer being poisoned and said hunters did not want silent forests devoid of bird life.

He said the indiscriminate topdressing of thousands of hectares with 1080 and other poisons, had wiped thousands of birds especially species like kea, falcon, morepork, robins, tomtits and others.

“Also 1080 was originally developed in the 1920s as a potent insecticide that happens to kill any and every living creature that comes in contact with it. It kills native bees and worms and insects, the latter often the food of native species such as kiwi, fantails, tomtits and others.”

Laurie Collins said in his work and leisure time over 50 years he had seen numerous examples of “morgue-like” forests after 1080.

 

© Scoop Media

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NZ Forest Service started a deer skin market which lead to private enterprise cashing in and not costing NZ a cent. Quite the opposite it made us money in terms of employment, exports $'s and tax. This went off and then the wild venison market started from that. Two deer per week made the shooter more than a tradesman's wages at the time. The deer numbers started to drop off and so deer farming was on the cards and live capture was on and massive prices were paid for these animals. Since those days the industry has gone through boom and bust and now is at a boom stage which it will most probably remain at for the foreseeable future. Not one person had ever thought that deer could become such a valuable commodity as they were a pest to be culled for years ( at a massive cost to the tax payer )
. The wild venison industry is hamstrung at the moment by 1080. Massive amounts of land are not able to harvested due to 1080. The possum market could become the same. There is fur / skins and meat to harvest from possums and to boot the wild meat market from goats, pigs and deer could once again bring in mega coin. The wild meat industry is alone is calculated at a $500 MILLION DOLLAR industry because of the upturn in organic produce. Add possum products, employment and tax and this raises to a BILLION DOLLAR return to NZ instead of the current $120 million cost to the NZ tax payer. The tax and money saved from harvesting all this could be used to fund the complete eradication of rats and stoats. DOC claims this is impossible but actually discourages anyone from trapping and actually charges them for trapping a pest that they are paid to eradicate????? There is only one out come form this all happening, possum control done at not only no cost to the country but an actual big dollar return. The return of native birds bringing in tourists spending money and going away happy instead of the current scare mongering which sends them away with a bitter taste in their mouth. Lets face the facts here 1080 isn't increasing bird numbers, tourists (and locals) are not impressed by bird numbers so they don't return and tell others. To start this process 1080 needs to be stopped and training and funding for traps and camping gear is needed to get the people into the hills and earning money off possums. The training and funding can be paid off over a year or two. Helicopters given the right to drop trappers off and pickup where they want within reason, instead of only being allowed around huts at present. The Dept. of Conservation would also need to drop their charges for trapping on DoC land.
This has worked before and will work again with the correct encouragement. Let the young guys that love living in the country side stay there and get good dollars instead of being forced into to going to the cities to find work, which also takes pressure off housing and infrastructure. It is a win, win, win scenario that would work and we all know it. Please share this and lets get some conversation going and maybe change the way things are done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NZ Govt Continues to Poison Endangered Kea Parrots

 

Published on Jul 3, 2014

They are at risk of extinction. Perhaps fewer than one thousand exist on Earth. That does not stop the New Zealand Government from continuing to aerial poison the endangered kea parrot's habitat ...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1402/S00020/open-letter-to-dr-jan-wright-commissioner-for-environment.htm   Open Letter to Dr. Jan Wright, Commissioner for Environment

Tuesday, 4 February 2014, 4:50 pm

Opinion: The Graf Boys

An Open Letter to Dr. Jan Wright, Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment

 

02/02/2014 - Janice Schofield Eaton

Because Dr. Wright has no email available to the people of New Zealand, I am releasing this to the public in the hopes it will reach her.

 

 

Dear Dr. Wright,

In your role as Parliamentary Commissioner of the Environment, you carry immense responsibility. You will be remembered, long after tenure, as the saviour of New Zealand birds (if you are correct in your 1080 stance) or as the person responsible for the greatest ecological holocaust of the century.

I have read your report on the Environment and believe you believe it will be the former. But what if, IF, it is the other way around? Thus I ask you to please contemplate this letter.

I am an immigrant to this country because I fell in love with its nature, the kiwi people, and yes, a kiwi man. My husband Barry Eaton is a daring man who was involved in all phases of the deer recovery from culling to the live capture phases (everything from jumping on the backs of wild deer from helicopters and bulldogging them to the more progressive netting). He was a possum fur trapper as well as involved in poisoning possums with cyanide. He has been involved in 1080 carrot bait operations in Southland for rabbit control. He has been a wilderness guide and knows the delights of tourists when they finally encounter a deer in the bush. My point being that he has seen first hand the challenges of the bush, the difficulties (and benefits) of the introduced species (from the wild venison market to exquisite possum fur products). He knows the habits of animals, what they eat, where they travel. And he has participated in 1080 operations and witnessed its multi-faceted effects.

 

We're now retired, living on the edge of the lovely Pearse Valley near Motueka, an area scheduled for a 1080 drop in June. We've read your report and the science and yet, we aren't sleeping well. Our stomachs are in knots over the future of our lifestyle, our recreation, our hunting, our water, our dog. The science, as convincing as it is (and it is convincing) isn't aligning with the firsthand experience of our neighbours and the quality of life before and after 1080 drops.

And that makes me curious, Dr. Wright. I am an author and my first book (Discovering Wild Plants, now in 9th printing) took 7 years of research (pre-computer days). What was so challenging was when data would hit opposing data, for example, sources claiming a plant poisonous while others touted its edibility. Something is obviously wrong! Is it dose? method of use? time of year? the part of the plant being used?

And so too with 1080 research. Some sources claim profound benefits and others such devastation. What's up?

The Micheal Mead study is one case that grabbed my attention. His peer-reviewed study indicated that the insecticide sodium fluoroacetate (also a rodenticide and vertebrate poison) had significant affect on invertebrates- which is a highly important consideration for soil health of the forest (and breakdown of carcasses and forest litter) as well as the health of insectivorous and omnivorous birds.

And yet this peer-reviewed study was never published and instead another non-peer reviewed study based on 35 of 400 traps set concluding little effect on invertebrates was released. A very helpful conclusion if one wishes to advance the use of 1080 but good science?

But then, I'm not a scientist by training, and I could be wrong in my analysis, so as with the plants, I do interviews with people who have firsthand experience. With plants it was questions like- Do you eat this plant? Did your grandparents? How and when do you gather? How do you prepare it? And if, after evaluating all the written and oral data, provided I feel confident, I then test the plant myself, documenting all failures and successes. And sometimes, even decades later, I need to do revisions on what I once believed true.

And so with 1080 I asked 1080-veterans of drops about bird populations before and after. Here at the Pearse I learn of the loss of 5 whio on the river and demise of the kaka (within a fortnight of 1080) and loss of weka, and kea, and the sudden silence from the morepork (not to be heard again for years.) I listen to the quiet farmer next door as he nearly goes apoplectic at the dramatic post-drop loss of the insectivorous fantails and bush robins in his native bush, the death of his lambs, the 1080 in his pastures, the 1080 (and 1080 carcasses) in his personal and stock water source.

And I listen to my bush-savvy husband, his experience garnered from his thousands of hours in the bush hunting/trapping/culling/poisoning telling me of the herbivorous nature of the possum, the rat that is well-an opportunistic rat- and the stoat (how it is a carnivore, non-cereal eater, non rotting-animal eater who may have an occasional 1080 death from eating a warm 1080 kill critter or an impacted still-live animal). And how when there is a 1080 rat die off, the less-impacted stoat is forced to increase its predation on surviving birds.

Who you believe, Dr. Wright, what you believe, is up to you. I ask you to truly feel in your heart, and question. And question again. Yes, ask your scientists.. And also ask zoologists like Dr. Jo Pollard. Ask the bushmen. Ask those living on the edge of 1080. Please consider What IF. What if the dramatic decline in bird species is not because of lack of 1080 frequency but because of broad scale aerial 1080?

My life experience, Dr. Wright, includes living in Alaska during Exxon Valdez. During the oil spill crisis, I worked for Exxon (coordinating information exchange between bird and otter centres and the federal agencies with Exxon central). I know the pressure to present facts-that-agree-with-company-policy over less favourable truth - and (like Mead) I was made redundant (only to be then funded by the Borough for the public service we were doing).

So I question science funded exclusively by government with a thriving State-Owned-Enterprise (S.O.E.) profiting on poison products. In my research, I also turned to outside sources and learned the USA EPA bans 1080 because 1. extreme toxicity 2. no antidote 3. AVIAN poison. Canada also classes it as an avian poison.

I question when 1080 is presented as humane, when I've seen footage of dogs, horses, cows suffering 1080 death. And this includes dogs and other animals well beyond 1080 zones. The effects do not end at the posted sign.

I question when after nearly 50 years of 1080 use, the situation with extinction of bird species is WORSENING. What if it's not lack of 1080, but BECAUSE of 1080. Everything done to the environment has intended and unintended effects. What if the unintentended effect is continued weakening of the sustainability of species?

I wonder, Dr. Wright, how you will you be remembered by future generations?

I wonder about alternatives to widespread aerial poison?

What if you the Parliamentary Commissioner were to sponsor a think tank, gathering all the brilliant minds to truly seek solutions. Gather the bushmen. Gather the scientists. Gather both sides of the 1080 debate. These people are not enemies but allies.

We all want the same thing - healthy bird populations, and TB free NZ.

it is just the methodology that is argued.

Solutions would be multifaceted. The money flow might diversify.

Some solutions might include:

• Thriving possum industries for omega-rich pet food.

• Exquisite NZ brush tail products (worth 10x the value of merino)- these profitable businesses returning tax levies to the government.

• Clever ecological solutions. Spirfire trats for the bird-gobbling stoats.

• Fertility vaccines for possums (if the industry isn't capturing enough).

• Bounties paid to NZers to hunt-trap-ground poison possums, rats and stoats (and taxes paid back to government on the earnings.

How many more solutions might unfold?

You could indeed become the most famous Parliamentary Commissioner of New Zealand in the history of the world.

Or the most infamous.

with deep thanks for your consideration,

Janice Schofield Eaton

To view recent video clips on the subject visit www.tvwild.co.nz

ENDS

© Scoop Media

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Morals over dollars person of the week. .

 

Mike Meads was one of DoC's top scientists, his area of expertise was insects. He was sent off by DoC to study the effects on insects from aerial 1080. He did the study and found that over half of the insects died as a results of 1080. DoC wasn't at all happy about that at all and he was asked to 'review' his study and he didn't so he was set loose by DoC and his study publically rubbished. They then got a scientist that speciality was in birds no less to do another study. That study showed that insects were at no great risk from 1080 . Mike meads also made this prediction I just read. In August 7, 1995, “Rural News” reported “former government scientist Mike Meads predicted that continued 1080 airdrops over New Zealand forests will destroy much of the food supply of ground eating birds like the kiwi.”
Mike Meads warned that because 1080 wipes out many leaf-consuming insects and micro-organisms, the litter fails to properly decompose and builds up at an alarming rate.
He was quoted as saying there was already an amazing leaf build-up in some lowland forests because without the organisms, after 1080 aerial drops, the leaf litter was not decomposing. Complicating the matter was the unusually long life cycle of many forest invertebrates, e.g. cicada has a 17 year life cycle, weta two years. One air drop of 1080 can wipe out 17 generations of cicada larvae and they and wetas were important in the kiwi’s diet.
submitted by Tony Orman:

Way to go Mike you are a true Kiwi hero for choosing morals over dollars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

****PLEASE SHARE****
Found this last night and read it twice it is so informative. Written by Tony Orman it is the most broad viewed and informative article that I have ever read on why 1080 is being used.
I was actually a bit shocked and surprised how this all works.
http://forum.nzcpr.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=135&start=45&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

 

 

I enclose my submissions on 1080.

Events of recent weeks with the ERMA panel suggest to me, it is going to be a bureaucratic whitewash.

Cheers Tony

1080 Reassessment HRE05002

Submission on the Application for Reassessment of Poison 1080 by the Animal Health Board and the Department of Conservation (Application HRE05002).

Below is my submission for the review of the use of compound 1080 in NZ.

Summary
* The manner of spreading 1080 especially from the air, is indiscriminate and with the potential to cause long term ecological damage.
* The policies of the Department of Conservation (DOC) and Animal Health Board (AHB) have little biological logic or base and are guided by an anti-wild animal prejudice rather than scientific fact
* The Animal Health Board's policy and priorities on bovine Tb are based on misconceptions as to causes of TB spread.
* 1080 is unethical as a slow acting, non-selective poison
* The poison regime is economically not viable. It is a threat to New Zealand's "clean, green image" export edge.
Explanation
Detailing the above points:-
Ecological Damage.
In August 7, 1995, "Rural News" reported "former government scientist Mike Meads predicted that continued 1080 airdrops over New Zealand forests will destroy much of the food supply of ground eating birds like the kiwi."
Mike Meads warned that because 1080 wipes out many leaf-consuming insects and micro-organisms, the litter fails to properly decompose and builds up at an alarming rate.
He was quoted as saying there was already an amazing leaf build-up in some lowland forests because without the organisms, after 1080 aerial drops, the leaf litter was not decomposing. Complicating the matter was the unusually long life cycle of many forest invertebrates, e.g. cicada has a 17 year life cycle, weta two years. One air drop of 1080 can wipe out 17 generations of cicada larvae and they and wetas were important in the kiwi's diet.
Meads worked for DSIR from 1969-1992, transferred to Landcare Research and was made redundant after completing a year long contract study for DOC on the effects of 1080 on non-target invertebrates of the forest floor at Whitecliffs, Taranaki in 1991.
DOC refused to publish the papers. In addition DOC reportedly put the papers to a peer review which was (predictably) critical.
The instance highlights the science regime which exists under the way in which research has been privatised and subjected to commercial pressures. In other words the integrity of science has been undermined.
I have spoken to scientists and they have expressed frustration at the auction system of bidding for funds. In addition working for a client on contract means that a scientist is forced to come up with conclusions compatible with the client's policy or aim or else face the fact of getting no more contract work and suffering harassment as Mike Meads found.
When Mike Meads' research conclusions came up contrary to DOC's policy, the outcome was almost predictable. His paper was subjected to a "kangaroo court" peer review and he was made redundant.
But the Meads research at Whitecliffs had strongly, and bravely, made a point that 1080, if used, must be used carefully.
The "Rural News" report said Meads was not against 1080 as a vector control tool if used safely such as in bait traps, where it would be specific to a given animal and then directly quoted him as saying "But widespread aerial distribution can only have serious long term effects on forests and forest life with enormous risk of destroying the ecosystem."
Mike Meads was no ordinary scientist. He was regarded as an authority on some of New Zealand's rarer invertebrates, including the threatened giant wetas, published more than 100 papers in many New Zealand and overseas journals and delivered papers to international conferences in Australia, UK and USA.
But Mike Meads wasn't the only scientist to warn of the adverse ecological effects of 1080.
In 1989, DSIR scientist Peter Notman ("Rural News" Oct 9, 1995)) found many insects, particularly subsoil leaf litter feeders, are highly susceptible to the systemic and contact poisoning effects of 1080.
"Rural News" October 9, 1995, detailed the reaction following Mike Meads research as "Landcare, his new bosses, didn't like his conclusions. His report was subjected to five different peer reviews by Landcare scientists, each recommending changes. Meads made changes that didn't interfere with his basic conclusions but faced delay after delay as his paper was bounced around the department----the paper's much altered final draft was eventually sent to the Department of Conservation and they didn't like it either. They sent it off for a sixth 'peer review' with an unnamed scientist in an unnamed Crown Research Institute. And they commissioned another Landcare scientist, ornithologist E B Spurr an authority on birds, but not on insects, to duplicate Meads' project in two different forests about to be aerial poisoned."
Meanwhile the bureaucratic juggernaut was burying Mike Meads and his findings.
Mike Meads was due to deliver his Whitecliffs study at a Royal Society science seminar in December, 1993. Ten days before the seminar, Meads was made redundant along with Peter Notman, who had first found 1080 affected subsoil insects. Meads was told he could deliver his paper, if he paid all his travelling and accommodation expenses which he couldn't afford to and his paper was not delivered.
Instead, reported "Rural News", the seminar heard two papers by an ornithologist (birds) on 1080 airdrop effects on invertebrates. "Both papers tended to play down the adverse effects of 1080" and according to "Rural News", Mike Meads use of pitfall traps criticised in the six peer reviews, were used in the research of Spurr's, but in that case were not criticised!
The case of Mike Meads underlines the lack of integrity by those responsible for the 1080, in this case DOC and some responsible for research, in this case Landcare Research.
On the subject of ecological damage and effects on vital bird species such as kiwi, I interviewed the late Ivor Scott of Karangarua in South Westland. I quote from my draft chapter to be published in a book in the near future.

"A few years ago the Department of Conservation aerial spread 350 tonnes of carrots carrying 1080 poison. Following the poison drop, Ivor's son David, went up the Karangarua and returned saying that in every clearing were dead birds, frequently under big trees. No dead deer were seen and there appeared to be plenty of sign of possum, which had been the target of the poison. Ivor rode up the valley and sure enough there were birds dead, particularly yellow-hammers, finches, waxeyes and larks. Paradise duck were dead or dying and he found a dead harrier hawk.
Ivor used to delight in taking his grandchildren up the valley to stay the night and hear the wekas and kiwis call.
"Since they laid the poison, I haven't heard a weka or a kiwi call," he said.

In another case, a Hawkes Bay deerstalking acquaintance, went to an area off the Napier-Taupo highway, and found three dead kiwi. He told me he realised that to be in possession of a kiwi, is an offence, so was forced to leave them there.
I have been in Stoney Creek valley near Reefton after a 1080 drop and it was like a morgue - deathly silent. In contrast, in the morning of the same day, I had been in an adjoining valley which had not had 1080 dropped (the Waitahu) just a few kilometres away - and the bird life was prolific.
I also note in my trips into the hills, the disappearance of native falcons, keas and bush robins in particular, following 1080 poison.
In 2000 a paper to the 53rd New Zealand Plant Protection Society by four scientists J M Ataria, M Wickstrom, D Arthur and C T Eason, highlighted the effects of sub-lethal (not fatal) doses to birds, namely, mallard ducks. The research said that 1080 was rapidly absorbed and distributed to the heart, sketetal muscle and noted "exposure to sub-lethal doses may in some instances, be sufficient to have long term detrimental effects."
Do the long term detrimental effects include inhibiting/nullifying reproductive ability? On a National Radio Morning Report discussion on 1080, Dr. Charlie Eason, Landcare Research toxicologist was quoted as saying studies on animals have shown repeated exposure to 1080 can affect heart and testes.
Studies of rats, mustelids, birds and skinks have provided evidence that 1080 is a reproductive hormone disrupter - reference recent "NZ Listener" article by Dr Sean Weaver, Victoria University.
The irony is that DOC, entrusted to safeguard native bird populations, is guilty of killing birds itself by direct or secondary poisoning, disrupting their breeding and in the case of birds like kiwis, tomtits, bush robins etc., killing their food, i.e. invertebrates !
I do not intend to quote instance after instance. The above should be sufficient to show indiscriminate use of 1080, i.e. aerial, is ecologically dangerous. It is also unjustified as I will explain later.

Anti-Exotic Animal Phobia
Late in the 1950s - in 1958 - Dr William Graf, a Californian Professor of Zoology, came to New Zealand to study the wild deer situation as Hawaii was considering introducing deer for sport. Conflicting information about New Zealand deer herds and their reputed problems prompted the Hawaiian Board of Agriculture to send the scientist to study the situation firsthand.
William Graf viewed the New Zealand scene often in the company of departmental officers. In his report following the visit, Dr Graf wrote that there existed in New Zealand an "anti-exotic animal phobia, to an extent that much of the public as well as many government officials do not and cannot view the situation in an objective perspective."
The bureaucracies were incensed and attacked Dr Graf - again a case of harassing anyone who dares to challenge official policy.
Dr Graf has not been alone in defining the "anti-exotic animal phobia".
Another was New Zealand eminent ecologist the late Dr Graeme Caughley, who worked for the New Zealand government's Forest Service and became an esteemed, world respected ecologist but left to work for Australia's CSIRO.
In later years in his book "The Deer Wars" and at international and New Zealand seminars where he frequently delivered papers, Dr Caughley explained that New Zealand's vegetation has been heavily browsed for millions of years. Browsing whether by moas and other birds (e.g. kokaho, pigeon) or wild deer, possums and other animals, was a part of the ecosystem.
The demise of the moa after its browsing for many millions of years, saw New Zealand's vegetation enter an "unnatural" state.
"The sudden termination of that regime of defoliation (i.e. browsing) with the extinction of moas would necessarily have led to marked changes in species composition and the formation of aberrant plant communities," said Graeme Caughley.
In short New Zealand's vegetation had developed over many, many centuries under intense browsing by herbivore birds including moas and others. The vegetation as early European settlers saw it in the 19th century was not natural or original, because the browsing component had been largely removed with the extinction of the moa.
Once deer - and other wild animals - were established, it is probable the vegetation-and bush-became more like its original state of the moa era, because browsing was restored into the ecosystem.
Back in 1930 "The Deer Menace Conference" set up the myth about wild animals. The department's annual reports continued to feed the myth. Phrases like "depredations of the hordes"(of deer) and "deer infested areas" littered the writings.
This theory was never seriously challenged until the American wildlife biologist Thane Riney stepped into the New Zealand scene joining the Internal Affairs department. He came with an open, scientific mind untainted by the assumptions of the 1930 conference.
Thane Riney came up against the ingrained policy of the department and the personnel who had made careers from the deer menace myth. Some Internal Affairs staff were openly hostile and spent much time researching and plotting Riney's destruction. It came to a head in a incompetence charge, one bureaucrat brought against Riney before the Public Service Commission. It failed.
In eight years, Thane Riney produced 25 published scientific reports, a high rate jealously scorned by his bureaucratic colleagues. Riney's research left it's mark. He had examined an "undisturbed" deer population at Lake Monk in Fiordland and found that left alone, deer numbers stabilised to a low level and did not explode out of control as the departmental propaganda maintained. Then a much less complex paper showed there was little or no relationship between areas of erosion-prone country and the areas of highest deer numbers.
In 1958 Thane Riney, no doubt somewhat frustrated by the bureaucracy, resigned and went to Africa to do his research.
Some years later, in 1967, Thane Riney reflected on those years with the Department of Internal Affairs and then the New Zealand Forest Service.
"Unfortunately the level of competence and understanding in silvicultural (exotic forestry) matters is in no way reflected in the dealings with, or their policy toward exotic animals. This it seems to me, is due chiefly to several botanist policy - makers who have had no experience with the growth of plants in other parts of the world where browsing and grazing animals behave exactly as in New Zealand. They do not know what animals are capable of doing and what they are incapable of doing in the way of ruining forests or how to measure the effects that animals do have."
"Most of their recommendations are based on what the botanists are afraid the animals might do, instead of what the animals actually have done after 50 to 70 years of acclimatisation. Several of these botanists are in high administrative positions and a policy based on the simple fear of the unknown is often offered to the public as proven fact."
Graeme Caughley's path was to follow Thane Riney's. After an MSc in Sydney, a PhD in Canterbury and a contribution to the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research in Antarctica, he moved to the Department of Forest Research. There he encountered the same antagonism as Riney did, so eventually took up a prestigious position with the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation research and headed to Zambia, Nepal and Afghanistan.
Then followed an academic career as Reader of Zoology at Sydney University and finally as chief research scientist and Acting Chief CSIRO, Division of Wildlife Ecology, Canberra, Australia. His work received accolades and tangible tributes such as the awarding of the prestigious "The Australian CSIRO President's Medal and Prize for outstanding scientific research."
Dr. Graeme Caughley was the author of over 130 scientific papers, articles and books- a prodigious output. Graeme Caughley's book "The Deer Wars" puts into reasonably digestible form for the layman, much of both his and Thane Riney's findings. It also details the manner in which departmental bureaucrats can scheme and why often their policies don't work, because of serious flaws.
"The anti-exotic animal phobia" that Dr. Graf termed it and encountered by both Thane Riney and Dr Caughley is still prevalent today within the Department of Conservation. It has been shown recently by two rash, inaccurate statements by first the retiring director general of DOC Hugh Logan and by his successor Alastair Morrison. Logan said deer double numbers every two years then Morrison said deer eat the understorey bald. Both statements were ludicrous by their gross inaccuracy and showed that sadly DOC's management just does not understand ecosystems, how they evolved and how they function.
Both are irresponsible statements by very well paid civil servants and typifies the obsessed mentality towards wild animals.
This then is the department with the responsibility for assessing wild animal situations and for spreading poisons.
The spreading of poisons is done on the erroneous assumption that there are 70 million possums spread evenly over New Zealand.
DOC has been guilty of some ludicrous claims. Experienced possum trappers I have spoken to dispute the mythical 70 million figure. Their estimates range in the 20 million to 25 million figure. One very experienced trapper was the late George Spittal of Rai Valley. In an article in "NZ Hunting and Wildlife" Summer 1996-7, he pointed out the fallacy of DOC's thinking.
"Government departments say there were 70 million possums in the country in 1973-4. After spending $57 million (per annum) on possum controls, (they claim) there are still 70 million possums."
DOC got so carried away with its arithmetic that Conservation minister Denis Marshall in the "Rural News" October 17, 1994, declared, based on a DOC's imagined 95 percent kill that" that "Nelson was one of the most successful areas with possum numbers down from 16,000 to 500."
The 500 figure drew guffaws of laughter and scorn.
DOC just does not understand basic possum population realities.
The realities are:-
* Possum populations are not consistent. Some gullies may have high possum numbers, other gullies because of aspect, low or nil numbers.
* Some areas by nature hold low numbers of wild animals.
At a 1986 symposium, "Moas, Mammals and Climate Change in the Ecological History of New Zealand" Dr. Peter Wardle told of low animal numbers, and said "An extreme example is stunted forest of yellow-silver pine in Westland. Such vegetation never supports many herbivores---The distinction between nutrient-poor and nutrient-rich vegetation is valid today in respect of deer and other mammals."
Other mammals includes possums.
In Marlborough for example, the Richmond Range and the Red Hills area in the head waters of the Pelorus and Motueka Rivers have low populations. Yet the Animal Health Board in conjunction with the Marlborough District Council aerial spread 1080 over the Manuka Island/Red Hills area which hold very low possum numbers.
It is claimed aerial poisoning is only done in remote, rugged areas, but the instance above (Manuka Island/Red Hills) is adjacent to a state highway with some access roads into relatively easy mountain country. Similarly, a DOC aerial drop in the historic Ship Cove, Cape Jackson area of the Marlborough Sounds, was very accessible by boat and again far from rugged country.
* Possum numbers are much higher in marginal country and along lower bush edges where possums will "graze" pasture than in forest.
* Possum numbers in rugged country are usually "controlled" by the rigorous environment especially climate. In inclement weather, natural mortality of possums may be as high as 40 percent.
* Beech forest does not by nature, support high wild animal numbers.
In addition, my observation is that possum numbers are in a natural decline which is characteristic of wildlife populations.
Thane Riney in his classic Fiordland Lake Monk study showed how a deer population left to Nature, peaks and then falls to a low stable level. Details of Riney's study are in my book published 2002, "About Deer and Deerstalking."
Any wildlife population acts the same. Possums are no different. I have observed a noticeable decline in road kills of possums, and in non-1080 areas, such as the Whangamoas between Nelson and Blenheim, and other highways. Fifteen years ago, possums (dead or alive) were common on highways; today very few are seen.
Possums at an estimate, reached their peak 20 years ago and have been in a gradual decline for the last decade or more.
These realities seem unrealised by DOC and AHB who frequently use the excuse to topdress with 1080 with the farcical "70 million possum" figure or "it's remote country." But if possum populations are low and stable, then the dropping of 1080 is pointless but at the same time, ecologically threatening - and a gross waste of valuable taxpayers' money!
In my book "About Deer and Deerstalking" I researched and told of the work of botanist/ hydrologist Dr Patrick Grant in the Ruahine Ranges. For decades government departments and the vociferous Forest and Bird Society blamed possums and deer for tall dead spars of forest trees poking above the forest canopy in the Southern Ruahines. Dr Grant was intrigued when he read of early missionary explorer William Colenso's travels in the ranges in the mid 19th century. Colenso told of forest damage and giant land slips long before any possums or deer were introduced.
Subsequently Dr Grant's research pinpointed the major cause of forest damage as climatic. The dead tree spars were the remnants of a severe drought period 1909-15. And such periods are cyclic. These periods of dry, windy weather were traced back by Dr Grant as far back as the 16th century.
Similarly Dr Grant compared photos taken in 1918 of the Waipawa upper reaches with the 1980s when he did his research and concluded the forest canopy had repaired itself despite the browsing of possums.
The seminar, "Moas, Mammals and Climate Change" in 1986 also featured papers by scientists on insect browsing such as grasshoppers on snowgrass and beech roller caterpillars. Late last year in the Nelson Lakes National Park, defoliation of large tracts of beech forest were found to be naturally caused by caterpillars - not possums.

Flawed Tb Strategy
The Animal Health board charged with the responsibility for reducing Tb incidence has gone about their responsibility in a flawed way.
Firstly Tb incidence rates should be examined.
A report in 2001 on Trends and Sources of Zoonotic Agents in the European Union and Norway listed Tb incidence rates. Notable were:-
Greece 2.74%, Ireland 3.82%, Portugal 4.42%, Spain 1.77%, Northern Ireland 7.51%.
New Zealand is well below all of these.
So how real is the perceived threat of the EU likely to ban imports of New Zealand produce because of Tb?
A Treasury Working Paper "Coughing Up for Tb control" produced in July 2000 raised serious doubts about the National Pest Management Strategy.
It said on the likelihood of a trade ban, that "the risk is probably very small,' and that "the true risks are likely to be smaller and shorter in duration than the AHB analysis would suggest."
The paper also addressed how the problem of Tb rose in the first place by saying "the root cause of the problem is not the presence of possums but rather their infection with Tb, as is clear from areas like Taranaki, which have possums but are still Tb free---suggest that Tb was spread by transport of infected animals."
Indeed in Marlborough one outbreak of Tb was known to be attributed to a farmer bringing in stock from an infected area near Kaikoura. The solution by AHB was to aerial drop 1080!
In Marlborough local farmers were convinced ferrets, not possums were the vector. At an AHB meeting at Ward several years ago, which I attended as a farming journalist, an AHB scientist Dr Roger Morris of Massey, argued wild deer and possums were the cause of Tb spread and ferrets were not a vector. When pressed in question time why Australia with a natural possum population did not appear to have a Tb problem, he put it down to Australia having no wild deer.
A local farm worker, a keen hunter, pest management employee who had lived in Australia for a few years and told Dr Morris, who incidentally is an Australian, that he was wrong! Indeed Australia has good populations of wild deer from fallow, to sambur to red deer and chital deer from Queensland to Victoria and Tasmania.
This is an example of the myths that AHB concoct to justify their policies.
At the same meeting AHB representatives completely debunked ferrets as a vector. Yet Marlborough's Bluff Station by concentrating on a ferret programme, rid itself of Tb and other farmers in the Ure Valley did the same. A major feature article in the Marlborough Express" Wednesday May 21, 1997, told of the success story by targeting ferrets.
However possums have been blamed for spreading Tb, yet ferrets are almost certainly a vector. Ferrets are capable of hosting the disease within their population while possums may remain unaffected. In contrast to possums, ferrets are extremely mobile with young bucks having been recorded as travelling several kilometres in a night. Importantly ferrets are not forest animals preferring open country or marginal land.
A 1995 study of 21 properties in Otago and Southland found that Tb infected cattle areas had significant populations of Tb infected ferrets. The study indicated tuberculous ferrets probably transmit infection to stock. This study was outlined in the NZ Veterinary Journal -" The prevalence of bovine tuberculosis infections in feral populations of cats, ferrets and stoats in Otago and Southland."
Landcare Research (Ragg and Byrom, authored a "Review of Ferrets" which showed Tb can be maintained within the ferret population. Significant points were:- * ferrets are not a target or significant kill by 1080
* ferrets are carnivores hence disease can be transferred by scavenging or even cannibalism
* ferrets are open/marginal country inhabitants, and interrelate highly within their social structure (i.e. close contact, bucks fighting, sharing dens etc).
* A ferret's territory, is large, averaging over 100 hectares.
* Ferrets are prolific breeders with several in a litter.
* Farmed cattle and deer investigate ferrets ailing from Tb which can be found wandering and sick during daylight. (personal comment from Marlborough farmers)
I strongly urge ERMA to examine all Landcare Research relating to ferrets as a vector.
Nor have wild cats been targeted as a vector, yet they are abundant in the wild. A ferret trapping programme in the upper Wairau showed wild cats far out numbered ferrets, by a ratio of at least 7 to 1. (personal comment by the trapper to me)
Yet wild cats, notably carnivores, are generally discounted by AHB as a vector.
Scientists have been frustrated by the AHB's dogmatism. Dr Frank Griffin seeing the long term, logical solution for deer farming as selectively breeding genetically Tb resistant deer, was refused funding for a logical and long term solution while annually millions of dollars were spent by AHB on spreading 1080 in meaningless campaigns.
In October 2001 I wrote an article, after hearing Dr Griffin address a Marlborough Deer farmers' function. The scientist said that New Zealand's pest management strategy narrowly focused on "killing possums and skin tests" and is not the solution to the Tb problem.
Dr Griffin said Tb resistant gene work is strategically important as deer Tb-resistant genes work was applicable to cattle or any other naturally infected host, as well as being relevant to managing wildlife populations relative to Tb
Tb is very likely to be spread quickly by irresponsible or ignorant stock movements. As an example in Marlborough, dairy farmers in Tb-free areas, grazed and still graze, cows off-season and during drought summers, in Tb areas around Kaikoura - this information coming from a former Marlborough Regional Animal Health Committee member.
There have been many cases and in Marlborough on the skin test (80 % accurate which in essence means one in 5 animals may give a false test) where older animals undetected by testing, continued to infect the herd and were often only detected on slaughter.
Statistics can be misleading or manipulated and slyly used to attribute self praise of policies, so as to be very misleading.
Figures are quoted of the reduction in the number of Tb infected herds but numbers fail to account for the fact that there are now less farms in total. Lower market prices, e.g. venison and deer farmers, mean a significant number exit that industry.
Continued Tb infection could be a factor in a stock farmer opting out of deer or cattle too, thus removing that infected herd from statistics. In addition more lucrative land production may mean a farm will be converted to grape growing and wine making. In other cases farms are amalgamated to a corporate style of farming as has happened in dairying, thus reducing the number of total farms.
Another example, according to a retired RAHAC member, was including lifestyle blocks with one or two beef calves in statistics, in order to suit justifying policies.
Reduction in Tb herds has been self attributed by AHB to vector programmes using 1080 poison. But the reality is that many more farmers are now far more aware of the ease with which Tb can be spread by stock transport, just in the last decade or so.
In my opinion, stricter controls and greater awareness by farmers and transport firms, have been a major factor in reduction of infected herds - rather than spreading 1080. But controls should be still stricter.
A significant number of farmers themselves are concerned about 1080 and have been openly critical of the AHB. A recent case was in 2005 Wairoa where Wairoa Federated Farmers expressed "no confidence" in the AHB. ("Straight Furrow" 7 June 2005).
Federated Farmers president and RAHC member Jean Martin was publicly critical. Again showing AHB's political tactics, the report said "the Animal Health Board had tried to put pressure on Federated Farmers to have Mrs Martin removed from the Regional Animal Health Committee (RAHAC)". Mrs Martin was quoted as saying "Their (AHB) attitude is they want to try and sack anyone who speaks out against them."
In "Rural News" of 22 February 2005, it was revealed that a cattle herd in the King Country was the source of the Wairoa outbreak. But AHB in its haste to blame wildlife - and use 1080 - made "the initial assessment--that the Wairoa case may have been caused by wildlife."
"Farmers' Weekly" of 22 February 2005, said "It turns out Wairoa farmers were right and the Animal Health Board wrong." Eventually and reluctantly AHB agreed the cause was transported cattle.
Even then AHB dithered. Federated Farmers wanted the imported cattle to be taken from the district. Mrs Martin said she found it incredible a farmer with so much experience would purchase cattle that only had a C2 status from an endemic area and bring them to a clear area. "Tb can lie dormant and undetectable for 5 - 10 years making the Taumarunui-sourced cattle still grazing in Wairoa, a ticking time bomb."

Unethical Poison
1080 is a slow acting poison, non-selective taking 24 to 48 hours to kill an animal. In contrast, cyanide is an instant killer. I have spoken to pest monitoring officers who have seen deer dying from 1080.
A pest monitoring officer Robin Pearce of Marlborough witnessed near Collingwood, a red deer hind come from the bush to water obviously ill with 1080. "She was hunched up, her eyes bulging and dribbling at the mouth," he said. He tried to catch her and she stumbled away. The same officer watched a dog screaming with the pain of 1080 and doing agonised back flips, biting at everything.
He was forced to shoot the dog to put it out of its misery.
"It's a horrible, horrible death by 1080," he said.
Dogs go through agony in dying from 1080 poison. The instances and accounts are numerous. In Marlborough farmers' dogs have been poisoned 9 to 12 months after a 1080 drop.
The AHB downplay the cruelty saying dogs are different from other animals. I believe this to be irresponsible and unethical. Deer, by nature, are not vocal animals, like a dog and do not cry out to the same extent.
I quote from Peter Harker's book "Random Shots" about deaths of deer via 1080.
"To see a large animal dying from 1080 poison is a horrific sight. I have heard fully grown stags and hinds screaming and groaning in agony before I've found them - and it's the saddest thing I've witnessed. And to see a young poisoned fawn groaning in pain and trying to follow its Mum made me ashamed --- death takes days not hours."
"One of the most pitiful sights I have ever seen was --- a stag that had obviously been poisoned by a recent 1080 operation behind Westport. The stag had pulled itself along --- in an endeavour to reach the forest lands --- my mate Peter Hancock shot it. The stag must have been ill for days as the drag marks covered several hundred metres. Only a day later I learned that a deer hunter had come across another deer screaming in agony on the next terrace."
Peter Harker added, "it certainly knocks the stuffing out of birdlife."
Earlier he pondered the scenario of a film showing animals dying from 1080.
"And if that same film was sent to the BBC and shown as a New Zealand documentary, I believe the repercussions would be world wide - all hell would break loose." ("Random Shots" by Peter Harker, publ. 2005)

Economic
The argument is often given by AHB of the need to protect New Zealand's export trade from trade barriers based on Tb rates.
But it seems (earlier quoted statistics) several European countries have far higher infection rates than New Zealand.
But the reality is that markets are likely to ban New Zealand exports if the country's 1080 practices reach foreign shores. I understand that a pet food manufacturer using possum meat has already, had export orders to Japan rejected because of unfavourable publicity re New Zealand's 1080 programme which incidentally dumps 90 percent of the world's production of 1080.
The Ministry of Agriculture banned the export of wild venison in case it was 1080 contaminated and in 2002 there was a situation in Nelson where 1080 contamination of water supplies and potentially dairy cows resulted in adverse publicity. Fonterra withheld a large quantity of potentially contaminated dairy products. ("Animal Health Grossly Overrates Poison" "Otago Daily Times" 6 Sept. 2002)

Conclusion
The above illustrates the opinion and fact, both layman and scientific, of deep concerns about 1080. Of maximum concern is the aerial spreading of 1080.
While it is probably outside of the scope of this hearing, the overall poison regime is of even greater concern, particularly with the uncontrolled, widespread and haphazard use of brodifacoum. as contained in rat poisons such as Talon. Residues are of such build-up that in areas like the Marlborough Sounds, wild pigs are unsaleable and should not be consumed. Clearly New Zealand has a major problem with its obsessed use of poisons.
If possum numbers need to be reduced, then ground hunting with licensed hunters using cyanide should be employed. Many argue for a bounty and indeed the dollar incentive is an effective way to harvest possum numbers. The parallel is with wild deer and venison prices when they were high.
AHB argues against a bounty saying hunters/farmers will farm possums. This is utter nonsense and shows the AHB 's major motive is to protect a well funded empire and salaries.
The use of 1080 means fur and protein is unusable because of poison residues. If 1080 was banned, then a lucrative fur, pet food manufacture industry could have great potential. The current preoccupation with poisons and 1080, is a needless waste of taxpayers' money, of a potential resource and potential export funds.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kahurangi 1080 poison drop to start   by KATE DAVIDSON

http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/news/9334304/Kahurangi-1080-poison-drop-to-start

 

Controversial 1080 poison will be used in Kahurangi National Park and bordering areas from tomorrow, with supporters and opponents clashing over its benefits and costs.

TBfree New Zealand will undertake the large-scale operation to control the bovine tuberculosis (TB) infected possum population. It has the support of the Department of Conservation, Motueka conservation group Friends of Flora, and private Motueka deerstalkers.

The aerial operation will cover about 22,600 hectares of the national park and adjacent forestry blocks in the Upper Takaka and Barron areas across the lower Flora Stream, Mt Campbell and the upper Riwaka.

TBfree New Zealand Northern South Island programme manager Matt Hickson said there had been opposition to the use of 1080, but the organisation had had "good robust discussion with as many parties as we can".

A group of Motueka deerstalkers had approached him saying they hunted in the area around the upper Pokoro catchment and wanted repellent-laced baits, which would protect deer, to be used. "It was really good they were prepared work with us and front up a proportion of the cost of the repellent," he said.

However, president of the Nelson arm of the New Zealand Deerstalkers' Association (NZDA), Morgan Rogers, said its submission against the operation had been shut out and they were classified as a "non-affected party".

He said NZDA had offered its services for an on the ground operation, but the offer had not been taken up. Mr Hickson said the group had been consulted with, but he did not recall the offer.

Rebecca Reider, spokeswoman for Beyond 1080 Golden Bay, a community group advocating alternatives to 1080 said the use of the poison was "like Russian roulette".

"[it's] tossing this very violent and indiscriminate poison all over the forest and hoping the right things eat it," she said.

Mr Hickson said biodegradable 1080 was being used in the operation because of the ruggedness and remoteness of the targeted area.

He said using alternative forms of pest control, such as laying traps, would take "years to do otherwise" and 1080 meant "we can go in and in one job and do it really easily".

He said there should be conservation gains from the operation as it should knock down rat and stoat numbers, benefiting native bird populations.

Friends of Flora, which has laid traps on 5000 hectares of the area for 11 years and raised funds for the operation, were working with DOC because 1080 was "very effective" in controlling pest numbers.

The conservation group had been targeting stoats with traps, but a spokesman said the poison was needed on the remote landscape to stem other proliferating pests such as rats, mice, and possums and 1080 was "really the only way to get into them".

 

Opponents of 1080 also said the poison was a risk to native birds such as kea but the spokesman said with any form of pest control, including traps, there were risks for native species.

Mr Hickson said the operation would be carried out minimising impacts on native birds and 1080 would not be used in areas where kea were most prevalent.

"We are always working with DOC on their research and trying to mitigate any risk that could come up," he said.

Chair of the Kea Conservation Trust, Tamsin Orr-Walker said 1080 was the best option for widespread pest control in the South Island - as destruction of kea nests by pests was still the greatest threat for the birds. "It would be great if someone found an alternative, but at the moment there isn't anything practical in the South Island area," she said.

Although there are low rates of bovine TB-infected possum in the Tasman region Mr Hickson said there was still a need to use 1080 as a preventive measure to protect livestock from what infected possums there are "leaking out of places like the Kahurangi and getting into cattle herds".

The operation will take place between the Motueka Valley and the Upper Takaka and Cobb valleys from tomorrow until December 5.

- Nelson

 

 

my footnote;

the 'crooks' in this article are...TBfree New Zealand Northern South Island programme and it's manager Matt Hickson

...the Department of Conservation, Motueka conservation group Friends of Flora, and private Motueka deerstalkers.

...Chair of the Kea Conservation Trust, Tamsin Orr-Walker & the trust itself.

 

At a rate of 4kg per hectare. That is 90,400 kilograms of poison bait.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This would never've been known if a whistle blower had not exposed it. The amount of information that is available that shows 1080 is not the answer is staggering, and it's only the stuff that is accidentally released., what DoC would have under lock and key would be mind blowing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stunning.
This is basically the same as the Government said about DDT when NZ was still using it after it had been banned world wide.

 

 

Published on Jul 7, 2014

New Zealand Forest and Bird believe that one of the worlds worst poisons is as safe to eat as a packet of crisps.

We are allowing fools to destroy our beautiful environment. The New Zealand government dumps enough 1080 poison to kill 20 million people every year.

Help us save the environment and our native Kea Parrot.
SIGN THE PETITION TO STOP DUMPING 1080 POISON
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/sa...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

DoC lies, lies and more lies.

by Chris W.

 

Water testing downstream from a drop site often produces very low levels or no levels of 1080 in water.. this is what is claimed and is a common argument used with regard to 1080 in streams and rivers.. what is not stated is that 1080, a plant derived substance attaches readily to plant material such as algae or any water plants present in an area.. therefore a test of just water is unlikely to reveal actually how much 1080 is present.. this is a mechanism of deceit and a means of producing "evidence" to mitigate claims of contamination.

Another interesting occurrence here in Taranaki was to do with the monitoring of before and after, possum levels. Trappers I spoke to who were hired to run test lines to determine possum levels, stated they were instructed to use unscented lure (plain flour) after the drop, yet prior to the drop they used scented lure (flour and curry powder or cinnamon) as per usual trapping practise.. clearly to give a 1080 biased result... does this happen across the board??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.