MUST READ: Talking about 1080 & dispelling the ignorance of science

By
Christine Rose
-
98
661

Taking a view on 1080 is almost guaranteed to cause disagreement with at least half your friends. Indeed, it seems nothing causes strange cleavages across the political spectrum, like talking about 1080. But the subject is like a spectre – and if we don’t talk about it fundamental disagreements will never get reconciled; and we let untruths continue, misunderstandings prevail, malintentions inform.

We let good people get abused; good science get undermined; and the defence of species and ecosystems go unheard. It’s worth talking about because native animals’ lives and ecology is at stake, and we should be up for the discussion about the use of toxins in our environment, animal welfare, alternatives, the future of New Zealand forests.

But it sure is a volatile topic, and often in even trying to talk about it, we’re talking past each other.

Engaging in the subject, you’re as likely to be called stupid, blind, or worse. Some people opposed to 1080 because of its impacts on animals are issuing death threats against people applying the stuff. People who shoot deer and pigs for sport are opposed to the use of aerial 1080 for pest control. And no matter what the science says, sometimes you’re just told ‘fuck 1080’. Opposition is a fundamental position that refutes science and objectivity. It’s hard to reconcile the views, they’re philosophical, political and guttural.

If you’re like me, your Facebook news feed is full of 1080-related posts, mostly heated. The ‘Operation Ban 1080’ Facebook page has had more than 350 posts so far today alone and has almost 60,000 members. The ‘Hikoi of a Poisoned Nation’ went from Cape Reinga to Bluff and its arrival at Parliament this weekend was celebrated with rallies in many towns and cities. Watch any political live stream and they’re spammed by a consistent and simple message ‘Ban 1080’. The issue is so polarised, so fraught, that it carries potential unforeseen political risks. This is evident with Auckland Council being prevented from proceeding with its planned 1080 drop in the Hunuas in the next week or so, by a High Court injunction, while still going ahead with the pre-bait cereal drop this week. But there are central government risks as well. Even though the use of 1080 is standard governmental practice, and environmental advocates like Forest and Bird, and the Green Party are in favour of its use in the absence of viable alternatives, there’s always the wild card NZ First who has policies opposing 1080 that might yet be randomly pulled from the pack to undermine the government, the way NZ First is want to do.

There are lots of reasons being expressed against 1080. It’s a poison. Developed by Hitler. A form of toxic control as part of an Agenda 21 conspiracy. DoC are inept and dangerous. 1080 kills everything it comes into contact with; plants, animals, native birds, reptiles. See the photos of dead kiwi by the score, dead deer, convulsing dogs. Read about the butter blockaded from export because of 1080 contamination. See its effects in kauri dieback disease. It accumulates in water, in beehives, crayfish collect and eat it. It’s being used everywhere. It’s being applied indiscriminately. No-one else in the world uses 1080. Trapping could do the work of 1080 anyway. Humans (DoC) are arrogant for deeming rats, cats, possums and mustelids as pests. They’re not really pests. They all deserve to live.

I’ve also seen ‘fuck the birds’ and ‘it’s survival of the fittest’.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

But there’s plenty of science-based evidence the other way. 1080 is definitely a toxin, a poison, that’s why it’s so effective in predator control. But it was developed before Hitler – first synthesised in Europe in 1896 and developed for rodent control in the US in the 1940s. DoC aren’t perfect, but they’re not evil conspirators wanting to take over the world, they’re doing conservation and environmental preservation work mandated by Government. 1080 doesn’t kill everything it comes into contact with – mammals are susceptible, but it doesn’t kill ‘flora’ as the SPCA’s Bill Kerridge claimed this week, and he should know better, and be more careful or destroy his credibility and do genuine animal welfare concerns an injustice. Whether you prefer the term pest, or predator, or not, there’s a hierarchy in our forest, and our birds found nowhere else in the world, being killed by rats, cats, possums and mustelids, are at the bottom of that order, and becoming extinct without effective and systematic control.

They need all the help they can get.

While many opposed to 1080 distrust evidence presented otherwise, they should be sceptical of the propaganda of self-interested hunters who show photos of deer and kiwi dead in reality from dog attacks and road kill. Referring to ancient ‘news’ about blocked exports and contamination, inflame the cause but are not accurate or helpful for today’s issues.

In many of the forests where kauri dieback disease is rampant, such as the Waitakere Ranges, 1080 has never been used.

It doesn’t accumulate in water; it’s only being applied to 5-10% of New Zealand, with improving precision. Incidents of bykill are tragic, though DoC are trying to minimise this (for example removing most of the Great Barrier Island weka), and the benefits to populations afterwards provide some compensation.

There is no risk to people in Bethells Beach or Wellsford from 1080 use in the Hunuas. The desire to avoid poisons in the environment is a valid wish. But if you’ve ever been tramping, or trapping in the Hunuas, or the Waitakeres, or anywhere in the South Island, you’ll know that traps and conventional methods for pest control cannot do the landscape-scale job required to protect endangered species and their habitats.

Concerns about animal welfare and humane treatment are valid. In animal rights ethics, sentience, and the will to live and the right to life are fundamental for any animal whether they’re the family cat, a farmed pig, a deer, a possum or an endangered bird. In an animal rights framework, to justify the death of an animal because it’s termed a pest is discriminatory and speciesist. Consistency would require us all to be vegetarian, so no animals die an unnecessary death.

Maybe it is arrogant for us to determine which animals live or die, deemed as pets, or food or pests. But whether you like it or not, we’ve been deeming other lives as pests since we started killing fleas and ticks off each other’s backs when we lived in caves.

Humans have the capacity for reason and morality and when introduced animals can wipe out individuals and collectives of species, cutting across their rights to life forever, morality requires the balancing of individual animal rights with species level values too. Animal sentience means we need to be as humane as possible in responding to environmental level problems, using the best tools at hand.
We need to exercise great care and responsibility dealing with other animals, and species, and mustn’t lose our humanity in discussing the issue with others who hold a different view about how this is to be achieved.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

98 COMMENTS

  2. Indeed. Anti1080 activists seems to transcend the political spectrum but they do remind me of antifa with their sheer anger and anti-scientific emotionalism.

    Seething fury is not a good recipe for persuasion.

    • Yeah well the forests are sick and all prescriptions to cure the problem has failed. So 1080 users haven’t done themselves any favours either. DOC’s use of 1080 is so limited its ineffectual. And most people can’t handle a bit of blood.

        • It’s more an argument that DOC blew 50 years of 1080 treatment that we won’t get back. Possums ain’t the only thing holding back forests. There’s the water ways, algae bloom, loose of wetlands. It’s not just 1080 it’s got to be taken as a whole strategy because each one could set off a cascading failure of left unchecked. I wouldn’t even care how much it costs because all that cash gets pumped into the economy anyway.

    • They remind me more of Trump supporters. Nine times out of ten they are, and see themselves, as outsiders

      • None of my neighbours would agree with your wrong generalisation, we are upstanding citizens defending our environment.

      • None of my neighbours would agree with your bizarre generalisation, we are farmers and upstanding citizens defending our environment.

    • i,ve been in the bush 4 times after a 1080 drop….whereas the birdsong is deafening so to speak on these occasions the forest was silent and bereft of any birdsong and indeed not too many to be seen by the eye at all…..its tragic……we need a better way

  3. So… Does any other country allow the use of 1080 or not? Is it poisonous to birds that eat insects and grubs/worms or not? Does it kill native birds or not?
    The most horrible aspect of this programme is that it has no end. It is far more indiscriminate than proponents want to pretend , but it has zero expectation of eliminating any pest species, only of knocking their numbers back for a while and then more poison endlessly out into the future.
    “The Silent Spring” came out when I was a kid. That’s a long time ago.
    If there was a plan to eradicate pests like Key’s pipe dream, there would be a case, but everlasting 1080 poisoning is grotesque.
    D J S

    • Some other countries use it, such as Australia, for foxes. Mammals are most susceptible to it which is why most other countries don’t use it whereas all our land mammals except bats are introduced and threats to wildlife and ecology. It has killed kea and weak but saves many more from predation and should always be used carefully and with discretion

          • America has a good study. And they banned… It is not good reading for 1080. And yet the ban 1080 people are the ones spreading false news?

            Come on.

            • Eh? Did you know possums are indigenous to Austrlia or?

              Austrlia has a camel, toad, mice, water buffalo and wild pig infestation and banning 1080 is just one big who gives a fuck.

            • Tony Hitch, America has not banned 1080 its used in coyote control. Elsewhere in America it not used as they have mammals which they wish to protect. we do not have native mammals and the introduced predators have devastated our bird, reptile, insect life and vegitation.

          • sorry cant find that link, but heres another
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixvo1DemwE4
            an another
            Someone just sent me this.
            No sure where it’s from-but full credit to the currently anonymous writer.

            Admin · 1 hr
            TV1 News you should have done your homework. And rather than bow to the directive of Forest & Bird which was delivered to all media on Wednesday last week and told you to ‘do your duty and support the poison rather than the protestors’, I and other New Zealanders believe that you should have aimed for balanced reporting. We expect better.

            An OIA enquiry revealed there have been exactly SIX cases of threats reported to NZ Police since March 2016.

            And the details of these 6 cases? In 2 incidents the perpetrator was apparently identified and ‘spoken to’ by Police.

            3 cases were (anon?) phone calls, 1 was a ‘flyer’ left on a DoC vehicle.

            None have progressed to prosecution.

            How many 1080 protesters do we know who have been attacked or abused by DoC staff or their agents? Just off the top of my head I can think of a veteran and pensioner, Graeme Sturgeon, being pulled from his car and hit in front of his two female passengers by ‘DoC security’ for being in a public car park where 1080 baits were being stored near New World. I can think of Phil Paterson who was run down by an angry farmer driving his farm vehicle straight at him deliberately on public land, and more recently a truck driver with 1080 baits on board drove at a protester on the road. Does anyone get the feeling that 1080 supporters are full of suppressed anger?

            You’d be forgiven for thinking – if you believed New Zealand reporters that is – that there were genuine reasons for concern about potential threats from ‘activists’ fighting for a poison-free New Zealand – threats aimed at those responsible for the aerial poisoning operations. For instance, here are three examples of recent headlines:

            • “Police warn anti-1080 activists over ‘terrorism’, threats” (NZ Herald, 25 May 2018)
            • “Attacks on DoC Staff ‘more frequent and more acute’” (TVNZ 15 April 2018)
            • “Anti-1080 protesters slammed: Federated Farmers says “feral” anti-1080 activists are worse than the pests.” (Otago Daily Times, 8 October 2016)

            Should we be worried about these ‘feral’ activists? Is the movement getting ‘out of control’?

            But really – how many ‘threats’ to DoC do you think might have been made in the past 18 months or so? 50? 100? Maybe 200 or more if DoC are repeatedly articulating their criticism and their supposed anxiety about the ‘safety’ of their staff.For instance, the guy ‘Neville’ (not his real name) who works at the Wanganui 1080 poison factory, reported to have installed CCTV at home for his family’s protection…

            How many threats?

            Six.

            Yes, that’s right. An OIA revealed there have been exactly SIX cases of threats reported to NZ Police since March 2016.

            And the details of these 6 cases? In 2 incidents the perpetrator was apparently identified and ‘spoken to’ by Police.

            3 cases were (anon?) phone calls, 1 was a ‘flyer’ left on a DoC vehicle.

            None have progressed to prosecution.

            So in fact, DoC’s lies about the threats and violence from any anti-1080 activists are clear. The Police’s attitude and strategy at the protests recently are unfounded. No more #fakenews DoC.

            We talk FACTS. We are PASSIONATE & we are PEACEFUL. We want poison free uncontaminated land, water and kai. #ban1080

        • Link please Rickoshay? So far I’m reading a lot of misinformation from anti-1080 proponents, but little in the way of real facts. If misinfirmation is how the anti-1080 puts their case then they have no case.

      • Especially they used 1080 for foxes in Tasmania – cost $50million – ten years later the scam was exposed – THERE NEVERE WERE ANY FOXES IN TASMANIA.

    • Of course 1080 was developed as an insecticide. So weta and all the natural food of the insect and grub eating birds and lizards will be prime targets. And the sick and slow will be what gets eaten first . Are we sure that the native bird deaths are not known and anticipated collateral damage that has to be obfuscated by pretending that their protection is the prime target, when it is the opossum and the goat and the deer damaging the forrest that is the target , and the bird deaths are not just an unfortunate side effect.
      D J S

      • Only example of why bird life is so important is when Mao ordered every one in China kill all the pigeons and would eventually destroy all there forests. kicked off one the worse waves of Chinese famines. Climate change, total incompetence, totally preventable.

      • 1080 was not developed as an insecticide. Perhaps your source mistook the term “rodenticide”. Often people will accidentally transmit mistakes because they are not significant to them, but the reader may find them very significant and propagate them.

      • Of courseOf course 1080 was developed as an insecticide..

        David, can you provide a reference for that assertion? I’ve looked at a few websites and I can find nothing that points to 1080 being ” developed as an insecticide”.

        The only reference to it’s kill-target are introduced mammalian pests such as rats and possums.

        • I don’t remember where I picked that up Frank . My sister and her then partner did a lot of study on 1080 when she lost horses to some poison immediately after a 1080 drop above her property, and carrots came down the creek. I will get back to you to confirm or opologise whether I can find reference or not.
          D J S

        • So far from wikipedia”…Toxicology[edit]
          Sodium fluoroacetate is toxic to all obligate aerobic organisms, and highly toxic to mammals and insects.”
          This doesn’t prove it was developed for this purpose ,only that it would work . 2B continued.
          D J S

      • David, it was developed as a rodenticide, not an insecticide. There will be tragically and inevitably be some bykill beyond what’s known, but the silent forests are those where 1080 isn’t used, rather than those where it is.

        • Citation needed. I though hyperbole was what the antis did?
          Interesting the early use as a ridenticide and the “tragic and inevitable by kill”, initially it was human!
          https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/sodium-fluoroacetate
          “By the end of 1949, there had been at least 12 deaths and six cases of nonfatal poisoning. In addition, there had been four deaths, all in children, that probably were caused by sodium monofluoroacetate, but other sources of poisoning could not be ruled out. Of the 12 deaths clearly caused by sodium monofluoroacetate, five involved small children who had found and often chewed on a poison cup, three involved juveniles who had found the poison in a soft drink bottle, and four were suicides of adults. Except one, each of the survivors was a child who had found a poison cup. “

          • The question that has not been answered, Keepcalmcarryon, is what similarity do 1080 and the unspecified “rodenticide” have in common? Aside from the active ingredient (Sodium fluoroacetate ), they appear to be two different compounds. 1080 degrades (biodegradable) quickly in a natural environment whilst this “rodenticide” appears longer-lasting. If the formulations are different, it is hard to make a comparison.

            • It’s the 1080 that kills you, not the carrot, cereal or water, not sure why the fixation in breakdown of a particular bait. Used for its secondary toxicity as DOC now do, carcasses containing poison are around for months in the winter.

    • …but it has zero expectation of eliminating any pest species, only of knocking their numbers back for a while and then more poison endlessly out into the future.

      The alternative, David, is to stop using 1080 and the consequence would be an explosion of rats, stoats, possums, mice and the destruction of our native birdlife and forests.

      Is that what you are advocating, David? Because I see no other possible consequence to stopping the use of this pesticide.

      In 2011/12, there were reduced numbers of birdlife in the Hutt Valley area. ( http://www.gw.govt.nz/assets/Our-Environment/Environmental-monitoring/State-and-trends-in-the-diversity-abundance-and-distribution-of-birds-in-Wellington-City-reserves-September-2013.pdf)

      In 2013, a 1080 drop was carried out in the Akatarawa Forest north of Upper Hutt. (http://www.gwrc.govt.nz/assets/Parks-and-Recreation/WarningtoFirewoodGatherersinAkatarawaForest.pdf) Since then we have had an increase in birdlife such as Kereru, Ruru, etc. (You can see the Kereru flying low over thye River Road/SH2, where often they come off second-best to collisions with automobiles and trucks.)

      Birdlife numbers in the Rimutaka region have increased since (http://www.rimutakatrust.org.nz/panels.htm).

      Pest control in the South Island, using 1080, has – unsurprisingly – yielded positive results: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12059583

      • Frank.
        I think that where an island or a reserve can be fenced off or otherwise isolated so that a focused eradication can be undertaken and maintained fair enough, it is worthwhile and has an end to the poisoning.
        As to the open range scientific monitoring and population studies would be needed to prove anything. Birds are very mobile creatures and presumably quickly recolonise an area where the local population has been wiped out by poison.
        My scepticism would be that the pest kill is likely to be reported optimistically and the collateral kill greatly underreported. The subject has been a focus of positive official and unofficial spin for the duration. Rose is a bit disappointing in her grouping Hitler and
        herbicidal claims against it which are clearly ridiculous alongside dog and deer deaths and native bird deaths which are clearly true , in a crude attempt to categorise all criticisms as equal. She would have been better to stick with the facts ,which she does later on.
        Just received this from my little sister…First synthesised in Belgium in 1896 and developed in Germany as a mothproofing agent in the 30’s . Don’t have a reference yet that I can link.
        D J S

        • “think that where an island or a reserve can be fenced off or otherwise isolated so that a focused eradication can be undertaken and maintained fair enough”

          And what about the rest of the country David?? Are you prepared to let possums, rats, and stoats destroy evrry last bird and denude every last tree so that the emotionalist viewpoint is upheld?? I submit to you sir that your way may not “poison” the country, but it will eliminate pretty much everything else. Possums, rats, and stoats salute you!!

          • My submission is that the issue is not that simple. It is not a question of 1080 or native birds. It’s a question of whether the cure is worse for the patient than the ailment. In the long run are we killing more birdlife with 1080 than the rats and possums are? It is an uncertain balancing act not a black and white choice.
            D J S

      • Any pest control of scale and permanence will provide excellent recovery results. The problem is no pest control for to long due no budget……..

      • Frank your last example in the landsbrough also used intensive trapping.
        I’m sorry but I’m not reading the other 37 page document you linked other than to note Wellington has a bloody great predator control fence. Is only 1070 to thank for all of this? Come on.

        • The predator-control fence exists only in a small area in the west of Wellington.

          My reference to birdlife is in the Upper Hutt/Rimutake region – approximately 40kms away from ‘Zealandia’. No such predator-control fence exists in Upper Hutt/Rimutaka.

      • where has the support for alternative systems been since this report? In 2008 much money was spent understanding anti aerial 1080 opponents questions and formulating replies, this has not provided solutions! What about the sterility issues of which have not yet been addressed!

  4. Death by 1080 poisoning is often very slow and very painful. Sub-lethal doses cause the organism ingesting it to remain alive but unable to function properly.

    NZ is the largest user of 1080.

    Other forms of pest control are available but at much greater cost. In the globalised world we endure, financial cost is everything.

    When the globalised system collapses, as it surely will over the next decade, other forms of pest control will emerge. And the population of the biggest ‘pest’ on the planet will decline significantly.

    Until that happens, officialdom will always take the seemingly easiest option.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_fluoroacetate

    • New Zealand is the largest user of 1080 for a very simple reason: we don’t have any native mammals – we are almost unique in that regard.

      I want to save not only our birds, but our forests too. There is some incredible footage of the rata forest in Otira compared with the valleys down the road, where the rata is dead. One has thriving bird populations, the other does not. Worth watching. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCH_OTFgor8&feature=share

      • So you identify where pest control has been done versus where it has not. Its nothing to do with any particular choice of tools to achieve!

    • “Other forms of pest control are available but at much greater cost”

      Such as?? Critics of 1080 keep telling us that alternatives exist but they are notoriously short on detail. What are these alternatives, please.

      • Whangaroa aerial 1080 was to cost $59 per ha. For the same amount Eco-land can work that forest twice. Reinvasion to this site will be rapid once aerial baits have discharged. The aerial effort would be pointless and hugely risky to non target species.
        Unfortunately we were not included in the discussion as aerial 1080 was promoted as the only option.

        • Yup. Cheap skates just throwing good money at bad. $59 is way to cheap for a national irradiation programme. Wouldn’t even pay for my lunch. Let’s say $59 for aerial baiting per ha, $59 for trapping and $59 and $59 shooters. First one to the results gets a million browny points.

          • Why wouldn’t you enable a $75-$100 per ha and set up permanent rotations every 4-6 months. Providing your boundary was protected or enlarging the pest population could not have chance to replenish and may collapse all together

            • Birth rates caped at twelve per year. The real problem is getting those ones in the high country. Okay so we go after the easy to get pests around roads so normie so don’t have to walk to far from there cars. There’s still millions of ha they can hide out till the cost is clear then boom. Right back where we started like its 1970 again.

        • assumption is the root of evil…. 1080 aerial applied in Whangaroa will result in a cost of approx. $177 per possum killed. I am sure if a bounty of $177 was placed on the possum there would be none left…..

  5. That line about becoming vegetarians for consistency is a simplistic, deliberately fallacious style of logic. Like nuance doesn’t exist. Like a whole suite of intermediate options weren’t available or waiting to be discovered.

    The point is, the 1080 program is unaspirational towards becoming more humane science, unaspirational to move past what we know is unethical, the infliction of mass chemical suffering indefinitely. This unaspirational quality over time means it is not science. There is no research or refinement. Only implementation of the favored chosen weapon, the poison. Like a deeply inferior unaspirational inhumane toxic false god. That no compassionate human being would put up with. What tries to normalize this scale of sadism? What is nonchalance about mass killing? Something there must be defeated.

    I say and I will continue to say that no ecology should need air raids of lethal poison as a cornerstone, if you actually have competent and ethical ecologists. They are worse than worthless if they have no better ideas.

    • I guess you condone miserable lives for animals so you can eat meat then? Carnalism (meat eating) is mass killing if there ever was. Check out some of the ethicists on these debates – Aldo Leopold, Tom Regan, Peter Singer, you’ll see there’s plenty of nuance in the animal welfare ethical philosophy which is what I refer to. They’re not just my views, but ideas that underpin the whole animal liberation / rights and welfare, and environmentalist philosophical traditions.

        • I’m not ashamed at all. I’m following a noble tradition of philosophy and philosophers who I respect greatly. No shame in that. I don’t see what’s evasive in my answer, though I note you didn’t answer my question about whether you eat meat.

          • Bike riding city dwelling BA in politics lectures rest of country on aerial pest control from philosophical moral high horse.
            There I’ve rewritten your article title for you, quoting just as much science as you have.

          • It’s shame the issue is so polarized, it has become so deliberately from extremes of both sides, this article and Martyns yesterday being examples.
            1080 is very handy for localized eradication, it would be a shame to have it banned outright but as a rotational aerial tonic, it’s just a salve to middle class consciences.
            My understanding was the protest by anti 1080 people was peaceful yet on tv the minister was claiming threats which are months or years old, no discussion of concerns.
            I can’t seem to post links from this phone but will put some up when I get time at home showing a) doc lying to suit itself, b) kea in real trouble from 1080, c) 1080 persists from several to many months in dead animals.
            In the past possums were the bad guy, now the PR has shifted to stoats and predators. To kill stoats (which aerial 1080 does poorly/patchily) relies on secondary poisoning- eating animals that died of the toxin. This is an incredibly non selective way to kill, any scavenger native or not can be killed.
            The real mistake most true believers make is the line “there is no alternative” as if aerial 1080 can/will save the birds, it can’t, it won’t and it is causing collateral damage. Not to mention getting many people offside ramming their version of conservation down everyone’s throats.
            Better to increase our network of on and offshore islands as arks for repopulation later.
            Disclaimer: I don’t have a ba in philosophy just a vet degree and an interest in conservation.

            • So here you are as promised some actual real science.
              exhibit A) DoC straight out lying that Iwi support their poison drop when they haven’t even been consulted:
              https://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/northland/106724561/doc-postpones-far-north-1080-aerial-drop-following-outrage-from-iwi

              b)Doc are averaging more than 12% kea mortality per poison drop they have monitored.
              Publically the cry “net benefit” but under OIA their own scientists are less than sure:
              https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/82491117/benefits-to-kea-from-1080-operations-uncertain
              Kea are a K select species which means slow to reproduce. Population modelling which used to be available on the kea conservation trust old website, showed the loss of adult birds was 3 times worse for the population than chicks in terms of survival of that population.
              Kea have been documented dead to 1080 since the 1960s in the Dobson valley but only recently, occasionally monitored.
              Zip have recently postponed a poison drop on the west coast where kea were seen eating the prefeed, the cancellation due to “the weather”.

              C) possum carcasses in one study were still deadly to dogs 75 days after death. 1080 can last for many months this way in cold conditions, over 200 days in a poisoned deer tested in the same study
              https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03014223.2012.740488

              • The report you linked to also clearly states;

                When other species (e.g. insects or birds) come into contact with 1080 in carcasses, sub-lethal poisoning is more likely. In these cases, as with sub-lethal poisoning in any non-target animals, any 1080 ingested will be metabolised and excreted, and trophic transfer will be minimal when compared to more persistent poisons.

                […]

                These field and laboratory results for invertebrates show that 1080 is consumed by some invertebrate species, and therefore a risk of secondary poisoning exists. However, the persistence of 1080 in insects is short-lived, and thus the risk to insectivorous birds or other predators is confined to a short period after sowing poison baits. While there is a theoretical risk from carcasses via invertebrates to birds or other predators, previous field monitoring of invertebrates and birds has shown that long-term population effects on non-target birds and invertebrates, via both primary poisoning from baits and secondary poisoning from 1080-poisoned carcasses, is unlikely

                The benefits to preserving our native birdlife by using 1080 seems even more apparent, according to your citation.

        • Rubbish, lolbz, Christine has raised valid points and usual the debate has descended into personal vitriol against anyone who stands and questions anti1080 hysteria. That’s what all this is, hysteria. There’s no credible science behind the poisoning” claims and anti-1080ists seem to prefer the extinction on our bird life.

      • Christine ; I used to run beef cattle. Big and fat they followed me up onto the truck to take them to the works. I couldn’t do it any more. It was the treachery , not that they didn’t have a good life while they lived. But they thought I was their best friend in the world.
        They don’t have to have a horrible life and most don’t. And it’s only because we exploit them so that they get to have a life at all. So is it better to have lived and lost (died) than never to have lived at all? To abuse a cleche. I think that they would probably opt for some life, everything seems to want to live, but I can relate to deciding to do without meat on the grounds of the exploitation. Hunting seems more honourable as the quarry knows you’r not it’s friend. But everything lives by something else’s death .
        D J S

        • @ DJS.

          Ah… Sorrow is one of the many prices we must pay for ‘enlightenment’.
          I remember my mother crying as she watched her ‘fat’ lambs be trucked off to the freezing works. She was so determined to not let one single lamb succumb to the weather, loss, or bung mothering she’d take them inside, warm them up in a bathtub full of hot water then feed them until they all thought she was a strange, bipedal sheep-mother who said the ‘fuck’ word a lot.
          Sheep. “ Ba aaaaaa, aaaaa ? “
          Mum. “ Fuck!”
          Sheep. “ Ok then. All is as it should be. “
          Once the animal farmer comes to realise that their animals are certainly not ‘dumb’ it’s time to stop animal farming and move on to something else. I’d suggest cannabis cropping myself. Or? Sell the fucking prison AKA ‘farm’ and move to a big, warm city, find a trusted dealer then sit back and relish your new found enlightenment.
          And I’d like to say this to any person plagued with regret, of any kind, type or permutation. Forgive yourself. Don’t ask God. He/She/It doesn’t give a fuck. Forgive yourself. Because you’ve come a long way Baby.
          We will all, one day, realise that wee beasties are entirely sentient. They have spirit and soul and are our Brothers and Sisters and sorry if I just fucked up your lunch plans dear reader.

          Robbie Burns.
          To a mouse.
          Wee, sleekit, cow’rin, tim’rous beastie,
          O, what a panic’s in thy breastie!
          Thou need na start awa sae hasty,
          Wi’ bickering brattle!
          I wad be laith to rin an’ chase thee,
          Wi’ murd’ring pattle!

          I’m truly sorry man’s dominion,
          Has broken nature’s social union,
          An’ justifies that ill opinion,
          Which makes thee startle
          At me, thy poor, earth-born companion,
          An’ fellow-mortal!

          I doubt na, whiles, but thou may thieve;
          What then? poor beastie, thou maun live!
          A daimen icker in a thrave
          ‘S a sma’ request;
          I’ll get a blessin wi’ the lave,
          An’ never miss’t!

          Thy wee bit housie, too, in ruin!
          It’s silly wa’s the win’s are strewin!
          An’ naething, now, to big a new ane,
          O’ foggage green!
          An’ bleak December’s winds ensuin,
          Baith snell an’ keen!

          Thou saw the fields laid bare an’ waste,
          An’ weary winter comin fast,
          An’ cozie here, beneath the blast,
          Thou thought to dwell-
          Till crash! the cruel coulter past
          Out thro’ thy cell.

          That wee bit heap o’ leaves an’ stibble,
          Has cost thee mony a weary nibble!
          Now thou’s turn’d out, for a’ thy trouble,
          But house or hald,
          To thole the winter’s sleety dribble,
          An’ cranreuch cauld!

          But, Mousie, thou art no thy lane,
          In proving foresight may be vain;
          The best-laid schemes o’ mice an ‘men
          Gang aft agley,
          An’lea’e us nought but grief an’ pain,
          For promis’d joy!

          Still thou art blest, compar’d wi’ me
          The present only toucheth thee:
          But, Och! I backward cast my e’e.
          On prospects drear!
          An’ forward, tho’ I canna see,
          I guess an’ fear!

          • Good that you’r on the same wavelength C B
            First I turned to market gardening Veges , Then went fishing,(plenty of killing there but no nurturing) now I farm, slaughter and butcher trees. Did you ever watch “The Silence of the Lambs”.
            Cheers D J S

  6. I absolutely agree with you Christine. As a Ngati Paoa Ranger & a qualified DoC “Bird Counter”, hehe. I am and have been involved with the drop’s in the Hunua, this time as a bit of an adviser to the Ngati Paoa Trust board this time around, and I was part of the council’s planning team, pre drop, during and after the last drop in the Hunua was 2015.
    I am too opposed to the use of 1080 but, its the best weapon we have until the purse strings are loosened enough to allow for people to be employed full time, to be on the ground to trap and make a living as kaitiaki. The 1080 programme is worth $30m annually so that would go along way to fund and employ people, especially iwi which many of the cuzzies want to do.

    However, these nutcases, the “anti’s” which within Ngati Paoa and most iwi there are some, don’t read or scrutinise the information that they are given or the anecdotal suspect photographic images pulled down from the web from the 90’s & 80’s ffs! Bird kill, on a road squashed by a fuck’n car is clasified as a 1080 kill! 4 or 5 dead dogs lying beside one another in an abattoir they claim were from 1080. The information is as about as reliable and the bullshit from the so called eyewitness account(s) of the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq!

    The latest court action by these people in Auckland with an injunction upheld by the Judge is a bit of a self serving stunt, I hope the council just ignore it and get on with as the claims tabled have not been backed up with evidence, again, more anecdotal bullshit.

    • Dear Denny
      We operate a ground based pest control system, It can be used at scale, 1 person 400ha over 10 days within Omahuta Forest Northland. It achieved after 2 visits to the forest a reduction from 52% wti to 7.5%wti (wax tag index) under a performance based contract in the areas in which it was positioned. Rat could also have been targeted but DOC did not enable the use o rat toxin. Hence stoats could also have been targeted if 2nd generation rat bait was enabled. There is an alternative to aerial 1080 where a person can walk, economically we can compete, environmentally we provide guaranteed outcomes with no non species death, we do not contaminate water ways with toxin or dead bodies, socially we provide employment within each area to people as you suggest. Currently we are being excluded from participation!

      • Tena koe Shane,
        Thanks for that piece of info. Have you approached your local iwi? Are they part of the current Treaty Settlement negotiations? If so, this is the time to initiate this kind of programme as part of a Governance-Management as part of the settlement package. Having a program for the Ngahere within the settlement to be able to have control of the G&M of the Ngahere. Tuhoe have done it.

        • Hi
          We are happy to talk to all that wish to make positive changes at landscape scale for the benefit of the communities that live within both human and others as we are one.
          Shane

      • Hey Shane,
        What are the rat toxins you would use and how would they be used? Interested as this is the first actual alternative system I’ve seen put forward and your post didn’t once refer to government mind control.
        Cherrs

        • We are working with 1st generation toxins. The system also enabling increased catch potential from traps. 20-30% increase when used with kill traps. yet 225% increased kill rate per visit when used with toxin beside kill traps

      • “There is an alternative to aerial 1080 where a person can walk, ”

        And what about the MAJORITY of our bush, mountains, remote valleys, etc, where walking is not so easy?? How can you put down traps to cover hundreds of thousands of hectares of wilderness areas?? And who would do it?? And don’t tell me the “unemployed” because sending untrained unemployed people used to living in an urban environment , with zero bush experience, would be a death sentence for many.

        Nice idea Shane, but impractical.

        • Open public tendering is the only way to determine where a person can walk! but unfortunately this is not done. 25 trained operators can cover 125,000 ha per year with 28 days guarantied control at each site. If a profession is again promoted with security of work continuation and realistic service payment many hard diligent workers would again return to forest environment that they call home.
          I agree there are areas where a person can not walk but there are fewer places that can not receive some form of ground work within 500m especially with helicopter support.

        • MJLNIR – Not in small area’s such as where my iwi are, in the Hunua. 23,000 hectares out of a total of 30,000 hectares so its doable I’ve walk it a couple of times.

          • 20,000ha of dense forest could receive pest control with a team of 5-6 people each year. Time and motion studies have proven 4500 ha each person is possible when working 5 day week, with holidays and time out between shifts(9 months in forest working). Just the thinking needs to change and permanent but efficient boundary control prescribed. How many people in total are required to do a once off aerial drop?

      • “Currently we are being excluded from participation!”

        Northland needs to take a leaf out of Taranaki,s book. They are open to all new technology and systems to meet their target of zero pests by 2050 in their forests.

  7. yeah nah its poison, bees gather it and it ends up in honey, fish eat it an it ends up in you, its completely banned in the rest of the world, its a lazy option for polis and farmers who seem not to care about chemicals in the natural environment, too see the comments is to know the effectiveness of that lobby, but the ground swell movement against it is a fact.
    So Fuck 1080 possums are tasty

    • No matter what your stance on the use of Aerial 1080 (For or Against) – there can be no doubt it is now being significantly MISUSED. The NZ Public were sold on this deadly, broad-spectrum toxin being used as the only option – a last resort. Now, we have been desensitised to it – and it’s use is widespread, and growing dramatically. Thousands of tonnes, indiscriminately applied across millions of hectares of mostly public land .. much of it readily accessible .. in an agenda that will continue to see billions of dollars spent, across decades. Well, the Sleeping Giant of public opinion – the Silent Majority ..is stirring. We now have what may be a fairly unique opportunity. A time to “Put Up .. or Shut Up”.

      There are relatively few people putting in a lot of effort on behalf of many, on various issues .. aimed at keeping New Zealand a great country to live in .. hanging on to what we’ve had for the past 150 years, and before .. issues like the Misuse of Aerial 1080, Firearms Licensing, Public Access to Public Land. We don’t always ask for you to do something in support. But you’re being asked now. Here goes something you can do, to help.

      Please get involved in the protests against the MISUSE of Aerial 1080

  9. Mjolnir:
    > “So far I’m reading a lot of misinformation from anti-1080 proponents, but little in the way of real facts.”

    How about this. We see a lot comments implying or even explicitly claiming that 1080 only affects mammals. For example:

    Christine:
    > “Mammals are most susceptible to it”

    Gerald:
    > “Elsewhere in America it not used as they have mammals which they wish to protect.”

    Cindy:
    > “New Zealand is the largest user of 1080 for a very simple reason: we don’t have any native mammals”

    This claim is also implied in a number of 1080 information sheets

    Forest and Bird:
    “It is used sparingly in these countries because of the need to protect their native mammals.”
    https://www.forestandbird.org.nz/resources/frequently-asked-questions-about-1080

    1080 The Facts ( a joint PR campaign between F&B and *Federated Farmers*):
    “its use has been limited because of the need in these countries to protect native mammals.”
    http://www.1080facts.co.nz/overview-of-1080.html

    PCE report:
    “New Zealand is unique because we have no native land mammals that can die from 1080 poisoning.”

    Yet, the real facts about 1080 are that it works by interrupting the Krebs cycle in cells:
    http://www.1080facts.co.nz/the-science-of-how-1080-works.html

    Since the Krebs cycle is essential to the survival of every creature that breathes air, 1080 is equally effective at killing any air-breathing creature, including *birds*.

    Christine even admits this:
    > “It has killed kea and weka”

    As has DOC:
    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11749165

    So is it the 1080 opponents who are ignorant of the science, and being taken in by propaganda? I’m not so sure.

    Perhaps it’s true that fewer birds are killed by 1080 than are killed by mammalian predators. Perhaps it’s true that bird populations increase faster in the years after 1080 drops that they did before. It would be nice to see some peer-reviewed evidence of this.

    But either way the claims that other countries don’t use 1080 because it only affects mammals is clearly false. The fact that this claim continues to surface suggests that there is some dishonest PR going on, perhaps motivated by the ability of a number of companies to funnel enormous sums of public conservation fund into their own pockets every year through 1080 operations?

  10. Thank you Christine for your blog which I found informative and well reasoned. Even on a quick read some commentators are loose with their naming of scientific terms which is confusing and reveals them to be confused. Passion is more important than accuracy for some!

  11. I have to this moment taken no position ever on 1080 poisoning. I have read all the posts and all the links. I have ended up with profound misgivings on 1080 poisoning. I would like to see a fully independent enquiry on the matter, one that is not arbitrated by vested interests. Until then I would like to see a full moritorium on dropping 1080.

      • In the horticultural industry they are using an IPM Strategy (Integrated Pest Management Strategy) whereby they minimise the use of artificial pesticides & insecticides.

        I would be interested to know whether this IPM approach is being used in Pest Management by DOC, or are they using the Old Vietnam Strategy ?

Comments are closed.