< Return to article listings

VOTE against 1080 in NZ

VOTE against 1080 in NZ

Poisoning Paradise - Ecocide New Zealand - Introduction Part 1

Poisoning Paradise - Ecocide New Zealand - Introduction Part 2

Poisoning Paradise - Ecocide New Zealand - Introduction Part 3

Vote against the use of 1080 in New Zealand by clicking on the following links. We as recreational outdoor users should be ANTI 1080. There are many more sustainable and environmentally friendly alternatives available. Your views count.

Opinion Poll on 1080 - Click here to submit your opinion on whether 1080 is safe to use in New Zealand's prestine environment

Vote against 1080 - Vote against the use of the poison in New Zealand

Opinion against 1080 - Express your opinion against the use of 1080 in New Zealand

Sign the petition against the widespread use of aerial 1080 dumps

1080 Petition - Sign the petition against the wide spread use of 1080 in New Zealand

 

Read the following scientific appraisal (SCIENTIFIC APPRAISAL) on aerial 1080. It was written by Dr Quinn and Dr Pat Whiting O'Keefe (retired American scientists, now living in New Zealand), and the content within this report was submitted to ERMA in 2007 to highlight the lack of sound and stastically valid scientific evidence to support DoC's claim that "1080 is good for our environment ecosystem as a whole". This report highglights that there is no such evidence available to suggest a net benefit at all, and in fact, it is more likely that there is a devastating impact on a whole. I urge you to read the report as it comprehensively paints an opaque overview of DoC's misleading claims through the employment of poorly conducted science. It is a lengthy document, and be warned, some of the claims will shock you.

Check out the following links and get in behind and show support to these groups with comments, ideas, and general encouragement.

Graf Boys anti 1080 Blog - Support the Graf Boys with their anti 1080 campaign. These guys are at the forefront of the push to ban the wide spread and careless use of 1080 in our environment.

Enuf is Enuf - Power to the people

Stop 1080 poison - Read about the many evils of 1080

Another 1080 Blog - Click here and read through some of the public's comments on 1080.

 
CHECK OUT THE VIDEO LINKS (below) - CLICK ON THEM TO WATCH

 

Enuf is Enuf protest song

 

Another Protest Song - (anti 1080 & brodifacoum)

 

Clean Green NZ, "Yeah Right"

 

The following video's were compiled by the Graf Boys in 2007. They were produced as a series called "A Shadow Of Doubt", and their purpose was to visually illustrate the ugliness, harsh reality, and negative impacts to native (& non-native) species from the widespread aerial dumps of 1080 toxin into our prestine environment. A Shadow of Doubt is to be viewed as a prequel to their more recent and profound documentary named "Poisoning Paradise, Ecocide New Zealand" (click here to find out more).

A Shadow of Doubt, Part #1

 

A Shadow of Doubt, Part #2

 

A Shadow of Doubt, Part #3

 

A Shadow of Doubt, Part #4

 

And CLICK HERE to see how DoC and Forest & Bird 1080 advocates are poisoning our children's minds with colluded information which is based on poorly conducted studies and misrepresented information.

Unbelievable

 

So which New Zealand Political Party is actually doing anything about it? Peter Dunne's United Future Party is (CLICK HERE). They are the one party that seems to take outdoor recreational users sersiously. I know who gets my vote next year...

Rate: 
Votes: 465

Comments

Daniel BajtFriday 4th December 2009 - 05.59pm
Feed some 1080 to your pet and watch it die, then try and tell me it the best solution...I dare you
Jamie CarleSunday 6th December 2009 - 11.45am
Not sure why you would ever actively feed 1080 to your pet... I believe there's enough concerning evidence to argue for this stuff to be banned from our NZ environment rather than protesting with ridiculous claims like that.
Ayla McherronThursday 3rd May 2012 - 06.59pm
im only 13 and i have had 3 cats and 6 dogs murdered from 1080 u tell me whats best daniel bajt
JuliaTuesday 19th February 2013 - 07.33am
It's not murder. DOC didn't plan on killing your pets, they want to eradicate all the pests that are killing kiwis, kaka and kea. They don't like the fact that it kills, they are just trying to do what is best for the kiwi.
Ayla McherronThursday 3rd May 2012 - 07.13pm
pull your head out of your ass and go fuck your self
paulmywinnieThursday 31st October 2013 - 10.57pm
already done, too late.....
paulmywinnieThursday 31st October 2013 - 10.57pm
already done,too late
birdscantalkFriday 4th December 2009 - 08.28pm
why would you feed your pet 1080? is your pet a rat or a stoat or a possum? does your 'pet' eat native birds alive? does your 'pet' destroy our native forests?
birdscantalkSunday 6th December 2009 - 10.45pm
Hi Jamie,
just so i can check it out ...where could I find this 'concerning evidence'?
Ayla McherronThursday 3rd May 2012 - 07.01pm
i cant see your point mabey because i cant get me head that far up my ass
Ayla McherronThursday 3rd May 2012 - 07.02pm
mabey if you knew what i thought of it u would not be so self cented
paulmy winnieThursday 31st October 2013 - 10.59pm
i bet you have done it more than once...
Jamie CarleMonday 7th December 2009 - 12.51pm
If 1080's so good for our environment birdscantalk, then why is it killing the very native birds that it "Claims" to protect?... There's plenty of evidence of dead native birds found within days of where aerial 1080 dumps have occurred...

If only birds could talk
zane cameronMonday 7th December 2009 - 01.31pm
uncontrolled 1080 drop's from plane's cause more damage to the nz environment such as native bird's and waterway's, than possum's,stoats, rats and cats combined. However these pest's need to be kept in check and another solution needs to be introduced very quickly before you poison my land even more birdscantalk!!
By the way you can find this concerning evidence by making a trip to your nearest doc office, simply ask where the last 1080 drop has happend, sit in the bush and just listen. I challenge you to hear a bird talk!! and dont bother taking any drink just have a sip of nice clean nz water out of one off the nearby streams the 1080 drop took place. Ps I am keen to hear how you went.
JonoMonday 7th December 2009 - 01.43pm
Yeah, if only birds could talk, then maybe we wouldn't be having this debate. What about those 17 Keas in South Westland that were killed by 1080? That was part of a scientific study that had produced the sort of results DOC didn't want to publish... the whole thing would have been swept under the carpet if it weren't for a insider DOC raising the issue...

If only birds could talk
100%recreationMonday 7th December 2009 - 01.59pm
why don't you start by watching the documentary by the graf boys birdcantalk... that's a good starting point. and rather than posing questions about where the evidence that suggests 1080 is bad (and by the way, you only need to look at the risk assessments of other developed and developing nations to see it's extreme threat to ecosystems), why don't you show us the rock hard evidence that proves 1080 is good for all native birds and mammals and insects? The few studies that have been done have been done poorly, using models that other scientists disagree with.
Jamie CarleMonday 7th December 2009 - 02.12pm
One of my major concerns after watching that dvd is, as Zane mentioned, the risks of non-lethal doses of 1080 in drinking water and what effect it has on the human body.

For many years when I was growing up, I regretfully drank water from creeks and rivers while hunting in central north island areas prone to 1080 dumps. As to what effect drinking that water has, or will have on me is unknown, but I hope like hell that in years to come I am still able to have healthy children.

Everyone has 20/20 vision in hindsight - but hindsight can be too late...
birdscantalkMonday 7th December 2009 - 10.12pm
Great reaction guys! Yes I have seen the Poisoning Paradise doco, and I have experienced NZ forests before and after 1080 (and also Brodifacoum) so I know for a fact that it has extremely negligible impact on native birds. If any of you actually want to check out some excellent links to universities and independent research try www.waiheke.tv. As for drinking water it has been proven over and over that it biodegrades incredibly fast and non-lethal doses excrete out. It is a naturally occurring toxin made by plants. Do the research!
Jamie CarleTuesday 8th December 2009 - 06.50pm
That's odd, if it's such an "extremely negligible impact", then why haven't we been able to solve the "pest problem" given that DOC've been dumping this stuff in our environment for the past, what, 20 years? And it appears we are losing more species overall than gaining. That’s odd though, how could that be if it’s so effective and negligible?

And how is it then, that a poison which kills insects and micro invertebrates (as it was designed to), of which many of our native birds eat (and not to mention larger by-kill such as mice, rats etc that have been known to be pecked at by weka for instance; placing them in danger of secondary poisoning...) can have such an "extremely negligible impact" on our native birds? They eat it, they die, simple. If these very birds you speak of eat any of these poisoned specimens, they are subject to the same fate. Death.

Remember, our native birds don't survive in isolation here, they are equally susceptible to primary and secondary poisoning as are the very introduced animals being blanket targeted.

Selective, more controlled measures are a far better solution than blanket dumps of this stuff. And if it could be done in a way that provides pest contracting jobs and perhaps a fur industry, then why not support that. After all, isn't that a cleaner, greener alternative for this 100% pure nation of ours?
fishoFriday 18th December 2009 - 02.13pm
1080 biodegradable?dogs died on Eastbourne beach,30kms away from Akatarawa 1080 drop,in other cases eating 7 months old carcass.1080 does not occur naturaly,it's a chemical with a diferent molecular structure [2 diferent molecules].Minimal impact on birds?Which cuckooland do you come from?I walked through Haurangi FP 7 days after the drop,the silence was amazing.I did see some birds but they were all dead.I have known this area intimatelly for nearly 40 years."Birdscantalk" ? more like "Birdbrain"
zane cameronTuesday 8th December 2009 - 12.01pm
Yes of course 1080 is biodegradable. And survey's have shown that it does not keep in reticulated water. 1080 was detected in waterway's for a short period (24hr's) and concentration was below ministry of health guidelines of 2ug/L .Concentrations 10 metres down stream were higher than 100 metres down stream..
But Break down is temperature dependent and occurs more rapidly at higher temperatures. It takes over 1-2 weeks at 11*c. These were controlled tests they were'nt dropped uncontrolable from a plane!! If it's so safe why does the ministry of health have a guideline? what does it matter!! I'l have to make sure im 100 metres down stream and not 10 metres next time i use stream water!! most streams im near the water is near frozen so the dilution rate is atleast 4-5weeks acording to there paper work. These so called facts are simply not good enough!!, The use of 1080 needs to be used in bait stations and so does poisons like cionide also need to be regulated. Non of us recreational outdoor user's want our babys born with fetuses hanging of the side of there face like the dude of south park becouse mad scientists con the public into thinking poisonining nature by dropping it outa plane's is safe!!! bugger the research.
zane cameronTuesday 8th December 2009 - 12.24pm
Just to add Possums and ferets were under control when my old man used to trap 30 years ago. He used to fetch up to $14 a skin, until the arse dropped out of the fur trade. Then the population went haywire and we have the problem we are faceing today!.
Fur is now on the rebound again and prices are around the 80-$90 a kg. The government / doc should be poking money into the fur trade to encourage more job's instead of spending that money on 1080 and a couple of companies to drop the crap!
birdscantalkTuesday 8th December 2009 - 08.54pm
So lets get this straight ... you accept that 1080 is highly soluble and breaks down rapidly, 50% within 2 hours, and 90% within 24 hrs. You are also most likely aware that 1080 operations occur once in every 3-5 years on only 2% of the 800 thousand hectares of publicly managed conservation land. So for a couple of days every 3 years on 2% of DoC estate you need to be awake...and in the mean time you’re buying your fruit and veges from the supermarket!!! read ‘The Poisoning of New Zealand” by Meriel Watts (no fan of 1080) and get a reality check.

Oh yeah by the way... commercial trapping dealt to oppossums but not mustelids, or rats and only in very accessible areas.
goto www.waiheke.tv
Jamie CarleWednesday 9th December 2009 - 11.27am
birdscantalk, I still don't understand how you can be sanctioning the use of 1080 when there's reports (published by DoC, of which i'm sure you've read) that clearly state that native birds are at risk (some at very high risk might I add) of both primary and secondary poisoning (Spurr
Jamie Carle (reply 2)Wednesday 9th December 2009 - 11.28am
(Spurr
Jamie Carle (reply 2)Wednesday 9th December 2009 - 11.29am
(Spurr and Powlesland 1997 - Impacts of aerial application of 1080 on non-target native fauna).

In that particular report there is acknowledgement that 12 native species are exposed to 1080 frequently, 15 species exposed occasionally, and 6 species exposed to 1080 rarely. Of the list they chose to illustrate (and bear in mind they never even touched on invertebrates in any great detail here - so expect the list to be the length of your driveway, maybe even your street), there is a huge proportion of the native species listed well below the wonderfully warm fuzzy 'negligible impact' line that you so clearly drew in the sand yesterday. 90% of species mentioned are flat out at risk of poisoning.

The fact that 1080 kills invertebrates (the wee critters that live in the forest litter, soils, logs, waterways etc), this makes everything that feeds off of invertebrates susceptible to secondary poisoning. Is that not of a concern to you? It is for me.
Jamie Carle (reply 3)Wednesday 9th December 2009 - 11.30am
And in terms of your references to research, it appears that the more you read on the 1080 matter, the more questions are posed and thus the more research that is needed to validate its widespread use. How can we be using this stuff if there are still soooo many questions to be answered, many of which may have devastating impacts in the future?

Clearly this stuff should be banned (particularly aerial dumps) until there is sufficient evidence to prove this stuff is as good as DoC claims it is. It seems this stuff was sanctioned long before adequate risk assessments were conducted back in the 60s - 70s and we've gotten used to using it ever since as a cheap pest control means.

Truth be told, the research conducted has been done in small parts here and there, and only illustrates the lack of research done on the long term impacts of 1080 to our native biodiversity and health and safety of bush users and rural communities in the affected zones.

Either heavily restrict its use, or find a far more environmentally friendly, economically feasible alternative.
zane cameronWednesday 9th December 2009 - 12.19am
No , 1080 breaks down acordingly to high or low temperatures and time of breakdown can vary.
(If the temperature happends to be right for it to break down 50% in 2 hours and 90% in 24 hrs, this gives us even more proof that if any animal eats it at this period of time it will have a much slower death than an animal that eats the bait when it is first dropped becouse the potency wont be there, therefore proves that animals endure a slow cruel death, theres a reality check!)
It's a fact that nz uses over 2tonne of pure 1080 annualy, so 16000 hectares (35,200 acres). You can make numbers sound big or small but nz is a small country and thats allot of land each year to poison!!
over say 4 years its 64000 hectares (140800 acres). 80% of the worlds 1080 anualy.
The only time I ever saw a rat in the bush after 17 years was in a hut , possums, ferrets, weasels are seen often and can be trapped , shot or poisoned which is control layed.
I grow my own mate, you can buy them!!
SamWednesday 9th December 2009 - 12.32am
Introducing 1080 was a crime itself. I dont understand "birdscantalk" how you could support dumping a toxin that literally kills anything that consumes it. You seem like you have done your research, and you've shown us some some stats and facts. But at the end of the day why would you support this when it is possible of using other methods to control pest numbers?The death these animals suffer (even the pests) from 1080 is totally inhumaine. If we had any respect for our wildllife we wouldnt be using this stuff whether it made a difference or not
AndreWednesday 9th December 2009 - 01.54pm
Why doesn't DoC agree to enter into a public debate televised on national TV regarding 1080 pro's and cons... an opportunity to answer many of the public's questions and concerns, and to defend it's common practice? After all, what have they got to hide if this stuff is "so good" for our environment?
birdscantalkWednesday 9th December 2009 - 06.22pm
To get away from the science for a while I would like to answer Sams question, firstly 1080 doen't 'literally kill anything that consumes it', it is primarily a mammalian toxin, and New Zealand only has introduced mammals (other than the bat) all of which are 'pests' particularly rats, mustelids (stoats etc) and oppossums. These mammals devour and destroy our forests and native bird species. Now the impact of 1080 on native bird species is extensive, in depth and robust (peer reviewed). Personally I am a long time volunteer on species recovery projects, that's my passion, ... and when you hold the small bloodied pile of feathers of kokako,kaka or kiwi that have been predated by either rats, stoats or possums the whole discussion of 1080 breakdown in cold water is bullshit. When we do nest protection around a specific tree in a managed area inside a 1080 treated forest and still get predation mortality on populations that may number no more than 4 - 5 pairs all your pretty photos of guns and bows and arrows are a lame joke.
Jamie CarleWednesday 9th December 2009 - 08.51pm
1080's target species in NZ may be for "mammalian" species, but it was initially designed as an insecticide, so it's also very effective at killing the front end of the food chain too - whether from primary posoining (i.e. freshwater crayfish eating them up like delicious desert cubes) from chaffage or crumbs splintering as it hits trees and rocks and spills into waterways from aerial dumps, or through secondary poisoning from insects devouring dead birds, possums, stoats, deer, etc...

It appears as though most of the pro-1080 research is done by DoC, AHB, Landcare etc with now some work being carried out by Uni grads and postgrads; the very people that either currently work in the industry or uni students who want to work in the industry, so one would assume their peer reviews will all lean towards a similar paradigm. But not everyone is tarned with the same brush - there are many examples of Uni students and people in the industry that work at DoC, Forest and Bird that (discreetly) disagree with current practices.

Given more public presssure, raised awareness, more scientific research illustrating the longterm ecosystem impacts (both negative and positive) of using 1080, I truly hope NZ agrees to implement alternative solutions, and further regulate (heavily) any poisoning operations.

I think in 5-10years time we will be looking back on the last 30 years and cringeing.
Ayla McherronThursday 3rd May 2012 - 07.06pm
well when doc are the last people on EARTH because the rest of us have been killed from drinking it they will finally go "oh it was 1080 that killed everything "
Ayla McherronThursday 3rd May 2012 - 07.08pm
no it does not kill them it murders them
birdscantalkWednesday 9th December 2009 - 05.45pm
Congratulations Jamie on being the first anti to actually start reading the research, rather than just dismissing it out of hand.
Now the subtitle to the 12 year old report you quote from is “ Review and Priorities for Research” its agenda was exactly that ..to review the existing research and identify the priorities (ie holes in the info) for further research. Now you identify invertebrates as being a concern for you, and this report also identifies invertebrates as needing further research. However if I can cherry pick a single sentence it would be..” “No impacts were detected in the numbers of amphipods, ants, beetles, collembolans, millipedes, mites, slugs, snails, spiders, or cave weta caught in pitfall traps after two 1080-poisoning operations...”. For further research on invertebrates I invite you to peruse the Lincoln University site ‘Impacts of 1080 on Taonga Species’. there you will find ‘Invertebrates that eat plants and fungi” and ‘Predatory Invertebrates’.
Now your question (or rather statement) re: How can we be using this stuff if there are still soooooo many questions to be answered? I would like to refer you to a eco-system level report “ Ecological Consequences of Toxin Use for Mammalian Pest Control in New Zealand-An Overview” by John Innes and Gary Barker, two scientists singled out be Whiting-OKeefe for exlemptory research and lack of (in his opinion!) bias. Basically what they say is that the net benefit to bio-diversity (which means EVERYTHING forests, invertebrates, native birds) hugely outweighs any perceived cost.

All these links and more available at www.waiheke.tv
1080isbadFriday 18th December 2009 - 12.32am
birdscantalk, iv looked at your link, now can you look at mine http://www.stop1080poison.com/
SamWednesday 9th December 2009 - 08.14pm
you still didnt answer my question on "whats wrong with using other methods". These other methods as written by others could lower the pest numbers the same as 1080 does but without poisoning everything in its path. plus other benefits would come out of it like employment etc. Why would you possibly not agree with that?! that way everyones happy. Your so concerned about your birds, yet 1080 is potentially killing them
AnonymousWednesday 9th December 2009 - 08.33pm
Using Traps alone for pest control and species protection would require vast amounts of resources in form of manpower and traps. In some of the rat controlled areas we use stations that are laid 25 meters apart in lines 25 meter apart. You can imagine what that means if it was up-scaled to anything more than a few hundred hectares here and there? The oppossum formula is bit of a smoke screen because as far as species conservation is concerned it is the rats that are the true menace and despite Zane only seeing one in 17 years I can assure you that they rule our forests and will devour alive any bird, egg or fledgling in their territory.
AnonymousThursday 10th December 2009 - 06.48pm
I think in 5-10years time we will be looking back on the last 30 years and giving thanks that DoC and thousands of NZ's got out and did the hard work of species conservation and instead of spending their free time killing animals actually saved the last fragments of bio-diversity left on this special, magical and wild land.
timThursday 10th December 2009 - 07.39pm
having a stab at hunters anonymous
lostlegendThursday 10th December 2009 - 08.08pm
birdscantalk, if 1080 is a primarily a mammalian toxin can you answer me this one simple question, why is it that in the list of non target species at risk from the 1080 drop in the north of the blue mountains 09/07/08 just over 75% were birds?

Data taken from teh ERMA website

Blue Mountains North

significant species identified as potentially at risk
Common Name
Long-tailed Bat
NZ Falcon
Kereru
Kakariki species
Yellowhead
Bellbird
Brown creeper
Fantail
Grey Warbler
Kingfisher
Long-tailed Cuckoo
Rifleman
Shining Cuckoo
Silvereye
South Island Fernbird
South Island Robin
Tomtit
Tui
Ruru
Australasian harrier
Shags
Paradise shelduck
Banded dotterel
Black billed gull
Red billed gull
Banded dotterel
Oystercatcher
Black fronted tern
Mallard
exotic finches
Black backed gull
Blackbird
Thrush
Starling
Red Deer
Fallow Deer
Feral Pigs
Feral Sheep
Feral Goats
Cats
Ferrets
Stoats
Rats

I have had the privilege to hunt the Blue Mountains on many occasions over the years. I hunted an area of the Blue Mountains in the middle to late 2000, There was a aerial 1080 drop in this area in 2001, I then hunted the same area in the start of 2002.

The difference was astounding, the plentiful birdsong and graceful fallow deer were gone, left was the evidence of death. Deer bones littered the thick pepperwoods near the hidden streams I didn’t spot a single possum bone or carcass. I’m not saying there weren’t any possums killed, maybe they are better at crawling away and dying in a painfully slow way in better hiding places than the deer, all I’m saying is I didn’t see any. What had once been an enjoyable place to hunt now felt like a funeral home where you just didn’t want to hang around in.

I’m yet to read the latest report on the most recent aerial 1080 drop in the Blue Mountains, but from what I have read they used deer repellent on the latest drop, I really hope that there is a better strike rate on possums this time and that the estimated kill rate of deer drops from 90% to a more acceptable level of 0%. In my opinion if DOC wants to use 1080 to target possums, and that’s what they keep telling us they are doing, use pellet bags stapled to trees or maybe the tree huggers will get up in arms because you are hurting the tree.

For those of you out there that are going to tell me that most of the wilderness is inaccessible to foot traffic and it’s not efficient for people to walk placing the bags this way. All I can say is a helicopter can drop of a person laying pellet bags in a valley it would take days to walk to just as easily as they can drop off a hunter in that same area.

If you place the pellet bags by hand at least you know all the bags will be in a place possums can get to and they won’t end up in the forests water supply.

And that’s my thoughts on 1080
calllumSunday 1st April 2012 - 09.00am
Well your comment is incorrect because we want to kill the deer's. They eat our native plants, also the list is wrong because you stated some animals that we wanted to be affected by 1080.
Ayla McherronThursday 3rd May 2012 - 07.10pm
get your head out of your ass and open your eyes u asshole
Ayla McherronThursday 3rd May 2012 - 07.11pm
you forgot dogs but i get your point
SamFriday 11th December 2009 - 08.33am
We could also be looking back in 10 or so years looking at the bad affects we didnt know about that 1080 could caused
Jamie CarleFriday 11th December 2009 - 11.31am
Other Councils obviously worry about 1080 - copy and pastte the following links http://huttnz.co.nz/2009/08/08/upper-hutt-1080-drop-closes-water-supply/

Raise awareness against aerial 1080 dumps - copy and paste the following link http://www.transitiontowns.org.nz/node/2168; http://www.openureyes.org.nz/blog/?q=node/1359

This 1080 issue is not just a NZ issue, Tasmania (Australia) are faced with similar debates - copy and paste the link http://www.redbubble.com/people/cradlemountain/journal/4026557-why-i-pick-up-road-kill-in-tasmania

I say ban the stuff entirely.

And anonymous, hunters play a fundamental part in game management. I'm not saying hunters can do it all on their own as there have been case studies showing hunter's can't manage it on their own, however an integrated game management plan - as is being advocated for by various organisations - is a good start.

The tahr management plan is showing great promise at keeping a check on animals, keeping recreational users happy, and providing opportunities for commercial guiding. The fiordland wapiti foundation is doing some excellent conservation work with the wapiti herd in the wilderness area - culling out red deer (reducing quantity and improving quality) of the wapiti herd. The Kaweka's / Kaimanawas is another classic example of game management where DoC and recreational hunters, and commercial hunters work together to achieve conservation objectives. So hunters do play a large role in env. management.
birdscantalkSaturday 12th December 2009 - 12.01am
Other Councils obviously worry about 1080

No..,, actually Maintaining a healthy forest in Wellington’s water catchment areas is the main reason for an 11,000 hectare possum control operation by Greater Wellington (GW) north of Upper Hutt this winter.
Most of the land that is being treated is the forested hills around the Western Hutt and Eastern Hutt rivers at the southern end of the Tararua Ranges.
GW Divisional Manager Water Supply, Parks
birdscantalkSaturday 12th December 2009 - 12.03am
Other Councils obviously worry about 1080

No..,, actually Maintaining a healthy forest in Wellington’s water catchment areas is the main reason for an 11,000 hectare possum control operation by Greater Wellington (GW) north of Upper Hutt this winter.
Most of the land that is being treated is the forested hills around the Western Hutt and Eastern Hutt rivers at the southern end of the Tararua Ranges.
GW Divisional Manager Water Supply, Parks
birdscantalkSaturday 12th December 2009 - 12.08am
go here to get the full story

www.gw.govt.nz/Possum-control-operation-to-help-maintain-water-quality/

PeopleSufferTooSaturday 12th December 2009 - 04.41am
Birdscantalk

"1080 is a poison and is toxic to humans and pets, particularly dogs. However, it has been used in New Zealand since the 1950s and there isn’t a single recorded case of a person dying from 1080 poisoning. "

There may be no reported deaths in NZ as indicated below in the "fully story" you link to however there are reported illnesses and known human affects.

Here is evidence of suffering by Grant Philpott

http://www.erma.govt.nz/news-events/focus/1080/hearings/addinfo64.pdf

A Poison Warning from the Alberta Province of Canada

TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION:
Sodium monofluoroacetate (1080) poisoning results from fluoroacetate changing into fluorocitrate within cell mitochondria. Poisoning is characterized by a symptom-free period of 0.5 to 2 hours or longer between ingestion and onset of symptoms (nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and hyperactive behaviour leading to convulsions). In monkeys, and presumably in man, effects on the heart are the primary cause of death. The first symptoms of poisoning are changes of heart sounds and premature, weak contractions. No effective antidote is known, but treating the symptoms is effective in approximately 50% of human cases.”
http://pr-rp.pmra-arla.gc.ca/PR_SOL/pr_web.ve1?p_ukid=3252
PeopleSufferTooSaturday 12th December 2009 - 04.43am
Bridscantalk - Some more science
Computed tomography demonstration of brain damage due to acute sodium monofluoroacetate poisoning Author: Trabes J Source: Journal of toxicology. Clinical toxicology, v.20, n.1, (1983 Mar), p.85 ISSN: 0731-3810

"The case reported developed an acute brain syndrome, including cerebellar signs, shortly after the ingestion of sodium monofluoroacetate. After insiduous improvement of the clinical symptoms, the patient remained with an "end-stage" cerebellar ataxia for 18 months following the acute intoxication. The development of brain atrophy, proven by computed tomography, is considered to represent a direct influence of sodium monofluoroacetate on the brain and to reflect the unique disturbances in cellular metabolism of glucose."

----

Sherley (2004)
"Reports describing human cases of fluoroacetate poisoning identify anxiety, irritability, verbosity, agitation, hyperactivity, rapid heart rate, confusion, epigastric pain, headache, nausea and vomiting, faecal incontinence, respiratory distress, hyperaesthesia, muscular twitches, muscular pain, tetanic spasms, cardiac irregularity, gradual loss of alertness leading to coma, epileptiform convulsions, tonic convulsions, periods of flacidity, periods of lucidity between convulsions, and partial paralysis"
(Gajdusek and Luther, 1950; Peters, 1952; Brockman
et al., 1955; McTaggart, 1970; Reigart et al., 1975;
Trabes et al., 1983; Chung, 1984; Chi et al., 1996,
1999; Robinson et al., 2002).

References:
Brockman, J.L., McDowell, A.V., Leeds, W.G., 1955. Fatal poisoning with sodium fluoroacetate. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 159,
1529–1532.
Chi, C.H., Chen, K.W., Chan, S.H., Wu, M.H., Huang, J.J., 1996. Clinical presentation and prognostic factors in sodium monofluoroacetate intoxication. J. Toxicol. Clin. Toxicol. 34, 707–712.
Chung, H.M., 1984. Acute renal failure caused by acute monofluoroacetate poisoning. Vet. Human Toxicol. 26 (Suppl. 2), 29–32.
Gajdusek, D.C., Luther, G., 1950. Fluoroacetate poisoning: a review and report of a case. Am. J. Dis. Child. 79, 310–320.
McTaggart, D.R., 1970. Poisoning due to sodium fluoroacetate (“1080”). Med. J. Aust. 2, 641–642.
Reigart, J.R., Brueggeman, J.L., Keil, J.E., 1975. Sodium fluoroacetate poisoning. Am. J. Dis. Child. 129, 1224–1226.
Trabes, J., Rason, N., Avrahami, E., 1983. Computed tomography demonstration of brain damage due to acute sodium monofluoroacetate poisoning. J. Toxicol. Clin. Toxicol. 20, 85–
Robinson, R.F., Griffith, J.R., Wolowich, W.R., Nahata, M.C., 2002. Intoxication with sodium monofluoroacetate (compound 1080). Vet. Human Toxicol. 44, 93–95.
Sherley, M., (2004) The traditional categories of fluroacetate poisoning signs and symptoms belie substantial underlying similarities

Really what everyone is calling for is a halt on this inexorable, genocidal approach to control, to open the issue to public debate and explore all options. Is that too much to ask birdscantalk?

PeopleSufferToo

birdsuffermoreSaturday 12th December 2009 - 03.47pm
hi peoplesuffertoo and lostlegend (who makes up your user names??)

It’s great to see that you guys are finally using ERMA as a resource for research into 1080. As you will be realising it’s a great source of unbiased information and great library of research and documents. Such as this one by toxicologist Dr CT Easton

“The effects of 1080, including the sub-lethal effects, have been studied in animals as surrogates for humans for 40 - 50 years. There are recent publications from NZ researchers as well as a wealth of international literature. Therefore the acute toxicity of large doses as well as the sublethal effects of lower doses are known and these include biochemical effects.
For example early publications on the sub-lethal effects of 1080 are found in the veterinary literature. These publications noted the effects in livestock that have been browsing poisonous plants containing fluoroacetate over a period of time.

Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals (EDC’s) are classified by toxicologists as chemicals that have oestrogenic and anti-oestrogenic activity through binding to endocrine receptors. EDC’s are synthetic chemicals that block normal oestrogenic activity eg: dioxins, PCB’s and DDT.
Receptor studies on 1080 and fluorocitrate conducted and published (and part funded by the NZDA) showed THAT 1080 IS NOT OESTROGENIC AND LACKS EDC EFFECTS.

1080 is classified as non-mutagenic based on the results of 3 standard toxicity tests: The Ames test, the mouse micronucleus test and the mouse lymphoma assay.

HENCE 1080 IS NOT MUTAGENIC AND NOT A CLASSIC EDC.

peoplesuffertoo I am confused as to why you are posting the symptoms of acute 1080 poisoning when you agree that not one human has ever been poisoned let alone died from 1080 poisoning in NZ?
PeopleSufferTooSaturday 12th December 2009 - 10.49pm
Birdsuffermore

I quoted text from the link www.gw.govt.nz/Possum-control-operation-to-help-maintain-water-quality/ given by birdscantalk

Philpott experienced symptoms from 1080 – so no I was NOT agreeing that humans have not affected.

My point stands – there should be a moratorium on these drops until more research and debate is carried out; and other control options have been investigated.

For example A review of the potential of fertility control to manage brushtail possums in New Zealand. http://www.berrymaninstitute.org/journal/spring2009/weihong_sp09.pdf

PeopleSufferToo
aliensatemybrainSaturday 12th December 2009 - 04.20pm
Hi Jamie
I checked out openureyes.org as you suggested...I'm really impressed that 1080 denial is also being celebrated by people who think that 9/11 was a controlled demolition orchestrated by Mossad/CIA, that climate change is a hoax, that the swine-flu epedemic is a plot by US bio-tech/industrial/military complex and who like to keep up to date with latest in Illuminati New World Order conspiracy news.
what did you do in 5 years at Lincoln University????
JamieMonday 21st December 2009 - 04.44pm
Aliensatemybrain, it's no wonder this 1080 debate has surfaced on openureyes - a forum that obviously feeds off of conspiracies - because according to the many poorly conducted DoC research, lack of stastically valid scientific evidence pro-claiming to create net overall benefits to our ecosystem, poorly conducted methodolgies, apparent funding insest with Govt, DoC and crown research insitutes, and lack of scientific research illustrating the "negligible impact" of 1080 to long term human health and procreation etc etc it has all the ingredients of a smelly fish recipe.

The whole thing stinks
PPPSunday 13th December 2009 - 04.33am
The debate continues:

Kiwi Party Hails Taupo 1080 Decision
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0910/S00065.htm

Realism Hailed on Possum Numbers
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0911/S00324.htm

PPP (Possum Poisoning Politics)
StephanSunday 13th December 2009 - 09.50am
To all of you claiming no one has ever been poisoned by 1080 in NZ, this article from The Press newspaper might be of interest-amazing how the agencies such as DOC and ERMA that are controlling the use of this lethal poison havent heard of cases such as this-or have they ?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/3097688/Hunters-family-in-1080-battle
AnonymousSunday 13th December 2009 - 11.27am
hi Stepnan,
so 40 years ago a part time possum hunter who normally used cyanide to kill possums hooks into a jar of jam heavily laced with 1080 poison and dies. If it had been a Coke bottle fill of Roundup would you advocate the banning of Roundup, and given that many hunters are tragically killed every year by 'friendly fire' would you also advocate the total ban on hunting?
StephanSunday 13th December 2009 - 02.48pm
Anonymous
My point is that every hearing held to discuss the use and control of 1080, and every pro 1080 group brings up the "fact" that no one has died from poisoning by 1080.Obviously this is incorrect and these groups have not investigated fully the history of 1080 and its effects.If they werent aware of a death that is listed in a coroners report since 1966 what other information are they unaware of?
As for friendly fire accidents and the storage of roundup, or 1080 in coke bottles and jam jars i would be advocating greater training for anyone dealing with them.
But rest assured if someone was trying to spray my drinking water catchment with roundup as they are with 1080 i would not stand by quietly, as i am sure you wouldnt either.
aliensatemybrainSunday 13th December 2009 - 04.18pm
ahhhh..did it never occur to you to wunda why this 40 year old death was suddenly news? maybe because the original cause of death was listed as encephalitis ( a kind of inflamation of the brain) and was only in August of this year that the cause of death was changed to 1080....still I don't suppose that will stop you from suspecting DoC as the Mordor of evil and cover-up.
As to water, I quote Zane Cameron ..one of your team...about 10 posts up "Yes of course 1080 is biodegradable. And survey's have shown that it does not keep in reticulated water. 1080 was detected in waterway's for a short period (24hr's) and concentration was below ministry of health guidelines of 2ug/L "

Yes of course 1080 is biodegradable. And survey's have shown that it does not keep in reticulated water. 1080 was detected in waterway's for a short period (24hr's) and concentration was below ministry of health guidelines of 2ug/L
Jamie CarleWednesday 16th December 2009 - 06.21pm
So I take it alien that you've got no problem drinking water from a catchment that has acted like a big 1080 collecting bowl? And would you honestly advise your pregnant wife to drink it?
aliensatemybrainSunday 13th December 2009 - 04.26pm
ohh by the way ...Mr Lostlegend ... the Blue Mountain drop, deer mortality less than 10% due to deer repellant, researched
PPPSunday 13th December 2009 - 08.01pm
and ithe debate continues again - yesterday!
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0912/S00168.htm
PPP (Possum Poisoning Politics)
PPPSunday 13th December 2009 - 08.27pm
and more from
Coromandel board votes to ban 1080
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1
PPPSunday 13th December 2009 - 08.28pm
Coromandel board votes to ban 1080
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1
PPPSunday 13th December 2009 - 08.29pm
Kaikoura mayor wants 1080 ban 2 Dec 09
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1
aliensatemybrainMonday 14th December 2009 - 10.18am
did I mention that the opossum strike was 100% at Blue Mountain (Otago) the deer mortality less that 10% as a result of DoC research and developed deer repelant and that all the hunters down here are totally stoked by the outcome?.
oh by the way check out these guys: www.waiheke.tv ..heaps of cool vids, links...the latest one to a Scoop article about some guy who records bird call before and after 1080 drops!
oh and like Jamie suggests check out that Transition Towns link he posted and see a total MAULING of the anti freaks up in Coro. by some guy called everth, Very Interesting!
Jamie CarleMonday 14th December 2009 - 12.07pm
Guys I appreciate your comments and I will respond later this week. I'm currently at a remote site in WA with limited connectivity - but please continue to fire away with your comments.
Research neededTuesday 15th December 2009 - 03.53am
Even Scientists call for more research: (Science media centre 13 November 2009)

Associate Professor Dianne Brunton, Director of the Ecology and Conservation group Massey Uni "It is a field where ongoing open research is important. Not all sites are suitable for 1080 or other poisons especially if they are close to human habitation or require repeated applications over long time periods."

Dr Sean Weaver Senior lecturer Envornmental Student Vic Uni "Some of the research that has been conducted on 1080 has been poorly designed and as a result have not been able to provide definitive results to several questions concerning the safety of aerial 1080 operations with respect to non-target organisms including humans."

Doug Armstrong Wildlife Econology Professior Massey uni - "My impression is that the research is fairly limited given the importance of the issue.

Prof Charles Eason, Wildlife Management, Lincoln Uni "More effective, safer alternatives to 1080 for the control of possums, predators, rodents and rabbits are required now to reduce over reliance on 1080 and provide greater flexibilty."
youhavwaytoomuchtimeWednesday 16th December 2009 - 04.15pm
birdscantalk, aliensatemybrain........PATHETIC! Go get a life.
1080isbadThursday 17th December 2009 - 08.31pm
We should apply the "precautionary principle" as advocated by the RMA 1991 and ban the use of 1080 until there is sufficient evidence that it's net overall benefits to native flora and fauna are long term, sustainable, and that the benefits outweigh any costs associated to things like public safety, public perception, public trust, tourism, traditional/cultural values, aesthetical values, NZ's "clean green" brand
1080isbadThursday 17th December 2009 - 08.37pm
The RMA advocates that in the absense of facts on 1080's net benefits, we should employ a conservative approach (or precautionary principle) when making decisions about sanctioning the use of 1080 across new zealand's land.

The fact is, we are too gun-ho about blanket dumps of 1080...
1080isbadThursday 17th December 2009 - 08.39pm
in the absense of sufficient evidence prooving that 1080 has net positive benefits for flora and fauna biodiversity, we should ban 1080's use.
kiwiFriday 18th December 2009 - 02.07pm
love the music clips - go grassroots new zealand - keep it coming people!!
birdscantalkSunday 20th December 2009 - 02.22pm
hello Research needed
below are the extended comments you chose to exclude from your post:

Associate Professor Dianne Brunton, Director of the Ecology and Conservation group, Massey University, comments:

“As with most conservation issues there are no silver bullets. I see 1080 as one tool (of many) in a very difficult fight against invasive pests and predators. 1080 is not the only way but it is very effective.
“The alternative of no control would be disastrous for our native species – rodents and stoats simply wipe out native birds and reptiles and invertebrates

Conservation Biology Associate Professor Mick Clout, University of Auckland, comments:

“[1080] does not persist in the environment. 1080 is a natural compound that breaks down quickly and it is found naturally in plants as a plant defense against herbivores. The compound does not accumulate in the food chain or stay around, making it more environmentally friendly. Having said that, it is highly toxic to a wide range of animals, so needs to be used properly. It’d be a real shame if we lost it.”
JamieSunday 20th December 2009 - 07.04pm
birdscantalk, no one here is advocating for "no control" as an alternative to 1080 for controlling possums as you've insinuated with Dianne Burton's second sentence...

Everyone is in agreeance that possums, stoats, ferrets, wiesels and DoC workers need to be carefully managed.

Where our disagreement lies is with the widespread abUSE; blatant disregard for property boundaries; tonnes of 1080 poison uncontrollably dropped into rivers and streams when aerially dumped; the dumping 1080 toxin into our "clean green env"; and the way in which aerially applied pellets kill non-target species (many of which are natives such as tomtits, robins, moreporks, harriers, pukekos, riflemans, grey warbler, weka, silvereye, kaka, kea etc) as touched on in various reports such as:

Peterson et al (1994) Possum management in NZ. Office of Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment

Spurr (1979) A theoretical assessment of the ability of bird species to recover from an imposed reduction in numbers with particular reference to 1080 poisoning. NZ Journal of Ecology 2:46-63

Powesland et al (1998) Evaluating the impacts of 1080 possum control operations on North Island robins, North Island tomtits and moreporks at Pureora - preliminary results. Science for Conservation 74: 1-22

Powesland et al (1999) Impacts of aerial 1080 possum control operations on North Island robins and moreporks at Pureora in 1997 and 1998. Science for Conservation 133: 1-20

Powesland et al (2000) Mortality of North Island tomtits caused by aerial 1080 possum control operations, 1997-98, Pureora Forest Park. NZ Journal of Ecology 24(2): 161-168

Nugent (2004) Fallow deer deaths during aerial 1080 poisoning of possums in Blue Mountains, Otago, NZ. NZ Journal of Zoology 31:185-192


At the very least, aerial dumping of poison's should be brought to a halt until there is sufficient, accurate, and non-biased evidence to suggest there is a net positive impact to our forest ecosystems. And perhaps in the meantime ground-laid 1080 (and strictly controlled ground-laid brodificoum) could be used in it's place as the lesser of the two evils.

The DoC-sponsored studies conducted in the past appear to be biased; lack appropriate statistical methodologies'; misrepresent findings; and reference other poorly conducted studies to back up their argument.

According to Whiting O'keefe's report, this is a case where bad science references bad science, which has led to creation of one giant rumour... reinforced by more propaganda by DoC and Forest and Bird..
AnonymousSunday 20th December 2009 - 03.55pm
check out the guys at

www.waiheke.tv
another anti 1080 opponentSunday 20th December 2009 - 08.51pm
www.enufisenuf.co.nz
zane cameronSunday 27th December 2009 - 05.13pm
How can I vote against aerial dumping of 1080?
When the only option is to vote against the use of 1080 (poison) in nz.

I only want to ban aereal drops and careless use of this poison not the whole use altogether.

It seems to me that the only option is to ban it out right or not . Which in my opinion isnt really right , becouse this stuff does work, when used controlably.

poletitions need to know exactly what people want!!

just a thought !
what do you reckon birds cant talk ect.

Jamie CarleSunday 3rd January 2010 - 03.44am
Heya Zane,

You have a valid point - to try find some sort of middle ground. And there is a lot of momentum building from members of the public to put a halt to aerial dumps of 1080 full stop. Most would agree that ground based control poses less risks than aerial dumps.

However, members of the public are yet to be convinced of the so called "net positive outcomes" of 1080 in general being used in NZ... The Whiting O'Keefe(s) surmised DoC's indoctrinated studies as merely propaganda dressed up in science.

I still believe this toxin should be banned until there is sufficient evidence to proove it's net positive benefits, particularly when there are other cleaner, greener alterantives available.
zaneMonday 4th January 2010 - 10.43pm
Yeah fair enough.
MattThursday 4th March 2010 - 03.46pm
I can't believe DOC is still using 1080. the truth is there right infront of them and yet they just ignore it. they call themselves the department of conservation and they're killing the very things they're supposed to save!
ChrisThursday 11th March 2010 - 12.33pm
I live in a DROP ZONE.THIS IS what it is like. Coverup and lies of the True conditions. Punishment if you ask. Lies if you ask. I know of many people who have become so sick they thought they would die. Takes years for them to come out of it.
Suicides and attempted suicides with people drinking water directly from these zones.
Bizzare and eratic behavour
Many empty cows after previous drop. People devastated from loss of animals. Medical Health Officers uncomunicative. A
farmerSaturday 24th April 2010 - 07.48pm
would you rather a few empty cows that 1080 may have had an affect on. or would you prefer that your cows get T.B. If more then 3% of all new zealands dairy heards are infected with T.B no more milk or beef can be exported out of new zealand. doesnt take a genious to figure out what that would do to our economy. Considering that already 2% of our heards have T.B I dont think we can afford to stop using 1080.
Ayla McherronThursday 3rd May 2012 - 07.17pm
I would think you would be fighting againsted it 1080 affects live stock think about your dogs and the ones you have lost the ones that did not deserve to die
Cameron FaheySaturday 20th March 2010 - 05.43pm
Hi Jamie
I find it funny that big countrys such as the usa and britian have out lawed 1080 ages ago but we still use it in fact over 90% of the worlds 1080 is used in NZ.Anyhting that can kill an animal the size of a deer with just a mouth full must have some nasty chemical in it that must be affecting the enviroment. when agent orange came out they said that was safe to drink as they are now saying with 1080 we all know how toxic that ended up to be.I bet if you gave a doc worker a glass of 1080 they wouldnt drink it!!!!!!!
DavidSunday 9th May 2010 - 08.39pm
Birdscantalk needs to get his head above his waist and look around,i have hunted in the haurangis for the last twenty years.once i could go into the differnt river areas and get a deer no problem and hear plenty of birds singing but then they dropped this toxic posion 1080 for the last two years i have not heard a bird singing in any of the river or bush in the haurangis and also no bloody deer.
Bradley Hamilton RiggsSunday 23rd May 2010 - 09.30pm
Hello mountain man. I am a mate of Curley's from masterton. Iam currently trapping in the Ruahines. I would like to publicly THANK YOU for being a loud voice against 1080!!! You would be absolutly amazed in the difference in bird life in the Ruahines vs the Tararuas (there is none) One has had 1080 the other has not!!! I have to travel weekly to the Ruahines and live in a tent. WHY because i don't even get the chance to control numbers in the Tararuas it's too easy to throw 1080 out of a machine. At $98 a kilo there are guys (and maybe girls) wanting to trap this block also. Money brings control And like i said people are obviously prepared to do it thanks to entrapeneurs like Basically Bush. I know keen men who have trapped in the past but have given up because they don't know when there work will be gone. Because there is possums the trappers work and because there is deer the choppers work. With this control what does DOC pay NOTHING and people like me get paid in hard economic times!!!
HillyMonday 26th July 2010 - 03.32pm
You see on the news every now and again peple getting convicted of cruelty to animals. Last one that got a lot of media coverge was a Tongan bloke who smacked his dog over the head as he intended to eat it. The media made him look like a real prick.
Anyway could you imagine the massive amounts of animal suffering induced by aerial 1080 drops. Watched a dog die from secondary poisoning. Scared the shit out of us.
If people could be exposed to the sights, sounds and smells of an animal dying in this manner............. well it would make even the hardcore 1080 supporter wake up to this wretched shits flaws.
SamTuesday 30th November 2010 - 10.59am
I agree with most of you, 1080 is a disgrace. A few Regional Councils have voted against it, but nothing will really change until DoC and the Animal Health Board are reined in by those in charge - central government. I just found this on the web:

http://www.unitedfuture.org.nz/peter-dunne-on-1080-poison/
(copy and paste it into your web browser)

I have voted UnitedFuture since they incorporated the Outdoor Recreation Party a few years ago. They are the only ones amongst those turkeys sticking up for hunting and fishing. I can't find any other polly aprt from Peter Dunne, calling for a ban on 1080 So I will be voting UnitedFuture next year, to get rid of this evil stuff.

1080 has to go!!
JamieWednesday 1st December 2010 - 01.58am
Thanks Sam, will add the link into the above post. Cheers =)
paulmy winnieThursday 31st October 2013 - 11.14pm
nobody likes you!!
nickFriday 3rd December 2010 - 11.55am
I know this is a hunting blog, and the whole country would be happy if hunters could kill every possum, rat and stoat in new zealand. The fact is 1080 can get a better pest kill rate than any other method that has been used here. A bounty on possums seems an ok idea, but there is no incentive to get rid of rats - and there's a lot more of them. They've used brodifcaoum around the Wellington region for maybe a decade now. There are higher populations of tui, wood pigeon and rata trees are now recovering. Whats so bad about those results?

Jamie have you had a good read of those studies you listed. You have to look at the overall benefits. For instance Powesland et al (1998) it quotes:
"The high nesting success in the treatment areas during 1996/97 (3.7 fledglings/pair) (Powlesland et al. 1998) and 1997/98 (3.8 fledglings/pair) resulted in there being greater numbers of robins in both study areas one year after each 1080 operation than before. By August 1997 in the Tahae study area, the population had increased from 28 to 36, a 28% increase (Powlesland et al.1998). Similarly, by September 1998 in the Waimanoa study area, the number of robins had increased from 35 to 48, a 37% increase."
baxter wilsonFriday 10th December 2010 - 04.45pm
hi just wondering if you know wher to get those bugger 1080 stickers from,just to display a bit ov support on ya truck.cheers
JamieMonday 13th December 2010 - 02.30am
Baxter,

These stickers come from Kate Winters, I think.

Kate's email address is Kate Winters [email protected] or [email protected]

Cheers
GeorgeTuesday 19th March 2013 - 11.06pm
It's funny because I'm only 15 and I have better grammar then the majority of these comments. Pathetic!
haggisMonday 29th April 2013 - 05.09am
hi guys , just read these posts on 1080 , just wondering what the actual rate of TB is and how many possums have been diagnosed ? over here in oz they are protected and you will go to court if you get caught killing a possum . just remember NZ has probably the best wilderness areas left
paulmy winnieThursday 31st October 2013 - 11.12pm
get a real name haggis
1080sucksFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.13am
hi
heartbeatFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.14am
wassup?
1080sucksFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.15am
nothin much just chillen yo
1080sucksFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.15am
hbu
heartbeatFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.16am
nm either just loving lyf
heartbeatFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.17am
whats 1080?
heartbeatFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.18am
is it like an energy drink or wat?
1080sucksFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.19am
bahahahahahahahahaha
1080sucksFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.19am
omg u like made my day
lol
1080sucksFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.20am
1080 is a poison lethal to all that breathes air
heartbeatFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.21am
oh my days
heartbeatFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.22am
wellthats just lyk cynide
heartbeatFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.22am
so whys everyone so serious
williamFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.24am
oppa gangnam style
williamFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.25am
oppa gangnam oppa gangnam style
williamFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.25am
oppa gangnam style
williamFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.25am
oppa gangnam style
williamFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.25am
oppa gangnam style
williamFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.25am
oppa gangnam style
williamFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.25am
oppa gangnam style
williamFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.25am
oppa gangnam style
williamFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.25am
oppa gangnam style
williamFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.26am
oppa gangnam style
williamFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.26am
oppa gangnam style
williamFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.26am
oppa gangnam style
jennaFriday 7th June 2013 - 05.26am
0i william dont be a faggot
keith johnsonMonday 24th October 2016 - 03.50am
I have my csl in 1080. I am a operator and handle the stuff. I have been there and done that . I have seen first hand the damage it can do. I say BAN 1080......

Leave a Comment

Your Name
Your Email
Your Comment
Notify me of replies
< Return to article listings
Site designed and developed by Loop Solutions