Forest & Bird Topic: pro-1080 poster

TrakaBat on "pro-1080 poster"

TrakaBat — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 09:48:57 +0000

Bounties and the fur-days did not save this rata forest, Mountainman.

MountainMan on "pro-1080 poster"

MountainMan — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 13:24:30 +0000

Here's the report link again <a href="http://www.kaka1080.co.nz/aerial_monofluoroacetate.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.kaka1080.co.nz/aerial_monofluoroacetate.pdf</a> <a href="http://www.kaka1080.co.nz/aerial_monofluoroacetate.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.kaka1080.co.nz/aerial_monofluoroacetate.pdf</a> <a href="http://www.kaka1080.co.nz/aerial_monofluoroacetate.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.kaka1080.co.nz/aerial_monofluoroacetate.pdf</a>

MountainMan on "pro-1080 poster"

MountainMan — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 13:22:54 +0000

AA can you paste the links or references of these recent studies illustrating the net positive benefits? I'd like to read them - stop avoiding the question The importance of that 2007 appraisal report is that it goes into detail about the (many) poorly conducted science studies dating dating back to the early 90s that underpin alot of DoC's policy and management decisions... There's a lot of misleading interpretations based on poorly conducted science claiming to be "fact" in many of those pre 2007 reports. And if you are truly open minded about dumping 1080 in our environment, then I suggest you read it..

auckland anne on "pro-1080 poster"

auckland anne — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 20:24:13 +0000

Must've been a lucky guess of mine that it was written and published in 2007, eh? If you want to convince someone, you don't go for a document that long and dry (it hasn't even got pretty pictures for gods' sake) and written and published a few years ago in this field doesn't help. This discussion is going nowhere but round and round in circles. Time for this party to call my input to a finish and get back to concentrating on positives. Too much negative and angst is definitely not good for a person - I seem to remember someone else said that about the 1080 debate actually. Celebrating some of the very good things happening in NZ conservation is far too important to let negativity get in the way. I suppose it comes down to if you see the glass half full of tonic, or half empty! I wish you well in creating jobs for hunters...Hunting to get rid of all our pests is gonna be one hell of a job!

MountainMan on "pro-1080 poster"

MountainMan — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 10:17:07 +0000

AA, what did you think of the following report? <a href="http://www.kaka1080.co.nz/aerial_monofluoroacetate.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.kaka1080.co.nz/aerial_monofluoroacetate.pdf</a>

MountainMan on "pro-1080 poster"

MountainMan — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 09:47:39 +0000

Pardon AA?? Can you please insert all references that illustrate the "various" ecological "benefits" of aerial 1080 post the 2007 report? Did you read the whole thing AA - front to back?? What did you think?

auckland anne on "pro-1080 poster"

auckland anne — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 05:54:58 +0000

And I'd have thought you'd be one of the first people to say "Don't believe all you read". That's why observing anecdotal evidence is more compelling in this case. And it's being handed to you on a plate in other threads on this very website...

MountainMan on "pro-1080 poster"

MountainMan — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 10:37:45 +0000

Just so I can read up on the latest research illustrating net benefits from aerial 1080, can you provide references?

auckland anne on "pro-1080 poster"

auckland anne — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 23:02:26 +0000

Your reference above to kaka was done in 2007. There's been more research done on kaka since then, showing the benefits to their population sizes in certain areas.. Seems like there's plenty of evidence to me about the net benefits to native spp (both plant and animal) from aerial 1080 drops. If you don't trust the numbers-count figures, (comparing population numbers before and then after a 1080 drop) then just look to anecdotal evidence like hearing increased birdsong or seeing more lush vegetation in some cases not too long after a 1080 drop. Plenty on youtube, but getting out there and seeing the net benefits in the flesh is more telling. I mean, if it were really so evil, how's it survived as a method here for as long as it has? It's had plenty of people looking at it closely enough!

MountainMan on "pro-1080 poster"

MountainMan — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 03:27:22 +0000

Alternatives to aerial 1080 <a href="http://thegrafboys.org/alternative.html" rel="nofollow">http://thegrafboys.org/alternative.html</a>

MountainMan on "pro-1080 poster"

MountainMan — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 03:17:35 +0000

Check out 1. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s84cuG5LjEo" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s84cuG5LjEo</a> 2. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtprJRaSHN8" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtprJRaSHN8</a> 3. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tln_KMIyulg" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tln_KMIyulg</a> You speak of the difficulty finding a method that can effectively rid pests like possums from everywhere ... aerial 1080 isn't able achieve this either... There's no scientific research that illustrates the NET positive benefits of aerial use of 1080 to overall populations of native birds etc. Have a read of the following report <a href="http://www.kaka1080.co.nz/aerial_monofluoroacetate.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.kaka1080.co.nz/aerial_monofluoroacetate.pdf</a>

auckland anne on "pro-1080 poster"

auckland anne — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 02:57:18 +0000

re wekas - I guess everyone believes what they want to believe, and won't credit what they don't want to believe. See <a href="http://forum.forestandbird.org.nz/topic/anti-1080-myths" rel="nofollow">http://forum.forestandbird.org.nz/topic/anti-1080-myths</a> about wekas and 1080 (and I'm sure there's other threads in this Room as well). The problem seems to be getting a method which will effectively rid all animal pests like possums from everywhere, including inaccessible terrain, and there are some places even experienced trappers and hunters just can't get to. This is a debate about the state doing a job keeping native species alive in the long-term through effective and large-scale pest control using a method that does let them get to those places, and not about how it should all be left simply to professional and amateur hunters and trappers, no matter how noble or sentimental they feel. And no-one, no-one I've heard in this debate, says that we shouldn't be looking at alternative methods. It's simply what you do 'in the meantime'. Nothing - and let species/populations go extinct possibly, or use what tools are available and don't put people at risk (humans aren't on your list I notice).. While there's debate about whether 1080 is causing more harm than it's preventing, heated discussions will continue and conspiracy-theories will continue - and all the while 1080 is still being used, like it or not. Anyway, you'd better start packing for your 200 nights away - and as Kukupa said, see how long you feel you're being effective before you blow a gasket and head for home. I don't mind the state paying to get rid of pests - we'll all benefit in the long-run, even the hunters will still have forests to hunt in. Don't forget that it's plant species that are being looked after too. Finally - can you look past the immediate effects on individuals, and look at recovery-rates? Even if we accepted your statistics about kill-rates from the actual 1080-delivery, what about the rates of population increase for that same species afterwards (let alone lots of additional species of plants and animals). There's lots and lots of examples stated on this discussion room about the numbers of populations increasing sometimes dramatically not long after a 1080 drop. You can't argue with what's really happening. That makes no sense. .

MountainMan on "pro-1080 poster"

MountainMan — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 23:59:54 +0000

And experienced trappers in areas high densities of possums can on average trap around 50 possums per night. So if we were to assume the average trapper worked 200 nights away in the field, that's 10,000 possums per season. Anyway, my point is, there are alternatives, and I think the extra financial cost associated to trapping far outweighs the risks associated to widespread (aerial) use of a toxin such as 1080. Fine perhaps if it's (carefully) managed for ground control, but certainly not from the air.

MountainMan on "pro-1080 poster"

MountainMan — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 23:52:08 +0000

Weka for a start are hugely at risk from both primary and secondary poisoning. According to statistics - at a 95 confidence interval - aerially applied 1080 is wiping out anywhere between 10 and 50% of weka, tomtit and kea's populations from any given area that's been studied. Note the word "population", as opposed to "individual". You do realise that individuals make up a population don't you? And so a population of 100 wekas being wiped out at a rate of 25%, means that after a blanket dump, you've wiped out 25 individuals. It's not rocket science And that's from each aerial dump. Blanket dump that same area in 3 years time (for infinity according to DOCs policy) and be prepared to slowly wipe out weka. And they're just one example So it's not a matter of what species will be wiped out; it's a matter of when. As for costings - DoC and AHB spend at least $50m per year on pest control, which if you look at possum numbers currently they're still way up above 50 million individuals, and yet we've successfully managed to blanket dump a toxin into our forests and waterways. Average price per kg of fur is around $80 / kg (can reach over $100 /kg). In a good season an average trapper can produce 350 kg's of furr, which (at a rate of 15 possums per kg) is 5250 possums. Employ say 3000 individual trappers across the Nation to look after certain bush blocks, give them a target of 5000 possums each year and pay them a wage, plus a commission of some sort to incentivise it, and you're looking at 3000 ppl x 5000 possums = 15million dead possum's each year. Which turns into a $80m fur industry (at assumed prices, catch rates, & personal) for instance. Where there's a will there's a way. And I don't know the answer for rats

auckland anne on "pro-1080 poster"

auckland anne — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 23:21:34 +0000

I responded briefly to your question about costs for saving natives, MM. In one of my earlier comments. Makes me wonder what else you've missed. Now for the not-so-brief answer; and remember, you asked for it!!...8-) We aren't risking losing native SPECIES to bykill. We're doing this to save native SPECIES. What you're talking about in bykill are individual animals. I understand how you'd get confused though. Here's a question for you though; Please name a native species that is at risk of getting wiped out by 1080 (not a few individual animals, like the list you give above, name a whole species that'll go...). Now, name a whole species that could be done in by pests. There you go - answers the "at what cost" question all by itself. .

MountainMan on "pro-1080 poster"

MountainMan — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 08:54:49 +0000

And the fact that 1080 kills invertebrates (the wee critters that live in the forest litter, soils, logs, waterways that break down & decompose organic matter), makes everything that feeds off of invertebrates (like birds, reptiles and other mammals) susceptible to secondary poisoning. They will suffer the same fate as the pests that the poison is aimed at targetting. Is that not of a concern to you? It certainly is for me. The long list of invertebrates at risk from poisoning could be as long as your drive way, maybe even your street... And these critters are suppoesed to form the backbone of an ecosystem. And you still think 1080 is the best solution we've got??? AA, I can sense this is one of those Tui moments... Yeah Right

MountainMan on "pro-1080 poster"

MountainMan — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 08:43:43 +0000

Please forgive me Kukupa, but I was unable to decipher your post above! And AA, are you saying that 1080 makes the pests magically disappear? If so, how is it that we seem to still have between 70 and 90 million possums in NZ? You all still haven't responded to the above comment... at what cost are we willing to risk losing native species as bykills to aerial dumps of 1080 (whether through primary or secondary poisoning?) The following native (and some non-native)species are known to die from primary or secondary poisoning from 1080: 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 Feral Deer Feral Pigs Feral Sheep Feral Goats Possums Cats Ferrets Stoats Rats Have a read of - <a href="http://www.kaka1080.co.nz/aerial_monofluoroacetate.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.kaka1080.co.nz/aerial_monofluoroacetate.pdf</a>

kukupa on "pro-1080 poster"

kukupa — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 06:12:41 +0000

MountainMan you should fine a 150acars somewere, (easy terain) and start traping it for RATS CATS STOATS AND POSSUMS. I give you less then 6 months to you will be pro 1080! When you start trapping for concervation, (like i do evrey day) it is blatantly obviously we need more 1080 in nz!

auckland anne on "pro-1080 poster"

auckland anne — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 05:00:13 +0000

A pretty damned high cost on preserving NZ's native wildlife actually. But I think I'm starting to see a "Pick me for a job" theme here.... And no, there's no alternatives to pest control that'll magically make the pests disappear. Or did you mean an alternative to using chemicals? An alternative like, oh I don't know, paying for trapping by a professional hunter for example. One that can scale vertical cliffs too. And just finally, what about areas that have possums, but it's too dangerous for people to let others shoot in that area, so it is illegal. Hmmm - maybe you need to get into some urban areas more.

MountainMan on "pro-1080 poster"

MountainMan — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 04:46:42 +0000

AA, I don't see your point. I'm talking about a toxin that is blanket dumped across NZ's native forests (an open ecosystem) when there are clearly alternatives available and you're talking about poisoning ants within a controlled environment with sprays etc? Apples & Oranges... And as for rats & mice, I'm old fashioned and so the simple trap method is perfect for me. That way you won't have to deal with a smelly rat somewhere in your cupboards because the poison didn't wallop it quick enough. Not everything has to be poisoned Pest contractors are a viable (albeit more expensive) alternative. But at what cost should we place on conserving NZ's native wildlife and promoting our apparent "clean, green image"? For instance, pest contractors are very effective at trapping & shooting possums to keep lids on possum numbers, and their furs, skins, and/or meat can be utilised in various ways (for clothing accessories or pet food). And in the process put a $$monetary value on controlling a nuisance species. You speak about pest control like there's no alternatives.. Goodness me, you need to get out of Auckland more

auckland anne on "pro-1080 poster"

auckland anne — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 04:37:02 +0000

Maybe in Auckland here we're a bit more aware of how easy it is to lose nature and then what it's like when it's gone. It does make me laugh though, your desire Mountainman to speed up the process of bringing Auckland to a place near you...And we're told that the rest of NZ doesn't want to be like Auckland!! Just keep waiting for 'an alternative' - we'll be at your place before you can shake a leafless stick.

auckland anne on "pro-1080 poster"

auckland anne — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 03:08:35 +0000

Never used poison to kill rats and mice then? Or poison to kill ants even? And if you had I'm sure you kept a close eye on the poison and where the insects like the ants carried it to, to make sure no other creatures got at it! As some well-known ads say, Yeah, right!! I don't know about you, but I find hypocrits more upsetting than ignoramausus... As for looking for an alternative - how many times does it need to be said that this is what is being called for? It just comes down to whether you want to do anything about the pests in the interim, or wait til a so-called alternative appears and hope like hell that there's still something native left to save. I don't want to fiddle while Rome burns thanks. .

MountainMan on "pro-1080 poster"

MountainMan — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 00:25:25 +0000

I'm totally opposed to aerial dumps of 1080 in general. Fine (perhaps) if stringent ground control methods are delpoyed, but certainly not blanket dumps of the stuff. And that hype about GPS tracking etc to avoid streams and waterways when blanket dumping 1080 is a load of .... I was hunting in the Whataroa Catchment back in Feb 2007 and helicopters were dumping the stuff across streams, rivers, small bush tarns EVERYWHERE!!! And it greatly concerns me that this poster (aimed at brainwashing children) blatantly fails to point out the wider impacts from secondary poisoning to non target species of birds and inveterbrates from breaking down contaminated carcasses. And not to mention also failing to point out that weka, kea, tomtits, robins, freshwater crayfish etc are highly susceptible to primary poisoning. For more discussion, check out <a href="http://www.thegrafboys.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.thegrafboys.blogspot.com/</a>

Oscar on "pro-1080 poster"

Oscar — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 06:19:39 +0000

"DOC and F & B are ignoramausus." LOL! I do like irony.

chris max on "pro-1080 poster"

chris max — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 00:12:31 +0000

DOC lies about nearly everything probably out of ignorance. I used to see weka everywhere , indiscriminant poisoning has wiped them out. Now they are found around population centres where they handle cats dogs stoats people etc and the disease doc says wiped them out quite well !!! DOC and F & B are ignoramausus.

Gerry on "pro-1080 poster"

Gerry — Fri, 22 May 2009 23:53:58 +0000

I'd love any of you to come down to Southern South Westland where I am lucky to be living and see all the birds around us. You can look out, as I am doing now on the giant southern rata on the hillsides and the huge tree fuchsia that carpet the valleys out my window. This is one of the last strongholds in mainland New Zealand of giant podocarp trees, fuchsia nearly 25 metres high, scarlet mistletoe and really healthy rata. All these are utterly vulnerable to browsing to extinction by possums.Go to the famous Upper Arahura Valley behind Hokitika (where the pounamu comes from) and see what happens in a place where there has never been any formal possum control. Virtually all the rata and fuchsia trees are now dead and there are very few native birds. Here in South Westland we heard morepork last night all night. This morning we were woken up by flocks of both kea and kaka. There are very few places where you get both coexisting. Today there are kereru flying in big flocks feeding on the fuchsia fruits. There are big groups of silvereye, the chorus of bellbird and tui and a little tomtit is chasing sandflies just outside our window. We also had a falcon yesterday sitting on a fence post and it allowed us to walk up to within a few metres and still didn't move! Forest and Bird did a fantastic job through the 1970s and 80s saving all these South Westland forests from the loggers. In 1977 Lands and Survey even proposed clearing all this valley and creating 16 dairy farms! Since 1991 it has been protected as a World Heritage Site. However those of us involved in the forest protection campaign always accepted that stopping the loggers and farmers clearing the valley was only part of saving it. The other part was controlling the insidious impact of introduced pests.In 1978 a Forest Service funded study in the pristine, unlogged Windbag Valley just east of us here found that the remaining kaka were 91% old male birds. The females and chicks had mostly been killed by stoats in their tree hole nesting sites. It was a tragedy that demanded urgent action. DOC gave this valley a top national priority for pest control to save rare birds and because it was a NZ stronghold for mistletoe. Since 1991 every 3-4 years DOC has carried out precise helicopter 1080 operations over all the forests that surround us here and throughout this valley. The next treatment is scheduled for June 2009. In addition for the last 20 years we have trapped stoats and have bait stations here for rats, possums and stoats. However the scope and benefit of our pest control work is very minor compared to the aerial treatment. The landscape is so broken and rugged that there is simply no way you could control pests in this valley on foot. Nor would it be as effective as aerial operations because ground work always leaves pockets of pests that re-invade their surrounds. I strongly support what DOC has done here and urge evryone to support an extension of this programme to save all the special places that you love too. It is simply a cop out to do nothing and say that we should wait for some alternative control method to be invented. We have been waiting on the scientists for years and years with little progress towards biological control. If you are an endangered bird like a blue duck (abundant now in this valley but disappearing in most other places) or if you are the last of the kaka, you don't have the luxury of waiting on the scientists because you will be dead, killed by the stoats while some people sat wringing their hands and doing nothing. Of course we don't like the fact that we have to take active steps using chemical or physical methods to control these killer animals..but that is the legacy of being a New Zealander. We are the guardians of some of the world's most extraordinary and vulnerable plants and animals. We have inherited the stupid mistakes made by our ancestors who bought the pests here from England and Australia in the first place. Don't forget that, driven by the desire to practice "biological control" of rabbits, stoats were bought to New Zealand. Read the book "Molesworth" and see how in the late 1800s they were breeding large numbers of stoats and catching cats throughout Christchurch to liberate on Molesworth to control plagues of rabbits! All the best with your pest control efforts! It is worth it

wellyboot on "pro-1080 poster"

wellyboot — Tue, 19 May 2009 02:43:34 +0000

Another interesting read to understand predator and prey behaviour is Animals in Translation by Temple Grandin and Catherine Johnson. I agree with Maggie. Just how well informed are we about 1080 and how it kills? What alternatives have been tried? I'm sure the advocates of this poison are not being deliberately cruel however I do wonder if they care about the methods they use to kill animals. I don't question that 1080 kills pests and in that respect has helped to save threatened species. The point at issue is whether there are other methods out there that would do the same or a better job in a more humane way. Surely the object of the exercise is to eliminate introduced species not advocate for 1080. The only reason I've heard for using this poison is one of cost, and for me that is not a good reason. I would like to see us put out a challenge to people to come up with a more effective humane way to control pests so we can get out of the hole we are in. The irony is that possum fur is used in high quality clothing for it's thermal qualities and they are an endangered species in Aussie.

Helen on "pro-1080 poster"

Helen — Sun, 17 May 2009 22:24:24 +0000

Perhaps a more enlightening read would be the excellent cover story published in the most recent Your Weekend (the magazine with weekend Fairfax newspapers) in which a guy who has done amazing work protecting kokako acknowledges that without 1080 we would not be able to protect this and many other amazing NZ species from predators. Totally recommend it as a really inspiring story about someone who has made a huge commitment to conservation.

Maggie on "pro-1080 poster"

Maggie — Sun, 17 May 2009 08:54:29 +0000

All fools? Uninformed is the better word. People have smooched up to poisons for years without knowing the effects. Read Silent Spring.

auckland anne on "pro-1080 poster"

auckland anne — Sun, 17 May 2009 01:52:38 +0000

My apologies for being as flippant as the poster, but now I can't get the images of F&Bers snuggling up to pellets of 1080 out of my head! One imagines that it can't be that cruelly destrucitve if all these people are knowingly smooching with it....Either that or we're all fools. Is that what's being said? That's pretty nasty and cruel in itself really... Oh, by the way, when I was a kid my parents kept chooks, and one time a stoat got in and killed lots of them but didn't eat them or take them away - one can only assume it enjoyed toying with killing them much like the cat toys with a dying mouse. So, yes, it may have killed each quickly and efficiently, but while the others presumably watched and ran around in terror...