Print Page | Close Window

89 Kiwi Killed In 1080 Drop

Printed From: The Fishing Website
Category: Hunting
Forum Name: General hunting topics
Forum Description: Anything hunting related here...
URL: https://www.fishing.net.nz/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=121933
Printed Date: 25 May 2024 at 7:12am


Topic: 89 Kiwi Killed In 1080 Drop
Posted By: Catchelot
Subject: 89 Kiwi Killed In 1080 Drop
Date Posted: 04 Nov 2016 at 5:14pm
Unbelievable... who is in charge of DOC? Nathan Guy again?
 
https://envirowatchrangitikei.wordpress.com/2016/08/27/oia-request-reveals-89-dead-kiwi-in-1080-treated-tongariro-forest-and-not-one-was-tested-by-doc-for-1080-poisoning-press-release-from-graf-brothers/" rel="nofollow - https://envirowatchrangitikei.wordpress.com/2016/08/27/oia-request-reveals-89-dead-kiwi-in-1080-treated-tongariro-forest-and-not-one-was-tested-by-doc-for-1080-poisoning-press-release-from-graf-brothers/



Replies:
Posted By: pjc
Date Posted: 04 Nov 2016 at 6:22pm
site cant be reached,but yep read it else where and its a national disgrace


Posted By: Catchelot
Date Posted: 05 Nov 2016 at 7:27am
Link fixed , thanks Paul


Posted By: viscount
Date Posted: 05 Nov 2016 at 8:09am
Just disgusting how our a$$hole government can let this happen,


-------------
Calling fishing a hobby is like calling brain surgery a job - Paul Schullery


Posted By: widerange
Date Posted: 05 Nov 2016 at 8:41am
department of conservation of the gravy train


Posted By: Happyangler
Date Posted: 05 Nov 2016 at 8:52am
Utterly utterly disgraceful.


Posted By: pjc
Date Posted: 05 Nov 2016 at 2:19pm
shared on f/b public page hoping it will get around that nz is not so clean and green


Posted By: OneWayTraffic
Date Posted: 05 Nov 2016 at 2:32pm
Numbers dwarfed by those killed by predation. 




Posted By: KikBac
Date Posted: 05 Nov 2016 at 5:10pm
Article was first published in 2011. Kiwi mortality (89 tagged kiwi deaths) is the total mortality from ALL causes (including predation) over a five year period. Significantly, there was no 1080 dropped in the Tongariro forest between 2006 and 2011 (the survey period.)
To imply that all 89 deaths, or even some of these deaths, were due to 1080 poisoning is simply misleading.


Posted By: Southern_Jez
Date Posted: 06 Nov 2016 at 12:50pm
Well said KikBac ... you must have read the whole article Thumbs Up


Posted By: Tagit
Date Posted: 06 Nov 2016 at 1:47pm
That wasn't how I read the article. I thought the point being made was that 1080 is not working for pest control as well as DOC are claiming, and that DOC are being rather (deliberately?)  careless by not testing the dead Kiwi to see if 1080 may be an issue. CG's point being that if it isn't working that well, why aren't be looking at other, more enviro friendly methods to see if we can get a better result. 

I have seen what 1080 does to areas I used to hunt and despite DOC claiming for year after year that it didn't affect the mammal population (deer and pigs etc) you could easily tell the difference after a 1080 drop even when you weren't tripping over the carcasses. Doc eventually conceded after masses of evidence that despite their constant denials, 1080 did kill deer, pigs etc and now seem to be claiming that as an upside. Whether it is an upside or not I guess depends whether you would prefer your children to be wandering in our forests or playing video games etc. Lets face it, once the inshore fisheries are totally stuffed, what are kids going to do for the wild food gathering type activities that are a traditional part of the Kiwi lifestyle. 

I met CG with his brother and his dad Egan (ex-culler from memory) out hunting several times when CG was a boy and his dad had a serious love for the bush which I assume he instilled in the boys through the trips he took them on. This isn't some anti government rant, but the view of someone who has grown up in the bush and probably loves it much more dearly than some of the 1080 decision makers do.

DOC don't really have much credibility left when it comes to representing what 1080 really does. They are so locked into it that everything they say has to be challenged and held up for inspection until it can be proved true rather than just a distortion of the facts to support their plans. I don't know if 1080 is the best solution for pests or not, but what I do believe is that the bush is a much less lively place after a drop, and DOC are not at all bothered about using 'spin' to support their own agenda on 1080.


Posted By: Southern_Jez
Date Posted: 06 Nov 2016 at 3:12pm
What you said Tagit is also different to the claim in the title of this thread: 

89 Kiwi Killed In 1080 Drop

these misleading claims do no party any favours.

I'm all for an alternative to 1080, however, until there is one, it is the best tool for the job whether we like it or not there is no way you can come up with a plan to trap Fiordland and still have tax payers money for health and education.


Posted By: The Tamure Kid
Date Posted: 06 Nov 2016 at 7:50pm
An incredibly emotive topic, and the reality is neither side is likely to change their viewpoint.

Interesting read about the debate in the Herald recently.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11734355




Posted By: Titahi
Date Posted: 06 Nov 2016 at 10:05pm
Originally posted by KikBac KikBac wrote:

Article was first published in 2011. Kiwi mortality (89 tagged kiwi deaths) is the total mortality from ALL causes (including predation) over a five year period. Significantly, there was no 1080 dropped in the Tongariro forest between 2006 and 2011 (the survey period.)
To imply that all 89 deaths, or even some of these deaths, were due to 1080 poisoning is simply misleading.

 You only have to set foot on a offshore bird sanctuary to see what occurs when predators and introduced species are oblitarated.

Catchalot: do you have the ability to be analytical? or just the ability to copy and paste?


-------------
"I love standing by the ocean and just knowing what its for"


Posted By: Tagit
Date Posted: 06 Nov 2016 at 10:49pm
A forest with a few less birds and a lot more deer & pigs is actually going to attract a lot more visitors and supply a lot more use to the average Kiwi. For every bird watcher I have ever seen in the bush I have seen a 100+ hunters. Getting rid of predators is a fantastic goal, but making the bush a place that far fewer people are going to use/visit is not really a great side effect. Just because DOC say that they are going to try and return something to it's 'natural state', doesn't mean that this is the best possible result for the people of this country. 


Posted By: part-timer
Date Posted: 06 Nov 2016 at 11:10pm
Originally posted by Southern_Jez Southern_Jez wrote:

What you said Tagit is also different to the claim in the title of this thread: 

89 Kiwi Killed In 1080 Drop

these misleading claims do no party any favours.

I'm all for an alternative to 1080, however, until there is one, it is the best tool for the job whether we like it or not there is no way you can come up with a plan to trap Fiordland and still have tax payers money for health and education.

Well said Souther Jez. Spot on.

There was an article in the Hearald a few weeks back I think..  that busted some of the "MYTHS" about how bad the stuff is..

A lot of people just get drawn into the hysteria about 1080.. by people deliberatly making false statments. Plenty of kids are / have been indoctrinated ...  its a bit like a religion...  

And then, there are the others who are worried about the their supply of pigs and deer...

j




Posted By: Titahi
Date Posted: 06 Nov 2016 at 11:41pm
Originally posted by Tagit Tagit wrote:

A forest with a few less birds and a lot more deer & pigs is actually going to attract a lot more visitors and supply a lot more use to the average Kiwi. For every bird watcher I have ever seen in the bush I have seen a 100+ hunters. Getting rid of predators is a fantastic goal, but making the bush a place that far fewer people are going to use/visit is not really a great side effect. Just because DOC say that they are going to try and return something to it's 'natural state', doesn't mean that this is the best possible result for the people of this country. 

I love the taste of wild pork and venison, but not at the expense of native species.....We see the world differently  :)



-------------
"I love standing by the ocean and just knowing what its for"


Posted By: Southern_Jez
Date Posted: 07 Nov 2016 at 8:28am
Originally posted by Tagit Tagit wrote:

A forest with a few less birds and a lot more deer & pigs is actually going to attract a lot more visitors and supply a lot more use to the average Kiwi. For every bird watcher I have ever seen in the bush I have seen a 100+ hunters. Getting rid of predators is a fantastic goal, but making the bush a place that far fewer people are going to use/visit is not really a great side effect. Just because DOC say that they are going to try and return something to it's 'natural state', doesn't mean that this is the best possible result for the people of this country. 

90% of visitors to Stewart Island are there to see some birdlife, it is a very small number in comparison go there to hunt whitetail (I am one of them that hunt whitetail). Over summer out of 20 people in the Bungaree Bay hut, 18 will be hoping to see kiwis and kakas, the other 2 have the permit for that hunting block. 
Fiordland is much the same, sure there will be 100's of hunters in there at any one time, but there will also be 1000s of trampers making their way over the great walks as well as the multitude of smaller walks hoping to see some native birdlife.



Posted By: Tagit
Date Posted: 07 Nov 2016 at 8:58am
Yes lots of trampers and yes some might like to see interesting birdlife, but they are mainly there for the tramp not the birds. I used to do a lot of tramping with different groups as well as a lot of hunting. Everyone would love to see a rare bird, but that wasn't why they were there. I would love to see out native bird life improve as well, but is 1080 the only way to achieve this?


Posted By: pjc
Date Posted: 07 Nov 2016 at 5:40pm
Talking to a trapper yesterday about possums and 1080.He believes the problem is the possums themselves,as soon as a few starting dying they move off in to another area,and when that area gets hit with 1080 they move back again,bit like a dog chasing its own tail and as for poisoning of kiwi.He claims not directly by kiwi eating the 1080 rather the grubs which may have the 1080 on/in them .


Posted By: Southern_Jez
Date Posted: 07 Nov 2016 at 7:55pm
Originally posted by Tagit Tagit wrote:

Yes lots of trampers and yes some might like to see interesting birdlife, but they are mainly there for the tramp not the birds. I used to do a lot of tramping with different groups as well as a lot of hunting. Everyone would love to see a rare bird, but that wasn't why they were there. I would love to see out native bird life improve as well, but is 1080 the only way to achieve this?

Fair points, is 1080 the only way to achieve it ... probably not, but it the most cost effective and suitable for new zealands unique fauna (no native mammals to be concerned with).

My main issue is with the misinformation that the anti-1080 groups keep recirculating - the initial title of this thread being a prime example - when the anti-1080 groups start using properly formed arguments that does not rely on 30 year old data, then perhaps people like myself who dont want to see 1080 used will start to listen. Either that or come up with a viable alternative taking into consideration cost, applicability, and efficacy, because without those 3 properties no compound will ever replace 1080.


Posted By: part-timer
Date Posted: 07 Nov 2016 at 10:40pm
Originally posted by Tagit Tagit wrote:

Yes lots of trampers and yes some might like to see interesting birdlife, but they are mainly there for the tramp not the birds. I used to do a lot of tramping with different groups as well as a lot of hunting. Everyone would love to see a rare bird, but that wasn't why they were there. I would love to see out native bird life improve as well, but is 1080 the only way to achieve this?

The short answer is "yes", its the only way at this time..

If new techniques are found, then all well and good...  Ive never heard of a better way as yet though..

Please tell me a better way..

If all the 1080 opponents had their way, the forrests would be stripped bare...  and there would be no birds to worry about in some areas..

get real people.... possums are eating our vegitation...

I used to go shooting threm at nights when I was a boy... im all for erradicating them..

J




Posted By: The Tamure Kid
Date Posted: 08 Nov 2016 at 11:50am
Hmmm, curious argument from that trapper PJC. 

I once saw a trapper near Lake Okataina come back to shore from across the lake with a couple of bags of fur plucked from the bodies of the dozens and dozens of possums he'd got on his trap lines overnight. 

I'm sure he would have basically left the bodies where they lay, given the hassle of trying to remove them, so surely those mass deaths would equally put off the possums' mates from hanging around? Thereby stuffing up the trapper's livelihood unless he moved for miles the next time? I very much doubt that was the case...

There are anecdotes to suit every side of this debate, and those with extreme views will cherry pick "evidence" to suit their argument as well.  
It's impossible to convince conspiracy theorists that the moon landings weren't a hoax, that 911 wasn't a self-inflicted attack etc etc. 
So this debate will never end either.


Posted By: Kezza
Date Posted: 08 Nov 2016 at 12:08pm
My main concern over the use of 1080 and similar is the way the stuff kills it's intended and collaterals….fast forward to 2:00mins



What I find wrong with 1080 apart from the inhumane way this shiiiiit works

• The huge gravy-train/big business associated with and driving the production and dispersal of 1080 that is dressed up as CONservation - no other country uses this crap anymore like we do.

• The lack of RnD in to alternatives such as reassigning dole payments (debt) in to actual "getting paid for a days work" (credit) - a lot of areas being targeted with aerial drops are accessible by foot or perhaps design trap technology that plucks and stores the possum carcasses in solar operated chillers once humanly dispatch of then automatically resets waiting for the next revenue gathering pest to come along. fibres and meat gets collected once every few weeks then taken to the next part of the production/jobs?...I think most of us could design something like this in our lunch breaks!!

• The collateral damages to native fauna (89 or 1 it's doesn't matter)

• The single bloody mindedness of a department out of control with the help of MPI is what pisssses me off!

To me it doesn't really mater what side of the fence you sit on in this debate - if you think it is ok to kill animals like this then you are a complete grunt!!…anyhow…



#BAN1080


-------------
http://www.legasea.co.nz" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Titahi
Date Posted: 08 Nov 2016 at 2:24pm
A kiwi being ripped to shreds by a dog aint pretty either Kezza.
A possum chewing off its leg to escape a gin trap also isnt a pretty sight. 

Unless you can come up with a cost effective strategy that equals the efficacy of 1080 nothing is going to change.

I look forward to seeing  your solar powered fully automated humane pest killer, that  you design this lunchtime  :)


-------------
"I love standing by the ocean and just knowing what its for"


Posted By: OneWayTraffic
Date Posted: 08 Nov 2016 at 2:30pm
Kezza, a conservative estimate of the birdlife killed by introduced predators would be in the millions. Populations of all native species plummeted after the introduction of stoats, ferrets and weasels. The net benefit to native fauna of keeping pest numbers down is immense. 

I certainly do not think it is ok to let our native species go extinct.  No one on this thread has proposed a better alternative. It isn't enough to say, 'no I don't like that.' Anyone can do that. Give DOC a better idea, and get New Zealanders behind it. 


Posted By: Kezza
Date Posted: 08 Nov 2016 at 2:59pm
Hi OWT….is it OK to kill animals in the fashion shown in the video? yes/no (this is important to weed out the loonies in these sort of discussions early)

I did make a suggestion in my post - not sure it's better or where I'd personally get the resource to canvas DoC and New Zealanders as per your suggestion - perhaps some of our collective tax should be used fr RnD, then marketing, then implementation

Yes have sent similar  ideas to MPI and DoC…..here it is again……what do you think? to simplified I expect but yeah….

The lack of RnD in to alternatives such as reassigning dole payments (debt) in to actual "getting paid for a days work" (credit) - a lot of areas being targeted with aerial drops are accessible by foot or perhaps design trap technology that plucks and stores the possum carcasses in solar operated chillers once humanly dispatch of then automatically resets waiting for the next revenue gathering pest to come along. fibres and meat gets collected once every few weeks then taken to the next part of the production/jobs?...I think most of us could design something like this in our lunch breaks!!


-------------
http://www.legasea.co.nz" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Kezza
Date Posted: 08 Nov 2016 at 3:04pm
Originally posted by Titahi Titahi wrote:

A kiwi being ripped to shreds by a dog aint pretty either Kezza.
A possum chewing off its leg to escape a gin trap also isnt a pretty sight. 

Unless you can come up with a cost effective strategy that equals the efficacy of 1080 nothing is going to change.

I look forward to seeing  your solar powered fully automated humane pest killer, that  you design this lunchtime  :)

- So 1080 is a dog control method to protect kiwi?…good-good now we're getting somewhere!….slight tangent there….tropical fever Jas?

- Yeah gin traps are fairly archaic and not sure how we got on to those?

- Ok maybe not design but certainly scribble a few diagrams that a % of the costs of 1080 could go to developing….heck….was just an idea…there are bound to be better and and it's not really my job to plan strategies for the future of pest control….maybe that is why I/we employ Department of CONservation?….or does the business of 1080 a bit of a strangle hold on advancements in effective/targeted pest control?


-------------
http://www.legasea.co.nz" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: OneWayTraffic
Date Posted: 08 Nov 2016 at 3:26pm
Kezza I'm not claiming that 1080 is a humane killer; it is not. That in itself is not enough to get the majority of this country behind a ban. I consider inhumane killing of possums, rats, stoats, and the odd native bird regrettable. I also consider letting our unique fauna disappear unacceptable. If 1080 is the best poison to use then use it they will.

A better alternative needs to put forward if you would like to see change. It would need to be biodegradable, effective, cheap and lethal. 

Otherwise it just won't happen. That is the reality. 




Posted By: The Tamure Kid
Date Posted: 08 Nov 2016 at 4:26pm
I think that most NZers are on the same page regarding the need to preserve our indigenous flora and fauna, and the need for a solution that is as humane as possible. And the fact that any pet dog which dies in pain is a tragedy, ditto the kea and other natives which get affected. We'd have to be heartless to not feel that way. 

I also think there's a lot of work going in to finding or considering an alternative, from sterilisation (of the possums, not the protesters Smile) through to other poisons, and trapping/hunting systems.

Despite what some people think, the permitting of poisons isn't done thoughtlessly. I sat through an announcement in Wellington a decade ago when the permit for Doc and others to keep using 1080 was announced. It followed a long process with all viewpoints and credible evidence considered, from what I could see in the report.

Here it is:
http://www.epa.govt.nz/publications/1080-decision-document-with-amendments.pdf



Posted By: pjc
Date Posted: 08 Nov 2016 at 4:29pm
Painting trees with cyanide is not answer either.effective but has implications as well


Posted By: Titahi
Date Posted: 08 Nov 2016 at 10:14pm
Originally posted by Kezza Kezza wrote:

Originally posted by Titahi Titahi wrote:

A kiwi being ripped to shreds by a dog aint pretty either Kezza.
A possum chewing off its leg to escape a gin trap also isnt a pretty sight. 

Unless you can come up with a cost effective strategy that equals the efficacy of 1080 nothing is going to change.
I look forward to seeing  your solar powered fully automated humane pest killer, that  you design this lunchtime  :)

- So 1080 is a dog control method to protect kiwi?…good-good now we're getting somewhere!….slight tangent there….tropical fever Jas?

- Yeah gin traps are fairly archaic and not sure how we got on to those?

- Ok maybe not design but certainly scribble a few diagrams that a % of the costs of 1080 could go to developing….heck….was just an idea…there are bound to be better and and it's not really my job to plan strategies for the future of pest control….maybe that is why I/we employ Department of CONservation?….or does the business of 1080 a bit of a strangle hold on advancements in effective/targeted pest control?

Thats a long long bow to draw from my post Keiren :) and certainly not my position, which is in the shade to escape the 35+ degree heat :)

Design..... Scribble... Mere details

http://https://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/42005/biocontrol_of_possums.pdf" rel="nofollow - http://https://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011 http://https://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/42005/biocontrol_of_possums.pdf" rel="nofollow - /42005/biocontrol_of_possums.pdf

More info here about research currently being undertaken for biological control of possums...


http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/science/plants-animals-fungi/animals/vertebrate-pests/strategic-technologies" rel="nofollow - http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/science/plants-animals-fungi/animals/vertebrate-pests/strategic-technologies

So not quite the vacuum of alternatives, but like scribbles they can often take time :)









-------------
"I love standing by the ocean and just knowing what its for"


Posted By: Tagit
Date Posted: 08 Nov 2016 at 10:34pm
One thing that we need to realise is that under the current process we will be pouring 1080 onto our land in 1000's of tonnes quantities FOREVER. Has anyone done any studies at all of the cumulative effects of pouring tonnes of poison onto the same spots over and over for decade after decade? Do we have to worry about insects and maybe predators mutating?  Thalidomide, asbestos, and DDT were once saviours of some of the worlds problems too. Has enough real research ever been done about a poison that only NZ (out of the whole world) uses in volume?
I had an interesting experience about 4 - 5 years ago. I was driving my family home from a holiday and we drove past a track access into Pureora forest. I hunted up that access for many years around 30 years ago until DOC started carpet bombing it with 1080 and wrecked the hunting (although that was vehemently denied at the time). Got sick of tripping over rotting corpses. Stunning bit of bush with gorgeous big natives all over the place. I stopped and took the kids for a ~90 minute walk up the track to show them some of the sights I remember. First thing we see is the notice saying that there had been a 1080 drop. Second thing was a couple of baits lying on the edge of the track barely off the road running past. Anyway, we go for the walk and all I can say is that after 30 years of what seems like almost continuous 1080 drops I didn't see or hear any more birdlife than I remembered, and the bush didn't appear to be any thicker or nicer than I remember either. Maybe there were a few extra birds that I didn't detect, or maybe I didn't notice that the bush had some extra leaves, but what I can absolutely confirm is that this heavily bombed area over 30+ years looked and sounded nothing like the DOC 1080 propaganda videos.


Posted By: Titahi
Date Posted: 09 Nov 2016 at 12:45am
Given how  water soluble  ( it is a salt) your concerns appear unfounded.

http://www.1080facts.co.nz/1080-and-water.html" rel="nofollow - http://www.1080facts.co.nz/1080-and-water.html

The above is produced by Forrest and Bird, who arent a lacky of the government and are independantly privately funded, Federated farmers are also independant of Government.


-------------
"I love standing by the ocean and just knowing what its for"


Posted By: Kezza
Date Posted: 09 Nov 2016 at 10:05am
OK…..tanget time….

I live 15kms in a straight line from Auckland's Sky Tower….we have possums, assorted rodents etc on our 9 acres and whilst my trusty .177 and fixed feline takes care of some of them it's not my job to ensure we are pest free and yes there are native birds and native trees about the property, my last house in densely populated suburbia neighboring the Waitakere Ranges which had possums, rats and a stoat (only saw one) and also native birds and I am sure even Remuera would have such nocturnal pests roaming about mostly unchecked.

blanket arial dispersal of 1080 across urban areas as well?….John Key's pool-boy be able to fish out wayward pellets before pink gins poolside at 4pm?…..all good! These urban populations of pests will be causing "spill over" in to our forests and replenishing pest numbers even if 1080 was effective…..what should we do about town dwelling pests? treat children and handbag pets as collaterals?


-------------
http://www.legasea.co.nz" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: cirrus
Date Posted: 09 Nov 2016 at 10:55am
Good point Kezza. I live in central Auckland. Lots of cats ,dogs,rats ,a few possums,the odd stoat. Yet bird populations,including native are healthy. Recently counted 16 Tuis at the same time feeding on nectar on one tree. Other species include ,grey warbler,white eye,kingfisher,fantail,a few native pigeon  etc. Yet i go into the forest and it is silent.

All predators are very mobile. Introduced rats arrived here at seaports and have spread everywhere. So while we bombard the forest with 1080 we have cities and towns that are safe haven for predators just waiting to repopulate the forest .

Dont know the answer to this.

It is agreed that 1080 does hammer the forest pests ,but also agreed that a small percentage survive and can rebuild. We will never know the number of non target birds and animals it kills. It is not in DOCs interests that we know .
And what is being done regard culling other major pests,namely introduced European wasps. They strip honey dew thus depriving native birds of valuable food. They also strip mine insects in all stages of the life cycle. The endemic Helms Butterfly now appears to be extinct in the Waitakere ranges and very rare in other forest areas. Wasp predation..

So maybe the authorities are happy with the present situation.
From a cynical perspective the existence of DOC in its present form depends on having rare and endangered species. It all were restored and healthy what would happen to DOC.
 Cruel 1080 is probably the best we have at the present time,but it is not good enough for complete & lasting control .


Posted By: Titahi
Date Posted: 09 Nov 2016 at 11:41am
Gummmmmon Keiren your an intelligent bloke..... posing this though.... "blanket arial dispersal of 1080 across urban areas as well"? 
 Trapping and alternative methods will work in urban areas, due to the relative ease of access, and lower pest density. So surely their is no need to aerial drop in urban areas..... try driving  50m around the corner to the next trap in Fiordland, Hunua or Waitakare....

And therein lies one of the issues, 1080 is such an emotive topic sane rational people  become polar in their views.  
Im out, I dont expect to sway anyones opinion. 

Oh look Kezza, Cirrus agrees with you....I rest my case :)  :)  :)


-------------
"I love standing by the ocean and just knowing what its for"


Posted By: Kezza
Date Posted: 09 Nov 2016 at 11:48am
just playing devil's advocate Jas….of course I wouldn't expect blanket arial drops in urban areas….and yes your last point is of a concern!Stern Smile

-------------
http://www.legasea.co.nz" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: The Tamure Kid
Date Posted: 09 Nov 2016 at 12:13pm
Originally posted by Titahi Titahi wrote:


And therein lies one of the issues, 1080 is such an emotive topic sane rational people  become polar in their views.  
Im out, I dont expect to sway anyones opinion. 

Bang on, Titahi. Most people are entrenched in their views and will swear black is white till the TB-infected cows come home. 
As in any emotive debate, they are entitled to their views. But it's chear that when opposed to the status quo it's easy to label government departments as all part of some big conspiracy, and scientists as in cahoots with business etc. See Trump and the rigged election!!

If any hard working Doc rangers and other on-the-ground staff are reading this, I congratulate you for doing your best with the tools currently available to look after our treasures. Ditto all the scientists beavering away in labs trying to find alternative solutions.

A place like Tiritiri-Matangi island shows what our country would be like if the generations before us hadn't stuffed it up with crazy wildlife and plant importations. You want natural bird song, check that place out. To think we nearly had foxes as well!

New Zealand's situation is unique in that our plants and birds evolved without the natural defences which are present in Australia, where possums/wallabies live in natural balance, or in Europe where the same can be said of German wasps/stoats/pigs/deer/weasels rabbits etc.
At the moment, I reckon our agencies are ambulances at the bottom of a very high cliff.


Posted By: pjc
Date Posted: 09 Nov 2016 at 4:09pm
Keeza might be on the right track.must a market for the meat.edible but nit my first choice. Possum sleep on the ground and feed un trees from my understanding so perhaps stun them while sleeping on easy terrain?


Posted By: Tagit
Date Posted: 09 Nov 2016 at 6:21pm
TTK - I don't think anyone is arguing that we shouldn't be trying to protect our natural wildlife. It is just the method that is being questioned. Just because 1080 is 'cheap', it doesn't make it right. We could probably fund an alternative, less toxic, plan with less side kills by halving the beehives booze bill, so the fact that the money required doesn't end up in DOC's pocket and they have to go for the cheapest solution is no excuse for dumping tonnes of poison all over our country. Don't blame DOC (for anything other than lying about 1080), but do blame the government for how they prioritise funding.

We keep on hearing that 1080 is the most cost effective solution. Doesn't make it the right solution just because our government doesn't stick the right amounts of money in the right buckets. They easily spend $millions on anything that they feel politically advances their cause, just need some of that to end up in more useful budgets.


Posted By: Tagit
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2016 at 9:57am
Interesting report in todays Herald. Doc's monitoring shows that they are getting a 12% kill rate of Kea where they drop 1080. Initial reading says that only 24 Kea were killed over several years, but read a bit more and that is 24 out of 199 that were being monitored which is just a bit more than a 12% kill rate. So highly endangered population of a bird that lives no where else in the world and DOC claim that a 12% population kill rate is OK because 1080 is cheap. The fine for killing a Kea is $100k or 6 months, so we obviously put a very high value on protecting them. What this says is that the value isn't quite as high if it is DOC funds being spent I guess. 


Posted By: OneWayTraffic
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2016 at 10:22am
The only thing ever likely to be better than 1080 is biological control. Of course biological control was what was intended with the introduction of stoats. 1080 is naturally occurring so biodegrades, and is more toxic towards mammals than birds. It is practically the perfect poison already. 




Posted By: pjc
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2016 at 12:59pm
So DOC is happy with a 12% death rate of kea,yet they will not attend westhaven to remove a sealoin which has benn there for a few months as it has not bitten anyone?


Posted By: Tagit
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2016 at 3:20pm
Not quite sure of how that comparison works? Most people down here see the Leopard Seal as an attraction rather than a real menace. He/she did eyeball me as I was walking along the marina one day but I don't really think of it as a serious threat. Fun to watch it catching sea gulls though. National Geographic stuff in your work place.


Posted By: pjc
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2016 at 4:21pm
Thanks Dave,another site and its all doom and gloom.From dogs wont leave vessel to children refusing to get out of car as seal may attack them..


Posted By: Titahi
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2016 at 6:47pm
Originally posted by Tagit Tagit wrote:

Interesting report in todays Herald. Doc's monitoring shows that they are getting a 12% kill rate of Kea where they drop 1080. Initial reading says that only 24 Kea were killed over several years, but read a bit more and that is 24 out of 199 that were being monitored which is just a bit more than a 12% kill rate. So highly endangered population of a bird that lives no where else in the world and DOC claim that a 12% population kill rate is OK because 1080 is cheap. The fine for killing a Kea is $100k or 6 months, so we obviously put a very high value on protecting them. What this says is that the value isn't quite as high if it is DOC funds being spent I guess. 

And the reason they are a threatened species is because of predation by introduced species..... If we do nothing   that stoats, weasels ferrets and rats would eventually wipe them out. Which would you prefer? 


-------------
"I love standing by the ocean and just knowing what its for"


Posted By: Catchelot
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2016 at 7:36pm
When is this going to end?!
 
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11749165" rel="nofollow - http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11749165


Posted By: pjc
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2016 at 8:16pm
Hmm why not trap all native species(where possible)transfer to another area before drop takes place?


Posted By: The Tamure Kid
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2016 at 10:30pm
Originally posted by Tagit Tagit wrote:

Not quite sure of how that comparison works? Most people down here see the Leopard Seal as an attraction rather than a real menace. He/she did eyeball me as I was walking along the marina one day but I don't really think of it as a serious threat. Fun to watch it catching sea gulls though. National Geographic stuff in your work place.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the 1080 thing, as I think it's the best option at the moment and plenty of work is being done by the boffins to find an alternative, but I'm with you on the leopard seal, Tagit!

I heard there were actually two, but whatever the situation was, I saw a huge sleek leopard seal in the viaduct right next to the old America's Cup yachts a few months ago. It was diving around under the jetty, wowing the tourists and locals alike, and came up with a big fish - I can only think it was a 2kg parore. It was incredible to see it that close, you could see the scars and its pffff of breath as it came up. No harm to anyone as long as they kept their distance, and there and at Westhaven it's restricted access to water and jetty level anyway.


Posted By: pjc
Date Posted: 23 Nov 2016 at 7:27pm
interesting read from a northland bush control group
came via F/B green party

http://www.baybushaction.org.nz/Bio1080.aspx



Print Page | Close Window