• Full Story

1080 report 'missed the point' - scientist

Print

Wed, 08 Jun 2011 1:29p.m.

The use of 1080 is controversial, and protests against it occur regularly

The use of 1080 is controversial, and protests against it occur regularly

Campaigners will continue the fight against 1080, despite a report released today suggesting use of the pesticide in New Zealand should be increased.

Environment Commissioner Dr Jan Wright released the report today, saying 3.5 million kg of 1080 is dropped on New Zealand forests each year, killing pests such as possums, rats and stoats.

The poison’s use has triggered emotional protests and calls for a ban, but Dr Wright believes 1080 poses a relatively small risk and even more of it should be used.

But 1080 campaigner Clyde Graf says he will continue to campaign against the poison, calling the report’s findings a “license to see the rest of our wildlife and ecosystems destroyed”.

“People who live on the edge of these communities that are being poisoned, they don’t want this stuff and it’s totally unnecessary,” he said.

A documentary out later this year will outline the other options available for widespread pest control, Mr Graf says.

Meanwhile, scientist Quinn Whiting-O’Keefe is disputing claims the report’s findings are based on scientific fact.

Mr Whiting-O’Keefe says aerial poisoning is the wrong way to go.

“The problem is not 1080, it’s the way it’s being used,” he says.

“Any other broad spectrum poison that you’ve drop indiscriminately into forest ecosystems would be having the same effect. It’s typical of Jan Wright that she sort of missed the point.”

The former associate professor at the University of California-San Francisco, says there is evidence the poison is more harmful than beneficial to native wildlife.

However, the Animal Health Board (AHB) has welcomed the report’s findings.

Chief executive William McCook says he hopes the report will reassure New Zealanders that the “carefully regulated use of biodegradable 1080 to control predatory pests such as possums is not only safe, but necessary”.

“This document stresses the vital role the toxin plays not only in the protection of our native wildlife, but also the beef, dairy and deer industry, worth more than $12 billion a year to our economy,” he says.

UnitedFuture leader Peter Dunne this morning called the report a “kick in the guts”.

“1080 has been used in New Zealand since the 1950s," he says. "Most people recognise that after 50-odd years of fighting a losing battle it’s probably time to rethink your strategy."

Mr Dunne, who last year said UnitedFuture will push for a total 1080 ban after the November election, says with predatory pests still the major culprits of native bird population decline the Department of Conservation (DoC) must investigate alternatives.   

“We currently spend around $100 million a year on 1080 operations, mostly in and around communities who do not want it and have to suffer the consequences of having it.”

Mr Dunne says 1080 is “an extremely cruel and indiscriminate killer” and local communities need to be better empowered to contribute to pest control operations.

“DOC spends $22 million on pest control each year and with 8 million hectares to look after it targets 1080 where it is needed most."

Conservation advocate Nicola Vallance hopes the report will help 1080 to be accepted as a critical weapon in the war against pests.

3 News

 

 

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

10 Jun 2011 12:16p.m.

Craig wrote:

Tammy your comments are misleading (deliberately i suggest)your say 3.5millon kgs of 1080 applied per annum this figure is bait applied which would contain 52500kgs of 1080.A big differance Fact not emotion

08 Jun 2011 05:07p.m.

Tammy wrote:

The makers of 1080 commissioned and partly funded this research (you the public also part funded it!), using 'funding-laundering' methods, which means that it is worthless and biased, simply designed to justify our buying and using more 1080. 1080 is actually ineffective and has huge effects on people, birds, and marine life. It poisons the water. Throw this report in the bin and get a new Environment Commissioner, one without a corporate agenda. And Whiting-O'Keefe is correct in his assessment of pseudo-science being used to sell the report, and in his assessment of Jan Wright being not up to the mark. Profit is the motivation here, not ecology, and that is appalling. How much is 3.5 million kilos of 1080 costing us taxpayers every year? There are far better, far cheaper alternatives, implementable right now.

08 Jun 2011 03:56p.m.

Jackie wrote:

Question, why are there Chinese characters on some of the banners?

08 Jun 2011 02:34p.m.

nikki wrote:

How can one trust research partially and indirectly funded bu the pharmaceutical industry!! where is DEMOCRACY if the peole mostly effected by the application of the poison don't have a voice. Get a refenrendum on the way combined with our election to have a direct vote. So far it's again burocrats even in DOC who force their power upon the nation and the environment. save the money, employ KIWIS to do the job manually. that will reduce unemployment, saves financial ressources for an unwanted product.

08 Jun 2011 02:23p.m.

Adolf Eichmann wrote:

ze benefits far outweigh ze chemical residues scweinhund!