Poison catchment, really?

LETTER

I wish to oppose in the strongest way possible the potential use of 1080 in our city’s water supply catchment.

The council even considering it for discussion is crazy!

I support 1080 to eradicate pests where there is no danger to human life, in those faraway hinterland places where foot access is difficult.

Advocates of 1080 state the science says it is perfectly safe when reaching water, but kura and eels have died.

Other newspapers in New Zealand are full of opposition to 1080 as it kills indiscriminately. Farmer’s dogs and stock have died of 1080. Birds also die from feeding on 1080-killed carcases.

Amber Dunn said the bush was “an 1100-hectare filtration plant for the city’s water supply”. But adding tonnes of deadly poison . . . ?

Malcolm MacLean is right saying he has seen footage of large animals writhing in agony in a very slow death. The video by the Graff Boys called Poisoning Paradise illustrates the grim proof.

We cannot take any risk as water is our “life blood”.

Tonnes of 1080 either dropped from a helicopter or applied on the ground in this natural catchment will not disappear; it would find its way into the city water supply.

New Zealand’s claim of “clean and green” is seen by many as a lie. No other country drops 1080 like we do in our beautiful mountains and native bush. It is banned in most countries, while we are the largest users of it.

Pests in the Waingake bush can be controlled by hunters and trappers on foot. Hunting clubs might do it for free.

GDC had better be very careful as if for some reason our water is poisoned, they could face huge lawsuits.

If they think this is scare tactics, I challenge councillors to put 1080 pellets in a water container and drink it.

I hope you see my point of view. This potential 1080 pollution of our Gisborne water catchment would be far worse than raw sewage problems in our city rivers.

So, citizens, oppose this. There are better solutions.

Alain Jorion

Footnote response from GDC environmental and science manager Lois Easton:

The council has made no decision on pest control methods in Waingake Waterworks. Three options have been included in the draft pest management, only one of which involves the use of 1080. Before any decision on pest control options is made, consultation with all stakeholders and partners will be undertaken.

I wish to oppose in the strongest way possible the potential use of 1080 in our city’s water supply catchment.

The council even considering it for discussion is crazy!

I support 1080 to eradicate pests where there is no danger to human life, in those faraway hinterland places where foot access is difficult.

Advocates of 1080 state the science says it is perfectly safe when reaching water, but kura and eels have died.

Other newspapers in New Zealand are full of opposition to 1080 as it kills indiscriminately. Farmer’s dogs and stock have died of 1080. Birds also die from feeding on 1080-killed carcases.

Amber Dunn said the bush was “an 1100-hectare filtration plant for the city’s water supply”. But adding tonnes of deadly poison . . . ?

Malcolm MacLean is right saying he has seen footage of large animals writhing in agony in a very slow death. The video by the Graff Boys called Poisoning Paradise illustrates the grim proof.

We cannot take any risk as water is our “life blood”.

Tonnes of 1080 either dropped from a helicopter or applied on the ground in this natural catchment will not disappear; it would find its way into the city water supply.

New Zealand’s claim of “clean and green” is seen by many as a lie. No other country drops 1080 like we do in our beautiful mountains and native bush. It is banned in most countries, while we are the largest users of it.

Pests in the Waingake bush can be controlled by hunters and trappers on foot. Hunting clubs might do it for free.

GDC had better be very careful as if for some reason our water is poisoned, they could face huge lawsuits.

If they think this is scare tactics, I challenge councillors to put 1080 pellets in a water container and drink it.

I hope you see my point of view. This potential 1080 pollution of our Gisborne water catchment would be far worse than raw sewage problems in our city rivers.

So, citizens, oppose this. There are better solutions.

Alain Jorion

Footnote response from GDC environmental and science manager Lois Easton:

The council has made no decision on pest control methods in Waingake Waterworks. Three options have been included in the draft pest management, only one of which involves the use of 1080. Before any decision on pest control options is made, consultation with all stakeholders and partners will be undertaken.

Your email address will not be published. Comments will display after being approved by a staff member. Comments may be edited for clarity.

W Gerrard - 14 days ago
Let's hope there is consultation GDC! 1080 should never be used near any waterways, and why are we still using this poison in NZ?

Wholesome Water - 14 days ago
Consultation will fix it. Our councillors love a bit of consultation and will surely take notice of whatever it advises.
I just hope the consultants come up with the right answer.

Warwick McDonald - 13 days ago
No way to 1080 in our water catchment for pest control, or for that fact anywhere in our region. Ban 1080.

Sue - 13 days ago
There are many serious concerns about using 1080 in any situation, but in a water supply it is surely inexcusable. 1080 is "vertebrate toxic agent" and a broad spectrum pesticide. DoC claims 1080 is "biodegradable", however the breakdown product is sodium fluoride which was responsible for 47 deaths in a hospital in Oregon after sodium fluoride was accidently added to scrambled eggs.
https://www.statesmanjournal.com/story/news/2017/11/18/oregon-state-hospital-poison-causes-47-deaths-1942/874550001/

Legal issues associated with the deposit of poison baits into riverbeds, and the legality of regulations which purport to exempt 1080 from usual resource management processes, are currently under appeal.

DoC's experts have reported some very good results with Goodnature re-useable traps, however they do not widely publicise or offer this option to communities.

Tony Orman, Marlborough - 13 days ago
What exactly are the pests? NZ is in the grip of a pest phobia. It's like a horror version of The Emperor's New Clothes.
1080, originally an insecticide, kills everything that ingests it. It's an ecosystem poison. It stimulates population explosions in rats and 4 years later the rat numbers are 4 times original level. Landcare Research studies prove it. (Roscoe, Sweetapple and Nugent)

Clyde Graf, Waikato - 13 days ago
1080 poison is dropped directly into all waterways, in most aerial operations, at the same rate as the land areas. This is a fact we have been following for some years now. The official toxin flight charts that are obtainable from the DoC most often show that the poison is spread directly into the waterways, almost always. Click on the link to the tvwild website to look at many official toxin distribution charts which show exactly where the baits are dropped ... https://www.tv-wild.com/toxin-distribution-charts

Alan Rennie, Oxford - 13 days ago
YOU NEED TO DO SOME HOME WORK ON ALL POISONS
We are coming to a crisis that a lot don't see coming, here is my take on 1080 poisoning, previously it was dropped in live water and live surrounding ground, farmers had good water around their farms, all tests done on 1080 were done on basic 1080, NOW with water becoming so polluted with nitrates, DOC still dropping 1080 in now dead water, mixed with cinnamon oils and other non tested products, 1080 will now start to remain in the water and now dead land.

In a distilled water aquarium without biota, 1080 residues declined only 16% in 170h (Eason et al. 1993b). In another study, 1080 solutions prepared in distilled water and stored at room temperature for 10 years showed no significant breakdown; moreover, solutions of 1080 prepared in stagnant algal-laden water did not lose biocidal properties during 12 months (McIlroy 1981a).

Victoria Mitchell, Lower Hutt - 13 days ago
The Govt currently can make decisions overriding councils regarding pest management and 1080, so beware when you are told you will be consulted . . . they don't have to.

Mike - 13 days ago
We are using poison because our govt is too useless to make all the lazy, unemployed dole bludgers get off their asses and into the hills to eradicate pests. But in saying this, would I really want some of these citizens running around with guns at night? Nope...but there are other methods like trapping, but I'm also afraid that it's easier to steal a TV for income than work for it. So 1080 is the answer I'm afraid.

BOB GINGLES - 13 days ago
Years ago I wanted to take my son up to the Waingake dams to put a hand line in and see if we could catch a few eels. The answer was a definite 'No'. The reason? Because a bait on a fishing hook would 'contaminate' the town water supply!
And now one of the options they are considering for pest control is the use of 1080!? WHY EVEN "CONSIDER" THE USE OF 1080?! IT WOULD BE CHEAPER AND MUCH SAFER TO EMPLOY POSSUM TRAPPERS TO DO THE JOB. I've witnessed the effects of 1080 poisoning in our native bush -"particularly the "SILENCE" after many native birds have been poisoned where once the bush was literally "alive" with bird song. MENG - please don't allow this option, let alone even CONSIDER it.

Rebecca Tebbutt - 13 days ago
Oh my goodness this should not even be a discussion, I am disgusted that the council would even consider this! What 1080 does to our wildlife is shocking. I am constantly amazed that we would put this in our forests and now potentially our water supply catchment?! This is crazy. I am so sad that this is happening in our country.

Lloyd Hanson, Blenheim - 13 days ago
GDC management should have a good, long look at themselves in the mirror and ask this: "Would I knowingly risk contaminating my and my whanau's water supply with a poison so toxic even a pinhead size of it kills and there is NO antidote?" If they answer yes, they are not fit to live on planet Earth!

Niggly - 13 days ago
I have read the article that Sue quotes and research which shows that to die you have to ingest around 3 heaped teaspoons of the stuff in one sitting. That would be far more than would normally be added as salt flavouring to any meal and would taste abominable. Something doesn't gel here.

Rowena, Hamilton - 13 days ago
1080 does not need to be used and should not be used in this country at all! It is a cruel business model being expanded with the excuse being all the pests, with highly questionable statistics. The "business" is worth lots of money to all the establishments involved, DoC, Landcare Research, OSPRI who don't even need to exist at all, NZGovt, which owns the poison factory - I cannot believe that the "pest threat", with the resulting horrific and ghoulish killing of all living things that come in contact with 1080, is based on a profitable business for all involved - but it is! They want to expand it with Predator Free NZ. Time to expose the lies.

Kelly - 13 days ago
No wonder New Zealand has one of the highest extinction rates of its native species in the world . . . we just poison them to keep our title!!

Clean green NZ my backside

Stan Jones - 12 days ago
Niggly states that you have to eat three teaspoons to die. Why don't you eat two or one teaspoons Niggly if you think that 1080 is OK in our country. Buffoon.

KM - 12 days ago
Regarding this letter by Alain Jorion, there are a few points that I feel must be expressed. You stated that some newspapers "are full of opposition to 1080 as it kills indiscriminately".
Possums are one of the main carriers of the disease Bovine Tuberculosis. This disease is detrimental to cattle and affects entire herds. Before 1080 is used, signs are posted warning of an aerial drop and its effects.
In the event that a dog does die from eating a dead carcass, this would be because the dog has wandered into an aerial drop zone - which can generally be prevented if farmers were to restrict the movement of their dogs during and after the aerial drops.
For those dogs that die and aren't farmers' dogs, there are always signs around areas that have been dropped with 1080 which clearly state that dogs should not enter the poisoned area.
Some livestock do die in the very rare event where they lick or come into contact with a dead carcass, but considering that 1080 restricts the rapid spread of Bovine TB, which can affect the cattle and deer industries in New Zealand and our reputation, this is a case of sacrificing a few for the lives of the many.
The same can be said for native birds. Yes, some birds do eat dead carcesses or the bait itself and die, but when you consider that populations of native birds increase after 1080 drops, the fact that a few die means little in comparison to the population growth that occurs afterwards.
The Tongariro Forest whio project requires that an aerial drop occurs every three years, and since the project has started the number of whio pairs has jumped from 30 to 109. Also, the bait has been dyed a specific colour that has been proven to deter birds; and the baits are far too big for most birds to consume. These are two way in which DoC has tried to minimise the number of birds that die from 1080.
According to the DoC website: "In December 2013 the EPA released a review of aerial 1080 operations over the past five years which found that these management controls are working well and there was no evidence of adverse impacts on water quality."

Eddie - 12 days ago
Yes I agree, from an expat kiwi living in Alice Springs, Australia. Think about tourism and what our visitors' views are about clean/green NZ.

Marise Lant - 11 days ago
Who came up with the idea of an option of 1080? It's real simple. If there are 3 options, eliminate the one with 1080 in it. This Government needs to work on other alternatives, more environmentally safe and sustainable, to uphold the Climate Change view it is now promoting. I would like to know when these consultation rounds are supposed to start. One year out from local elections will be an era for accountability.

Stephen Davison, Christchurch - 11 days ago
Mad Hatter's tea party. Wake up for Christ's sake

Alan Rennie - 10 days ago
YOU NEED TO DO SOME HOME WORK ON ALL POISONS
We are coming to a crisis that a lot don't see coming, here is my take on 1080 poisoning, previously it was dropped in live water and live surrounding ground, farmers had good water around their farms, all tests done on 1080 were done on basic 1080, NOW with water becoming so polluted with nitrates, DOC still dropping 1080 in now dead water, mixed with cinnamon oils and other non-tested products, 1080 will now start to remain in the water and now dead land.

ABOVE IS MY OPINION, BELOW IS WHAT YOUR TAXES PAID SCIENTISTS TO FIND OUT ABOUT 1080.

In a distilled water aquarium without biota, 1080 residues declined only 16% in 170 h (Eason et al. 1993b). In another study, 1080 solutions prepared in distilled water and stored at room temperature for 10 years showed no significant breakdown; moreover, solutions of 1080 prepared in stagnant algal-laden water did not lose biocidal properties during 12 months (McIlroy 1981a).

Alan Rennie, Rangiora - 10 days ago
1. THE PERSONAL LIABILITY OF COUNCILLORS UNDER THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2002

Note that the Act refers to councillors as "elected members" or simply "members". My comments are in blue.

Members liability for losses
Pursuant to section 44 of the Local Government Act 2002, the Crown can take proceedings against members. Members may be (jointly and severally) liable for the losses of local authorities in the following cases:

(a) Money belonging to, or administrable by, a local authority has been unlawfully expended.

(b) An asset has been unlawfully sold or otherwise disposed of by the local authority.

(c) A liability has been unlawfully incurred by the local authority.

(d) A local authority has intentionally or negligently failed to enforce the collection of money it is lawfully entitled to receive.

Jointly and severally means that they are liable as a group and individually as well. This gives the prosecution the option of suing all of the members who are culpable or just those that it selects. Selection is based on which defendants have the wherewithal to satisfy the award of damages.

The provisions are far-reaching. Any unauthorised expenses are covered. Any liability, including debts are covered. Money that the local authority has failed to collect could cover the failure to set, charge and collect rates in compliance with the law

Under C any Liability - ie wrongly poisoned animals, any clean-up costs etc will be going to individual councillors.

Poll

  • Voting please wait...
    Your vote has been cast. Reloading page...
    Should the district apply to the Provincial Growth Fund for it to back a feasibility study for reinstatement of the rail line to Gisborne?