Thread: Warning Distressing and Disturbing Photographs- 1080 Poison

Here is a straightforward challenge to the powers that be.
1 Create an independent department free of pollutants such as fanatical twig and tweeters etc. This new department could be accountable to Dept Internal Affairs and staffed by independent thinking pragmatists.
2 The department will call for proposals from interested parties to control possums rats and stoats in two sample areas; one of which will be a remote rugged area such as Te Urewera and the other to be a tracked area such as marginal farmland or exotic forest , for example Kaingaroa. Each area to be of equal size approximating 40,000 hectares.
2a The proposals are to not include any aerial applications of 1080 or brodifacoum or similar poisons.
2b The price to undertake the operation will be a total of $4.8 million (the equivalent cost of 1080 operations) and is repeatable and refinanced on a three year cycle.
3 Proposals will be reviewed and the best proposal will be accepted for a fixed guaranteed fee of $4.8 million payable by the NZ government over three years with a renewal for period 3-6th year.
4 Performance monitoring will be independently conducted and normal penalties applied where contract obligations are not met.

I'd bet there would be some very innovative proposals including several viable solutions.

Originally Posted by Nick-D

Mate that site isn't science. It's opinions with references to studies. I've read plenty on there.

She makes good points, but often attributes correlation as causation, and makes ideological leaps of faith. You have to understand it is just one person's opinion.

If you read the references often they don't even support the argument she is making.

It's always good to question and review but you are only looking at the issue from one perspective. There are a platitude of resources to read and plenty of scientific findings to base your opinion on.

That site is the anti 1080 equivalent of the doc articles. Reference what's useful disgard the rest.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Not true. A very large amount of the data, especially in the index section is derived directly from DoC's own science, plus Landcare Research , some of which had never been made available to the public. Of course, we know it is in the interests of the establishment and the twig and tweeters to try to decry this valuable information base (probably the best in NZ) because it is comprehensive and honest.

Originally Posted by Nick-D

Not really man. There is a tonne of independent, peer reviewed science you can read. Pretty hard to 'spin' that. The reading I have done paints a grim, non perfect but ultimately beneficial outcome for our native species. The spin by either side of the argument simply focuses on the positive or negative while ignoring the other.

Nick-D I spent several yrs in both the Factory and out in the field,1080 is bad news full stop.
Seeing what it can do first hand is disgusting to say the least. There are many like myself that regret ever having to work with the shit.
DOC for one completely ignore the extreme hazards of 1080,along with all the other poison outfits.
Some of the lies you here from the likes of F&B are absolutely outright dangerous,they should be taken to task over that alone.
I don't need someone like yourself telling me right from wrong concerning 1080,you learn a lot over yrs of being a approved operator.
I know there are scientific reports on all the true (bad ) things associated with 1080 and things the public should be warned about and those aren't from DOC's own scientist's.
These poison crazy groups are doing NZ more harm than good....and they know that.

Originally Posted by doinit

Nick-D I spent several yrs in both the Factory and out in the field,1080 is bad news full stop.
Seeing what it can do first hand is disgusting to say the least. There are many like myself that regret ever having to work with the shit.
DOC for one completely ignore the extreme hazards of 1080,along with all the other poison outfits.
Some of the lies you here from the likes of F&B are absolutely outright dangerous,they should be taken to task over that alone.
I don't need someone like yourself telling me right from wrong concerning 1080,you learn a lot over yrs of being a approved operator.
I know there are scientific reports on all the true (bad ) things associated with 1080 and things the public should be warned about and those aren't from DOC's own scientist's.
These poison crazy groups are doing NZ more harm than good....and they know that.

Man I get what you're saying. I'm just saying there is plenty of quality information on which to derive an opinion from. You don't have to be an operator to be well educated in the subject.

It's entirely possible(if a bit long winded) to learn about 1080 without resorting to propaganda, be it forest and bird or Clyde Graf.

I've seen the effects. It's nasty. I would rather not see it on our landscape. But it's not as cut and dry as many make out

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Woody

Not true. A very large amount of the data, especially in the index section is derived directly from DoC's own science, plus Landcare Research , some of which had never been made available to the public. Of course, we know it is in the interests of the establishment and the twig and tweeters to try to decry this valuable information base (probably the best in NZ) because it is comprehensive and honest.

Yeah man I get ya. She references real studies. I've read through the vast majority of that site.

However the information and summaries presented around those references are her opinion. She cherry picks what supports her agenda and discards what doesn't. That doesn't mean she is always wrong, but it's important to understand the difference between scientific study and journalistic review.

As it is curated by her, and presented with an obvious agenda it is by definition opinion and not scientific theory.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

@ Nick-D. "As it is curated by her, and presented with an obvious agenda it is by definition opinion and not scientific theory."

That is a gross and unjustified statement. There are at least three PHd's contributing on that site, along with others experienced in forestry and long 'real" forest and mountain experience, each of whom expresses detailed conclusions based on the available data. (Much of which derived from information previously withheld from public scritiny by gov't departments and gov't financed NGO's.) These are independent scientists who have the guts to provide balanced analysis of the data without the pressures of standover by employers such as DoC or "contracted scientists" ; nor are they bound by the confidentiality clauses contained in DoC and AHB employment or contract terms. The data and reports on that site are not biased and are therefore much more acceptable than DoC and AHB and F&B spin.

AGAIN, I challenge the powers that be:__Here is a straightforward challenge to the powers that be.

1 Create an independent department free of pollutants such as fanatical twig and tweeters etc. This new department could be accountable to Dept Internal Affairs and staffed by independent thinking pragmatists.

2 The department will call for proposals from interested parties to control possums rats and stoats in two sample areas; one of which will be a remote rugged area such as Te Urewera and the other to be a tracked area such as marginal farmland or exotic forest , for example Kaingaroa. Each area to be of equal size approximating 40,000 hectares.

2a The proposals are to not include any aerial applications of 1080 or brodifacoum or similar poisons.

2b The price to undertake the operation will be a total of $4.8 million (the equivalent cost of 1080 operations) and is repeatable and refinanced on a three year cycle.


3 Proposals will be reviewed and the best proposal will be accepted for a fixed guaranteed fee of $4.8 million payable by the NZ government over three years with a renewal for period 3-6th year.

4 Performance monitoring will be independently conducted and normal penalties applied where contract obligations are not met.

I'd bet there would be some very innovative proposals including several viable solutions.

Maybe it is worth considering the obvious benefit of the "Pest Free New Zealand" dream.

It's a vegan wet dream of no top predators being needed anymore, and getting rid of hunting.

It is of course impossible, but the fantasy is cherished and so lives on.

Originally Posted by Woody

@ Nick-D. "As it is curated by her, and presented with an obvious agenda it is by definition opinion and not scientific theory."

That is a gross and unjustified statement. There are at least three PHd's contributing on that site, along with others experienced in forestry and long 'real" forest and mountain experience, each of whom expresses detailed conclusions based on the available data. (Much of which derived from information previously withheld from public scritiny by gov't departments and gov't financed NGO's.) These are independent scientists who have the guts to provide balanced analysis of the data without the pressures of standover by employers such as DoC or "contracted scientists" ; nor are they bound by the confidentiality clauses contained in DoC and AHB employment or contract terms. The data and reports on that site are not biased and are therefore much more acceptable than DoC and AHB and F&B spin.

AGAIN, I challenge the powers that be:__Here is a straightforward challenge to the powers that be.

1 Create an independent department free of pollutants such as fanatical twig and tweeters etc. This new department could be accountable to Dept Internal Affairs and staffed by independent thinking pragmatists.

2 The department will call for proposals from interested parties to control possums rats and stoats in two sample areas; one of which will be a remote rugged area such as Te Urewera and the other to be a tracked area such as marginal farmland or exotic forest , for example Kaingaroa. Each area to be of equal size approximating 40,000 hectares.

2a The proposals are to not include any aerial applications of 1080 or brodifacoum or similar poisons.

2b The price to undertake the operation will be a total of $4.8 million (the equivalent cost of 1080 operations) and is repeatable and refinanced on a three year cycle.


3 Proposals will be reviewed and the best proposal will be accepted for a fixed guaranteed fee of $4.8 million payable by the NZ government over three years with a renewal for period 3-6th year.

4 Performance monitoring will be independently conducted and normal penalties applied where contract obligations are not met.

I'd bet there would be some very innovative proposals including several viable solutions.

I think its a good resource and nice to have. But it is still opinion.
You could extrapolate enough data from the references on that site to create a succinct argument supporting the use of 1080. If you think that site is free of bias I believe you are mistaken. It is well presented and a good resource, but should no be your only source of information. But clearly we disagree so probably not any point in arguing.

I do wholeheartedly agree with your sentiment that if we committed real resource into finding an alternative we could drastically reduce the numbers of 1080 drops needed to sustain wildlife populations.

I think the best model would be to lead the charge as hunters for conservation. Real science funded and implemented by us. Conservation from the pockets of the lands traditional custodians. I imagine a pay to play conservation model re the US would come up against much resistance, however IMO it is the best chance we have to maintain the hunting we love so dearly.

Originally Posted by Woody

@ Nick-D. "As it is curated by her, and presented with an obvious agenda it is by definition opinion and not scientific theory."

That is a gross and unjustified statement. There are at least three PHd's contributing on that site, along with others experienced in forestry and long 'real" forest and mountain experience, each of whom expresses detailed conclusions based on the available data. (Much of which derived from information previously withheld from public scritiny by gov't departments and gov't financed NGO's.) These are independent scientists who have the guts to provide balanced analysis of the data without the pressures of standover by employers such as DoC or "contracted scientists" ; nor are they bound by the confidentiality clauses contained in DoC and AHB employment or contract terms. The data and reports on that site are not biased and are therefore much more acceptable than DoC and AHB and F&B spin.

AGAIN, I challenge the powers that be:__Here is a straightforward challenge to the powers that be.

1 Create an independent department free of pollutants such as fanatical twig and tweeters etc. This new department could be accountable to Dept Internal Affairs and staffed by independent thinking pragmatists.

2 The department will call for proposals from interested parties to control possums rats and stoats in two sample areas; one of which will be a remote rugged area such as Te Urewera and the other to be a tracked area such as marginal farmland or exotic forest , for example Kaingaroa. Each area to be of equal size approximating 40,000 hectares.

2a The proposals are to not include any aerial applications of 1080 or brodifacoum or similar poisons.

2b The price to undertake the operation will be a total of $4.8 million (the equivalent cost of 1080 operations) and is repeatable and refinanced on a three year cycle.


3 Proposals will be reviewed and the best proposal will be accepted for a fixed guaranteed fee of $4.8 million payable by the NZ government over three years with a renewal for period 3-6th year.

4 Performance monitoring will be independently conducted and normal penalties applied where contract obligations are not met.

I'd bet there would be some very innovative proposals including several viable solutions.

@Woody its a case of heads up arse and no competitiontheyed hate competition, the one thing that sorts, also unqualified ministers don't help, lobbied to death no doubt.

He he. Yep. Reminds me of a poster I brought back from when I was in logging camps in BC. It said; "don't steal; the government hates competition."
I am in no doubt the citizens of NZ are being burgled big time.

Here is a pretty decent summation as many see it.

"OPINION OF A 1080 NUTTER"
by Bill Wallace, founder of the Ban 1080 Party
Published in the Greymouth Star, 21 September, 2108

"I became seriously opposed to the aerial use of 1080 in 2014.
At the time I was flying DoC staff and contractors into Kahurangi National Park to monitor rat numbers.
Those DoC workers were recording very low rat numbers in the remote valleys that had never been poisoned before, and could not sleep for Kiwi at night, and reported kaka and kakariki in the bush around them, as well as no shortage of blue duck.
When I asked the local biodiversity officer why they would poison this central area of the Park with virtually no rats, he responded, “We’ve got that much money for 1080, we don’t know where else to spread it.”

With a B.Sc. in Ecology, I decided to read the DoC science, and ask some official questions of DoC.
I asked which bird species were to be monitored, and where the unpoisoned control areas for comparison would be. Three separate DoC officers received the same questions; three different answers were received.
Greg Napp (13/4/2014 DoC) said “it is almost impossible to find comparable “control areas” because of Kahurangi’s unique characteristics'.
Jan Hania (6/6/2014 DoC) said the Haast Range and Lake Roe in Fiordland were the control sites.
Steve Deverell (July 2014 DoC) said that Abbey Rocks and Mt Stanley were the control sites.
But none of the same species were studied at both sites so any comparisons would be meaningless. Perhaps DoC staff should talk to each other before they just “make stuff up”.

DoC went ahead with poisoning the entire Park, in spite of low rat numbers. DoC’s own Compulsory Standards (June 2014) prevents 1080 drops unless rat monitoring is at 20%. The only exception to the Compulsory Standard is expert judgment of benefit to the birds.
When I requested the expert judgment that had convinced DoC to proceed ,Nelson’s DoC conservator said “The technical advice was given verbally and therefore a copy cannot be made available” (OIA reply Dec 18 th 2014)
In 2014 DoC claimed 95% of rats had been killed, and 85% of stoats. When I requested the rat and stoat data, it was clear there was only a 65% drop in rat numbers averaged over the poisoned valleys, and no stoats had been counted either before or after the drop. Rat numbers dropped also in the unpoisoned valleys as well, which happens every winter anyway. (OIA reply 20/11/15)
Also the 29 rock wren being monitored on Grange Range all disappeared at the time of the 2014 1080 drop, DoC attributed that total loss to a heavy snow fall. Now I can’t prove that these insectivorous birds died from secondary poisoning (1080 was designed as an insecticide), but neither can DoC prove it was snow.
And if the snow was responsible for 100% loss of rock wren, then it would also probably account for the 65% drop in rat numbers.(Stuff 17/1/2015)
There is no doubt in my mind that DoC manipulate their figures, they exaggerate their successes, and deny or ignore their failures.
DoC’s latest research paper on 1080 in alpine areas (O’Donnell, Weston, Monks 2017), concludes the evidence for success is anecdotal, but that is enough to justify continuation. Anecdotal means hearsay, and reading that paper, the hearsay comes from DoC’s most pro-1080 staff. Hardly indisputable, independently peer reviewed science.
What about the hearsay from WARO operators in Fiordland, the valleys recently poisoned, not a single kea at the gut heaps, whereas in the unpoisoned valleys, about 20 kea at each gut heap.
And the 8 resident kea at the Kepler hut, which disappeared immediately after that drop.
When frustrated DoC staff do “out” their department’s cover-ups, and release the horrendous kea deaths (9 out of 27 Franz, 7 out of 11 Okarito), DoC come up with completely unsubstantiated claims about modification of behavior by humans, and always include photos of beautiful live kea, never the sad dead kea
which they recover and photograph. Convert these losses to percentages and you realize the 95% reduction in kea numbers over the 65 years we’ve been using 1080, is largely attributable to 1080.
The recent ZIP double dose, double strength insanity in the Perth River in South Westland, which is as remote as you can get, recorded 8 out of 11 kea had interacted with the pre-feed baits - no human conditioning possible here. DoC’s response was to shoot over 100 tahr, and leave their cut open bodies on
prominent ridges to hopefully attract the kea away from the poison baits. (ZIP 11/7/2018)
The supposed careful timing of the drops is also a myth, the idea is just before the birds nest when predator numbers are building. In late spring 2016, the Kaikoura earthquake followed by the Banks Peninsula fires tied up virtually all the heavy lift helicopters, and DoC were still dropping 1080 well into following winter, long after the birds had hatched and fledged, and rodent numbers would have been dropping naturally as they do each winter.

And the science is that the rat number always recover quickly after the drops anyway. The only science I can find on rat’s genetic resistance found the dose that killed 74% of rats (about DoC’s success rate), 4 generations on of survivors getting the same dose, was only killing 17% of rats.( Howard, March et al 1973)
Is DoC simply creating Super Rat.
DoC are now planning aerial drops every year on the Heaphy Coast, “each pest control operation will provide a window for native species to breed and thrive that lasts around 3 to 6 months before rat numbers begin to build again” (DoC
7/9/2018)
In Sept 2016, Civil Aviation released an urgent notice to helicopter operators to check their hooks, as there had been a spate of recent releases of poison buckets ( Continuing Airworthiness Notice - 05-005 Cargo Hook System ... 13/9/2016)
My understanding is that 3 buckets were dropped that year, 2 of them not recovered, so two 1 tonne heaps of 1080 poison in the bush or a river.
An OIA to then DoC Minister, Maggie Barry about these incidents, elicited this response “I am informed that the then Minister of Conservation was advised of one incident involving a departmental operation that occurred on 2 November 2013.”
The reason DoC don’t consider it an incident, is that the heaps are within an area consented for poison drops. Convenient logic, or just denial of the bad stuff ?
Perhaps the cruelty is the biggest concern for a lot of NZer’s. 1080’s cruelty ranking is 6, but because that is lower than the 8 rating of brodifacoum (which DoC also drops from the air), the claim is that 1080 is “relatively humane”. There is no 10 on the scale, so 9 is the most horrendous torturous death imaginable.
Our Govt’s scientists fed 1080 to 38 impounded dogs, and then recorded their deaths “continual barking and howling, the dog becomes over-active, and behaves as if terrified, but appears to be unaware of its surroundings. There are tonic convulsions (sustained muscle contractions) followed by running movements. Vomiting is common,…death is typically the result of respiratory paralysis. Death is never cardiac in origin, the hearts slows but continues beating for some time after respiration fails”
If Jan Wright and successive Ministers can defend this as “humane”, then they are as cold-hearted and callous as the scientists who administer the poison and witness the deaths, pretending this is conservation science.
New Zealand’s much touted Animal Welfare Act, has a special clause 30A which allows DoC and it’s contractors to “wilfully and recklessly ill-treat wild animals or animals in wild state”.

Gareth Hughes for the Green Party was last week attacking chicken meat processors for their animal welfare abuses (Stuff 10/9/2018), but across the hall, his associate Eugene Sage, is gleefully preparing for the torturous deaths of tens of thousands of mammals and birds in total breach of the Act, if it wasn’t for Sect 30A.
The Green Party’s close relative, Forest and Birds enthusiasm for 1080 suprises me. I wonder how many of their wealthy donors would revisit their bequests if they realized the level of support for this cruelty. If you’re about to write your will, Women’s Refuge or SPCA would seem much more deserving and caring organisations.
And the poor old possum, portrayed by DoC as a savage predator, but with the teeth arrangement and gut of a typical herbivore.
OSPRI claim possums spread Tb to cattle, but there is no evidence to support this claim. The Broadcasting Standards Authority found OSPRI guilty of false advertising as they could not produce a shred of evidence to support their claims.
(Herald 28/7/2016)
The actual transfer of Tb around NZ has always been on the back of trucks, and the recent M.bovis debacle has exposed how appallingly inept OSPRI’s management has been of the NAIT tracking system, which helps explains why Tb has never been completely eradicated.
So, while the taxpayer is forking out $1 Billion in a probably doomed attempt to clean up M.Bovis, OSPRI continues to collect 3.8c/Kg milk solids and $17/head cull subsidy from farmers, and wastes this $65M/yr on 1080 poison.
Of 124,000 possums autopsied in the last decade, 54 had Tb. In the same time frame, Landcare infected about 200 possums with Tb and released them into the wild in a bizarre experiment, which showed infected possums didn’t move beyond their home range before dying, further proof there is no possibility of possums transferring Tb between regions.

As for the threats to DoC, who doesn’t know someone who’s had a wheel come loose? All DoC’s claims of threats seem planned to attract attention away from the real arguments about the cruelty and stupidity of their continued drops. An OIA revealed there have been exactly SIX cases of threats reported to NZ Police since March 2016. And the details of these 6 cases - in 2 incidents the perpetrator was apparently identified and received a formal warning from Police. 3 cases were phone calls, 1 was a ‘flyer’ left on a DoC vehicle. None have progressed to prosecution. (OIA Police 27/8/2018).

DoC’s exaggerated escalation of the threat level, simply portrays their staff as pathetic paranoid poisoners, barricading themselves away in their offices, drawing lines on maps for the next 1080 drop, to justify their share of the budget.
And the repeated claim that the 1080 in the infant milk formulae was an anti-1080 protestor. Jeremy Kerr was a contractor to DoC, producing poison products of his own, so why do media, politicians and DoC keep repeating this blatant lie ?

A police investigator in that operation, Derek Shaw, said “I have to say that 95% of the anti-1080 group were just genuine good New Zealanders that were taking a well thought-out position on an issue and were following their passion. "I’ve got a new respect for the anti-1080 community because of their
genuineness and their honesty and their passion. I haven’t got an opinion one way or the other [about 1080] but for them, I can see that on the whole they’re not some kind of terrorist group or anything like that and were good to deal with."
(Stuff 22/10/2016 Thank you Derek)
And the 25,000,000 birds eaten a year by introduced predators. That figure comes from the back of an envelope calculation, 5 breeding pairs per hectare, 70% nests fail, 60% of failures because of predators, so 42% nesting failure to predators multiplied up by average clutch size, and hectares gives about 25 million.

I’ve researched DoC’s papers and find that their scientists believe that given their small sample sizes, and their lack of scientific controls, over 20% of birds could be killed in 55% of 1080 drops (Veltman Westbrooke 2010), so that’s 2 birds out
of 10 per hectare, that’s 40% nesting failure (assuming the 2 were from different breeding pairs) so on DoC’s own figures, again multiplied up by average number of eggs laid, that’s potentially 25,000,000 eggs not laid because of 1080.
As for the myth that 1080 is somehow selective, Professor Ian Shaw (NZ’s leading toxicologist) says “if anyone tells you that 1080 can discriminate between pests and native animals they are talking complete and utter rubbish.”(Stuff
March 13, 2015)
And how much of the DoC budget is wasted on the slick PR propaganda machine, churning out the glossy Battle for the Birds brochures for each of the drops ? These brochures always include photos of kea and rock wren as species being “saved”, but DoC’s Graeme Elliot tells us “The 1080 drop in 2014 killed four Keas and led to the death of Rock Wrens” (Fairfax Nov 16, 2015) It wasn’t just 4 kea. It was 4 kea wearing radio transmitters, 10% of the radio-tagged kea. In previous poisoning drops DoC have managed over 30% kill of kea. If 4000 kea were exposed to those massive drops, DoC killed at least 400, possibly a thousand, kea.

And my favorite line, quoted by successive ministers is “it’s the best tool we’ve got in our toolbox”. Well, if I was looking for a builder, and the best tool he had was a 65 year old chisel, with a broken handle, and a blunt rusted edge, I’m not going to give him $500 Million a year, and say “Carry On”
The anger against 1080 in rural communities is palpable, the majority of farmers I know, don’t believe for a minute, that 1080 is doing anything to protect them from Tb. Many rural families in our area (as do we personally) live largely on venison and wild pork. There’s no night clubs out here. Apart from rugby, our young men hunt on their weekends, but this recreational pursuit is disappearing, and many of them have witnessed the horrific loss of a dog to this poison.
And we also notice the loss of our native predators after the 1080 drops, no longer the haunting call of the morepork and the searching glide of the falcon around our home, and the shrill cry of the kea that were on Mt Burnett, until the first 1080 drop.
Am I a conspiracy theorist, I don’t believe so, but an old retired lawyer acquaintance of mine talked about the “collective institutionalized atychiphobia” he encountered when working for regional councils. It’s the fear of being wrong, and at a Departmental level it’s being the first to put your hand up and question what you’re doing, or admitting you’re wrong. The collective job security mentality kicks in, and the Council or Government department will go to Court, or employ the spin doctors, rather than accept liability.
The flood gates on the 1080 myth will open, it will be as big as the leaky home scandal when it breaks, but nobody will ever be held responsible, and as it’s all taxpayer’s billions, apart from the poor old farmers levies, no individual will be financially disadvantaged.
So, write us all off as nutters and extremists if you will, but don’t be surprised by the fervor of our hatred for this cruel indiscriminate toxin, and our disdain and lack of respect for DoC."

Bill Wallace
Founder Ban1080 Party
B.Sc.
Collingwood.

Woody, I am back from my tramp

You should really stick to anti-1080 activism and leave economics to other people ...

So the $ 60 / ha figure. That's maybe a bit on the high end (considering the source), some of the publicly available estimates are as low as $ 12 / ha. But let's not quible, I expect the real amount is somewhere in the middle...

Now the core problem with your argument. You somehow multiply that by your 200 ha example, and come up with $ 12 K PER DAY !!! Only one minor problem, 1080 is not applied daily. It is not even applied monthly or annually to the same area. Anyone who has had their favorite hunting area go through a stand-down period will know this very well. The reality is that 1080 is applied maybe once every 3 years for rats and 5 years or longer for possums. So even at $ 60 per ha, you are looking at an annual cost of $ 20 / ha or less. And by the way, that includes pre-bait and monitoring. It is the total operational cost.

All of this is easy to check. The EPA publishes annual info on the area in ha that was treated with 1080. The annual budgets for DOC / AHB / OSPRI etc are not that hard to find.

Anyone with half a brain should realize that trying to equate the effect of a a single application of 1080 to a couple of days worth of trapping is laughable at best, and that is ignoring your "creative" maths

Originally Posted by ebf

Woody, I am back from my tramp

You should really stick to anti-1080 activism

His mates have been busy defacing town signs...doing so much good work.


Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by BRADS

His mates have been busy defacing town signs...doing so much good work.


Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

There’s always nut bars on each edge of the spectrum....meaning it works both ways.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by tiroatedson

There’s always nut bars on each edge of the spectrum....meaning it works both ways.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

at least he spelt it right