Thread: 1080 KILLING FISH

Thanks Scribe and Cambo for that info.

The way Forest and Bird writes it, and sells this information as being sourced from DOC, almost makes it sound like they are confidently insinuating it is perfectly fine for a person to eat a 1080 bait - and suffer nothing. Especially by making it sound like humans have been consuming it for centuries. Which contradicts what DOC warns, but if these are the people who are the pro-1080 group then all it takes is one gullible New Zealander to follow and attempt to eat it to prove a point. Or enter a 1080 zone with their young children, thinking it would be completely harmless for them should they pick it up.

So I've never looked into Forest and Bird before, but now I'm actually thoroughly disturbed by them.

Originally Posted by Aly

The sentence goes:
"All over the world millions of people have been regularly consuming 1080 for centuries with no discernible ill effects."

If they were talking about tea, not sure what tea they're drinking.

*edit: their information about tea is wrong here too, that fact is wrong. While tea is more "hydrating" than water (and only some particular tea such as Green Leaf because a lot of tea has caffeine which dehydrates you) the amount of water is still the same, and unless that "cup" that they're drinking from is about 1.5 litres then no..... most tea consumers aren't over hydrating themselves..... *

Is Forest and Bird run by 10 year olds who make up their own facts or something?

Kevin Hackwell, Forest and Birds head honco has been guilty of holding up a bag of salt and vinegar chips the inference is that 1080 is no more dangerous than the salt and vinegar in the chip packet. Children were present at this meeting.

We always know when a drop is coming. It is telegraphed by stories in the press written by Forest and Bird. These series of stories often declare that the number of birds being eaten by possums and rats is increasing dramatically and calling upon DOC to do something about it.

You might have lost me there Aly.
They're referring to people having been drinking tea for centuries, tea that supposedly contains flouroacetate.
A claim that I would like proven as fact or fiction as I've heard this one before too.

Originally Posted by Moutere

You might have lost me there Aly.
They're referring to people having been drinking tea for centuries, tea that supposedly contains flouroacetate.
A claim that I would like proven as fact or fiction as I've heard this one before too.

Moutere, I would be more interested in seeing how flouroacetate turns in Salt and Vinegar.

Originally Posted by Moutere

You might have lost me there Aly.
They're referring to people having been drinking tea for centuries, tea that supposedly contains flouroacetate.
A claim that I would like proven as fact or fiction as I've heard this one before too.

I can't seem to find any information on it in tea, but I do find information on how fluroacetate in plants was problematic in livestock in Australia because it kept killing of significant amounts of herds. I highly doubt humans could really consume the same plants if it's killing off livestock.
Which regardless would still make their claims redundant because people are not putting 1080 compound in their tea.
Which they are insinuating.
And having tea with fluroacetate plant in it would have to be rather diluted with a lot of water.

Overall I guess my point is that they are very, very misleading with their statements.

Originally Posted by Scribe

Moutere, I would be more interested in seeing how flouroacetate turns in Salt and Vinegar.

Ha, I think we can both safely say he is clutching a straws on that one.

I'm going to look at fluroacetate in tea to see what I can find.
There is a difference between sodium monofluroacetate compound and fluroacetate in plants....
So far all the headlines that are coming up are saying this is bull, though.

Originally Posted by Aly

I'm going to look at fluroacetate in tea to see what I can find.
There is a difference between sodium monofluroacetate compound and fluroacetate in plants....
So far all the headlines that are coming up are saying this is bull, though.

Yes, 1080 is a synthesised version of flouroacetate, which is claimed to be in tea.
The comparison to tea is in the context of minimum water quality standards regarding 1080. Not the suggestion that there is 1080 in tea. I agree that one sentence could be worded better.

"And on the issue of 1080 being naturally-occurring, plants produce fluoroacetic acid, but manufactured 1080 is sodium monofluoroacetate. Mr Eason stated in April 2002 that "Anyone comparing 1080 poison with the naturally-occurring substance is stupid.""

^This pretty much sums up what I've found.
Science Clarified

What's found in tea leaves in nowhere near the considered toxic amount, it's incredibly low-concentrate, naturally occurring acid found in point .trillionth amounts.
It's not like you're taking a bait and dunking it in your morning Earl Grey like a sugar cube

Originally Posted by Moutere

Yes, 1080 is a synthesised version of flouroacetate, which is claimed to be in tea.
The comparison to tea is in the context of minimum water quality standards regarding 1080. Not the suggestion that there is 1080 is in tea. I agree that one sentence could be worded better.

Oh I know that, I'm saying that 1080 compound is a concentrated amount where a bait which is placed into the New Zealand environment is of certain toxicity, whereas naturally occurring it isn't a compound.

More from F&G...

Tests reveal risk in 1080-zone trout | Stuff.co.nz

The poison found in nature is potassium fluoroacetate, which has a bitter taste which is a natural deterrent to browsing animals.

The poison used in compound 1080 is sodium monofluoroacetate which is a manufactured compound and designed to be almost tasteless and which was originally registered as an insecticide in the UK. However, authorities recognised the extreme potency and danger to users, and the fact that is could be readily taken up through the root / transpiration systems of plants, and was proven to be capable of poisoning sap sucking insects feeding on the sap of those plants feeding on the underside of leaves. It was subsequently banned from use there.

While it is commonly described as a vertebrate poison by applicants such as DoC and the Animal Health Board it is not generally recognised (some say deliberately) by permit issuing authorities or DoC or the AHB that it is an extremely lethal insecticide as well. Scientist Mike Meads was a world renowned specialist in invertebrates and both he and Notman pointed out the potential dangers and risks of poisoning the base of the environmental food chain in NZ by use of 1080. Both of them lost their jobs very soon after producing their research. DoC actively sought to discredit Meads and refused to publish his peer reviewed findings. DoC has put very minimal effort into further investigation of the implications of 1080 effects on the over all structure of forest biomass since the ERMA review in 2007 where ESPC (now NZWBM) along with several other submitters provided Mead's and Notman's science as evidence. The ERMA review (EPA) could not ignore this evidence but while recommending several courses of further research, is actually powerless to ensure such research is carried out. Another specialist toxicology professor from Victoria University described the "official" effort to find the potential dangers (for instance the long term dangers such as effects on DNA in pregnant women) as being equivalent to using a large meshed snapper net to try to catch a sprat. In other words, the correct protocols and resources for investigation did not exist or were not being applied in NZ. That scientists interview can be seen on the DVD "A Shadow of Doubt".
Very many persons in NZ and worldwide are extremely concerned at the NZ government's apparent tendency to suppress information and research effort that might reveal the potential long term harm caused by 1080 use.

Incidentally; can anyone on here tell me in detail what the over all diet is of Keruru. I have watched these birds feeding voraciously on kowhai leaves and my dogs have pointed them on the ground in forests while deer stalking or pheasant hunting. (Kaka also must have a very strong scent. My dogs will identify Kaka in trees from several hundred metres distance.) I assume Keruru are feeding on the ground, on fallen berries, but I have no proof of their ground feeding diet. Perhaps they also feed on fallen leaves, other vegetation , or even worms and insects? Could somebody enlighten me please.

Much of a pigeons water needs are provided by water trapped in the forks of trees. (These water traps also trap 1080 pellets with fatal results for these and other birds)

I have noticed over the years that in some areas pigeons are forced to come down to the forest floor to drink and bathe. I am sure they avoid doing this as much as possible as they are so awkward and vulnerable on the ground in a forest.

In saying that they will graze in open paddocks on the Coromandel where they must feel safe. I suspect they will be after clover.

That's one bird that seems to thrive on the coast considering all the local and regular poisoning. No idea why.
There are trees in kowhitirangi that you can count literally hundreds in, when they are budding.
Anyone one heard about the Glenorchy poison.
Smashed an already under threat whitetail herd.
Its gotta stop. You see ads in our paper here with "Save our birds" heading all the poison notifications in local notices and papers. Kids at school are being desensitized to 1080 as well.


Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk