Astonishing 'putting on of best face' by Department of Conservation Te Anau area manager Reg Kemper as he delivers the news that hundreds of kilograms of rat poison-laced pellets fell on a Fiordland island housing critically endangered kakapo.
The accidental drop of brodifacoum, nasty, nasty stuff that persists in the environment for a very long time has special significance to those of us who listened to DoC staff extol the virtues and safety of 1080 at the public meting at Riverton on Tuesday night. They didn't mention the possibility that 'hundreds of kilos' of the stuff could fall where it wasn't wanted, as this rat poison has done!
What an appalling thing to happen! And right in the middle of an island populated with kakapo!
Despite saying that the pod full of poison 'fell into the lake', prompting the 'best place' comment from Reg Kemper, he later adds,
"Eight conservation staff were now at the island searching for pellets. However, it was believed most of the poison had fallen into the lake." (emphasis mine).
Very, very bad occurence and not the first time brodifacoum has been spilled into the environment. Last time it was a truck-load that went over the edge of a Kaikoura road and into the ocean.
Accidental spills - big news nowadays!
More to come on this.
For now, here's the link.http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/news/3857268/Poison-pellets-fall-on-kakapo-island
11 comments:
Just say it Robby - a colossal fuckup that should see those responsible disengaged from their Pay (Sacked)
There'll be some painful soul-searching going on at DoC HQ for a while yet Mark. They've certainly given their detractors a Howitzer to fire at them, especially those engaged presently in the anti-1080 push. All claims of safe procedures go out the window when a huge screw-up like this occures.
Reminds me of the Gulf of Mexico somehow...
Odd that they wouldn't name the helicopter company that dropped its load. That will become apparent soon, you'd hope...
Hi Robert. I don't know if you've seen my comment over on Marty's blog. If you hadn't noticed it, I'd be keen to know what you have to say about 1080 alternatives. It's something I've been trying to find out more about (more comments on this post of his), and you seem to have been involved in that area for a while.
Hi Mike
Your question is the 64 million dollar one of course!
I was in the hall when Aussie thinker/writer/borax-poker Tim Flannery suggested that we import the possum-hunting eagle from Papua New Guinea and release that into areas thick with possums - that gasp from the audience was audible!
My view is that regularly dropping toxins over vast areas of New Zealand is unforgivable which brings the issue straight to 'what to do instead' - your question.
Seperating the aeriel drops from ground baiting wiould be a start as one attracts far greater negative criticism, quite rightly.
Your concern is inaccessible areas and I accept that ground baiting and trapping is not possible in many areas. That leaves Flannery's suggestion - hah! I joke, although bio-controls of some sort will surely be the final solution, unless the possums beat us to it.
In the Waitutu, next on the list for 1080 from the air, the greatest concern DoC seems to have is with mistletoe. You'd have to decide for yourself whether one plant justifies the drops. I also wonder whether unintended consequences such as the possible destruction of odd creatures like peripatus has been taken into account, studied, reported upon. Big drops of poison seem a very blunt instrument indeed, when you think of the miriad of creatures that could be endangered by the toxin.
I've not answered your question really, but I'm betting that there are a brace of strategies that could be employed in place of 1080 drops. I'm keen to hear your views Mike and I have looked at your comment on mars2earth.
Personally, I see the 'rat poison' accident as a huge weapon for the anti-1080 people to use against DoC. Major stuff-up, as yet suppressed, news-wise.
Hi Robert. Thanks for the response on this. There's little doubt that this rat poison incident will continue to haunt DOC for a long time to come.
I'm not an expert on 1080 use, but the question of what to do instead really bothers me. I can't see any viable alternative likely to be better than what's being done at present. The whole eco-system is messed up well before 1080 became an option thanks to some horrendous decisions, and I'm not personally convinced about waiting until everything is absolutely and perfectly 100% understood before we try to fix it.
I've heard arguments about 1080 killing birds, which I know has been the case in the past. I've also heard that a lot is being learned about 1080 as it's being used, and 1080 use today is less destructive than it's been in the past when many of the examples from the anti-1080 lobbies that I've seen seem to originate. (Perhaps not all of them, I'm unsure.)
For me I think the telling factor is Forest & Bird, which is an organisation I have a lot of respect for when it comes to assessing this kind of thing. It's independent from DoC and government influence, its primary purpose it to advocate protection of the native environment (even when this conflicts with other interests such as recreation), and it's experienced and well resourced for researching these topics. It's hard for me to believe that Forest & Bird would come out so clearly in support of 1080 use (aerial drops included) if there were better alternatives.
Anyway, these are the anecdotal thoughts going through my head around this.
Cheers.
Mike.
Mike - you've made some strong arguments for the continued use of 1080 but I'd like to challenge a couple of those, if I may :-)
Firstly, I don't accept that the onus is on the opponents of 1080 to suggest alternatives to its use.
It is valid to challenge something but be unable to offer 'the answer'. That argument is often used by powerful institutions against individuals who speak out about them.
Secondly, to cite Forest and Bird's attitude to 1080 use goes only so far - there are many things that they do, such as using herbicides to manage pest plants, that can be challenged strongly, weakening their other claims, imho.
Forest and Bird also have a 'nativist', 'conservation' ethic that doesn't match with the views of other movements that seek to improve biodiversity in New Zealand, such as those developing the Terraquaculture movement based in the MacKenzie Country or the Permaculture movement.
In calling for something better than 1080, I sense that you are thinking of a single 'fix' but I'd propose a range of approaches and I'm sure you've considered all of those before. There is a tendency amongst institutions such as DoC, as I'm sure you're aware, for centralised, one-stop-shop solutions to broad issues. The DoC uniform is one such answer :-) and proved that it's a failed model to follow.
Any idea as to why the helicopter company that made the stuff-up hasn't been named yet? There must have been DoC staff on board to have had the news so quickly released (would you own up to such a mistake unless you had an observer on board?)
The explaination that the 'rat poison' would sink harmlessly to the bottom and blend in with the organic material that lies there, causing no further threat, is very unconvincing to me.
Hi Robert. Thanks for the response, and sorry for having taken some time to get back to you.
Fair enough on the point about not having to suggest a solution. I guess the main thing that concerns me, whoever dreams it up, is being clear about what's going to happen if and when the 1080 aerial drops stop.
In honesty I'm not sure I'll completely agree with you on all of this, certainly not in a short amount of time, but I think I'm getting a better grip on what many of the actual concerns are and where you're coming from, which is really helpful for me.
I'll give the helicopter company the benefit of the doubt here in their owning up unless there's an obvious reason to think otherwise. Some people will own up to that kind of thing, especially if they genuinely care about what they're doing and recognise the potential implications if they didn't. Imagine if wildlife started dying because they didn't report it and DoC workers hadn't gone in to check how all the birds were doing. Somewhere down the line it'd become obvious why they were dying and the dots would have been connected anyway.
If it was an honest mistake and something procedural (maybe so many other things were going on that it just never occurred to anyone to put in an extra rule of not flying poison over the island), DoC might not be naming the company because it thinks it shares some responsibility. A huge amount of what DoC does with wildlife recovery is experimental because the kinds of problems they work with have never existed anywhere in the world before. You'd hope something's learned from this and it could be a backwards step to wreck a relationship with a bunch of people who are quite possibly really good at their job nearly all the time, and still likely to do it better than anyone else could. It's hard to tell without being there. I'll be interested to see whatever reports come out about this (and I think they will sooner or later).
Seeya.
Mike.
Hi again Mike.
I'm kinda guessing you're a PR guy for the Department, charged with keeping an eye on 1080 'activity' in the public domain, but that's okay. I''m not anti-DoC by any stretch of the imagination, having worked for and with DoC staff over many years. I'm also aware of the need for practical solutions for what are very difficult problems (pest plants are my strongest area of interest).
The helicopter event was bad news for all concerned and lessons will have been learned. It highlights the dangers of handling dangerous materials when dealing with ecological problems. Protocols weren't followed somewhere along the line, it's obvious and there would have been some very hot words exchanged in the air I bet.
I too would not like to see the relationship the public has with DoC 'wrecked'. I think the Government is doing enough of that 'wrecking' as it is.
Gotta say though, the anti-180 brigade is whipping up a storm down south here. As with the story of the 'droppers', the 'anti's' has holes a mile wide. Good luck to all concerned.
Hey, I'm flattered. :) You can think what you like but for the record, I've never worked for nor have I ever been contracted to DoC or any related marketing organisations in any form, unless you count things like reporting about broken facilities when I get out tramping.
Maybe it's a reflection of experiences growing up and people with whom I've interacted, but I tend towards giving people the benefit of the doubt unless I have reason not to. I realise this doesn't work in every section of society.
You could always click through to my blog if you wanted a clearer idea of who I am (if you hadn't already), but I'll leave that up to you.
Cheers.
Mike.
Mike!
More fool me - I hadn't thought that your name was a live link.
Now I know where you are coming from - high places!
I've had a quick skim, but I'll spend some time reading of your adventures tonight - looks great and the photos are alluring.
I'll write a comment on what I find, in case you do check back in here sometime.
I accept, of course, that your comments on the 1080 issue are without bias of the kind I suspected.
Cheers
Robert
Hi again. Yes sorry, I didn't realise you hadn't picked up I was this far north. :) It's hard to find people who know a lot about 1080 in tramping circles (at least in my tramping circles), so I just thought I'd tack on a question after what you wrote on Marty's blog a while back. I really do appreciate you having helped me with what some of the actual concerns are (besides deer and hunting dogs being poisoned, which seems to be what hunters comment on most.. even though there's more to it). It gives me some more starting points and context for reading up further.
Cheers.
Mike.
Post a Comment