Offroad-Express

Posted: **Sat Oct 18, 2014 5:05 pm**

I know I've seen a fair few carcus's of late due to the latest round of sodium monofluoroacetate,
its a bit unsightly and makes the tracks/creeks a mess (I hit one at about 40km/h on a dirtbike),
whats the safest way to dispose of these? bury them? incinerator? or drop them outside a doc office?

Posted: **Sat Oct 18, 2014 5:31 pm**

found a msds which is fairly helpful incinerator looks the safest
http://www.pestoff.co.nz/msd/pellets.pdf
interesting to note that the msds states carcus removal and excess bait removal is required.

Posted: **Sat Oct 18, 2014 8:39 pm**

i'm sure i read somewhere that the correct disposal is to drop it on your local DOC office door step stating where it was collected from and leave it with them to deal with.

Posted: **Sat Oct 18, 2014 8:54 pm**

^^^^^^^ yes what he said.
Not at all happy with them deciding to bomb the hunuas next winter, apparently they can avoid the reservoirs but still bomb the entire area.
How they feck do they figure that, every drop of water that hits those hills ends up in the reservoirs, which supply's Auckland with 65% if its drinking water..

NZ uses 80% of the worlds 1080 consumption, some countries won't have a bar if it cause of how toxic it is..

Not happy

Posted: **Sun Oct 19, 2014 12:22 am**

so for all the 1080 haters

they are talking about build a plant to make 1080 in izone rolly...

interesting considering all the birth defects and illness in the small town where its made in states

https://www.change.org/p/the-department ... ison-drops

and another

https://www.change.org/p/selwyn-distric ... responsive

Posted: **Sun Oct 19, 2014 6:21 pm**

Way too much paranoia and conspiracy theory type rubbish spread by the anti 1080 campaigners.
A common one is the "19 different native bird species have had corpses test positive for 1080 after aerial 1080 operations"
Not an untrue statement, but as usual the facts are misrepresented if the full context is not given. In the case of that propaganda line, it was from the 70's in a few drops that were carried out wrong using small fragments of bait. Rather than the large pieces as used now.
1080 is mainly affective against mammals. NZ has a couple species of native bat and no other native mammals.
The fact is there is not any method even close as effective for eradication of pests that destroy our native species.

Posted: **Sun Oct 19, 2014 6:42 pm**

Yeah Revhead. Let's just spray the sh1t all over the place and eradicate everything. That'll sort it.
Humans aren't native to New Zealand either!

Posted: **Sun Oct 19, 2014 6:46 pm**

It doesn't work like that, which is exactly the point I was trying to make above

Posted: **Sun Oct 19, 2014 6:56 pm**

Would you happily drink water knowing its come from resevoiurs in the hills where 1080 has been dropped? I have other reasons why I dislike it but that's my main issue.

Are we absolutely certain that there are going to be no side effects on our kids and their kids from this in 50 years time because we have been drinking water containing 1080?

Posted: **Mon Oct 20, 2014 2:55 am**

1080 is a very contentious issue, the preservation of native species is important but one needs to ask at what cost ( not in a financial sense) this can reasonably be expected to succeed.

A biological answer is not necessarily the answer either, one only has to look at the West Island to see what Cane Toads are doing over there.

Edited: To remove the humour that does not suit such a serious issue.

Posted: **Mon Oct 20, 2014 7:48 am**

J_Dub wrote:Would you happily drink water knowing its come from resevoiurs in the hills where 1080 has been dropped? I have other reasons why I dislike it but that's my main issue.

Are we absolutely certain that there are going to be no side effects on our kids and their kids from this in 50 years time because we have been drinking water containing 1080?

Yes I would.

Posted: **Mon Oct 20, 2014 9:02 am**

Because u know its safe or because u don't care?

Posted: **Mon Oct 20, 2014 10:50 am**

Because I know it's safe I don't care about it.
They are not dropping it the lakes. Even if some did find it's way in there it would be so diluted it won't matter.
Do you know how much they would have to direct drop into the lakes to have an effect? Don't forget it's biodegradable.

Now, one thing I don't understand is IF it's as bad as the anti 1080 crowd claim, what is the motivation for it's use? Why would so many agencies advocate it's use?

Posted: **Mon Oct 20, 2014 11:29 am**

There is only 1 motivation for its use and they don't seem to care to admit it.

They have said its not faultless, that no tool is perfect but that its the cheapest most effective way to target pests.

The dilution theory may be true but my point is they say they can effectively drop into the ranges without getting into the water catchment areas but this is wrong, anything dropped into the hills eventually makes its way down into the streams, obviously not as a solid piece but it will eventually leech into the waterways. Its arrogant to say they can avoid the water

Posted: **Mon Oct 20, 2014 11:41 am**

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11343620

Oh look a council has a vested interest .
Funny how this was keep quite aye .....

And what other "agency's" are advocating it use apart from DOC?

I find it amusing that managed to find some scientists to support there claims here .Considering it is banned everywhere else in the world due to its toxicity .It would be very interesting to follow the source of the money that funded that particular study .

Posted: **Mon Oct 20, 2014 12:42 pm**

J_Dub wrote:There is only 1 motivation for its use and they don't seem to care to admit it.

They have said its not faultless, that no tool is perfect but that its the cheapest most effective way to target pests.

The dilution theory may be true but my point is they say they can effectively drop into the ranges without getting into the water catchment areas but this is wrong, anything dropped into the hills eventually makes its way down into the streams, obviously not as a solid piece but it will eventually leech into the waterways. Its arrogant to say they can avoid the water

What's that motivation?
Are you sure they have said "catchment area" and not just the water itself? There is a difference. Dropping it on the ground means it will biodegrade. Some might get as far as the lake, but bugger all. It does not stay pure and move through the earth.

Posted: **Mon Oct 20, 2014 12:45 pm**

UBZ wrote:I find it amusing that managed to find some scientists to support there claims here .Considering it is banned everywhere else in the world due to its toxicity .It would be very interesting to follow the source of the money that funded that particular study .

That is incorrect.

Posted: **Mon Oct 20, 2014 3:48 pm**

Love the one line response , which totally ignores the first part of my post

If you actually research it's use else where in the world - or Australia , Japan , Mexio , Isreal , Korea and the USA. The application is heavy restricted to areas where it cannot access the water table or human food production crops.
The reasons they state for this is lack of scientific research in regards to long term effects on the bio system .

Got any real science to back up your claims. Especially since you seem to have a vested interest .....

I mean have you ever actually seem a helicopter drop happening ? There is nothing controlled or scientific about it . Just simple carpet bombing

Posted: **Mon Oct 20, 2014 4:00 pm**

I don't have a vested interest at all.
Merely asking pointing out the errors in the quoted "facts" on all the anti 1080 web sites and asking for clarification of statements.

I haven't ignored anything. I just chose to focus on an error.

Posted: **Mon Oct 20, 2014 4:26 pm**

I have a vested interest I smoked a carcus on the trailbike and covered myself in stinking guts and oz residue,
I know I can be likely cured of a tb infection but I'm quite uncertain of being cured of 1080 poisoning,
I also know I can cure my dogs of tb if they decide to gut something dead they've found but maybe not if it were tainted with 1080.
I take issue with animals suffering a cruel death that could have died quickly and fed a family.
I take issue with $100k being dropped into 1 or 2 days chopper work that could have employed a doc trapper for a whole year.
the msds states carcus's should be removed where practical, not where affordable or reasonable or even accessible,
I think its entirely practical for 1000's of jobs to be created for the cleanup.
I also take exception that worksafe nz has not charged doc with breach of the health and safety employment act 1992 for its action or inaction in not following a chemical handling msds

And lastly I'd happily go trapping and shooting 50hours a week, year in year out for that choppers 100k day or two

Posted: **Mon Oct 20, 2014 5:45 pm**

The Environmental Protection Agency did a very extensive and in-depth 5 year review of the use of 1080. which can be found here. http://www.epa.govt.nz/about-us/monitor ... ments.aspx

The final passage reads:-
This five year review shows that the tighter management regime has been followed and there have been improvements in the use of aerial 1080. Operators show willingness to continually improve and learn from past mistakes. Communications about 1080 operations have improved substantially. Incidents and complaints have reduced and water quality remains unaffected. The tighter management regime is working. 1080 remains the only viable option to control pests in our native ecosystems and to control TB. The PCE’s continued endorsement of 1080 use to protect
native species by killing possums, rats and stoats strongly signals that it is currently the most suitable control method.

Posted: **Mon Oct 20, 2014 7:49 pm**

How big is this gona get?
If they are prepared to do drops in a place which provides over half the water supply for NZ biggest city then I'm assuming they will do drops almost anywhere..

Maybe it is a small issue now, but what are the affects in 50 years after all our native forests are riddled with the shit

Posted: **Mon Oct 20, 2014 8:57 pm**

mr revhead i gave up read ur govt feed bullshit, the day you walk into the bush and see first hand the side effect over and over again then you wil understand why i hate this shit, 1080 is making it worse cause pray for everything change the facts are out there by researchers, and yes we use 80% of 1080 made and most countrys have baned it and we are the only ones that drop it froma helicopter with no control, also global recomendations say all carcases and bait in streams should be cleared yet its not

Posted: **Mon Oct 20, 2014 9:16 pm**

Mate If you think 1080 helps birds and that go for a walk in the bush before a 1080 drop and have a listen to the bird song then go for a walk in the bush after a 1080 drop and you will be able to hear the difference. How much time do you spend in areas that have been 1080'ed?

1080 is an insecticide thus is designed to kill bugs bird eat bugs....

if anybody went out and poisoned animals so inhumanly as 1080 kills them they would be severely punished however the government is allowed to do this on a mass scale?

Watch the videos on YouTube about 1080 poisoning and see how all these animals are dying.

Posted: **Mon Oct 20, 2014 9:56 pm**

Ashohman wrote:Mate If you think 1080 helps birds and that go for a walk in the bush before a 1080 drop and have a listen to the bird song then go for a walk in the bush after a 1080 drop and you will be able to hear the difference. How much time do you spend in areas that have been 1080'ed?

1080 is an insecticide thus is designed to kill bugs bird eat bugs....

if anybody went out and poisoned animals so inhumanly as 1080 kills them they would be severely punished however the government is allowed to do this on a mass scale?

Watch the videos on YouTube about 1080 poisoning and see how all these animals are dying.

amen to this

Posted: **Mon Oct 20, 2014 10:01 pm**

Mudde1 wrote:The Environmental Protection Agency did a very extensive and in-depth 5 year review of the use of 1080. which can be found here. http://www.epa.govt.nz/about-us/monitor ... ments.aspx

The final passage reads:-
This five year review shows that the tighter management regime has been followed and there have been improvements in the use of aerial 1080. Operators show willingness to continually improve and learn from past mistakes. Communications about 1080 operations have improved substantially. Incidents and complaints have reduced and water quality remains unaffected. The tighter management regime is working. 1080 remains the only viable option to control pests in our native ecosystems and to control TB. The PCE’s continued endorsement of 1080 use to protect
native species by killing possums, rats and stoats strongly signals that it is currently the most suitable control method.

yes but here is the problem, govt fund them and doc so they will cover there ass and make thinks look more impressive than they are hate to say it, i know my auntys been there and got out of there cause of it

Posted: **Mon Oct 20, 2014 10:02 pm**

Mr Revhead wrote:
J_Dub wrote:There is only 1 motivation for its use and they don't seem to care to admit it.

They have said its not faultless, that no tool is perfect but that its the cheapest most effective way to target pests.

The dilution theory may be true but my point is they say they can effectively drop into the ranges without getting into the water catchment areas but this is wrong, anything dropped into the hills eventually makes its way down into the streams, obviously not as a solid piece but it will eventually leech into the waterways. Its arrogant to say they can avoid the water

What's that motivation?
Are you sure they have said "catchment area" and not just the water itself? There is a difference. Dropping it on the ground means it will biodegrade. Some might get as far as the lake, but bugger all. It does not stay pure and move through the earth.

Posted: **Tue Oct 21, 2014 7:54 am**

quoted from msds:Engineering Measures: Decontaminants are water (dilution), heat > 120°C (denaturing) and
microbial decomposition (degradation).
so unless there is significant microbial action within the waterway traces could likely build up in much the same way as other contaminants in our water (giardia for example).
http://www.hindawi.com/journals/tswj/2012/149893/abs/
quite interesting to read that staph is one of the bacteria that will successfully degrade the stuff,

Thing that really bugs me is the blanket use of aerial drops,
a lot of the areas are easily accessible and could provide employment for ground trapping.
A return of the bounty system perhaps $5 a tail?

Posted: **Tue Oct 21, 2014 8:41 am**

Even Doc's own research shows this stuff doesn't work, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMvdXlFS ... Ywih5I8OMA

Posted: **Tue Oct 21, 2014 8:55 am**

I think the planned drop for Hunua next winter is estimated to cost a bit over $500,000.

That's 10 incomes for a whole year that could be payed out for full time trappers and hunters, 10 hunters could easily cover the hunuas 10 times over each in a year

Offroad-Express

1080 carcus cleanup

1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup

Re: 1080 carcus cleanup