Thread: SPCA call out 1080 for what it is - good on you !!

Originally Posted by Tahr

If this shit didn't kill deer most of us wouldn't give a toss about it or the RSPCA.

That's bullshit.

I care about the unknown long term effects of the stuff.
Where I live gets hammered with the shit.
It gets in our waterways and so into us.
Does long term exposure to minute traces cause cancer or any other ailments? No one knows.

I am not anti or for 1080 but I am anti trusting what the government says.
The stupidity of predator free by 2050 is a political rant. It will never happen.
There are just stupid politicians and people that believe the hype.
At what cost to the environment and people will the attempt have in the long run?



Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by R93

That's bullshit.

I care about the unknown long term effects of the stuff.
Where I live gets hammered with the shit.
It gets in our waterways and so into us.
Does long term exposure to minute traces cause cancer or any other ailments? No one knows.

I am not anti or for 1080 but I am anti trusting what the government says.
The stupidity of predator free by 2050 is a political rant. It will never happen.
There are just stupid politicians and people that believe the hype.
At what cost to the environment and people will the attempt have in the long run?



Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Trace exposure to 1080 does cause reproductive abnormalities. It seems that in some areas and with some bird species ie Kokako which being nectar feeders are not poisoned that there is a positive effect on population. The forest benefits from removal of possums and more flowering takes place. These are the studies that are presented to polli's. However in the case of the South Island, Kea and Kakariki colony's are killed out totally and Morepork and Falcon populations disappear.
The issue for SPCA is cruelty - not ' Is this cruelty justified' 1080 causes a cruel death without question. F&B also need to be honest if asked ' Is 1080 Cruel'
The 'grey area for me is that I admit here to leaving poisoned baits for Rats and Mice, knowing that their deaths will be 'cruel' the only difference with what I do and airdrops is that it is targeted but still cruel.

Originally Posted by R93

That's bullshit.

I care about the unknown long term effects of the stuff.
Where I live gets hammered with the shit.
It gets in our waterways and so into us.
Does long term exposure to minute traces cause cancer or any other ailments? No one knows.

I am not anti or for 1080 but I am anti trusting what the government says.
The stupidity of predator free by 2050 is a political rant. It will never happen.
There are just stupid politicians and people that believe the hype.
At what cost to the environment and people will the attempt have in the long run?



Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Its been around for a while now, there is a fairly good scientific understanding of the long term effects of 1080 exposure and its risks.

Trace exposure and long term effects likewise have a pretty good understanding of the toxicity, its bio availability, half life and how the body breaks it down. As they understand very well how the toxin works it is pretty simple to track its potential side effects.

There is no added risk profile noted in any of the studies I have read with regards to cancer. Do you consume bacon? Because that is scientifically proven and well understood to increase risk of cancer over time. Botulism sucks ass though so we take the trade off with the cancer causing preservatives.

Thoroughly agree with the predator free 2050 thing though. No chance it happens short of some crazy advancements in genetic engineering. Certainly wont happen with todays techology. I think we could probably get close to getting rid of possums and maybe mustelids but good luck getting rid of rats any time soon.

Its not perfect and I would love to see a reduction of its use, but I fail to see viable alternatives in many cases. I also think people who are vehemently against 1080 so often ignore the fact that it does in many cases help the native wildlife. Focus so much on the negatives that they forget the net result (as least as the credible evidence I have seen shows) is a positive one.

Originally Posted by Nick-D

Its been around for a while now, there is a fairly good scientific understanding of the long term effects of 1080 exposure and its risks.

Trace exposure and long term effects likewise have a pretty good understanding of the toxicity, its bio availability, half life and how the body breaks it down. As they understand very well how the toxin works it is pretty simple to track its potential side effects.

There is no added risk profile noted in any of the studies I have read with regards to cancer. Do you consume bacon? Because that is scientifically proven and well understood to increase risk of cancer over time. Botulism sucks ass though so we take the trade off with the cancer causing preservatives.

Thoroughly agree with the predator free 2050 thing though. No chance it happens short of some crazy advancements in genetic engineering. Certainly wont happen with todays techology. I think we could probably get close to getting rid of possums and maybe mustelids but good luck getting rid of rats any time soon.

Its not perfect and I would love to see a reduction of its use, but I fail to see viable alternatives in many cases. I also think people who are vehemently against 1080 so often ignore the fact that it does in many cases help the native wildlife. Focus so much on the negatives that they forget the net result (as least as the credible evidence I have seen shows) is a positive one.

It's not my point. You can believe everything you read if you want.
They said agent orange was harmless once, again backed by numerous studies. That turned out great.

I am talking about the unknown 20-30yrs from now.
Yes 1080 has been around for ages.

But it has never been used as much and in quantaties it has been recently.

Yeah I eat bacon but it's my choice, the government doesn't force me too





Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by R93

It's not my point. You can believe everything you read if you want.
They said agent orange was harmless once, again backed by numerous studies. That turned out great.

I am talking about the unknown 20-30yrs from now.
Yes 1080 has been around for ages.

But it has never been used as much and in quantaties it has been recently.

Yeah I eat bacon but it's my choice, the government doesn't force me too





Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

I am very careful of which information I take as verbatim. That's why I try to read actual scientific studies, not cherry picked articles or second hand anecdotal evidence.

Like I said the toxicity and health risks (of which there are some) are well documented and understood. I can only formulate an opinion based on real data. And the data we have shows low risk to public health.

I hope we can find a viable alternative bit I really don't see one right now

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Nick-D

I am very careful of which information I take as verbatim. That's why I try to read actual scientific studies, not cherry picked articles or second hand anecdotal evidence.

Like I said the toxicity and health risks (of which there are some) are well documented and understood. I can only formulate an opinion based on real data. And the data we have shows low risk to public health.

I hope we can find a viable alternative bit I really don't see one right now

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Fair enough.



Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Nick-D

I am very careful of which information I take as verbatim. That's why I try to read actual scientific studies, not cherry picked articles or second hand anecdotal evidence.

Like I said the toxicity and health risks (of which there are some) are well documented and understood. I can only formulate an opinion based on real data. And the data we have shows low risk to public health.

I hope we can find a viable alternative bit I really don't see one right now

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

If the risks are understood, why is there blatant disregard to the manufacturers requirements, ie removing poisoned carcases.

Originally Posted by tetawa

If the risks are understood, why is there blatant disregard to the manufacturers requirements, ie removing poisoned carcases.

Because the powers that be deem it to be unnecessary or impractical or both. I'm gunna go ahead and guess that removing every possum carcass from a 1080 drop in fiordland is pretty difficult

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Nick-D

Because the powers that be deem it to be unnecessary or impractical or both. I'm gunna go ahead and guess that removing every possum carcass from a 1080 drop in fiordland is pretty difficult

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Nick D. Maybe but removingctgem from flat roaded tracked forests and reserves is not. And how do they intend removing carcasses fom streams huh?
The use of it is gratuitous bullshit.
Chur Boy take note Sage et al are gonna blow $30 mill this year alone. You dont need to be even a junior bean counter to understand an annual incentive of that size would attract the best national and international entrepreunuers and lateral thinkers very quickly . Of course the drones in DoC and Regional Councils and MPI would be made redundant very quickly. Maybe that why it isnt happenning ay?

Originally Posted by Nick-D

I am very careful of which information I take as verbatim. That's why I try to read actual scientific studies, not cherry picked articles or second hand anecdotal evidence.

Like I said the toxicity and health risks (of which there are some) are well documented and understood. I can only formulate an opinion based on real data. And the data we have shows low risk to public health.

I hope we can find a viable alternative bit I really don't see one right now

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Now put some logic to it, It is just wrong to spread any poison from the air all over your country. There has to be a better way!!

Originally Posted by Nick-D

Its been around for a while now, there is a fairly good scientific understanding of the long term effects of 1080 exposure and its risks.

Trace exposure and long term effects likewise have a pretty good understanding of the toxicity, its bio availability, half life and how the body breaks it down. As they understand very well how the toxin works it is pretty simple to track its potential side effects.

There is no added risk profile noted in any of the studies I have read with regards to cancer. Do you consume bacon? Because that is scientifically proven and well understood to increase risk of cancer over time. Botulism sucks ass though so we take the trade off with the cancer causing preservatives.

Thoroughly agree with the predator free 2050 thing though. No chance it happens short of some crazy advancements in genetic engineering. Certainly wont happen with todays techology. I think we could probably get close to getting rid of possums and maybe mustelids but good luck getting rid of rats any time soon.

Its not perfect and I would love to see a reduction of its use, but I fail to see viable alternatives in many cases. I also think people who are vehemently against 1080 so often ignore the fact that it does in many cases help the native wildlife. Focus so much on the negatives that they forget the net result (as least as the credible evidence I have seen shows) is a positive one.

I would prefer to eat bacon however if 1080 is as safe as you think it is why not have a wee taste and let us know what the outcome is. I'm eager to hear the results

Originally Posted by 7mm Rem Mag

I would prefer to eat bacon however if 1080 is as safe as you think it is why not have a wee taste and let us know what the outcome is. I'm eager to hear the results

Well 1080 is cereal baits right? Maybe with a splash of milk and a coffee on the side??

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by R93

That's bullshit.

I care about the unknown long term effects of the stuff.
Where I live gets hammered with the shit.
It gets in our waterways and so into us.
Does long term exposure to minute traces cause cancer or any other ailments? No one knows.

I am not anti or for 1080 but I am anti trusting what the government says.
The stupidity of predator free by 2050 is a political rant. It will never happen.
There are just stupid politicians and people that believe the hype.
At what cost to the environment and people will the attempt have in the long run?



Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

The forum represents a very small sample of hunters, and likely the thoughtful ones. Of course it was a generalisation - but I believe it to be true.