Thread: Warning Distressing and Disturbing Photographs- 1080 Poison

Originally Posted by Tahr

I just can't take this seriously. 89 dead Kiwi in Tongariro attributed to 1080 - what a crock. I challenge you or anyone Woody to put up any proof what so ever a a single one of them were killed by 1080.
Almost every time you guys put something up like this it discredits you.

Same as when I here DOC have never killed a kiwi with 1080?

Originally Posted by Maca49

Same as when I here DOC have never killed a kiwi with 1080?

Same challenge to you then Maca, put up s single shred of evidence of Tongariro Kiwi being killed by 1080. I have never personally seen a single scientifically validated death of a Kiwi by 1080 - anywhere - ever. Have you?

Originally Posted by Tahr

Same challenge to you then Maca, put up s single shred of evidence of Tongariro Kiwi being killed by 1080. I have never personally seen a single scientifically validated death of a Kiwi by 1080 - anywhere - ever. Have you?

Could you put up any validated truth that none have been killed by 1080?

If you have never personally seen a single scientifically validated death of a kiwi by 1080 - anywhere - ever. Then Tahr perhaps you should take your own advice and put in an OIA.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=3&theater

Originally Posted by Graeme Sturgeon

If you have never personally seen a single scientifically validated death of a kiwi by 1080 - anywhere - ever. Then Tahr perhaps you should take your own advice and put in an OIA.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=3&theater

You realise that this is a table that shows there is 1080 in the liver of animals that have been necropsied, and is not a measure of if they were in fact killed by the 1080. You are assuming causation without sufficient evidence.

You do understand the liver is a cleaning device that filters and accumulates toxins and hence is why they use it to detect poisons.

Without a further indication of cause of death this data is entirely useless.

This sort of ideological leap hurts your cause.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

You have forgotten some are still eggs. I think you are assuming causation without sufficient evidence Nick-D

Originally Posted by Graeme Sturgeon

You have forgotten some are still eggs. I think you are assuming causation without sufficient evidence Nick-D

I'm not assuming anything. I wasn't the one implying 1080 kills kiwi and presenting that data as evidence.

Your claims, true or not are simply not represented in the evidence you supplied. Simply put, you are just making shit up.

You could given that evidence argue that 1080 bio accumulates in native birds, specifically in carnivorous species. That's much of my issue with the anti 1080 movement, much of the real issues(of which there are many) get drowned out by nonsense claims and conspiracy theories.


Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Nick-D

You realise that this is a table that shows there is 1080 in the liver of animals that have been necropsied, and is not a measure of if they were in fact killed by the 1080. You are assuming causation without sufficient evidence.

You do understand the liver is a cleaning device that filters and accumulates toxins and hence is why they use it to detect poisons.

Without a further indication of cause of death this data is entirely useless.

This sort of ideological leap hurts your cause.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Well said Nick.
I just looked at that link and came to the same conclusion...none have died.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Get your hand off it Nick-D. If we have poisoned their livers and their eggs then the rest of the birds pretty damned manky. I cant believe that you could claim only finding 1080 in the livers and eggs of our most iconic bird is hailed by you as some sort of a triumph.

Originally Posted by Graeme Sturgeon

Get your hand off it Nick-D. If we have poisoned their livers and their eggs then the rest of the birds pretty damned manky. I cant believe that you could claim only finding 1080 in the livers and eggs of our most iconic bird is hailed by you as some sort of a triumph.

Hes not saying it's a triumph mate hes just pointing out the birds are not killed buy 1080 as you first said...
A minute searching Kathy Whites history on Google certainly makes it not very valid data....

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Graeme Sturgeon

Get your hand off it Nick-D. If we have poisoned their livers and their eggs then the rest of the birds pretty damned manky. I cant believe that you could claim only finding 1080 in the livers and eggs of our most iconic bird is hailed by you as some sort of a triumph.

I'm not claiming it's a victory. I'm not claiming anything. You're the one making claims.

Again your making a claim based on no evidence. Show me the evidence that this tiny level of accumulated toxin (.05 parts per million) in the liver is enough to effect or impact the animal in questions health.

I'm not a toxicologist and neither are you so let's stop pretending you know what these results actually mean, cos I sure don't.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Nick-D

You realise that this is a table that shows there is 1080 in the liver of animals that have been necropsied, and is not a measure of if they were in fact killed by the 1080. You are assuming causation without sufficient evidence.

You do understand the liver is a cleaning device that filters and accumulates toxins and hence is why they use it to detect poisons.

Without a further indication of cause of death this data is entirely useless.

This sort of ideological leap hurts your cause.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

So what does ppm in a liver test represent in terms of toxicity? Or to put it another way, what would a lethal dose for a kiwi/weka show in ppm from the liver?
Anyone know?

Originally Posted by sneeze

So what does ppm in a liver test represent in terms of toxicity? Or to put it another way, what would a lethal dose for a kiwi/weka show in ppm from the liver?
Anyone know?

No idea man. That's the point.

There a bit of data around ld50 rates but I can't find anything that relates liver trace levels to toxicity or probable death.

Given the accumulatove filtration nature of the liver I would be inclined to think its not an accurate measure of toxicity at all. But that's purely speculative.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by sneeze

So what does ppm in a liver test represent in terms of toxicity? Or to put it another way, what would a lethal dose for a kiwi/weka show in ppm from the liver?

Anyone know?

No idea about liver tests sneeze..but have come across shit loads of Weka tipped up after a 1080 drop.
Most still had crumbs and dye in their mouths. Weka in my experience are one of the first ground dwellers to die from a drop.
The biggest upset for me was observing a pure white Weka..(very rare) for several weeks,then bang,,dead from a drop.
DOC were told about it before the drop but were not the slightest bit interested.
I believe it was the 3rd ever sighting,,with proof.

Originally Posted by Graeme Sturgeon

If you have never personally seen a single scientifically validated death of a kiwi by 1080 - anywhere - ever. Then Tahr perhaps you should take your own advice and put in an OIA.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=3&theater

Brodi, not 1080. Answer the question I asked, and not the one you wish I had asked.