Discussion Thread on the use of 1080 in New Zealand
Daymond Goulder-Horobin
Public
Seen by 149
I am curious to know the membership's position on the usage of 1080 in New Zealand. There is a strong divide about its usage and whether it should be banned and reverted to Trapping or other safer methods, or whether 1080 "Does the Job".
I note that based on discussions I have had that it is clear the mainstream published science supports the usage of 1080 with all the major parties in agreement, perhaps a few searching or being open to alternatives to some extent. However, I also consider many observations of what 1080 seems to have done with some observing that it has damaged and destroyed aspects of wildlife as well as unreasonable collateral damage from its usage based on personal observations made by farmers and onlookers.
Thus we have a classic problem where the published and peer-reviewed science is not matching what some of us are actually seeing. So what do you guys think? I am hesitant to finish a write up of our approach to 1080 without support from the membership given the nature of the subject. Also share personal observations as well and "Viable" alternatives as they say in the mainstream if you have them.
Poll Created Fri 14 Dec 2018 11:16PM
How should we go about handling the issue of 1080 - In-depth Poll Closed Wed 30 Jan 2019 11:02PM
I have left this to an open poll as there are many ways to go about dealing with 1080. I back the Integrity of the Internet Party membership and everyone's vote count. you may put your own suggestion in if I have missed something.
If this format is unsuitable pls advise, I would rather something further than a simple Yes/No if the membership felt that way.
Results
| Results | Option | % of points | Voters | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
A Full Ban on 1080 ASAP | 80.0% | 4 |
|
||
|
|
Only Ban 1080 Airdrops and consider allowing surgical implementation on the ground | 20.0% | 1 |
|
||
| Have a suitable alternative to 1080 before proceeding with a ban | 0.0% | 0 | ||||
| Do Nothing | 0.0% | 0 | ||||
| Ban poisons for pest control | 0.0% | 0 | ||||
| Undecided | 0% | 655 |
|
6 of 661 people have participated (0%)
Jo Booth Fri 14 Dec 2018 11:37PM
I’m keen to see effective alternatives - so see an outright ban as impractical in short term. Lets get the poison restricted and limited use rather than tossing it to the winds
Mason Bee Sat 15 Dec 2018 12:30AM
With an independent foreign scientific investigation (not just a review of the current papers).
Stephen Dickson Sat 15 Dec 2018 12:44AM
Nothing in this poll for me, its not just 1080 being badly misused.
Geoff Anderson Sat 15 Dec 2018 1:18AM
A full ban forces the issue of alternatives, many of which are already known.
Waiting for alternatives is a delaying tactic that may take years or forever.
Kathy White Mon 17 Dec 2018 11:34AM
I think 1080 is doing a huge amount of harm and it needs to be stopped immediately.
Daymond Goulder-Horobin Sat 15 Dec 2018 12:35AM
Your comments are very important for further insight that we can use btw.
Geoff Anderson Sat 15 Dec 2018 1:09AM
I’ve already stated that in my opinion, ‘1080 is nasty and needs to be phased out ASAP’, but it’s just as important to get viable alternatives sorted.
‘No pest control’ only appeals to non farmers.
1080 is banned in most countries because the science has been known for 70 yrs. So I don’t understand what this -scientific consensus of support is.? Surely it is bean counter support only.
DOC do lots of good but have some history of damage due to ‘politically correct decisions to simple problems’ and some dubious political affiliations. (No govt. body is perfect)
It always comes back to “the people” and that’s what’s best for the country.
Surely there is no argument that 1080 is good for people? There are plenty of known alternatives.
I don’t see money as the issue, as money is always available when necessary.
Feet on ground costs but it gets unskilled people off benefits.
Workers pay taxes and spend more money and it all goes round.
Jobs give self respect and motivation and improve expectations.
Paying people to do nothing is nuts, a total loss. 12 workers to support 1 unemployed. Getting them to do a govt subsidized job for the country reduces those numbers.
Daymond Goulder-Horobin Sun 23 Dec 2018 11:27PM
Good paper I found. Referenced well.
Daymond Goulder-Horobin · Fri 14 Dec 2018 11:41PM
I allowed multiple choice so one could vote for two options, people should be able to add there own options as well. This is a dynamic poll.