“A hole hastily dug in sand on a tourist beach by the Dept of Conservation last weekend doesn’t cut it! A hole containing 700 dead rats, a goat, seabirds and marine life… a toxic time bomb !”
It’s been pointed out in the article here below the 1080 manufacturer’s instructions regarding the disposal of 1080-poisoned carcasses. What we have seen over the past weeks regarding the environmental disaster that’s been dubbed ‘ratgate’ has been apparent failure to adhere to any kind of precautionary principle. as has been recommended by the two NZ environmental groups Flora and Fauna Aotearoa and Clean Green New Zealand Trust who have produced independent testing on the rats. NZ’s DoC have also tested however they have not yet released the results. Regarding handling of carcasses however this is how DoC rolls it seems*. Poisoned carcasses left to rot in waterways have been observed & reported by environmentalists for a very long time. DoC has been saying it’s unlikely the wildlife washed up at North Beach were the result of 1080 poisoning so we’ve seen them dig a hasty hole in the sand of a tourist beach to bury it all… near human habitation, and no warnings early in the piece. And so now we know the poisoning of the rats was almost certainly due to 1080 there is more independent testing of the other wildlife to come. Watch this space. EWR
IT’S CONFIRMED! 1080 POISON IS “ALMOST CERTAINLY” THE CAUSE, SAY LAB SCIENTISTS …
by Carol Sawyer
“Independent tests of samples collected by volunteers from the area confirm the presence of substances that indicate the deaths were almost certainly caused by 1080 poison”.
Laboratory scientists’ professional conclusion is that the deaths were almost certainly caused by 1080 poison. Meanwhile, what about the toxic dump on North Beach, Westport? 1080 manufacturer’s instructions are that all carcasses should be buried at least a metre deep, at least half a mile from human habitation and at least half a mile from any waterway. A hole hastily dug in sand on a tourist beach by the Dept of Conservation last weekend doesn’t cut it! A hole containing 700 dead rats, a goat, seabirds and marine life… a toxic time bomb !
Re independent testing, Asha Jade, of Flora and Fauna, says ” Hope to have full results to share next week. More species are currently being tested as well. Hope to share with redacted details to protect the lab, which is of the utmost importance at this stage. We needed to get it out to the public given the health & safety risk, and that DoC is withholding results.”
(Information from the GrafBoys). Regarding a drop at Mt Pirongia in 2014, fight charts released by the Department of Conservation reveal that 1080 poison was dropped directly into most streams and catchments, including to eight of the nine known water abstraction points. Poisoned carcasses have been left to rot in the streams, and animal welfare concerns have been raised. The Department of Conservation Mt Pirongia aerial drop, breached or ignored all of these warnings …
*The New Zealand manufacturer’s (owned by NZ Govt) 1080 poison label includes the following warnings –
“Toxic to terrestrial vertebrates.”
“Take measures to reduce of non-target animals being exposed to the toxin either through eating the baits or by scavenging the carcasses of poisoned animals.”
“Harmful to aquatic organisms.”
“Take all practicable steps to manage any harmful effects of a spillage including preventing baits from accidentally entering streams or waterways.”
“This product is toxic to wildlife. Birds and mammals feeding on carcasses of contaminated animals may be fatally poisoned.”
“Where practicable, the exposed bodies of all poisoned animals should be collected and destroyed by complete burning or deep burial in a landfill approved for hazardous substances. Dehydrated carcasses may remain dangerous to dogs or cats for an indefinite period. A single mouse poisoned by 1080 may contain enough poison to kill an adult dog.”
“Take measures to minimise the chance of baits accidentally entering any body of water.”
And … “Apply the product only as specified by label directions.” …
NOTE: The NZ authorities do not practice the precautionary principle with the spreading of 1080 poison. In fact they are now legally allowed to drop it into your waterways without the previously required consents, even though the manufacturer’s warning says take care not to drop it into the waterways. Whilst they continue to claim it is harmless, there is much independent research that says otherwise. (See 1080science for further independent info). In light of that, in my opinion it is safer to follow the precautionary principle, that is, proceed as if there were a possible risk to your health rather than assume there is none. Since 1080 is a known teratogen I believe it is particularly important for pregnant mothers or even those who think they may be or who could be pregnant, to distance themselves from an area where 1080 is being distributed, particularly aerially because of the drift of the dust over long distances. I believe these are the concerns being raised here, and particularly also with regard to warning tourists of the risks of drinking the water, who may not be able to read the signs (if there indeed are any). Finally, of particular concern is the topography of Milford Sound. When it rains at Milford Sound, “all of the steep landscape can be considered a streambed”. EWR.
By Carol Sawyer
Bowen Falls, Milford Sound….. the water intake for supplying Milford Sound township, and all tourist boats and accommodation, is approx. 200m upstream of the Bowen Falls and approx. 100m below the 1080 poison bait drop zone, where 1080 poison baits were aerially dropped on 15 October, 2019.
See smallest map attached. The person who provided that map says:
“Blue (circle) is rough location of intake. Red is a big pipe running from intake into the hydro electric station. It creates the power. Also here is where the only filter for our drinking water is…it’s a UV filter. Then it is distributed to vessels and accommodations. Our drinking water is straight from the Bowen River valley. I have walked up the pipeline before… quite steep in places.”
The significance of all of this is that the aerial 1080 drop could possibly have contaminated the water supply. As well as that, poisoned carcasses will, as we know from experience in all aerial 1080 drops, end up in that waterway as well, also then being a source of contamination.
1)Bowen Falls – Photo Te Ara, Encyclopaedia of NZ
2)Water intake – approximate position provided.
3)Area around Milford Sound excluded from aerial 1080 poison… map provided by Dept of Conservation.
DEPT OF CONSERVATION TELLS TOURISM COMPANY OFF – Skippers are not to warn tourists about the dangers of drinking the water after aerial 1080 drop in Milford Sound area yesterday.
Milford Sound (Arthur, Sinbad and Cleddau Valleys) was aerially poisoned on 15 October, 2019.
Pam Vernon reports (15 October, 2019) “A reader at the Envirowatch Rangitikei site today commented about warning the tourists on the dangers of drinking the water: “Hi there my brother works as a skipper for one of the biggest tourism companys in Milford and one of the skippers warned the customers on the mic and a doc member was on the boat and got seriously offended called her boss then doc warned the company gave them a chewing. The company forced all skippers to say nothing at all or risk consequences. The company is afraid of the bad side of doc because that’s who gives them there consent to cruise in Milford. Blackmail against freedom of speech. This is real as of the other day.”
Another person said, (14 October, 2019, 1080 Eyewitness):
“DOC poisoning operation in Milford tomorrow
Who the hell gives DOC the right to poison our only water supply, the Bowen Falls?
650,000 tourists come here every year to view this pristine environment, if only they knew….. “
I’m told the Bowen Falls are in the drop zone, and the whole township at Milford Sound and all the tourist boats are supplied by water from that source.
OIA responses from Southern DHB and DoC state there is a buffer zone round the Milford water intake which they regard as sufficient. See attached, (plus maps from original notification of the drop).
The Milford Sound water intake is approximately 200m above the Bowen Falls, and I’m told the intake is only about 100m inside the top end of the buffer zone (yellow area on map). Helicopters were seen working along that face. Helicopter pilots tell me 250m is a minimum buffer zone for safety, and more if on a slope, as baits tumble into valleys. Poisoned carcasses will inevitably end up in that waterway, as well, providing further contamination.
“The Bowen River catchment valley is rather like a giant granite bath, with very little top soil, and average rainfall of 7000mm per annum. Together with winter temperatures, ice and snow melt, this will likely increase the risk of 1080 arriving at the intake at the same time and breaking down much more slowly.”
and of the 2017 drop at Milford Sound he says:
“The water quality testing (pg 6 of DOC’s operational report 5.2.2) revealed the presence of 1080 at 1ppb.”
Put it this way… I wouldn’t be drinking that water !
According to Leslie McGrath, the Dept of Conservation will not take water tankers in to supply safe water because it is “too expensive” ! However the Department’s response to a request for alternative water supply is at the bottom of page 3 in their OIA response attached.
Thanks to the GrafBoys for this video clip which speaks for itself.
For those who are asking how come the bird was still alive? … a comment from the GrafBoys: “The bird most certainly would have died, if not shot. There is a two hour or more, latent period before the effects of the poison are felt by the victim. Some animals, cold blooded, can take even longer before the poison kicks in. This bird would have been feeding on pellets in a drop area and may have flown across a forestry road where 1080 poison wasn’t laid. Often poisoned blocks are right next to unpoisoned ones.”
And were it pre feed, non poisonous pellets as some are suggesting, then that would change precisely nothing. The same bird and others like it are still going to eat the drop of real poison to come aren’t they? That is the purpose of the pre feed drop. So still the question remains for you … do you want to risk eating a bird that may have consumed 1080? You obviously can make up your own mind about that, however I would not touch any game captured in a 1080’d area, period.
So, in my opinion it goes without saying, if you hunt for your food, you should always check the stomach or crop contents for poison. This is the stark reality now as the authorities appear to be throwing all caution raised by health professionals to the wind. They need to be invoking the precautionary principle:
This principle is expressed in the Rio Declaration, which stipulates that, where there are “threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.”
(Note, ‘cost effective’, corporate speak right there).
At any rate, if there’s any doubt … best to err on the side of caution. Remember the Indian family from Putaruru. They would not test for 1080 (until it was too late) which looks to be standard going by the testimony of the retired NZ Medical Doctor.
NOTE: For further articles on 1080 use categories at left of the news page.
If you are new to the 1080 poisoning program, a must watch is Poisoning Paradise, the doco made by the GrafBoys (banned from screening on NZ TV, yet a 4x international award winner). Their website is tv-wild.com. Their doco is a very comprehensive overview with the independent science to illustrate the question marks that remain over the use of this poison. There are links also on our 1080 resources page to most of the groups, pages, sites etc that will provide you with further information to make your own informed decision on this matter.
Note: We aim to raise awareness by providing independent information on environmental poisons … and we don’t endorse violence.
You are entitled of course to accept or reject our information, however if you are pro poisoning of the environment, EnvirowatchRangitikei is not the place to espouse your opinions. Neither do we tolerate trolls. Mainstream would be the place to air your pro-poison thoughts, you already have an accepted platform. This is a venue for sharing the independent science you won’t of course find there.
Predictably the damage control trolls have shown up on this post, both FB & in comments here. Many demanding was the bird tested? Time & date please? They don’t of course demand the same of DoC whose own records confirm they kill non target wildlife on an ongoing basis with nary a ripple of discontent from the pro poison people. Whose tracks are also covered by the total reluctance to test for 1080 poisoning (see our suspected 1080 poisoning page). I reiterate this is a warning bell to those who hunt for food. It is clearly becoming very unsafe to do so because of both poisoning and secondary poisoning.
The article clearly does not claim that the stomach contents were tested however, if you hunt for food and find similar gut contents that you sincerely believe are clover as one person suggests, then feel free to go ahead and eat. Bon appetit to you. Remember though, if you get sick like the Putaruru family, you likely won’t be tested for 1080 even if the attending doctors think you should. Good luck with that.
Not surprising given the US has the highest vaccination rate coupled with the highest infant mortality. Go figure. Still lining up for your jabs sleeping ones? Do the math. Join the dots. Not rocket science is it?
RECLAIMING THE VACCINE NARRATIVE: “NO SUCH THING AS A SAFE VACCINE.”
Vaccines are not “safe and effective.” There is no such thing as a safe vaccine.
But you wouldn’t know it to listen to the narrative being reported in the media. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the agency appointed to hold the final word on health and safety says, “Vaccines are safe and effective. The science is settled.”
However, when asked for proof showing that vaccinated children are healthier than unvaccinated children, the so-called science-based CDC offers none, claiming that it would be immoral to do such a study, to withhold ‘life-saving” preventatives from the population. “Trust us. Case closed.”
But curious minds do not close and do not trust opinion without proof as infectious and chronic disease rates skyrocket in children. Concerned individuals who live by the Precautionary Principle want answers. They refuse to be the guinea pigs who offer up their bodies for experimentation.
The Original Study Between The Vaccinated and Unvaccinated
Curious minds do not accept the status quo. They seek information to make informed choices. They look to the past, before the inception of the CDC in 1946. And they discover the first study by Alfred Wallace published in 1889 between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals for the first Small-pox vaccine entitled, Vaccination: Proved Useless & Dangerous.
The study’s conclusions based on forty-five years of registration statistics concluded the following (p 4):
– That during the forty-five years of the Registration of deaths and their causes, Small-pox mortality has very slightly diminished, while an exceedingly severe Small-pox epidemic occurred within the last twelve years of the period.
– That there is no evidence to show that the slight decrease of Small-pox mortality is due to vaccination.
– That the severity of Small-pox as a disease has not been mitigated by vaccination.
– That several inoculable diseases have increased to an alarming extent coincidently with enforced vaccination.
The first two claims were proved from the Registrar General’s Reports from 1838 to 1882. The results were indisputable, presented in figures and graphs for the entire period, so that data could not be manipulated.
The author noted that during this time period, a decline in deaths from Diarrhea and Typhus was six times greater than the decline in deaths from Small-pox due “to more efficient sanitation, greater personal attention to the law of health, and probably also to more rational methods of treatment.” Other reports of the time, such as by Dr. Walter Hadwen, MD, agreed.
“It is astounding that no−one has done any research on the effects of sub−lethal doses of 1080 episodic exposures on developing human and non−human brains, given the fact, that 1080 is a known brain or central nervous system toxin!” Dr Peter Scanlon
The article from mainstream in 2009 mentioned in the headline, rolls out the usual statements of ‘the benefits outweigh the risks’ or ‘there’s little evidence 1080 could harm pregnant women’, without producing a shred of data to prove these claims to the public. That could be because there really aren’t any according to the late Dr Peter Scanlon who asked the pertinent questions on 1080 research, or rather the lack thereof, quote:
“Where are the cancer causing or carcinogenicity studies? … there aren’t any;
Where are the reproductive studies, particularly focusing on female eggs? … there aren’t any;
Where are the developmental studies, early exposure to brain, immune system? … there aren’t any;
Where are the long term chronic exposure studies looking at mitochondrial DNA content and mutation rates? there aren’t any.
There’s a lot of doubts about this substance, it’s dangerous.”
Hear Dr Scanlon speak on the need for regulatory bodies to look at those age groups that are most vulnerable to chemical environmental exposure which can affect them in those growing periods. The periods he says when there are critical windows of much harm being done in the womb, foetuses, embryos, newborns and how exposure here in this early time of life, can lead to great harm & susceptibility to disease years or decades later. Watch the GrafBoys’ video below. Dr Scanlon speaks in the first half of the video.
So the midwives’ precautionary warnings to their patients were well founded.
Further read Dr Scanlon’s letter of submission cautioning about the potential risks from 1080 to the unborn (my emphases added) and also the risks to food & water:
Dr Peter Scanlon,
2 Bremworth Ave,
Dear Select Committee members,
I would suggest that you request scientifically referenced answers to some important questions in relation to the human safety of aerial 1080 (or sodium monofluoracetate/SMFA) drops in New Zealand or invoke the precautionary principle until such information is provided. With respect to potential human health risks the ERMA process was inadequate and often based on outdated and simplistic 19th and mid− 20th century level science involving animal studies that will not predict human risk, particularly in the most vulnerable populations. Any 19th or earlier century scientist could tell you what dose of 1080 would likely kill or be acutely toxic to human or non− human creatures. However no one can tell me or you for that matter, what sub−lethal dose will not have long−term negative health effects on the developing brain, immune, dental, endocrine and reproductive systems in embryos, newborns and young children using late 20th and early 21st century methods to access harm, especially changes to gene expression that may lead to disease later in life.
Early developmental exposures may lead to life−long problems and some may be analogous to the “leaky home” phenomena, where problems only manifest with time, hence long−term developmental studies are needed to exclude this possibility. I alerted ERMA of the 2007 International Conference on Fetal Programming and Developmental Toxicity which produced a very important statement (The Faroes Statement) for regulatory bodies to incorporate specific testing for early life environmental chemical exposures for risk assessment which was ignored. Could you please provide an impartial answer to a question posed by Independent MP Gordon Copeland in 2008 ” Does 1080 pose a risk to the health of unborn children?”
A concerned Māori woman contacted me and presented to the Waitangi Tribunal evidence for the Whanganui Inquiry last year her concerns that 1080 may have been implicated in causing a cluster of miscarriages, stillbirths and congenital malformations to the children of pregnant Māori women following aerial drops and raised the question of bowel cancer in some adult Māori being possibly linked to environmental 1080 exposures through contaminated food and water sources.
The current scientific gaps which the ERMA 2007 reassessment failed to address and assumptions based on outdated or poorly studied science for human risk considerations cannot exclude the possibility of 1080 having such adverse health effects in Whanganui or other NZ rural communities. The current medical system cannot easily investigate such concerns. In following an ERMA directive, recent NZ studies have found maximal levels of 1080 in puha & watercress to contain, respectively 15 and 63 parts per billion, and on the basis of these figures it has been calculated that a 70kg person would have to eat 9.3 tonnes of affected puha & 22 tonnes of affected watercress to have a 50% chance of dying from 1080 poisoning. Sadly that gives absolutely no safety reassurances for the many pregnant women or those with chronic medical conditions such as kidney, heart or liver disease, who enjoy such kai, or the common practice of Maori parents who mix mashed puha or watercress with pumpkin or kumara for the feeding of their infants. Non−toxic, low dose 1080 will not pose a risk for healthy adults but the current environmental food & water risks are in the ballpark levels that could especially harm our youngest & most vulnerable children. What 1080 amount will not affect their growing bodies, especially their developing brains? What level may cause a miscarriage? It is astounding that no−one has done any research on the effects of sub−lethal doses of 1080 episodic exposures on developing human and non−human brains, given the fact, that 1080 is a known brain or central nervous system toxin! And the brain function is intimately connected with immune and endocrine function. One Pirongia mother has raised this issue of developmental delay and other health issues in her children from possible low level water contamination during pregnancy in a well written ERMA submission. The studies for which the Ministry of Health based their provisional maximal acceptable levels of 1080 for drinking water ( 3.5 parts per billion) did not include neurotoxicity data, nor does Natalia Forunda’s University of Otago’s 2007 PhD
recommended level of 0.6 ( zero point six) parts per billion. I believe if developmental data, including fetal & young infant brain data were included, given the extreme vulnerability of this age group, that a much lower Maximal Acceptable Value for drinking water would be mandated. The limits of reported testing for 1080 is 0.1 ( zero point one) part per billion, so if one looked at the most vulnerable human groups, unborn and young children, levels under this, which the current test would record as zero, could still pose a human health risk. No aerial drops should occur near drinking water until this risk has been excluded and long−term neuro−developmental (i.e. behavior & brain function), immune, metabolic and reproductive outcomes for early life exposures have been scientifically accessed.
The finding of naturally occurring levels of SMFA being present in drinking tea at higher levels than the provisional maximal acceptable values for potable water, hence implying safety, is irrelevant for early unborn exposures. Some recent studies have linked tea− consumption during pregnancy to increased risks of brain tumours, leukaemia, dental fluorosis in the child as well as an increased risk of pre−eclampsia in the mother. Laboratory eel studies have shown 1080 levels of 17.4 parts per billion for those eels that consumed contaminated possum muscle and 30.6 parts per billion that ate contaminated possum gut. 1080 is slowly metabolized in eels. Are eels contaminating the food chain?
Will NIWA provide 1080 contaminant monitoring for local consumers of 1080 levels in eels after aerial drops and also measure other possible contaminants such as heavy metals, pesticide residues and toxins in them, that may have negative additive human health effects?
The ERMA scientific advisors decided that no studies were needed to be done to see if 1080 causes cancer on the basis that 1080 did not cause DNA mutations using traditional types of screening tests which are now being questioned in the cancer literature for their usefulness in predicting cancer risk given the rapid advances in the past few years in studying non−mutagenic causes of cancer. For instance, one of the energy−producing enzymes that 1080 inactivates, aconitase, has recently be found to have a role in regulating and protecting mitochondrial DNA from mutating. 1080 affects the sausage shaped cellular structures called mitochondria. Human cells contain 2 sources of DNA, namely nuclear and mitochondrial DNA. The possible effect of 1080 causing mitochondrial DNA mutations has simply not been accessed. Another enzyme that 1080 interferes with also has been linked with a certain type of cancer. Also, sub−lethal effects of 1080 impairing energy production needs to researched as defects in mitochondrial functioning has been recently found to play an important role in the initiation and/or progression of various types of cancer, including colorectal cancer Having recently met the daughter of one of the early 1080 aerial operation users and discovered her father died ” too early” with Bowel Cancer− the lack of any carcinogenicity studies in light of recent developments is simply inexcusable. Furthermore, damage to mitochondrial DNA has recently been shown to be involved in causing common diseases besides cancer such as heart disease, obesity & degenerative brain disorders, including dementia. Long−term studies on those working with this chemical or any individual with chronic medical conditions such as kidney impairment, diabetes, liver disease or heart disease that consumes possible 1080 contaminated foods should be accessed for progressive mitochondrial toxicity and for effects on mitochondrial DNA.
The 1080 chronic intoxication study of an occupationally exposed rabbiter −exposed over 10 years, was published in the NZ Medical Journal in 1977, and was ignored by ERMA mainly because the Christchurch doctors who trustingly sent a urine specimen to a certain Forest Research Institute scientist to measure the 1080 contained in it, who gave them a 1080 measurement in writing, later denied that he had in fact measured 1080. The more recent Sept 2009 NZ Medical Journal research on 1080 assessment of occupational exposures by Beasley and colleagues failed to even acknowledge or learn from this former paper yet they did admit how little they know about 1080 interactions with the human body. It was the similar structural toxicity appearances in the liver and kidney cells from the rabbiter’s specimen’s to morphological or structural states in 1080 experimental animals that lead Parkin and colleagues, to consider 1080 as the most likely cause of toxicity. They used electron microscopy performed on kidney biopsies taken from the rabbiter which showed changes that most likely represented degenerating mitochondria, hence the need to look for evidence of mitochondrial pathology such as tissue biopsies, or look for changes in mitochondrial DNA levels using techniques as have been used for monitoring HIV drug−induced mitochondrial toxicity, or check for mitochondrial DNA mutations and not just focus on 1080 level measurements. The reason New Zealand Medical Officers of Health report no concerns with 1080 is that they have failed to do the appropriate diagnostic investigations just mentioned, and the following adage applies to them−”If you don’t know what to look for, then you probably won’t find it”. 30 yrs later we still have no decent chronic toxicity human data or really understand the human kinetics of this chemical in healthy adults, let alone those with any concurrent chronic illnesses and most significantly Beasley and colleagues failed to do any measures of mitochondrial toxicity from this mitochondrial interfering toxin, hence we are none the wiser about its safety.
Given the “scientific ignorance” of those who proclaim human safety when doing aerial drops near water supplies in the West Coast, Whanganui, Coromandel, Levin, Hutt Valley and other regions of New Zealand and the real lack of safety data, especially for NZ’s most vulnerable human populations, our unborn, young and old and those with chronic illnesses, one really must question whether it is ethical to use such a poorly studied chemical from a human health risk perspective. The native flora and fauna are replaceable. TB ridden cows are replaceable but the future health of our children and our most vulnerable is not.
” I nga wa o mua” − The past informs the present.
” Foresight should be sought as hindsight is dearly bought”
Dr Peter Scanlon (Accident & Medical Practitioner)
M.B.ChB.. B.H B., P.G.DipCEM.. B.Sc.. F. AMPA
No one in my home is strong, healthy or brave enough to be a firefighter. That’s one reason why we don’t want cell towers or antennas of any size being installed near us. My neighbors feel the same way.
This May 2018 Verizon marketing video features employees testifying about how excited they are to be providing this technology to the world. According to the video, 5G can travel through walls and travel 3000 feet.
You must be logged in to post a comment.