1080 or not 1080 is the question

Science is all about discovery and how new technologies can be applied to make life better for all on this planet – not just humans, but increasingly precious wildlife and plant life too. It is easy to be cynical about NZ First’s Provincial Growth Fund, which allows Regional Economic Development Minister Shane Jones to travel around the country disbursing cheques and bonhomie which help build his popularity. However, the latest tranche of spending, announced this week, appears a sensible approach to a major national issue which has the regions in its frontline.

Jones said on Monday that $19.5 million from the fund had been earmarked to expand predator control efforts in the ‘‘surge regions’’ of Northland, Bay of Plenty, East Cape, Hawke’s Bay, Manawatu¯ -Whanganui and the West Coast.

Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters says the money will help in developing control approaches which do not rely on 1080 poison. It signals a ‘‘necessary and significant shift away’’ from 1080 use in a way which does not jeopardise pest-control requirements.

The money will be used by Crown company Predator Free 2050 Ltd, set up in 2016 to eradicate rats, stoats and possums in the next 31 years and protect native species. Jones sees the funding as a way of controlling predators over tens of thousands of hectares of rural and forested land while creating jobs in the regions and shoring up their futures through business and tourism growth.

The initial intention of the cash injection is to look for alternative control techniques to augment 1080, including better traps, lures and remote sensing methods. Conservation Minister Eugenie Sage has made it abundantly clear such efforts are not intended to replace 1080, but to reduce the need to use the poison to keep newly made predator-free areas in that condition.

She is also sticking with New Zealand’s and the Government’s entrenched ban on the genetic modification of organisms or the use of such technologies.

Sage has come under fire, predictably, from National Party conservation spokeswoman Sarah Dowie for her apparent blinding by ideology. Dowie says her party is more interested in how ‘‘good science’’ can guide conservation policy, rather than following a dogmatic line.

Whatever your view of 1080, nobody is going to disagree that the debate on its virtues and potential drawbacks has had a polarising effect on our communities, particularly those in the regions where 1080’s deployment is much closer to home.

The science still stacks up in favour of 1080 use, despite the fact it can kill livestock and pets, fish and invertebrates. Environmental organisations support it and former parliamentary commissioner for the environment Dr Jan Wright thought it should be used more.

While Sage is sticking with the genetic engineering-free policy – she told Newshub she is not interested in going down the ‘‘GE rabbit hole’’ – New Zealand needs to keep an eye on international progress in this area. Neither should we get so focused on 1080 as the only possible chemical solution that we ignore where GE-free science may take us in future.

New Zealand should consider 1080-free solutions wherever and whenever possible. But in vast areas of the country it’s not currently an option, and then it needs weighing up whether poison or nature-savaging beasts are the lesser evil.

Eugenie Sage has come under fire . . . for her apparent blinding by ideology.