1080: Evidence must beat emotion

‘Stop poisoning our children’’ and ‘‘1080 kills everything’’ screamed banners carried by opponents of the contentious pest control agent at demonstrations around the country on Saturday. Protective face masks, hazardous-materials suits, skull and crossbones logos. In short, an emotion-overriding-evidence level of hysteria reminiscent of those sometimes seen at antivaccination demonstrations. If that assessment sounds uncharitable, it’s supposed to, because the future of many precious native species is at stake.

Amid accusations of deception by the Department of Conservation (DOC), in particular – it being the agency behind the aerial drops of 1080 that are the only proven way to tackle pests in vast areas of inaccessible back country – there were claims of the poison presenting health hazards to people and wildlife.

Taranaki protest organiser Kevin Moratti claimed ‘‘if 1080 inadvertently got in our water catchment off the mountain – I mean a bucket being dropped or something – New Plymouth would be without water for three months. This is the toxicity of this stuff.’’

Quite aside from the problem of an entire pestcontrol strategy being predicated on the possibility of a preventable mistake, the clear evidence that 1080 is that toxic is lacking. Through the noise, representatives of organisations like DOC and Forest & Bird were at pains to point out the importance of evidence established around the use of 1080, and what we stand to lose if drops are halted. Which is not to say 1080 is foolproof or perfect, but that it is the best means we currently have for controlling pests, especially during mast events, when exceptional growth means pest food sources are abundant and reproduction rates rise.

The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment’s 2011 report Evaluating the use of 1080: Predators, poisons and silent forests recommended Parliament not support a moratorium on the use of 1080, pointing out that the use of such control methods as trapping were important but limited. ‘‘In our great forests on the conservation estate, possums, rats and stoats breed virtually unhindered, and ground control methods, no matter how sophisticated, simply cannot cover large areas of rugged terrain or prevent the devastation of mast years.’’

Discussing the alleged toxicity of 1080, the report said more than 2500 samples over 20 years had been taken from drinking water supplies, streams and lakes after aerial drops. ‘‘In all this time, 1080 residues have never been detected in drinking water supplies, and only found in vanishingly small and harmless levels in 3 per cent of the remaining samples.’’ As more than one 1080 defender has said since the weekend, the concentrations of its toxic ingredient, monofluoroacetate, are significantly higher in tea than the maximum concentration allowed under New Zealand’s drinking water standards.

No-one claims 1080 is a perfect solution to pest control challenges, and efforts will continue to find better ones, but there’s also precious little evidence for the outlandish claims around it. If anything, the evidence clearly shows it’s the best option we currently have, and putting its use on hold indefinitely would damage our conservation estate beyond repair.

‘‘1080 is the best means we currently have for controlling pests, especially during so-called mast events.’’