United Future

NZ is the only country in the world where its native forests face extinction if 1080 usage was stopped, hence we are the only country to have to have a mass poisoning system. 1080 is the only answer so far. Trappers won't go into areas that are physically difficult to access.

For all those 1080-haters, may I ask sincerely, how many of you actually own and actively use a Timm's trap. That includes you, Peter and Clyde.

According to a media response by DOC:

The Graf Boys' release fails to point out that 1080 – which breaks down naturally in soil within weeks – was last used in the forest sanctuary almost four months before the first recorded kiwi death.

The Grafs also fail to point out that chick survival in this forest more than doubled in each of the two years after the last 1080 operation in 2006 when stoat numbers were very low, compared to years without 1080.

"DOC has monitored more than 280 kiwi both through and after aerial 1080 operations – some for well over a year – and we have never lost a single bird to 1080,” said Dr. Avi Holzapfel, DOC’s Kiwi Recovery Group leader.

You can read the full media release here: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/SC1110/S00014/1080-kiwi-claims-extremely-misleading.htm

It is really disappointing that you (United Future) are jumping on a populist bandwagon such as this without seeming to have any desire to know the truth. I do not want ANYONE who is not willing to make decisions based on real evidence in my government. I also suggest that everyone reads the response by DOC ( http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/SC1110/S00014/1080-kiwi-claims-extremely-misleading.htm).

Graf's release states that "After 35 years of poisoning campaigns, and desperately trying, there still isn't a single, credible scientific research paper that demonstrates a net population benefit to any native species through the use of aerially applied 1080 poison. Not one! And yet the drops continue."

THIS IS A LIE

There a loads of papers on the effectiveness of 1080 in killing mammalian pests, and loads on the response of bird populations after 1080 operations. A few examples:

Seaton et al. (2009) 'Breeding success of New Zealand falcons (Falco novaeseelandiae) in a pine plantation' New Zealand Journal of Ecology

Powlesland et al. (1999) 'Impacts of aerial 1080 possum control operations on North Island robins and moreporks at Pureora in 1997 and 1998' Science for Conservation

Nugent et al. (2010) 'Effect of one-hit control on the density of possums (Trichosurus vulpecula) and their impacts on native forest' Science for Conservation

Being misleading is one thing, but how can he blatantly lie like this?

Via www.facebook.com/1080facts

For anyone who is interested, DOC have have posted the data they supplied Clyde Graf under the OIA regarding both testing of dead kiwi for 1080 residues, and spreadsheets listing the fate of all monitored kiwi, on their website.

A quick analysis of the resluts show that a total of 214 birds were monitored between July 2007 and July 2011. This consisted of 88 chicks (birds under 183 days old at the start of the monitoring period), 60 sub-adults (birds aged 183 days to 4.5 years) and 66 adults (birds over the age of four and a half) were monitored.

The overall survival rate across all monitored birds was at least 37% and possibly as high as 57% (if all birds that lost transmitters survived). The comparative survival rate of kiwi in areas with no pest control is around 6%. So it is completely misleading to say 1080 isn't working. It is still working at least six times better than no control and probably up to nine times better.

The breakdown of survival vs death is as follows:

Of the 88 chicks monitored:

28 (31%) survived to the end of the study period (27 survivors reached 183 days old and were therefore recorded as "reached sub-adult status" with only one remaining a chick)

48 (54%) died or were presumed to have died during the monitoring period and are unlikely to have reached sub-adulthood

12 (13.6%) either dropped their transmitters or the transmitter failed

Of the kiwi chicks that died, 79% (38 birds) showed signs of predation.

Of the 66 adults monitored:

24 (36%) survived to the end of the study period
27 (40%) died
15 (22%) either dropped their transmitters of had them removed

Of the adult kiwi that died, 70% (19 birds) showed signs of predation.

You can view the raw data here: http://www.doc.govt.nz/about-doc/news/media-releases/1080-kiwi-claims-extremely-misleading/

So Clyde Graf is basically an environmental crook and should not be a candidate for the United Future party.