For the year ended 31 December 201 2
Annual Report on the Aerial Use of 1080
Cover photo: Possum scavenges in an abandoned kererū nest. Kindly provided by Nga Manu Images.
Contents
Executive summary 4
Introduction 5
Sectors that use aerial application of 1080 for pest control 5
Application information 7
Aerial pest control operations 9
Post-operational reports 9
Communication 12 Monitoring 14
Incidents and public concerns 15
Research 21
Alternatives to the use of 1080 22
Improvements in the use of 1080 22
Other 1080 research 22
1080 is used to control animal pests including possums, rabbits, stoats and rats to reduce impacts on native animals and plants and prevent the spread of bovine tuberculosis (TB). Following the reassessment of 1080 in 2007, the controls on its aerial application were tightened. 1080 is one of the most closely-monitored hazardous substances in New Zealand.
This is the sixth annual report on 1080 application and the fifth to include data from aerial operations. The report details the number of operations, amount of land covered, any incidents arising during operations and research about 1080.
There were 48 aerial 1080 operations during 2012, covering approximately 432,000 hectares of land. This is a similar number of operations and area of land to 2011. The largest number of operations and amount of land covered were in the West Coast region, as has been the case since 2008. This is due to the prevalence of native forest in this region, the need for pest control and access limitations because of the terrain.
Most aerial 1080 operations were incident free in 2012, with only five breaches of the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) or Resource Management (RMA) legislation due to operator oversight or accidents.
This is a decrease from eleven incidents in 2011.
There were four breaches caused by members of the public trespassing on land where 1080 operations were occurring, or interfering with the operation itself.
This is a reduction from eleven in 2011.
The majority of incidents were reported to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) by operators themselves rather than by members of the public or other agencies, a continuing trend since we started monitoring 1080 in 2008. Only five complaints were received from the public during 2012.
In 2012 the regime generally worked as intended.
The benefits of using 1080 are being realised, for example the number of cattle and deer herds infected with bovine TB has fallen over recent years, while risks are being minimised. The controls are being followed and operators continue to show a willingness to improve practices.
Over the last six years there has been progress in safely managing 1080 through research, development of industry standards and better communication. Operators have come under scrutiny from enforcement and funding agencies and it is encouraging that the trend for improvements has continued in 2012.
The successful use of 1080 was highlighted by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment (PCE) in an updated report published in 2013. The PCE continues to support, and advocate for an increase in, the use of 1080 for pest control, especially to conserve native plants and animals.
Introduction
The reassessment of 1080 for use in pest control was completed by the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) New Zealand in August 2007. After careful consideration, the Authority concluded the benefits of using 1080 outweighed the adverse effects, and released its decision to allow the continued use of 1080 with additional controls. Recommendations were also made for the development of best practice guidelines, and for further research.
In reaching its decision, the Authority was mindful that the use of 1080 was a polarising issue about which many New Zealanders have deeply-held views. It recognised the importance of engagement through better communication and consultation with the public, local communities, Māori and special interest groups. The Authority’s decision outlined a new management regime for 1080 operations.
This is the sixth annual report since the release of the reassessment decision and the first to be published online only. It provides information on aerial 1080 operations in 2012 and a summary of research that was carried out up until July 2013.
In her 2011 report,1 the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment concluded that 1080:
›› can kill possums, rats and stoats in one operation
›› can reduce predator populations allowing populations of native species to increase
›› can be used quickly to protect birds and other animals at vulnerable times
›› is more cost-effective than ground based methods in the majority of the conservation estate
›› has limited environmental impacts.
In an update this year2 the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment reiterated her conclusion that 1080 is the best means of pest control currently available to help in protecting native flora and fauna. She reported that control of possums, rats and stoats is inadequate and is only being carried out to any extent on one eighth of conservation land. She also identified and questioned an apparent imbalance in conservation funding, with more being spent on 1080 research than on pest control operations. The Commissioner argued that 1080 has already been proven to be a cost effective means of protecting native flora and fauna and this should be better reflected in decisions assigning funding to research and use.
Sectors that use aerial application of 1080 for pest control
Control of animal pests including possums, wallabies, rabbits, rats and stoats is carried out using both ground control and aerial application of poisons.
Ground control may include methods such as trapping, shooting or placement of various toxins in bait stations. The toxins, or vertebrate toxic agents, may include 1080.
Aerial application is the use of aircraft to distribute baits and is considered by users to be a key advantage where pest control is undertaken on rugged or remote land.
Different users carry out pest control operations with aerially applied 1080 for different reasons. The sectors that aerially apply 1080 are:
›› the Animal Health Board
›› the Department of Conservation
›› regional councils
›› other land managers.
1 Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, June 2011; Evaluating the use of 1080: Predators, poisons and silent forests.
2 Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, June 2013; Update report on the original investigation, Evaluating the use of 1080: Predators, poisons and silent forests.
The Animal Health Board
The Animal Health Board (AHB) manages and implements the National Pest Management Plan for Bovine Tuberculosis (TB) in New Zealand, under the Biosecurity Act 1993.
The TB strategy, which was approved by the Government in 1998, was amended in 2004, and again in 2011. The plan provides for measures to control TB in cattle and deer herds, and works in two ways:
›› disease control – aiming to control and contain the spread of the disease within cattle and deer herds
›› vector control – aiming to control and contain the wild animal species (in most cases possums) responsible for spreading the disease to cattle and deer.
The 2011 amendment introduced new objectives for eradicating TB from possums and other wildlife species across 2.5 million hectares of the approximately 10 million hectares where wildlife infection is present.
Such eradication depends on sustained possum control to achieve low, even possum densities across large areas for long enough periods to break the cycle of possum-to-possum disease transmission.
The AHB uses a combination of ground control methods and aerially-applied 1080 in their plan for containing and controlling possums. In 2012, the AHB treated approximately 280,000 hectares using aerial application of 1080, which is approximately four percent of the total area treated by the AHB. This is 65,000 hectares less than in 2011. The decrease is due to the cycle of pest control operations rather than an overall decrease in use.
Note that from 1 July 2013 the functions of the AHB have been transferred to a new organisation – TBfree New Zealand.
The Department of Conservation
Possums and rats eat the eggs of native birds, attack their young and cause significant damage to native trees. In the absence of natural predators, possums and rats (as well as stoats and ferrets) have flourished and cause a great deal of damage to native animals and birds, and to the native forest environment.
The Department of Conservation (DoC) manages approximately 8.75 million hectares of conservation land. It uses a combination of ground control methods and aerial application of 1080 to:
›› improve the health of ecosystems by reducing the impact of browsing, competition and predation by possums and rats
›› protect threatened species from predators through direct control and secondary poisoning3
›› control rabbits.
DoC’s total area under sustained management is about 1.8 million hectares.4 In 2012, approximately 136,000 hectares were treated using aerial application of 1080 – comparable to 2011.
Regional councils
Under the Resource Management Act 1991, regional councils are responsible for maintaining indigenous biological diversity in their regions. They are also required to manage pests under the Biosecurity Act 1993. The councils achieve these responsibilities through:
›› local regulation (for example regional pest management plans)
›› incentive and education schemes
›› direct (regional council managed) control.
3 This is where scavenging pests are killed by eating poisoned rabbits, rats or mice.
4 Not including the Chatham Islands and sub-Antarctic islands.
Where regional councils directly control animal pests they use a combination of ground control methods and aerial application of 1080. This control reduces the impact of browsing, competition and predation by possums, and protects threatened species from other pests.
Regional councils have a combined area under sustained management of approximately two million hectares, and control pests over about 800,000 hectares annually.5 In 2012, these councils reported aerial applications of 1080 that covered approximately 5,200 hectares (0.6 per cent) of the estimated annual pest control area.6
Other land managers
Farmers and land managers (such as Land Information New Zealand) use a combination of aerial application of 1080 and other control methods like shooting and ground-laid poisons to reduce the environmental effects of rabbits. This is done to meet the
requirements of regional pest management plans, or for pest control on individual farms to protect crops.
In some areas referred to as rabbit-prone land, the rabbit population is not curbed by natural mechanisms and numbers can increase quickly.
Environmental effects can include:
›› a reduction in the diversity of plant species
›› an increased risk of erosion
›› a reduction in soil quality
›› adverse effects on indigenous and other fauna when predators of rabbits (such as cats and mustelids) target alternative prey.7
Large areas of the South Island are at risk from rabbits.
Approximately 380,000 hectares are considered extremely rabbit-prone and about 630,000 hectares are considered highly rabbit-prone. Most of these areas are in Otago, Canterbury and Marlborough8. In 2012, 1080 was aerially-applied for rabbit control over approximately 12,000 hectares (3 percent of the extremely rabbit-prone land) in Otago and Canterbury.9 This is similar to the area treated in 2011.
Application information
The pest management cycle for an area under sustained management spans several years. Every year parts of the area will be controlled by different methods at different times. This means that some parts of an area under sustained management will be treated by aerial application on a five to seven year cycle, while other areas may only ever be covered by ground control methods.
Table 1 shows treatment areas for different land managers from 2008 to 2012. It shows that the area of land treated by aerial application of 1080 has been reasonably consistent since 2008, when monitoring first started.
5 Data for regional councils as at 2006.
6 This does not include work done for the control of rabbits on behalf of other land managers.
7 See www.ecan.govt.nz/advice/your-land/plant-animal-pests/managing-animal-pests/pages/rabbits.aspx.
8 Lough, RS 2009. The Current State of Rabbit Management in New Zealand, MAF Biosecurity Contract Report, Wellington.
9 No aerial 1080 operations for rabbit control were reported for Marlborough in 2012.
TABLE 1: Aerial 1080 treatment area (000 hectares)
AHB DOC REGIONAL
COUNCILS
OTHER LAND MANAGERS TOTAL AREA RABBIT POSSUM
2008 Aerial treatment area (1080) 425 107 5 14 13 564
2009 Aerial treatment area (1080) 314 167 17 17 - 515
2010 Aerial treatment area (1080) 254 171 5 9 - 439
2011 Aerial treatment area (1080) 34410 127 5 10 5 491
2012 Aerial treatment area (1080) 27911 136 512 12 - 432
A dash (-) signifies that no operations were reported.
Figures are rounded to the nearest thousand hectares.
The Animal Health Board (AHB) conducts aerial 1080 operations over a considerably larger total area, and aerially-applies more 1080 than any other user. In each year the AHB was responsible for more than half of the land treated with aerially applied 1080. Whilst the AHB is the largest user of 1080, usage of aerial 1080 over the last five years represents only four percent of the AHB’s total pest control area which is approximately 8.8 million hectares. In large part this is due to a significant proportion of the AHB’s pest control area including farmland, with aerial 1080 being mainly used on the more remote fringe areas.
10 Includes combined AHB and DoC operation of 31,500 hectares.
11 Includes combined AHB and regional council operation of 27084 hectares.
12 Includes combined Council lead + DoC co-funded operation of 2428 hectares.
By comparison, a significant proportion of DoC pest control occurs in more difficult forested terrain.
However, as with the AHB aerial 1080 is used on only a small proportion of the land managed by DoC. Eight percent of the 1.8 million hectares managed by DoC has been treated with aerial 1080 in the last five years.
Aerial pest control operations
This section is divided into three parts. The first gives a synopsis of the mandatory post-operational reporting of aerial 1080 operations. The second looks at monitoring data collected, while the third section provides more detail on individual reported incidents and how the operators and enforcement agencies responded to them.
Operational managers are required to submit information after an aerial 1080 operation, including:
›› who undertook the operation and why
›› information about the 1080 formulations used and application rates
›› the location and size of the operation
›› monitoring information, including:
– water monitoring, if it was carried out in conjunction with the operation
– species monitoring, if it was carried out in conjunction with the operation
›› an assessment of the outcomes of the operation
›› an overview of the communication activities (consultation and notification) and the outcomes of that communication
›› an overview of any incidents and complaints related to the operation, and the actions that resulted from those incidents and complaints
›› a map of the operational area.
Individual post-operational reports are available on our website at: www.epa.govt.nz.
Post-operational reports
Operation management
The Environmental Protection Authority received reports for 48 aerial 1080 operations in 2012, covering approximately 432,000 hectares. This is the same number of operations and a comparable area to 2011. The majority of land was treated by the AHB (65 percent) and DoC (31 percent). The remaining area was treated for rabbit, possum and wallaby control by regional councils and other land managers.
Of the reported operations:
›› twenty-two were funded by the AHB, the same number as 2011
›› one was co-funded by a regional council and the AHB
›› eleven were funded by DoC, an increase from eight in 2011
›› one was led by a regional council and co-funded by DoC
›› three were funded by a regional council
›› three were funded for research into pest control
›› eight were funded by other land managers for rabbit control.
Formulations of 1080 and application rates All of the aerial operations to control possum, rodents or both used 1080-laced cereal baits with a concentration of 1.5 grams of 1080 per kilogram of bait. Deer repellent-coated cereal baits were used in ten of the 37 possum and both possum and rodent control operations. Carrot baits were not used on any possum control aerial operation in 2012.
All rabbit control operations used carrot baits laced with 1080 at the rate of 0.2 grams per kilogram of bait. The different concentrations of 1080 used in bait are due to differences in susceptibility to the toxin between the target species.
Bait application rates for possum and rodent control operations varied between 0.5 and three kilograms of bait per hectare, with rates for rabbit control varying between six and 35 kilograms of bait per hectare. The difference in application rates reflects the differences in pest numbers and feeding patterns between target species.
Despite the differences in toxic concentrations and application rates, the average application rate of 1080 was similar for both rabbit and possum control operations. The average application rates were approximately 3 grams of 1080 per hectare for possum control and 4.3 grams per hectare for rabbits. This is similar to previous years. Application rates were well below the maximum allowable rate of 30 grams of 1080 per hectare.
Location of operations
The number of aerial 1080 operations in each region, and the sectors using 1080, varies depending on the purpose of the operation, topography and land cover.
The number of operations and area treated in each region are shown in Table 2. This table also shows the number of operations carried out by each funding group.
In 2012 the regions with the largest number of aerial 1080 operations were the West Coast, Waikato and Otago, with twelve, nine and seven operations respectively. However, the reasons for the operations differ and so the areas treated also differ. The West Coast has 37 percent coverage of indigenous forest, and aerial application of 1080 for possum control is considered a key tool in possum and rodent control programmes both by DoC and the AHB. In Waikato the operations were carried out to control possums and rodents on farmland, to control bovine TB, and on conservation land to protect native plants and animals.
In Otago, all of the operations covered small areas on private land for rabbit control.
TABLE 2: Number of aerial 1080 operations and area treated in each region (2008- 2012) REGIONANIMAL HEALTH BOARDDEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATIONREGIONAL COUNCILSOTHER LAND MANAGERS RABBIT & POSSUM TOTAL AERIAL OPERATIONS
AREA TREATED (000 HECTARES) Year080910111208091011120809101112080910111208091011120809101112 Bay of Plenty111-1---1----211-147114-7 Canterbury11--111--1--1--9126741114776252491037 Hawke’s Bay54334---543345281241773 Manawatu/ Whanganui51-3222111- ----1----831434844312042 Marlborough332---1---- ---342--492826-- Northland---1-1-- ---1-1--2-14- Otago23-2--2---- ----5499779911713334133 Southland---1- 1---1-1--7-25-- Taranaki ---1- 1-2---1----2-1-22-35-21 Tasman32-2232-1---64-326564-4639 Waikato52364132-13111413---1-966897127776475 Wellington121-214--- -1---131-231929-32 West Coast15976646656---1--1-2015131212183181203208105 TOTAL41281722221318118113221418161518117564454948565514439492434 A dash (–) signifies no operations reported. Area figures are rounded to the nearest 1,000 hectares. The data have been reviewed as a result of the five year review; one additional operation was identified in 2008. 13One operation was joint with DoC. 14 One operation was joint with the regional council.
Size of operations
The total land area of 1080 aerial application in 2012 was 431,983 hectares. The average size of aerial applications was 8,998 hectares, with the largest application covering just over 55,000 hectares and the smallest 150 hectares. This is comparable to the size of operations in previous years.
The size of the operation can depend on its purpose and location. DoC and the AHB mostly carry out aerial 1080 operations to control possums and other predators over larger tracts of land. Bigger operations can increase the time it takes pest numbers to rebuild since fewer pests migrate into the heart of the treated areas. The average size of aerial 1080 applications was 13,400 hectares for DoC and 12,696 hectares for the AHB.
By comparison, the average size of aerial 1080 rabbit control operations undertaken by other land managers was 1,068 hectares.
Figure 1 shows the area of aerial application by region.
It shows that the largest area of application was in the West Coast. Whilst Table 2 shows that Otago had a comparatively large number of operations, they were mainly small applications for rabbit control, so only a small area was treated relative to other regions. This is consistent with previous years.
Figure 1: Total area of aerial 1080 applications in each region (hectares)
Communication
Good communication can reduce public concern and result in fewer incidents. The EPA expects to see a high level of communication (consultation and notification) with neighbours, affected groups and communities to an extent appropriate for each operation.
Consultation with Māori groups
Māori groups should be engaged with as early as possible when an aerial 1080 operation is to be carried out on public land that may affect Māori cultural and natural resources.
20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000
0
West Coast Wellington Waikato Tasman Taranaki Manawatu/Whanganui Hawkes Bay Canterbury
Otago Bay of Plenty
Māori stakeholders were consulted on 97 percent (35 out of 36) of the aerial operations that took place on public land in 2012. This is the same rate of Māori consultation as 2011. Changes to operational plans as a result of consultation with Māori were not specifically identified for most operations. However, in one operation boundaries were changed as a result of consultation with Māori groups.
Consultation with hunting groups
Hunting groups should be engaged with as early as possible when an aerial 1080 operation is to be carried out on public land if hunting is likely to be affected. Early engagement of these groups is especially important in recreational hunting areas15, and where commercial harvesting of animals for meat is prevalent.
Hunting groups were consulted in 72 percent (26 out of 36) of the operations that took place on public land in 2012. This is the same rate as reported in 2011.
Consultation with hunting groups resulted in one operation changing baiting strategies and timing to reduce impacts on hunting and two operations using deer repellent baits.
Changes to operations as a result of consultation Changes to operations as a result of consultation are considered an indicator of whether the consultation was effective. Twenty-two of the post-operational reports for 2012 identified one or more changes to the operational plan as a result of consultation, including:
›› sixteen operations reported boundary changes
›› one operation excluded sensitive areas as a result of concerns expressed by local iwi
›› three operations made changes following concerns expressed by local landowners, including the exclusion of sensitive areas such as waterways and kea habitat
›› seven operations changed the timing of the application to allow others to manage effects such as changing stock grazing and granting hunting permits
›› five operations changed from aerial to ground application of 1080 for parts of the operation
›› three operations added deer repellent.
Notification
Notification takes place after consultation is complete.
The purpose of notification is to inform affected parties of the timing and location of 1080 operations and other relevant details. Notification of certain types of incidents is also required.
One concern about notification was reported to the EPA in 2012. This related to a failure to comply with a resource consent condition rather than a breach of HSNO requirements.
Communications Guideline for Aerial 1080 Operations
Operators must consult prior to applying for permission to use 1080 and provide evidence of consultation in the application. Prior to granting permission for an aerial 1080 operation, Public Health Units (PHU) assess consultation against the Communications Guideline for Aerial 1080 Operations16. The Ministry of Health (MoH) reports the results of these assessments to the EPA.
15 The eight recreational hunting areas are North Pureora Conservation Park, Kaimanawa, Kaweka, Haurangi, Lake Sumner, Mt. Oxford and Mt. Thomas, Greenstone/Caples beside Lake Wakatipu and Blue Mountains.
16 This report is available on the EPA website: www.epa.govt.nz.
The Ministry reported that 58 applications for aerial 1080 operations were assessed against this guideline in 2012. All of the applications met the requirements of the guideline and no permission was declined as a result of inadequate consultation. This is an improvement since the guidelines were introduced in 2009.
Weather and other site specific conditions mean that not all of the 58 applications for 1080 operations assessed by the MoH resulted in operations being completed.
Monitoring
Water monitoring
If an aerial 1080 operation is within the catchment of a drinking water supply, the local PHU may require water monitoring before water intakes are reconnected. This is done to ensure that drinking water does not contain 1080 residues that breach the tolerable exposure limit (3.5 micrograms of 1080 per litre of water).
The tolerable exposure limit is set at a level that is protective of human health.
Water monitoring may also be required in other water catchments as part of environmental monitoring for resource consents or for research purposes. It may also be used to provide evidence where PHUs are investigating concerns about alleged water contamination.
Post-operational water monitoring was carried out in 13 of the aerial 1080 operations in 2012, with 73 individual tests reported. The tests had a method detection limit of 0.1 micrograms of 1080 per litre of water.
Only one sample contained concentrations of 1080 above the method detection limit. This sample contained 0.2 micrograms of 1080 per litre of water, which is significantly below the tolerable exposure level for human health. This is consistent with previous
years. Since 2008 there have been more than 500 water samples analysed for 1080, only 10 of these were above the method detection limit and they were all below the human health tolerable exposure limit.
Operators and regulatory bodies are likely to continue to test water to verify that specific operations pose no risk to water supplies.
Species monitoring
The monitoring of plant and animal species is carried out to determine the need for pest control operations and their success. Species monitoring is not a mandatory requirement for 1080 operations, but where monitoring is carried out, operators must report the results to the EPA.
Pre-operational monitoring of pest species was carried out in 34 (71 percent) of the aerial 1080 operations undertaken in 2012. All rabbit control operations were monitored prior to aerial operations whilst nine DoC and 12 AHB operations had pre-operational monitoring of pest species.
Post-operational monitoring of pest species was carried out on 28 (58 percent) of the aerial 1080 operations in 2012. For all but two (93 percent) of the monitored operations, the operators reported meeting their stated target for pest control17.
Monitoring of non-target species was carried out on seven operations to determine the effects of 1080 on them. Species monitored included dogs, kea, kaka, tomtits, native trees and native snails. Such monitoring is generally carried out over several years in order to identify trends in populations of native species following pest control operations. For example, the AHB is carrying out a ten year research project assessing changes in native bird and plant populations following removal of pest species.
17 Target results vary based on methods of monitoring and are included in the post-operation reports available on the EPA’s website: www.epa.govt.nz.
Incidents and public concerns
The EPA is advised of complaints, incidents and activities associated with 1080 use in three ways:
›› the public registering their concerns – a member of the public contacts us to express concerns about a particular 1080 operation or related practices
›› incident reporting – an operator or agency contacts us to express concerns about a particular 1080 operation or related practices
›› media monitoring – we learn through our media monitoring service of incidents or concerns reported in the news.
Incidents related to specific operations are reported in post-operational reports. The reports for the 2012 operations are available on our website at:
www.epa.govt.nz.
Since 2008 industry and enforcement practices have improved and operators now have greater accountability when conducting aerial 1080 operations. For example, the way in which permissions are granted has been improved. This includes clearer conditions on permissions and better mapping of boundaries and exclusion zones. Industry has also developed standard operating procedures which give clearer direction to operators about compliance requirements.
Enforcement and funding agencies have increased their resources for responding to public concerns, auditing against controls, permission conditions and standard operating procedures. This has led to improved responses to complaints and incidents, as well as improved detection of breaches.
There has been a significant change in the way that the EPA is initially advised of incidents and complaints.
In 2008 and 2009, the majority of incidents were initially reported by the public, enforcement agencies and media. Since then the majority of complaints and incidents have been self-reported by operators.
Overview of incidents and public concerns There were 26 incidents, objections or concerns reported to the EPA in 2012, a decrease on the previous two years (Figure 2). Most of the reported incidents and concerns were reported by operators and funding agencies rather than members of the public. The total number of reported incidents includes several non- HSNO related incidents or concerns.
Figure 2: Incidents and public concerns reported to the EPA18
18 The total number of reported incidents and public concerns is more than the combined breaches shown. Not all investigations revealed breaches.
50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
Total Operator breach Public breach
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
All reported incidents were investigated and showed:
›› a decrease in the number of breaches19 by operators compared to last year (11 in 2008, three in 2009, six in 2010, 12 in 2011 and five in 2012)
›› a decrease in breaches by the public compared to last year (three in 2009, two in 2008, 16 in 2010, 11 in 2011 and four in 2012)
›› five breaches of HSNO controls and other legal requirements from operator oversights or accidents, down from 11 in 2011
›› four breaches caused by interference or trespass by the public, down from 11 in 2011
›› five public objections to 1080 operations
›› four other incidents not relating to breaches of controls
›› eight other unsubstantiated incidents.
One of the operator breaches related to an incident where aircraft applied or spilled baits outside the area allowed by permission conditions. Two incidents related to baits being missed whilst clearing them from walking tracks after a 1080 drop. In one instance the breach was compounded by a failure to clear tracks within 24 hours of the application. One breach was due to a failure to submit a post-operation report within the six month deadline. The remaining breach was due to a notification condition on a resource consent not being met.
Incident summaries
This section contains information on the aerial 1080 incidents, objections and compliance issues reported to the Environmental Protection Authority in 2012 (by region – north to south).
WAIKATO
Operation: Tihoi
There was one operator control breach and one incident of public entering 1080 area while walking their dogs.
Type: Operator breach of HSNO controls Date Received: December 2012
Rimu Track was cleared by the operator as required by consent conditions, however a member of the public found some bait on/near the track a week later. MoH and DoC were notified and the operator checked the track for bait. No enforcement action was taken.
Type: Dog death – public entering 1080 area Date Received: September 2012
The operator reported that while aerially applying toxic bait to Tihoi sector 3A, the pilot spotted a group of hunters in the operational area. The hunters said they were not aware of the operation. One of the hunters’
dogs showed symptoms of 1080 poisoning and was shot. One of the hunters lodged a complaint with DoC shortly after the incident outlining the apparent lack of information, DoC explained that information is readily available on their online permit system and pesticides summary. The complainant did not give any details so no follow up action was possible.
19 A breach is a non-compliance with HSNO controls or other legal requirements.
Operation: Whareorino
There were two non-HSNO incidents.
Type: Non-HSNO incident Date received: May 2012
A contractor’s analysis of flight lines suggested that 1080 application could be within the 60 m buffer zone along a portion of Mangatoa Road, Whareorino.
The contractor spent two days checking the roadway and surrounds for any bait, none was found. The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), MoH and the police were notified. There was no public health risk and no compliance action was taken.
Type: Non-HSNO incident Date received: May 2012
The helicopter pilot inadvertently activated the bucket motor on the ground at the loading site. Bait was flung at high velocity for two seconds. Operators searched the area and recovered 2 kg of bait from within and outside the loading site. The contractor advised MoH of the accidental discharge on the helipad. MoH were satisfied no public health risk remained.
Operation: Hatepe Type: Public objection
Date received: September 2012
An anonymous letter was sent to AHB implying a photo of a dead sika deer was the result of 1080 poisoning exacerbated by a failure of deer repellent.
No action was taken.
Operation: Te Kopia
There was one public trespass, one unconfirmed stock death incident and one public objection.
Type: Public trespass
Date received: December 2012
A recreational user entered an area adjacent to the loading zone on the day of toxic application. He stated he had permission to be there and film the operation, which was not the case. He was asked to leave, which he did. No further action was taken.
Type: Unconfirmed stock death by 1080 Date received: December 2012
Three calves died in a paddock adjacent to an aerial 1080 treatment area three days after application.
The farmer and an operator staff member walked the paddocks to check for 1080 cereal baits, none were found. They found a section of raised boundary fence but could not confirm that stock had entered the treatment area through it. The landowner took samples which were analysed by a veterinarian.
However, no testing for 1080 was undertaken and therefore the results were inconclusive.
Type: Public objection Date received: November 2012
A local landowner telephoned DoC about his disapproval of aerial 1080 application on his mother’s property.
HAWKE’S BAY
Operation: Te Urewera
Type: Operator breach of HSNO controls Date received: August 2012
An advisor from the MoH notified the EPA that a deer hunter found two 1080 baits and a dead possum on the Okahu Road to Skips Hut section of the Moerangi walking track. An aerial operation had taken place three days earlier. The contractors did not clear that section of track within the 24 hour timeframe.
Compliance advice was given to the operator.
Operation: Kokomoka
Type: Operator breach non-HSNO Date received: June 2012
A resource consent was required from both Bay of Plenty (BoPRC) and Hawkes Bay (HBRC) regional councils. The BoPRC required the consent holder give two working days’ notice prior to commencing the 1080 aerial operation. This was not done.
All requirements for the HBRC consent conditions had been met. The operator emailed a written apology and map of the toxic flight lines to BoPRC. This was then followed up with a phone call to the compliance officer.
Consent conditions required by both councils were reviewed by the operator and councils.
MANAWATU/WHANGANUI
Operation: Retaruke Type: Non-HSNO incident Date received: January 2013
A wild pig ate 1080 bait in the consented treatment area, left the area and vomited some pellet material onto untreated private land.
Operation: 2012 Hihitahi Type: Public breach Date received: July 2012
Members of the public and a reporter for the Wanganui Chronicle entered the operational area and removed 1080 toxic baits. When informed of the incident, the AHB arranged for regional council staff with controlled substance licences (CSLs) to remove the baits from the reporter’s possession and contacted the PHU. The PHU HSNO enforcement officer did not believe there was any malicious intent involved.
The baits were apparently removed so they could
be tested for 1080 residue. The officer assessed the situation and determined public health was not at risk at that stage. The matter was then forwarded on to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE), no further action was taken.
Operation: Kia Wharite Type: Non-HSNO incident Date received: March 2013
During pre-feed a loader rolled down hill. It was retrieved with a digger and there were no injuries.
WELLINGTON
Operation: Rimutakas
There were two public objections and two incidents of public entering areas while walking their dogs.
Type: Public objection Date received: January 2012
A member of public was concerned that he would have 1080 blown over him whilst working outside.
AHB staff attended and discussed the operation and no further action was needed.
Type: Public objection Date received: February 2012
A neighbouring resident objected to the aerial control project and made threats to operators. The police were informed as a precaution. No further action was taken.
Type: Dog death – public entering 1080 area Date received: September 2012
A dog owner walked past 1080 warning signs into an application area, after which the dog died. It is possible that 1080 was the cause, however no autopsy was undertaken.
Type: Dog death – public entering 1080 areas Date received: September 2012
A family walked their dog on its leash on the Kaitoke Ridge Track. The owner saw the dog eat green bait, after which it vomited. The dog was taken to a vet but later died.
The contractor had checked and cleared the track of any baits on three separate days. Signs were in place at all access points to the site of the aerial operation warning that dogs should not be taken into the area.
Letters had been sent to dog owners and the general public and adverts placed in newspapers prior to the 1080 operation.
Vet clinics around the area were aware of the procedure to treat 1080 poisoning, however in this case the dog didn’t survive.
TASMAN
Operation: Aorere Valley
Type: Dog death – public entering 1080 area Date received: September 2012
A landowner let his dogs loose into an operational area within days of the 1080 application. All of the dogs returned, however one dog subsequently went missing and another died when back at the property.
The owner reported that the dog that died showed symptoms of 1080 poisoning; it is assumed that the missing dog died elsewhere. The dog owner took no action at the time and disposed of the dead dog.
Neither the AHB nor the contractor was informed so no post-mortem assessment was done to confirm cause of death.
WEST COAST
Operation: Marsden
There were two incidents of public entering areas while walking their dogs.
Type: Dog death – public entering 1080 area Date received: August 2012
A pig hunter’s dogs encountered 1080 bait and two of them subsequently died from suspected 1080 poisoning. Warning signs were posted at all points of entry to the operational area and the contractor had also made the dog owner aware of the 1080 operation.
Type: Dog death – public entering 1080 area Date received: July 2012
A dog died of unknown causes. The owners suspected 1080 poisoning but were unable to advise where the dog encountered poison. The owners stated that they had seen no signs. An audit was done of all 1080 signs and public notifications and no issues were found. It is not possible to verify the cause of death due to lack of evidence. No further action was taken.
Operation: Pukaki Type: Public breach
Date received: October 2012
The complainant was collecting firewood with her children within the treatment area and encountered two pellets of 1080. The complainant was concerned that there was not sufficient signage as it was only noticed on leaving the area. The issue was discussed with the landowner who confirmed that an access permit is needed for this area and the complainant did not have one. Information on 1080 drops is given out to holders of access permits.
The Medical Officer of Health was contacted and the incident investigated. Further information was sought from the AHB and the contractor. The baits found
by the complainant were within the treatment area specified in the permission so there was no breach of the permission conditions. The complainant was formally interviewed and admitted that she knew that a permit was required to collect firewood on the land and that she did not have one. It was deemed that no risk to public health had occurred. A report was sent to the complainant and she was reminded to seek permission from the owner if she wished to gather firewood on their land.
Operation: Mokihinui - Maori Gully Type: Public objection
Date Received: June 2012
On one of the days sowing took place, a member of the public arrived at the loading site and complained about 1080. A staff member spoke with them and they left. No further action was taken.
CANTERBURY
Operation: Hawdon Valley
There were two operator breaches of controls.
Type: Operator breach of HSNO controls Date received: January 2012
Pilot error resulted in exclusion zones being crossed and aerial application within 30 metres of the East Hawdon Bivouac. No public exposure to the baits was encountered following the incident. The PHU were satisfied DoC took appropriate action to mitigate the risk to public health. Warning signs were placed at each of the listed huts, access points, camping and public amenity areas prior to the operation.
Type: Operator breach of HSNO controls Date received: July 2013
The post-operation report was delivered to the EPA after the six month due date. Compliance advice was given.
Operation: Rolleston Range Type: Non-HSNO incident Date received: September 2012
A helicopter in transit dropped an empty bucket within the consented area. It was recovered the following morning.
OTAGO
Operation: Natures Wonders Type: Public breach
Date received: July 2012
A group of four people climbed over a fence into the operational area to go rabbit shooting. They were trespassing, which was reported to the police but no further action was taken.
Research
In its 2007 decision on the reassessment of 1080, ERMA recommended a government supported research programme into the use of 1080 and alternative pest control methods. There has been extensive research which can be classified as follows:
›› alternatives to 1080
›› improvements in the use of 1080
›› other research related to 1080 use.
Many of the research projects are ongoing, as collection of data over an extended period is necessary to draw informed conclusions. The research has been funded or carried out by DoC, AHB, Connovation Ltd, Landcare Research or MBIE and further details can be found on their websites – www.doc.govt.nz, www.tbfree.org.nz, www.connovation.co.nz, www.landcareresearch.co.nz, www.msi.govt.nz. A summary of the number of projects in each research area between January 2012 and July 2013 is shown in Table 3.
Table 3: Summary of research projects
NEW PROJECTS
UPDATE ON EXISTING PROJECTS
Alternatives to the use of 1080 (one new, 13 updates)
Extending the use of toxins already in use in New Zealand 4
Seeking registration in New Zealand for toxins currently used overseas 2
Consideration of new toxins 1 7
Improvements in the use of 1080 (three new, 17 updates)
Reducing amounts of 1080 used 6
Effects of the use of deer repellent 1
Size and composition of baits 1 1
Effects of aerially-applied 1080 on bird populations 2 7
Effects of possum control on trees 2
Other research (one new, seven updates)
Strategic pest control 5
Degradation of 1080 in soils 1 1
Impacts of 1080 on water quality 1
Alternatives to the use of 1080
Projects included field and laboratory trials of cholecalciferol, zinc phosphide, sodium nitrite and humane red blood cell toxins. The efficacy, impacts on non-target species and environmental risks and benefits of alternative toxins have been considered.
Improvements in the use of 1080
Research in this field has focused on reducing costs of using 1080 by reducing bait size and rates, using aeroplanes instead of helicopters and developing GPS controlled buckets. Work has also been done to improve targeting of species and reduce impacts on non-target species.
Other 1080 research
A number of projects looked at strategic
considerations of pest control in New Zealand, such as the effectiveness of alternative strategies to control bovine tuberculosis. Assessment of the fate of 1080 in soil and potential impacts on water quality was also carried out.
