Fishnhunt New Zealands main hunting and Fishing Forum. millions of posts on fishing and hunting, dogs, 4x4 vehicles, outdoors and much more Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 100 Replies) Orange Fronted Kakariki (Read 4575 times)
Marty Foote
Forum Senior
****
Offline


I Love The FishNhunt Forum

Posts: 527
Joined: Jun 29th, 2014
Gender: Male
Orange Fronted Kakariki
Jul 7th, 2018 at 3:11am
Print Post  
I'm just pricking DOC into getting back to the talking table.

The Orange-fronted DOC attachments are not publicly available and you will have to ask DOC if you want a copy..As such, I do not have the ability, to provide forum readers with the attachments, unless the forum owners will put in place a mechanism that will allow for such information transfer to happen.

However, I dear say, that if you made the same inquiries, that I did, you will receive the same information I did.

Hi RNZ people,

Please look at the attached Orange-fronted parakeet recovery documents, that I received after writing the stuff below, before you make any decisions about what you will do, as RNZ news reporters and RNZ journalists. You will see, in those attached documents, that DOC employees and DOC scientists have always been promoting trapping as something that needs to happen even where aerial 1080 is being used.

Please look at all the information and make your own decision on what you are prepared to do to promote in your own roles as RNZ reporters and/or RNZ celebrity personalities. I sincerely hope that the words like "unhinged" and "anti-1080 nutter" will never be a part of the sort of wording that RNZ people will ever use, in the future, when describing intelligent bushmen that are prepared to sign output contracts that mean that they will never get paid unless they achieve the predetermined wild animal control densities targeted.

Also...Please ensure that your new RNZ personality, Karen Hay, that doesn't have a current RNZ email address, is forwarded this email.

Before you analyse the information about orange-fronted kakariki...Be warned that the Orange-fronted parakeets are, quite simply, the "canary-in-the-coalmine" with regards to the way DOC is using aerial 1080. Look at other birds that have better public profiles (kiwi, whio, kea, etc) who are also being hurt by the total public reporting emphasis on aerial 1080 poison and absolutely no public reporting on the trapping contractors that support the aerial 1080 operations with the on-the-ground trapping work that is happening.

This is taken out of a larger document I'm working through looking at 1080 costs and effectiveness.

You will notice that at the same time DOC has been dropping 1080 to "save" the Orange-fronted parakeet, the bird numbers have actually plummeted, from a small, but viable, breeding population, to numbers so low that they cannot be encountered during the monitoring.

You will also notice that DOC started monitoring rats only until the results showed that 1080 was not killing the rats, DOC then switched to possum monitoring, for one year, during which the 1080 failed to kill possums and then DOC switched back to rat monitoring and placed the monitoring lines in places that they should not have been placed which then enabled them to pick and choose which monitor line results they would use in the EPA report.

Cheers...Marty

10) Hawdon, Andrews and Poulter valleys 2016.   20,946  ha

EPA operational report: https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

Bait: $248,835.00   = $11.88/ha at a sowing rate of  2 + 2 = 4kg/ha = $2.97/kg bait cost.

Flying: $209,920.45   = $10.02/ha = $2.51/kg

Transport/Storage: No costs recorded.

Security: $3,332.00 = $0.72/ha

Monitoring:
Stoat:No costs recorded
Rat:  No costs recorded
Possum: No costs recorded
No bait or carcass decay monitoring costs are recorded.

Management/Consultation: $45,012.00 = $2.15/ha

Consents: No costs recorded.

Post operation work (track clearance, buffer carcass removal, etc): No costs recorded.

Signage: $12,153.00 = $0.58/ha

Other: $1,567.00 + $3,124.00 = $4,691= $0.22/ha

Monitoring:

STOATS: No monitoring done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of stoat control for this operation.

POSSUMS: No monitoring done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of possum control for this operation.

RATS:

The post operation rat target was 5%.

Pre: Hawdon 4.7%, Poulter 0%
Post: Hawdon 0%, Poulter 0%

The operational area was below the rat target before the 1080 was applied.
There was no reason to proceed with the operation as the rat numbers were already below the target set.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of rat control for this operation, except to say that the money spent here was wasted and would have been better spent somewhere else that had rat populations above the target set.

Orange Fronted Parakeet:

Outcome target:  "A viable breeding Orange-fronted parakeet population will still be present in the Hawdon & Poulter Valleys at the conclusion of the 2016 / 2017 breeding season."

Outcome result: "No OFP's have been found in these valleys this season. There may be one OFP nest yet to be confirmed."

Historical 1080 operations for this area are linked below:

This operational area has had eight aerial 1080 operations over the last nine years, The Orange-fronted parakeet monitoring showed 13 nesting pairs in 2011 and today no Orange-fronted parakeets are being encountered. This means that there was a viable breeding population before 1080 was used and over the decade of 1080 use the Orange-fronted parakeet population has dropped to the point that no individual birds are being encountered during monitoring.

2008: https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

Rat:
Pre: May-10%, June-7%, July-4%, Aug-11%, Sept-6%,
Post: Oct-0%, Nov-0%, Jan-0%, Mar-1.3%

This rat density monitoring pattern is normal, without rat control, with measured densities rising until Sept-Oct, dropping in Oct-Nov and starting to rise again in Mar-April.
The rat numbers never reached the level that could be described as "a plague of biblical proportions".
The 0% recorded in Nov/Jan cannot be definitely attributed to a 1080 rat kill and could very easily be the result of the rats moving into the canopy to feed.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of rat control.

Possum: No possum monitoring was done.
Stoat: No stoat monitoring was done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of possum and stoat control.

Orange Fronted Parakeet:

Outcome target: No target set.

Outcome result: No monitoring completed.

2009: https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

Rat:
Pre:  Jan-2%, Feb-0.9%, Mar-3.1%, Apr-7.5%, May-5.6%, Jun-8.5%, Jul-9.3%, Aug-22.7%.
Post:  Oct-1.5%, Nov-0%, Jan-0%.

This rat density monitoring pattern is normal, without rat control, with measured densities rising until Sept-Oct, dropping in Oct-Nov and starting to rise again in Mar-April.
The rat numbers never reached the level that could be described as "a plague of biblical proportions".
The low rat densities recorded in Oct/Nov/Jan cannot be definitely attributed to a 1080 rat kill and could very easily be the result of the rats moving into the canopy to feed.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of rat control.

Possum: No possum monitoring was done.
Stoat: No stoat monitoring was done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of possum and stoat control.

Orange Fronted Parakeet:

Outcome target: "A viable breeding Orange-fronted parakeet population will still be present in the Hawdon Valley at the conclusion of the 2009/10 breeding season. Orange-fronted parakeet encounter rates in the Hawdon Valley (from standardised monitoring lines) will not reduce from 2008/09 to 2009/10."

Outcome result: "OFP encounter rate in November 2009 was 0.38 birds per hour, compared with 0.21 birds per hour in the same survey in 2008."

2012: https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

Rat:
Pre: Aug/Sept/Oct- up to 7% (Please note that the highest recorded line is 7% and there is no average stated)
Post: Dec to Mar-0%.

This rat density monitoring pattern is normal, without rat control, with measured densities rising until Sept-Oct, dropping in Oct-Nov and starting to rise again in Mar-April.
The rat numbers never reached the level that could be described as "a plague of biblical proportions" with the highest recorded line being 7%.
The low rat densities recorded in Dec to Mar cannot be definitely attributed to a 1080 rat kill and could very easily be the result of the rats moving into the canopy to feed.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of rat control.

Possum: No possum monitoring was done.
Stoat: No stoat monitoring was done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of possum and stoat control.

Orange Fronted Parakeet:

Outcome target: "A viable breeding Orange-fronted parakeet population will still be present in the Hawdon Valley at the conclusion of the 2012 / 2013 breeding season. Orangefronted parakeet encounter rates in the Hawdon Valley (from standardised monitoring lines) will not reduce from 2011/12 to 2012/13."

Outcome result: "The orange-fronted parakeet population is present in both the Poulter and Hawdon valleys however the number of orange-fronted parakeets in the Hawdon and Poulter is not known and it can not yet be determined whether the populations are still in decline, are stable or are increasing. Encounter rates and nests found were down from 13 nests in 2011/2012 to 5 in 2012/2013."

2013: https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

Rat:
Pre: No monitoring done.
Post: No monitoring done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of rat control.

Possum:
Pre: 70%BMI or 17.5%RTC & 31%BMI or 7.75%RTC (dividing the BMI by 4 to achieve RTC).
Post: 9%BMI or 2.25%RTC  & 10%BMI or 2.5%RTC (dividing the BMI by 4 to achieve RTC).

The post possum density was more than twice the target of 1%RTC.

Stoat: No stoat monitoring was done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of stoat control.

Orange Fronted Parakeet:

Outcome target: "All known orange-fronted parakeet nests are fully protected against introduced predators."

Outcome result: "No monitoring of outcomes was undertaken." 

2014: https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

Rat:
Pre: 26%
Post: 16%

The post rat density was more than 3 times the target of 5%.

Possum:
Pre: No monitoring done
Post: No Monitoring done

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of possum control.

Stoat: No stoat monitoring was done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of stoat control.

Orange Fronted Parakeet:

Outcome target: "A viable breeding Orange-fronted parakeet population will still be present in the Hawdon & Poulter Valleys at the conclusion of the 2014 / 2015 breeding season. Orange-fronted parakeet encounter rate will not decline."

Outcome result: "Monitoring ongoing."  (Please note, this is the second year running that Orange-fronted parakeet monitoring results have not been published).


2015: https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

Rat:
Pre: 9%, 13%, 9%
Post: 0%, 0%, 0%

Because of poor placement of monitor lines the results cannot be relied upon to give accurate results.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of rat control.

Possum:
Pre: No monitoring done
Post: No Monitoring done

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of possum control.

Stoat: No stoat monitoring was done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of stoat control.

Orange Fronted Parakeet:

Outcome target:
1) "A viable breeding Orange-fronted parakeet population will still be present in the Hawdon & Poulter Valleys at the conclusion of the 2014 / 2015 breeding season. Orange-fronted parakeet encounter rates in the Poulter will not decline."

2) "A viable orange-fronted parakeet population will still be present in the South Branch Hurunui at the conclusion of the 2014 / 2015 breeding season. Orange fronted parakeet encounter rate will not decline."

3) "A viable breeding Orange-fronted parakeet population will still be present in the Hawdon & Poulter Valleys at the conclusion of the 2014 / 2015 breeding season. Orangefronted parakeet encounter rates in the Poulter will not decline."

Outcome result: "Encounter rate has not declined significantly since last season despite the massive beech mast and consequent influx of mice, rats and stoats.."  (Please note, this is the third year running that Orange-fronted parakeet monitoring results have not been published).

The wording of the Orange-fronted parakeet outcome result would indicate that the parakeet numbers are declining, although this decline is not as significant as the decline in 2012-13.

2016: https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

Rat:
Pre: 4.7%, 0%.
Post: 0%, 0%,

The rat density was recorded at below the target of 5% before the 1080 was applied.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of rat control.

Possum:
Pre: No monitoring done
Post: No Monitoring done

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of possum control.

Stoat: No stoat monitoring was done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of stoat control.

Orange Fronted Parakeet:

Outcome target: "A viable breeding Orange-fronted parakeet population will still be present in the Hawdon & Poulter Valleys at the conclusion of the 2016 / 2017 breeding season."

Outcome result: "No OFP's have been found in these valleys this season. There may be one OFP nest yet to be confirmed.

Over the last decade the Orange-fronted parakeet population has declined from a small, but viable, breeding population to numbers so low that normal monitoring methods are unable to count any individual birds. At the same time as the decline has been happening there has been very intensive aerial 1080 operations happening that were supposed to "save" the Orange-fronted parakeets from extinction.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Cantyguy
Donor Member
*****
Offline


I Love The FishNhunt Forum

Posts: 3199
Location: North Canterbury
Joined: Oct 10th, 2010
Gender: Male
Re: Orange Fronted Kakariki
Reply #1 - Jul 7th, 2018 at 7:58am
Print Post  
That is of concern isn't it! Is it possible that other factors may have contributed to their decline. Are there viable populations in adjoining valleys? Is their home range such that they may have migrated to another area? I certainly hope it is not 1080, if so questions to need to be asked and future operations modified.
  

Digital Hunter...in search of the perfect pic
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
outdoorlad
Forum Font
*****
Offline


I Love The FishNhunt Forum

Posts: 2821
Location: Christchurch
Joined: Nov 10th, 2006
Gender: Male
Re: Orange Fronted Kakariki
Reply #2 - Jul 7th, 2018 at 9:43am
Print Post  
Those DOC gits will still argue that it’s the rats & tree monkeys that are responsible not the 1080  Tongue

DOC putting the “Con” in conservation
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
EC
Forum Font
*****
Offline



Posts: 2161
Location: West Coast - Reefton.
Joined: Nov 9th, 2006
Gender: Male
Re: Orange Fronted Kakariki
Reply #3 - Jul 7th, 2018 at 9:50am
Print Post  
outdoorlad wrote on Jul 7th, 2018 at 9:43am:
Those DOC gits will still argue that it’s the rats & tree monkeys that are responsible not the 1080  Tongue

DOC putting the “Con” in conservation


Yes there are those that will argue black is white but those that have jumped ship will agree totally.
Funny wee lot...the DOC.
  

Wrinkles are the map of your soulful journey,,,you'd be lost without them,,
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
XRhunter
Donor Member
*****
Offline


I Love The FishNhunt Forum

Posts: 837
Location: Central North Island
Joined: May 30th, 2014
Gender: Male
Re: Orange Fronted Kakariki
Reply #4 - Jul 7th, 2018 at 2:52pm
Print Post  
Geeeze Marty, you're poking a few gigantic holes in their 'scientific' approach to predator control. Keep up the good work:)

Good to see someone well enough versed in the matter to show 'em up.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Marty Foote
Forum Senior
****
Offline


I Love The FishNhunt Forum

Posts: 527
Joined: Jun 29th, 2014
Gender: Male
Re: Orange Fronted Kakariki
Reply #5 - Jul 7th, 2018 at 4:44pm
Print Post  
Cantyguy wrote on Jul 7th, 2018 at 7:58am:
That is of concern isn't it! Is it possible that other factors may have contributed to their decline. Are there viable populations in adjoining valleys? Is their home range such that they may have migrated to another area? I certainly hope it is not 1080, if so questions to need to be asked and future operations modified. 



These are the only valleys that they know of where they are naturally occurring. There have been some releases onto offshore islands that appear to have had some problems.

There may be other reasons, such as a parasitic mite or disease that only affects Orange-fronted parakeets and leaves the other kakariki species alone.

I got this information, about parasite/disease from the DOC Recovery Plan that has not been published on the DOC website and you have to ask DOC to send you a copy.

The other things that are stated, in the recovery plan, is the need for ongoing trapping, the possibility of poison-shyness developing in rats and the need for DOC staff to have access to all the management tools that are available.

The disease thing may have some credibility except that it is only attacking Orange-fronted kakariki and leaving the closely related yellow-crowns alone.

It was a virus that wiped out the North Island Weka. Initially the weka was a big winner with European settlement in areas where grain was being grown. Weka grew to plague proportions, on the East Coast, with the increase in rat numbers which is the main weka food supply. It was thought that the weka had been made extinct in the North Island, however, there are still low numbers of weka in the Urewera. If you were to listen to DOC and F&B, you would be led to the conclusion that predators were the reason for the demise of weka, when the opposite is true, in that, weka are highly efficient predators and are having to be killed, with 1080, when stoat trapping is not stopping the loss of whio eggs and chicks that are being taken from the nests.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Salmoner
Donor Member
*****
Offline


I love salmon fishin

Posts: 3559
Location: Darfield
Joined: Feb 19th, 2008
Gender: Male
Re: Orange Fronted Kakariki
Reply #6 - Jul 7th, 2018 at 7:06pm
Print Post  
Marty Foote wrote on Jul 7th, 2018 at 3:11am:
I'm just pricking DOC into getting back to the talking table.

The Orange-fronted DOC attachments are not publicly available and you will have to ask DOC if you want a copy..As such, I do not have the ability, to provide forum readers with the attachments, unless the forum owners will put in place a mechanism that will allow for such information transfer to happen.

However, I dear say, that if you made the same inquiries, that I did, you will receive the same information I did.

Hi RNZ people,

Please look at the attached Orange-fronted parakeet recovery documents, that I received after writing the stuff below, before you make any decisions about what you will do, as RNZ news reporters and RNZ journalists. You will see, in those attached documents, that DOC employees and DOC scientists have always been promoting trapping as something that needs to happen even where aerial 1080 is being used.

Please look at all the information and make your own decision on what you are prepared to do to promote in your own roles as RNZ reporters and/or RNZ celebrity personalities. I sincerely hope that the words like "unhinged" and "anti-1080 nutter" will never be a part of the sort of wording that RNZ people will ever use, in the future, when describing intelligent bushmen that are prepared to sign output contracts that mean that they will never get paid unless they achieve the predetermined wild animal control densities targeted.

Also...Please ensure that your new RNZ personality, Karen Hay, that doesn't have a current RNZ email address, is forwarded this email.

Before you analyse the information about orange-fronted kakariki...Be warned that the Orange-fronted parakeets are, quite simply, the "canary-in-the-coalmine" with regards to the way DOC is using aerial 1080. Look at other birds that have better public profiles (kiwi, whio, kea, etc) who are also being hurt by the total public reporting emphasis on aerial 1080 poison and absolutely no public reporting on the trapping contractors that support the aerial 1080 operations with the on-the-ground trapping work that is happening.

This is taken out of a larger document I'm working through looking at 1080 costs and effectiveness.

You will notice that at the same time DOC has been dropping 1080 to "save" the Orange-fronted parakeet, the bird numbers have actually plummeted, from a small, but viable, breeding population, to numbers so low that they cannot be encountered during the monitoring.

You will also notice that DOC started monitoring rats only until the results showed that 1080 was not killing the rats, DOC then switched to possum monitoring, for one year, during which the 1080 failed to kill possums and then DOC switched back to rat monitoring and placed the monitoring lines in places that they should not have been placed which then enabled them to pick and choose which monitor line results they would use in the EPA report.

Cheers...Marty

10) Hawdon, Andrews and Poulter valleys 2016.   20,946  ha

EPA operational report: https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

Bait: $248,835.00   = $11.88/ha at a sowing rate of  2 + 2 = 4kg/ha = $2.97/kg bait cost.

Flying: $209,920.45   = $10.02/ha = $2.51/kg

Transport/Storage: No costs recorded.

Security: $3,332.00 = $0.72/ha

Monitoring:
Stoat:No costs recorded
Rat:  No costs recorded
Possum: No costs recorded
No bait or carcass decay monitoring costs are recorded.

Management/Consultation: $45,012.00 = $2.15/ha

Consents: No costs recorded.

Post operation work (track clearance, buffer carcass removal, etc): No costs recorded.

Signage: $12,153.00 = $0.58/ha

Other: $1,567.00 + $3,124.00 = $4,691= $0.22/ha

Monitoring:

STOATS: No monitoring done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of stoat control for this operation.

POSSUMS: No monitoring done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of possum control for this operation.

RATS:

The post operation rat target was 5%.

Pre: Hawdon 4.7%, Poulter 0%
Post: Hawdon 0%, Poulter 0%

The operational area was below the rat target before the 1080 was applied.
There was no reason to proceed with the operation as the rat numbers were already below the target set.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of rat control for this operation, except to say that the money spent here was wasted and would have been better spent somewhere else that had rat populations above the target set.

Orange Fronted Parakeet:

Outcome target:  "A viable breeding Orange-fronted parakeet population will still be present in the Hawdon & Poulter Valleys at the conclusion of the 2016 / 2017 breeding season."

Outcome result: "No OFP's have been found in these valleys this season. There may be one OFP nest yet to be confirmed."

Historical 1080 operations for this area are linked below:

This operational area has had eight aerial 1080 operations over the last nine years, The Orange-fronted parakeet monitoring showed 13 nesting pairs in 2011 and today no Orange-fronted parakeets are being encountered. This means that there was a viable breeding population before 1080 was used and over the decade of 1080 use the Orange-fronted parakeet population has dropped to the point that no individual birds are being encountered during monitoring.

2008: https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

Rat:
Pre: May-10%, June-7%, July-4%, Aug-11%, Sept-6%,
Post: Oct-0%, Nov-0%, Jan-0%, Mar-1.3%

This rat density monitoring pattern is normal, without rat control, with measured densities rising until Sept-Oct, dropping in Oct-Nov and starting to rise again in Mar-April.
The rat numbers never reached the level that could be described as "a plague of biblical proportions".
The 0% recorded in Nov/Jan cannot be definitely attributed to a 1080 rat kill and could very easily be the result of the rats moving into the canopy to feed.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of rat control.

Possum: No possum monitoring was done.
Stoat: No stoat monitoring was done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of possum and stoat control.

Orange Fronted Parakeet:

Outcome target: No target set.

Outcome result: No monitoring completed.

2009: https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

Rat:
Pre:  Jan-2%, Feb-0.9%, Mar-3.1%, Apr-7.5%, May-5.6%, Jun-8.5%, Jul-9.3%, Aug-22.7%.
Post:  Oct-1.5%, Nov-0%, Jan-0%.

This rat density monitoring pattern is normal, without rat control, with measured densities rising until Sept-Oct, dropping in Oct-Nov and starting to rise again in Mar-April.
The rat numbers never reached the level that could be described as "a plague of biblical proportions".
The low rat densities recorded in Oct/Nov/Jan cannot be definitely attributed to a 1080 rat kill and could very easily be the result of the rats moving into the canopy to feed.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of rat control.

Possum: No possum monitoring was done.
Stoat: No stoat monitoring was done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of possum and stoat control.

Orange Fronted Parakeet:

Outcome target: "A viable breeding Orange-fronted parakeet population will still be present in the Hawdon Valley at the conclusion of the 2009/10 breeding season. Orange-fronted parakeet encounter rates in the Hawdon Valley (from standardised monitoring lines) will not reduce from 2008/09 to 2009/10."

Outcome result: "OFP encounter rate in November 2009 was 0.38 birds per hour, compared with 0.21 birds per hour in the same survey in 2008."

2012: https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

Rat:
Pre: Aug/Sept/Oct- up to 7% (Please note that the highest recorded line is 7% and there is no average stated)
Post: Dec to Mar-0%.

This rat density monitoring pattern is normal, without rat control, with measured densities rising until Sept-Oct, dropping in Oct-Nov and starting to rise again in Mar-April.
The rat numbers never reached the level that could be described as "a plague of biblical proportions" with the highest recorded line being 7%.
The low rat densities recorded in Dec to Mar cannot be definitely attributed to a 1080 rat kill and could very easily be the result of the rats moving into the canopy to feed.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of rat control.

Possum: No possum monitoring was done.
Stoat: No stoat monitoring was done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of possum and stoat control.

Orange Fronted Parakeet:

Outcome target: "A viable breeding Orange-fronted parakeet population will still be present in the Hawdon Valley at the conclusion of the 2012 / 2013 breeding season. Orangefronted parakeet encounter rates in the Hawdon Valley (from standardised monitoring lines) will not reduce from 2011/12 to 2012/13."

Outcome result: "The orange-fronted parakeet population is present in both the Poulter and Hawdon valleys however the number of orange-fronted parakeets in the Hawdon and Poulter is not known and it can not yet be determined whether the populations are still in decline, are stable or are increasing. Encounter rates and nests found were down from 13 nests in 2011/2012 to 5 in 2012/2013."

2013: https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

Rat:
Pre: No monitoring done.
Post: No monitoring done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of rat control.

Possum:
Pre: 70%BMI or 17.5%RTC & 31%BMI or 7.75%RTC (dividing the BMI by 4 to achieve RTC).
Post: 9%BMI or 2.25%RTC  & 10%BMI or 2.5%RTC (dividing the BMI by 4 to achieve RTC).

The post possum density was more than twice the target of 1%RTC.

Stoat: No stoat monitoring was done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of stoat control.

Orange Fronted Parakeet:

Outcome target: "All known orange-fronted parakeet nests are fully protected against introduced predators."

Outcome result: "No monitoring of outcomes was undertaken." 

2014: https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

Rat:
Pre: 26%
Post: 16%

The post rat density was more than 3 times the target of 5%.

Possum:
Pre: No monitoring done
Post: No Monitoring done

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of possum control.

Stoat: No stoat monitoring was done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of stoat control.

Orange Fronted Parakeet:

Outcome target: "A viable breeding Orange-fronted parakeet population will still be present in the Hawdon & Poulter Valleys at the conclusion of the 2014 / 2015 breeding season. Orange-fronted parakeet encounter rate will not decline."

Outcome result: "Monitoring ongoing."  (Please note, this is the second year running that Orange-fronted parakeet monitoring results have not been published).


2015: https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

Rat:
Pre: 9%, 13%, 9%
Post: 0%, 0%, 0%

Because of poor placement of monitor lines the results cannot be relied upon to give accurate results.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of rat control.

Possum:
Pre: No monitoring done
Post: No Monitoring done

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of possum control.

Stoat: No stoat monitoring was done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of stoat control.

Orange Fronted Parakeet:

Outcome target:
1) "A viable breeding Orange-fronted parakeet population will still be present in the Hawdon & Poulter Valleys at the conclusion of the 2014 / 2015 breeding season. Orange-fronted parakeet encounter rates in the Poulter will not decline."

2) "A viable orange-fronted parakeet population will still be present in the South Branch Hurunui at the conclusion of the 2014 / 2015 breeding season. Orange fronted parakeet encounter rate will not decline."

3) "A viable breeding Orange-fronted parakeet population will still be present in the Hawdon & Poulter Valleys at the conclusion of the 2014 / 2015 breeding season. Orangefronted parakeet encounter rates in the Poulter will not decline."

Outcome result: "Encounter rate has not declined significantly since last season despite the massive beech mast and consequent influx of mice, rats and stoats.."  (Please note, this is the third year running that Orange-fronted parakeet monitoring results have not been published).

The wording of the Orange-fronted parakeet outcome result would indicate that the parakeet numbers are declining, although this decline is not as significant as the decline in 2012-13.

2016: https://www.epa.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Hazardous-Substances/1080-repor...

Rat:
Pre: 4.7%, 0%.
Post: 0%, 0%,

The rat density was recorded at below the target of 5% before the 1080 was applied.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of rat control.

Possum:
Pre: No monitoring done
Post: No Monitoring done

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of possum control.

Stoat: No stoat monitoring was done.

No claims can be made as to the effectiveness of stoat control.

Orange Fronted Parakeet:

Outcome target: "A viable breeding Orange-fronted parakeet population will still be present in the Hawdon & Poulter Valleys at the conclusion of the 2016 / 2017 breeding season."

Outcome result: "No OFP's have been found in these valleys this season. There may be one OFP nest yet to be confirmed.

Over the last decade the Orange-fronted parakeet population has declined from a small, but viable, breeding population to numbers so low that normal monitoring methods are unable to count any individual birds. At the same time as the decline has been happening there has been very intensive aerial 1080 operations happening that were supposed to "save" the Orange-fronted parakeets from extinction.


Are you saying that the Hawdon , Andrews Poulter and South Branch of the Hurunui have each had 1080 applications in 8 of last 9 years ?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bin huntin
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love The FishNhunt Forum

Posts: 127
Location: Taupo
Joined: Oct 15th, 2010
Gender: Male
Re: Orange Fronted Kakariki
Reply #7 - Jul 8th, 2018 at 4:56pm
Print Post  
Parakeets seem to have strangely disappeared after 3 1080 drops in northern Kaimanawas. Kaka are now in extremely low numbers. Rifleman seem to have gone and Bush Robins are in very low numbers
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
steveg1
Just Joined
*
Offline


I Love The FishNhunt Forum

Posts: 23
Joined: Oct 22nd, 2014
Gender: Male
Re: Orange Fronted Kakariki
Reply #8 - Jul 9th, 2018 at 11:31am
Print Post  
The battle for the birds will be won - the only birds left will be in an aviary safe from 1080. The nectar eaters should be ok though.

I live near to the Wainuiomata catchment which gets a dose of 1080 about every 4 years. The last one was in 2014; following which we noticed a dramatic drop of all species of seed and insect eating species, with the exception of hawks which went on to kill 25 full grown hens at my place in the following year - never had one prior to since then.

They are due to do another drop just as we are starting to see a return of some of the species lost to the last drop; some of those species like falcons and cuckoos are probably gone forever from our area.

Interestingly I contacted WRC to see if they did any monitoring that would support our anecdotal evidence - they provided me with a spreadsheet of their bird monitoring survey results within the catchment which showed an increase in almost all species - I find it odd that on one side of the fence numbers can increase while on the other side they are largely annihilated.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Cantyguy
Donor Member
*****
Offline


I Love The FishNhunt Forum

Posts: 3199
Location: North Canterbury
Joined: Oct 10th, 2010
Gender: Male
Re: Orange Fronted Kakariki
Reply #9 - Jul 9th, 2018 at 9:39pm
Print Post  
Very interesting article and promising.
https://www.wildernessmag.co.nz/closing-zip-possums/
  

Digital Hunter...in search of the perfect pic
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Salmoner
Donor Member
*****
Offline


I love salmon fishin

Posts: 3559
Location: Darfield
Joined: Feb 19th, 2008
Gender: Male
Re: Orange Fronted Kakariki
Reply #10 - Jul 9th, 2018 at 9:56pm
Print Post  
Great article, thanks for posting.


Marty still waiting for a reply please.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Marty Foote
Forum Senior
****
Offline


I Love The FishNhunt Forum

Posts: 527
Joined: Jun 29th, 2014
Gender: Male
Re: Orange Fronted Kakariki
Reply #11 - Jul 9th, 2018 at 11:24pm
Print Post  
Salmoner wrote on Jul 9th, 2018 at 9:56pm:
Great article, thanks for posting.


Marty still waiting for a reply please.


How about this written a while ago. You might also want to consider that fact that all the captive possum 1080 poisoning trials have regularly only got 80-90% kills, which means that they can't eradicate possums, with 1080, unless the poisoning is much more effective in the wild, than can be created in totally controlled captive situations.

Thank you pointing me in the direction of the ZIP report:

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/56a03ffedc5cb428e06b5982/t/5a611c2fe2c483
11888e8c60/1516313655397/ZIP+Technical+Report+%231+-+1080+to+Zero+Jackson-Arawha
ta+trial+v.2.pdf


From my perspective nothing much has changed from the view that ZIP cannot make the claims about possum "functional eradication", based upon the monitoring that was done immediately after the aerial 1080 operation. The monitoring totally ignores scientific findings, and advice, about post-aerial 1080 operation monitoring of possum populations.

The reasons why the monitoring cannot be relied upon, to base the ZIP claims on, are:

Possum populations should always be monitored at least 4 months after the 1080 has been applied.

This scientific advice was first given to DOC, the Agricultural Pest Destruction Board (APDB) and the Regional Pest Boards during the 1980's when it became apparent that monitoring immediately after aerial 1080 operations was underestimating the surviving possum population density and overestimating the possum kill. Subsequently, AHB has commissioned a number of scientific studies about the post-aerial 1080 underestimation of possum densities. These studies have supported the belief that monitoring, immediately after aerial 1080, will underestimate the possum population and overestimate the possum kill.

There are three theories as to why this possum monitoring underestimation, when Trap-Catch is used, and a fourth where bait interference methods (Wax-Tags, Chew-Cards) are used, is happening:

a) Arboreal possums take time to come down from the canopy.

b) Sub-lethally poisoned possums become very sick and take time to recover enough to be interested in investigating a trap-site.

c) The surviving possum population goes into a "state of shock", through losing many members of the social community in a short space of time, and this "state of shock" takes time to recover from, as new social orders need to be established before the possum population starts behaving normally.

d) Where the possums need to bite something novel there will be a percentage of the possum population that has become poison/bait-shy and will not bite the Wax-Tags or Chew-Cards (There is also a percentage of the possums that are naturally bait-averse and will not eat any novel bait presented to them and will never be recorded by Wax-Tags or Chew-Cards or killed by eating poisoned baits).

In order for the ZIP possum monitoring to mean anything, the monitoring will need to be done again, with Trap-Catch being used to ensure that any poison-shy and bait-averse possums have a chance of being recorded. I understand that it is thought that the area is too small to wait the four months plus, before monitoring, as it is feared that reinvasion would be a problem. A better approach would have been to design a more robust programme, right from the start, instead of ignoring, tried and proven, monitoring procedures in order to seem to be accomplishing the results stated would be the desired outcome prior to the 1080 being applied.

To sum up. Any possums that were living in the canopy, or were poison-shy/bait-shy/bait-averse, or were still recovering from "social shock" or sub-lethal 1080 poisoning would not have been recorded by the ZIP post-aerial 1080 monitoring.

I also note that there were three adjoining sites that could have been used by ZIP for the trial. The other two sites had all weather access, as there was direct road access and the Jackson River did not need to be crossed. The other two sites were Mt Ellery and Wheeler Slope. Both of these sites would have been better sites, for the study area, as they contained better permanent possum habitat than the habitat contained in the area chosen for the study. The area, chosen for the study, is mostly river flat and would have naturally had very few wild animals resident at the time the post-operation monitoring was done, even without any control. A cynic could argue that the study site was chosen, not to robustly test the 1080 Double Dosing theory, but, to give the best possible opportunity to show that 1080 Double Dosing worked, even if it meant that the results were severely flawed and the results could not be expected to be duplicated in other areas. Combine the study area with the monitoring methods used, as well as the timing of the monitoring, and a cynic has a very strong argument that supports the idea that the 1080 Double Dosing trial was designed to give a predetermined result in favour of aerial 1080, regardless of how effective the same 1080 operations would in other areas.

Here are my comments about statements made in the report:

1) Objective.

This trial sought to develop a technique (sometimes referred to as a ‘prescription’) for aerial 1080 to achieve ‘functional’ extinction of possums in South Westland. We dubbed the technique ‘1080 to Zero’. The threshold for achieving functional extinction was set at <1 possum per 400 ha (OSPRI, 2014), a level at which the population is no longer functionally viable.

OSPRI and DOC have many examples of aerial 1080 operational areas, that were monitored immediately after aerial 1080 operations, that recorded the same results ZIP has recorded, with the possum population rising so quickly, after 4 plus months, that the rise cannot be attributed to natural increase or reinvasion and it has been accepted that the possums were there all the time and that they had never been killed by the 1080 or recorded in the post-1080 monitoring.

Contract trappers have consistently recorded similar results to the "functional extinction" result that ZIP is aiming for. Contract trappers have been employed behind many poison operations, that have recorded zero possums post-poison, and the trappers have caught hundreds, and even thousands, more possums than would have been caught in an area that had been trapped by an experienced contract trapper with a target of 1%RTC.

2) Permission was secured from the Medical Officer of Health (Ministry of Health) to aerially sow toxic bait to the river edge, thus removing any exclusion zones from the treatment area. As such, there were no areas where target animals could be present where they would not be able to gain access to bait (i.e. no animals were ‘exempt’ from the trial treatment).

The same statements have been made by aerial 1080 operators for well over twenty years, except, the MOH permission has been sought, and granted, to drop 1080 into waterways to ensure that no animals would be exempt from exposure to 1080 baits.

3)  The complete removal of possums and rats appears to have been successfully achieved within the treatment area for at least 60 days post control. This is possibly the first time that aerial 1080 has been shown to successfully remove all rats and possums from a site.

The second sentence is false. What is more important, is that the people involved know that this statement is false. DOC and OSPRI have provided me with numerous examples where the same flawed monitoring methods and timing, used in the ZIP trial, have "shown to successfully remove all rats and possums from a site". The ZIP results are the same as many DOC and OSPRI results, going back over 30 years, which have proved to be false as the surviving wild animal numbers, both possums and rats, have been underestimated and the possum and rat kills have been overestimated because the monitoring was designed in such a way that scientific advice was deliberately ignored so that false possum and rat, post-1080 operation, population densities would be recorded.

4)  The combination of no exclusion zones, double prefeeding, bait swath overlaps (i.e. no gaps in coverage), and higher than standard bait sowing rates are all considered to have contributed to this successful outcome. All of these factors are differences between the trial technique and the current standard technique for aerial 1080 operations for predator control.

If this statement is true, then DOC, OSPRI and LandCare have been lying to the NZ Public over the last 20 odd years and all the millions of dollars spent on scientifically studying these issues has been a complete and utter waste of taxpayers financial resources.


To sum up, the ZIP report, on the Arawhata 1080 Double Dosing trial, could be described as a very well written sales document for the benefit of the aerial 1080 industry. The report cannot be described as a credible scientific report with which to judge the effectiveness of the 1080 Double Dosing or "1080 to Zero" method of wild animal control.

Junk science sets out to do everything possible to support a theory. Good science sets out to do everything possible to disprove a theory and if the theory cannot be disproved it can then be adopted as scientific fact.

Kind regards.....Martin Foote.


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Marty Foote
Forum Senior
****
Offline


I Love The FishNhunt Forum

Posts: 527
Joined: Jun 29th, 2014
Gender: Male
Re: Orange Fronted Kakariki
Reply #12 - Jul 9th, 2018 at 11:41pm
Print Post  
The link, to the ZIP report above, won't work by just clicking. Try copying the whole thing and then pasting into the new window address...It worked for me.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Davie
Active Member
**
Offline


I Love The FishNhunt Forum

Posts: 71
Location: Nth Canterbury
Joined: Nov 28th, 2012
Gender: Male
Re: Orange Fronted Kakariki
Reply #13 - Jul 10th, 2018 at 10:05pm
Print Post  
It’s a shame DOC think 1080 is the golden bullet, I walked to the sth branch hut a about 5 years ago, it was an evening 2 months after a 1080 drop and all I saw was 4 cats, made me wonder how many cats still up there I didn’t see. DOC have all the facilities for a thorough follow up if they were serious about saving the birds but the occasional time I see the the utes are packed with fishing rods and rifles
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Salmoner
Donor Member
*****
Offline


I love salmon fishin

Posts: 3559
Location: Darfield
Joined: Feb 19th, 2008
Gender: Male
Re: Orange Fronted Kakariki
Reply #14 - Jul 10th, 2018 at 10:33pm
Print Post  
Hey Davie and you other guys that dont like 1080 [who does ?] have you ever thought about joining a predator trapping group, starting one or asking DoC if you can do volunteer work in a trapping programme ?

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8
Send TopicPrint
 

FishnHunt - New Zealands Famous Hunting and Fishing Forum Since 1995 » Powered by YaBB 2.6.11!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2018. All Rights Reserved.
Site Design By Alan Simmons - PRism and all rights are reserved from 1995 and onwards