NZ Wildlands Biodiversity Management Society - Phone call with Graham Sperry

Graham Sperry - active member of NZ Wildlands Biodiversity Management Society

After a solid 3 hour convo he highlighted some very valuable points

Politics

There's a lot of political investment in 1080 from

• parties
• companies
• the government 
• scientists
• regional councils

That said, there's plenty of opposition but we have to be careful who we pitch to and acknowledge it'a highly controversial subject that is backed by the government. 

P.s. I'm talking serious controversy - there's a lot of money invested in 1080

For this reason Graham wasn't as keen on the idea of a sticker that companies use to identify themselves as anti1080 - the risk for them, and us, is too great

If we used a sticker it would safer represent funding for alternatives, but even then, any opposition is still opposition

A bit about 1080

• It was originally introduced to kill rabbits
• We are signing 10 - 30 year contracts to drop 1080 with no warning other when just before and during they actually do it
• The population of TB infested possums is actually really small - like 2%, DOC says higher
• 1080 is decided is meant to be the most cost effective option, costing $10 a hectare as a form of pest control. In reality, the cost of the operation is $57 - $80 a hectare. Hiring a full time trapper would cost far less, $20 - $30 a hectare, and generates industry (the costs doesn't include profit from the possum). 20 possums are worth $120 in raw materials. 
• The excuse DOC uses is that by supporting a fur industry the hunters wouldn't want to extinguish the population and effectively the hunters would be 'farming pests'. This said, if they are committed to predator free by 2050, why are we investing so much in 1080 and signing 30 year contracts? How hard are we really looking into alternatives?
• Possums were originally introduced for the fur trade.
• At current, the tax payer pays for 1080, a controlled bounty system encouraging public management of the pest populations would generate income and save money.

In terms of hunting he recommended we look at hunting rabbits, hares and geese. Geese in particular are under utilised as a food source, they graze on farmland, and an adult has 10 - 15kg on meat on them. Currently Doc cull and leave them. 

A friend of Grahams is doing exactly what we were thinking - we could either supply to her or learn from her. Especially in regards to food safety requirements, how far we can source meet from 1080 drops etc

In the long term, hunting is an effective way of managing 'pest' animals as it creates industry (tourism, meat, fur, skin), raises welfare standards (the label of pest means they are not protected).

We could look at these animals as assets rather than pests - if they are controlled they provide revenue.

To consider -

We'd get more revenue on the human meat market

Fur is very valuable

Skins are also of high value