Copeland Gordon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Copeland Gordon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:648;Page:17533] 
3.  
GORDON COPELAND (Independent) 
 to the  
Minister of Conservation 
: Will she undertake a comprehensive review of her department’s use of aerial 1080 drops following the news that seven kea have died after eating that deadly poison? 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK (Minister of Conservation) 
: 
 I am advised that the Department of Conservation constantly reviews its biodiversity operations to take account of new information and improve the overall outcomes. The reason that we know about these kea deaths is because the Department of Conservation initiated research to see whether there was a problem. Now we are considering what adjustments can be made accordingly. 
Gordon Copeland 
: Can the Minister confirm that the killing of endangered and protected native birds is always illegal in New Zealand and does she expect her department to face charges or is it the case that the Department of Conservation now considers itself above the law? 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK 
: No deaths occurred intentionally. Deaths occurred in only one of three areas under this operation which affected only one population of kea. Kea are rare but are not critically threatened with extinction. We have to conduct pest control operations if we want to boost their numbers. Doing nothing is not an option. 
Moana Mackey 
: Are kea threatened by the pests being targeted in 1080 operations? 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK 
: A recent study showed that in an area that had not been subjected to any pest control the chicks and the eggs in 40 percent of kea nests were eaten by predators; 1080 operations kill possums and stoats both of which are predators of kea. 
Eric Roy 
: How can the public possibly have any confidence in the Minister and the Department of Conservation when in one week its officers shot a takahe mistaking it for a pukeko and in the next week we learnt that seven kea were killed in a botched poisoning operation? 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK 
: In reference to the first part of the question the Department of Conservation staff are devastated by the outcome of that experience and I reject the assertion of that member opposite. He was in a party that did nothing for 10 years about 1080 poison. If those members think that they knew those risks why did that member not speak to his Minister at the time and say that that operation should have been stopped? They did nothing because they knew the benefits. 
R Doug Woolerton 
: Does the Minister know of any viable option to 1080 in the control of possums in our forests? 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK 
: There are other options like bait controls on the ground with traps but the difficulty is that when there is difficult terrain—high mountainous terrain—people cannot be expected to get up there and put out traps. So 1080 is the only real option. Farmers know the benefits because of tuberculosis control. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: With reports that the water supplies of areas like Kumara on the West Coast and Levin are being threatened by aerial use of 1080 and with reports today that avian genocide of kea is now occurring as a result of indiscriminate 1080 drops what will it take for the Minister and her department to review the policy of aerial distribution of 1080 in favour of more ground-based and safer distribution? 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK 
: I would not call the deaths of seven out of 29 kea in a survey genocide at all but it is of concern. We have to learn from our own research carried out by our own department. As to the water aspect of that question we know that 1080 breaks down once it is mixed with water. That is why no levels of 1080 beyond acceptable minimum levels have ever been found in drinking water. If we could find another option that was better than 1080 poison of course we would use it yet only last year the Environmental Risk Management Authority concluded that it was the best agent to use for pest control. 
Gordon Copeland 
: Is the Minister aware that the labelling of 1080 states: “May be fatal. Repeated oral exposure may cause reproductive or developmental damage.” and that some pregnant women feel forced to leave their homes—as recently happened in Karamea—and is it not time to bring an end to the aerial application of this deadly poison in favour of alternative ways of controlling possums stoats and weasels? 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK 
: I would like to refer the member to my previous answers; I think his questions have all been answered. I reiterate that it was only last year in 2007 that the Environmental Risk Management Authority review concluded that the benefits of 1080 outweigh the risks including those of aerial operations. 
Gordon Copeland 
: I seek leave of the House to table the labelling that is contained on a 1080 container. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Gordon Copeland 
: I seek leave of the House to table a paper by Clare St Pierre of the Waikato concerning alternative pest control methods that avoid 1080 at a cheaper cost. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.