THE SHORT ANSWER IS “DEFINITELY YES.”

Lets put the options into a logical perspective with some facts which have been established over a long time.

When animal numbers get too high in a particular area to the extent that they create a very harmful effect on the immediate environment or economy then it is normal practice to reduce the numbers. Examples of this are common internationally and include culling of elephants in Africa, rats, mice, ducks, rabbits, many insects, coyotes, dingoes, wild dogs in various countries, and include deer, rabbits, wallabies and possums, rats, mustelids in New Zealand; even including birds such as the native cormorants (shags) Kea and Harrier Hawk under a bounty system at times.

In New Zealand the most common means of controlling animals prior to the introduction of widespread use of 1080 was by trapping and shooting with the addition of target specific hand placed poisons for possum, rabbits, rats and pigs. Even explosive detonators implanted in potatoes were used in some instances to lure and kill pigs.

High numbers of animals such as deer, pigs and possums were successfully controlled by men on foot operating through all the wild back country of NZ for decades and as sales of deer, possum and rabbit skins for the hide trade increased with international demand in the 1940’s onward, followed by international demand for wild venison, commercial hunting increased the take to adequately control animal numbers.

The advent of extraction of wild animals by fixed wing aircraft and helicopters, augmented by jet boats on the back country rivers brought further efficiencies and allowed far greater access and resulted in large numbers of animals able to be culled. As well, private casual hunters were able to bring out their shot animals and sell them to several processing businesses set up for the export trade. The advent of 1080 virtually stifled that industry because animals could not be sold if they came from within or close to the massive areas where 1080 had been applied.

The trade in wild animal products was largely successful in keeping wild animal numbers to acceptable levels at zero cost to the taxpaying public and created a lot of employment and carer opportunities. By contrast, the 1080 industry today has all but eliminated those opportunities and created a $100 million per year millstone around the public neck as well as creating a hazard to the environment.

SO WHY ARE WE DOING IT? There is no doubt that the previous methods worked, and were enhanced by the advent of aircraft and jet boats and commercial incentives. Virtually no part of the terrain can be classed as inaccessible or remote by these criteria. Certainly some areas are rugged, but that has not prevented cullers from accessing it in the past. What seems to be occurring is that with the forced demise of the commercial animal recovery and utilisation industry, the public is now being told by 1080 proponents that there are no economic alternatives.

That leaves a single argument; COST; and ESPC believes it is not a valid argument at all. In uncomplicated terms, the $100 million expenditure surrounding 1080 can and should be turned into a return, rather than remain the liability it is; supporting a bureaucratic unproductive and unrealistic NZ wide cartel.

The paper below was presented to the ERMA review of 1080 by ESPC as part of our submissions.

Opportunities in the Opossum Industry today.

Dawson Fur Traders

Whakatane

Possum products are in demand and will be for years to come. In the past the industry has depended solely on skins to supply the fashion industry which has seen boom and bust situations develop which has flowed on to the amount of control work being done by private skin recovery operators.

The slack was taken up by non recovery operators in the early 90's and has grown at the cost of the possum industry in many cases i.e. The use of 1080 and requirements by some regional councils not to allow recovery of by-products. 

We now have 3 arms to the industry.

1.Fur mixed with Merino to make light weight knitted products and fur for duvet inners and jackets.

2.Skins for the garment trade

3.Carcasses – at present fledgling but much potential for pet food; a million dollars is currently being invested in a possum pet food plant in Te Puke.

These 3 industry arms have the potential to process all the by-products from possum that New Zealand can produce.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

For their part Regional Council or Governments must play their part by:

1.Actively restricting the use of poison that have no recovery content, i.e. Adopt a recovery criteria on all control operations, except in areas deemed to be too difficult for ground control work.

These to be mapped and subject to public consultation. Areas such as main range spines may need to be poisoned but having said that, many areas are over 3000 ft and don't have a possum problem anyway.

2.Bring in a controlled bounty system - sets of dried ears preferably. Use existing possum traders and or DOC officers as receiving agents pay $4.00 each and watch the possum numbers fall. This has to be the most cost effective approach to possum control; effectively 25% tax paid on bounty plus all the other tax and export revenue from the product.

The main reason why there is no feral venison industry is because of 1080; so deer numbers are rising and 1080 is being used to control these numbers also; this is a ridiculous situation.

Same applies to a potential possum carcasses for human consumption; take out 1080 and the potential for feral possum carcasses on the world market especially Asia becomes a strong possibility.

Possums for pet food value at $1.00 per kg, whereas for human consumption, $5.00 per kg to the trapper. Total possum kill at present estimated from commercial trappers about 1.5 million and probably at least double this being killed and wasted by 1080 and other non-recovery operations.

Cost example:

By implementing a controlled bounty, I estimate an increase of commercial recovery kills to   4 million .

On this basis an assessment of the potential possum carcass value would be on current prices.

(Fur only)

     Fur     ValueLabour Content Minimums

     Trapper           $3.752

     Wholesales     $4.501

     Spinner       $6.501

     Knitter           $10.001

     Wholesaler   $15.001

     Retailer         $25.00          10

   * Total Value $25.00          16 min's to produce

*This figure ($25.00) is what the value of fur is once it’s retailed.

If this is multiplied by 4,000,000 we have $100,000,000 and approx 1,000,000 hours of labour.

This doesn’t even take into account the potential carcass value or the renewal of the feral venison trade.

The real cost of poisoning operators in New Zealand at present is probably closer to $200,000,000 and for anyone to say it is the cheaper option needs to start looking for another job.

My History

-Deer culler for the forest service 1970-1975 in Urewera National Park

-Started and Operated Dawson furs Ltd. 1978 trading and exporting possum products.

-Have operated this company in conjunction with possum skin recovery.

-Venison recovery and Eel fishing to present time.

Bruce Dawson   (Dawson Fur Traders)

Whakatane.

----------------------------------------------------

ESPC and the NZ Wildlands Biodiversity Management Society Incorporated have further extensive evidence on the above matters.