100% Pure? Not Even Close

Nearly a third of New Zealand's lakes are unhealthy, according to a NIWA report and pastoral land use has got a lot to do with it.

The quality of healthy lakes is declining because of nutrients coming off of livestock farming, New Zealand's fresh waters are paying a heavy price for industrial dairying and intensive agriculture - according to a press release issued by the NZ Green Party.

New Zealand needs urgently to establish clean water rules to protect freshwater, emphasis ours:

Delayed report shows need for clean water rules
Thursday, 11 November 2010, 10:44 am
Press Release: Green Party
A new report showing the poor health of New Zealand’s lakes demonstrates why we urgently need clean water rules to protect our waterways, the Green Party said today.
“Almost a third of all lakes in New Zealand are unhealthy, and many are getting worse,” Green Party Co-leader Dr Russel Norman said.
“New Zealanders love our rivers and lakes, and we want to protect them. Our kids have a birthright to swim and fish in our waterways, but this legacy is at risk.”
Dr Norman was commenting on Lake Water Quality in New Zealand 2010, a report by the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA). The report was due to be released by the Ministry for the Environment last week, but was held back until today.
“One can only speculate about the reasons for the delay,” Dr Norman said.
“It is interesting timing that the report’s release was delayed during the World Dairy Summit in Auckland, when the report concludes that pastoral land use is associated with the ecological deterioration of our lakes.
“This report is further evidence that we need clean water rules to set standards, limits, and targets for water quality as soon as possible.”
Based on monitoring of 112 lakes between 2005 and 2009, the report’s authors projected that nearly a third of New Zealand’s 3820 lakes are unhealthy. They also make clear conclusions about the cause: “The most significant finding from this study […] is that pastoral land use in New Zealand is associated with eutrophication and ecological deterioration. Furthermore, the condition of some lakes currently in good condition is declining, likely as a result of nutrient enrichment from livestock farming.”
Dr Norman said New Zealand’s rivers and lakes were bearing the ill effects of agricultural intensification and industrial dairying.
“It’s time we took action to turn this around by introducing clear rules for clean water.
“In many areas, the situation is getting worse. Between 2005 and 2009, twice as many lakes were deteriorating as were improving.
“This report provides yet more evidence that we urgently need clean water rules. The water measurement regulations announced today are a start, but they are well short of what’s needed.
“Not only did John Key’s Government sit on this report, it’s sitting on a draft National Policy Statement (NPS) on freshwater management. This is ready to go and would set clear targets and timelines for improving the state of fresh water in New Zealand.
“The Land and Water Forum reported that we need an NPS, and quickly. This report shows there is no more room for delay.
“We need clean water rules and we need them now,” Dr Norman said.
Reference:
Lake Water Quality in New Zealand 2010: Status and trends: http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/ser/lake-water-quality-in-nz-2010/
ENDS

A short while ago we blogged about another strike at the foundation's of New Zealand's 100% pure myth with the revelation that 20% Of Kiwis Have Unsafe Drinking Water.

The drinking water quality figures were released in a report (allegedly ‘buried since June’) that one in five people in New Zealand has unsafe or unregistered drinking water that has not been classified.

The report, which is bound to promote further ‘NZ is third world‘ criticism, was released by the Ministry of Health after a 2008-2009 review of drinking water showed that quality in New Zealand was deteriorating.

Paul Gorman in the Press commented on the report, saying

About 849,000 people, or 20 per cent of Kiwis, were supplied with water that either failed to meet bacteriological standards or had not been classified because sources were unregistered.
That was a rise from 712,000 New Zealanders in the corresponding 2007-08 period.
Unacceptable levels of E. coli were in water supplied to 93,000 people, down from 118,000 the previous year.
However, 247,000 people received water that did not comply bacteriologically with standards because sampling was too infrequent to show compliance.
That was up from 194,000 people in the 2007-08 period…more here

The quality of the water that Kiwis and holidaymakers swim in is a lot worse.
In July we pointed out that in less than two years the number of unsafe bathing places had increased from 29% to to 43%, if a report was The Herald was anything to go by:

Many popular swimming spots contain high levels of bacteria that cause diarrhoea or infection, a new report shows.
Of 206 rivers, lakes, lagoons and estuaries tested regularly by councils during summer, only 57 per cent were safe for swimming most of the time. The Ministry for the Environment report showed that one in nine freshwater swimming spots, including popular west coast lagoons, often had too much faecal matter in the water to be safe for bathing.
Piha Lagoon, where young children often swim, was Auckland’s worst spot…
Bethells Lagoon was above the safe threshold for bacteria in a quarter of its tests…
Northland region had the most spots – 10 out of 23 – that were consistently too polluted to swim in. The intensification of farming in that area was believed to be responsible for its poor freshwater quality…." more here

Clean?  - definitely not, Green? is that referring to people who believe advertising slogans, or the colour of the water?

100% pure ? - not even close.

You may also like to take a look at our Green Credentails, or Green Wash page and other posts tagged 100% Pure Myth

Today's posts - click here

Migrant Tales - Emigrating When You're Older

 Continuing in our series of Migrants’ Tales – first hand accounts of the migrant experience in New Zealand taken from locations around the net.

Today’s Tale is taken from the self help and support forum for migrants Expatexposed.com:
In it the British poster talks about what it was like to migrate to New Zealand as an older person, and why they left after two years of struggling to live in the North Shore, Auckland – an upmarket area very popular with immigrants from both Europe and Asia:.

“My wife and I are in our mid 50s and returned to UK last month after nearly 2 yrs living & working (and struggling) on Auckland’s North Shore. We, too, experienced many similar aspects of work life as you say you have, and that was certainly a large factor in our own deciding to bail out.

e have now decided to look on the last 2 years as having had an adventure, although it’s very tempting to mirror your own view of it all as really having been a waste of time. Certainly one thing we noticed was how every one seemed to be, as I put it, “Desperate For Every Last Dollar“, and that’s probably why so many NZ workplaces often seem to want more than their pound of flesh. It’s a poorer economy, of course, than that of the UK or even OZ, and this spins off in so many ways throughout Kiwi workplaces, the standard of living and lifestyles. The tourist brocures etc don’t show this side of the coin, and I’m really sorry that your experience hasn’t worked out, but I do hope that at least when you return to the UK you will have the advantage of being back in a country and culture etc. which you presumably grew up in and are 100% accustomed to. Good Luck!

It certainly was an adventure in being resourceful, in learning how reticent many folks were where we lived, in coping with so many exasperating aspects that grew more frustrating as time went by.
I’m talking about things such as paying income tax on every single dollar we earned, neighbours who kept their selves to their selves to the point where they never even passed the time of day over the garden fence; no central heating in our house with no curtains, no double glazing, no insulation and not even a fireplace or wood burner, invading bush cockroaches, choking and filthy car exhausts(Clean Green NZ???!!!), wages around 25% or more under what we earned in the UK, overall cost of living up to 30% more; careless designs such as no overflow vents in sinks and baths, no individual plug fuses – and a spur domestic electricity wiring system which a Kiwi sparky agreed is less safe than the UK’s fused plugs and ring main system; social starvation/isolation because Kiwis tend to stick to family and close childhood friends only, ugly warehouse retail sprawl on the North Shore and appallingly dangerous road marking and signs systems that obviously haven’t been given more than a moment’s thought by planning departments only too anxious to flee the office at 4pm sharp in search of their beloved bachs, BBQs, BMWs and boats.

What made us roar with laughter was when we heard radio adverts in the daytime advertising a brothel…. yet at the same time a woman was admonished by North Shore City Council for sunbathing topless!!
Roll with it.

Just a few of the things that more than peeved us as time went by.”

Today's posts - click here

1080 Dropped On Contractors Playing Possum

 Another blow was to dealt to NZ's 100% Pure reputation today. First it was the Brazilian tourists who say they were sprayed with brush killer whilst hiking in the Kahurangi National Park, now it's a group of contractors who allege they had toxic 1080 pellets dropped on their heads whilst out working. Ironically the aggrevied men were contractors spraying weed killer in Lucy's Gully near New Plymouth.

In a report published on Stuff one of the contractors is alleged to have said

 "We've got poison dropping on top of us, we just wanted to get the hell out of there...... it's a scary thought," contractor Lewis Beattie told One News.

The crew got out of the gully and his brother, Dan, tried to find out what was happening from his employer, when he said another helicopter flew over and dropped another load of the highly toxic poison on them.

While the two men admit they are strongly opposed to 1080 use, they said their colleagues were not speaking out because they feared for their jobs if they raised any objection to being showered with the poison.

DOC spokesman Phil Fleury said the department had informed the men about the drop two days earlier.

Residents living near to the drop-zone filmed the helicopters at work, and expressed concern over the poison getting into sources of water or flying outside of approved areas, the channel reported.

1080 is the brand name for Sodium fluoroacetate. In New Zealand, DOC uses the poison to control possums and rats. "

A bit more light was shed on the incident by The Herald who say that the contractors were not phoned or warned about the drop until after it took place and that:

"DOC said it had no obligation to warn the contractors. Spokesman Phil Fleury said they had been told two days in advance that the poison could be spread dependent on the weather.
"The courtesy call is the 48 hours notice and the choice that they can make to be in there or not. We don't consider people were at risk while they were in the park while this operation was on."

If they don't consider people to be at risk during the operation why bother issuing an alert two days previously? Either the stuff is safe, or it isn't. Trampers and day trippers aren't so lucky, they don't get 'courtesy calls' what are DOC's obligations toward them?

It makes the personal account of the Brazilian trampers all the more credible and it's interesting to note that at the time they were exposed to the aerial spraying of weed killer they said:

"Most times we would see 1080 drops around the tracks and when they spray they don't seem to care if anyone is there. Many of the travellers we met were saying the same thing. New Zealand's 1080 poison and weed spraying programmes will definitely have a big negative impact on your tourism."

Are we detecting a recurrent theme here?

For other posts about toxic 1080, a poison that is broadcast from helicopters to kill unwanted mammals in the landscape see HERE

Today's posts - click here

1080 Drop For Mount Egmont To Go Ahead

From the Taranaki Daily News:

"Fingers are crossed at the Department of Conservation for fine weather in the last part of summer to drop 70 tonnes of 1080 pellets into the Egmont National Park.

The saga of Operation Egmont has been dragging on since August last year.

DOC was unable to fly helicopters into the park by the end of its consent window on December 20 because of bad weather and received an extension to March 31 from Taranaki's medical officer of health.

Plans were then to make the aerial drop of non toxic cereal bait in mid-January, followed by the 1080 bait early this month.

However, DOC Taranaki area manager Phil Mohi said it was decided to hold off on last month and the early part of February because of the number of summer trampers.

Mr Mohi said it was now "fingers crossed" the weather would be right to begin the whole operation shortly.

It costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to cover more than 33,500ha of park in green cinnamon-scented 1080-laced pellets to control possums, stoats and rats.

"At present forecasts for February and March are looking good so we hope to undertake the operation within the next few weeks," said Mr Mohi.

He said possum control would still be effective despite the delays.

DOC will contact all neighbouring landowners of the park just before the drop. Signs will be erected at all park entrances, along with public notices in local publications..."

Early February and they expect all the trampers to be gone, that's rather premature isn't it? Readers may remember the Brazilian couple who were incensed when caught up in aerial weed-killer spraying of gorse and exposed to a "rain of chemicals" in Kahurangi National Park, the second largest national park in New Zealand. See "Clean Green New Zealand Is A Joke."

But rest assured. Safety is going to be of the utmost importance this time round:

"The bait will be applied using two of Eltham's Beck Helicopters, equipped with GPS technology.
DOC staff will be clearing bait from tracks and the public is asked not to handle any pellets they find. Dog owners are also asked to be extra vigilant over the next few months, for while dogs are not allowed in the park it is possible possum carcasses may wash downstream during floods.
"Safety is our key concern with this operation," said Mr Mohi."

And this is from people who cross their fingers?

 
Today's posts - click here

"Clean Green NZ Is A Joke"

Those were the words of a Brazilian couple who say they were exposed to a "rain of chemicals" from a helicopter spraying gorse whilst they were tramping the Heaphy Track in the Kahurangi National Park, the second largest national park in New Zealand.

The 78.4km Heaphy Track is the longest trail in the park and considered one of the least developed. About 4000 people complete it each year. According to the DOC website there is an annual program to control gorse using Tordon/Grazon brushkiller spays.

This is a report about the tourists, from Voxy:

"Blenheim, Jan 21 NZPA -
A Brazilian couple, who claim chemicals were showered on them while tramping, say New Zealand's "clean, green" image is a joke.

Caroline Leone and husband Rodrigo Ferreira Santos from Sao Paulo saved for their trip-of-a-lifetime to New Zealand because they believed it "was the perfect place for experiencing beautiful nature, amazing national parks and great landscapes".

However, while tramping the Heaphy Track before Christmas they and others were shocked to experience a "rain of chemicals" from a helicopter spraying gorse. Ms Leone said they were aware of a helicopter and aeroplane flying directly over head for the entire five-hour tramp back to Kohaihai. They thought a rescue was being staged somewhere, until arriving at Kohaihai they saw a sign advertising aerial spraying of gorse.

"I have no word to describe the anger I feel right now," said Ms Leone who suffers from a medical condition which is made worse by herbicides and pesticides. "We could not believe what had just happened to us. We find it completely unacceptable and disrespectful as well as a deep violation of our rights not to be told that we were going to be exposed to any chemical spraying whilst tramping in a national park."

Karamea tourist operator Paul Murray, of Rongo Backpackers where the couple stayed, said they were visibly shaken and angry. He described the chemical applications as "a blatant disregard for the rights of tourists and trampers".

Ms Leone said her medical condition, called endometriosis, was exacerbated by herbicides, pesticides and dioxins in the environment so she tried her best to avoid exposure. The couple encountered two other weed spraying incidents in the South Island but say, ironically, they chose to holiday in New Zealand for its clean, green image.

"What happened to us is unacceptable in a country that sells its image overseas as `100 per cent pure and clean'. It's just a joke," said Ms Leone.

"Most times we would see 1080 drops around the tracks and when they spray they don't seem to care if anyone is there. Many of the travellers we met were saying the same thing. New Zealand's 1080 poison and weed spraying programmes will definitely have a big negative impact on your tourism."

The couple are perfectly within their rights to feel so angry and let down, they came to NZ because of its 100% pure image and were then allegedly exposed to herbicide for 5 hours.  But how many other visitors have been exposed to toxins without knowing it?

What are Tordon and Grazon? This is from the Journal of Pesticide Reform:

"The herbicide picloram (commonly sold under the trade names Tordon and Grazon) is typically used to kill unwanted broad-leaved plants on rangeland and pastures, in forestry, and along rights-of-way.

In laboratory tests, picloram causes damage to the liver, kidney, and spleen. Other adverse effects observed in laboratory tests include embryo loss in pregnant rabbits, and testicular atrophy in male rats.

The combination of picloram and 2,4-D causes birth defects and decreases birth weights in mice. Picloram is contaminated with the carcinogen hexachlorobenzene. Hexachlorobenzene, in addition to causing cancer of the liver, thyroid, and kidney, also damages bones, blood, the immune system, and the endocrine system. Nursing infants and unborn children are particularly at risk from hexachlorobenzene.

Picloram is toxic to juvenile fish at concentrations less than 1 part per million (ppm). Concentrations as low as 0.04 ppm have killed trout fry. In Montana, roadside spraying of Tordon killed 15,000 pounds of fish in a hatchery 1/4 mile downstream from the Tordon treatment.

Picloram is persistent and highly mobile in soil. It is widely found as a contaminant of groundwater and has also been found in streams and lakes. It is also extremely phytotoxic, and drift and runoff from picloram treatments have caused startling damage to crops, particularly tobacco and potatoes.

Because of these characteristics, both the Ecological Effects Branch and the Environmental Fate and Ground Water Branch of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recommended that use of picloram not be continued. These recommendations were not accepted by EPA when it evaluated picloram in 1995."

With little known about its effects on humans we wonder if anyone will be monitoring the health of the Brazilian couple. Why is spraying being done during the peak holiday season?

TVNZ have also picked-up on this story and have invited people to give their responses to the question: Do you think NZ is living up to its clean, green image?

The following responses were given

cgilmour74 ; 2010-01-21 @ 11:49 NZDT

I'm an Aussie living in Papamoa, and I cannot believe you use poisons to control the rabbit population here. I have seen numerous dead birds and penguins in the sand dunes as a result of the poisons. In addition I was shocked to find out Kiwis don't have to have a recycling bin!!!

Oboist2 ; 2010-01-21 @ 10:31 NZDT

There is lot to be proud of as a New Zealander, however we are subject to "market forces" and the almighty dollar, the same as any other country, and as such, often the most cost effective solutions are sought to control problems. Some problems, brought on by, for the most part, environmental mistakes from the past, sometimes do require solutions that I for one, would rather not see used, but the reality.. We can do better.

Deerstalker ; 2010-01-21 @ 10:19 NZDT

Some of our lakes are dead - mostly from dairy farming effluent [faecal coliforms] and nitrates leaching through the soil into the watertable. Rivers are over tapped for water by dairy farming and end up dry beds by the sea. Our forests are great swathes of chemically poisoned land unfit for human habitation. Our seabeds are being plundered. New Zealand, you were in such a hurry to catch up with the rest of the world, you ended up with its problems.

nicH ; 2010-01-21 @ 09:44 NZDT 

I agree that people should look after their back yard. However, we do promote NZ to be a natural clean utopia to the rest of the world and a lot of our practices do make this claim false. I think we are in a unique position to be an example to the world of how to be clean and green but we seem to be happy to live with the facade and not demand the reality. It all starts with the individual, demand organic and free range produce and meat and, demand better pest and weed control practices.

Click on highlighted links for more about the '100% Pure' myth and the aerial use of the pesticide the couple saw on their trek -  1080. 

Today's posts - click here

1080 Documentary Wins Out Against NZ Propaganda Machine

Dirty tricks are afoot in the war against 1080 use in New Zealand. "Someone based in New Zealand" has been left with egg on their face after allegedly sending an email to the director of the AMRISTA Film network trying to "persuade" the festival organisers not to show the Graf brothers Poisoning Paradise documentary about the use of 1080 in NZ. Unfortunately the ruse backfired and the Graf brothers were sent a copy of it.


Details of the attempted coup are presented on the GrafBoys weblog, from which the following extracts are taken. This is the email in which the self confessed "very disturbed" author managed to do his/her own "dredging up":  an old, spent conviction of one of the brothers: (note: words in italics within the emails are our comments)

"To: director@swanseafilmfestival.com
Subject: Poisoning Paradise is propaganda

Dear Director

I was very disturbed to read recently that Poisoning Paradise, a film by Clyde and Steve Graf of New Zealand , is to be shown at your festival. I am concerned that audiences unfamiliar with the issue in New Zealand would not recognise this film for what it is – a blatantly biased piece of propaganda paid for by the deer hunting lobby.

The film (it would be very wrong to call this a documentary) is also made by deer hunters, one of whom has been convicted of armed robbery. The very few so-called ‘experts’ that the brothers dredge up have no scientific standing in New Zealand . The ‘research’ is not peer reviewed and goes against all other scientific research in New Zealand (see the first link below).

Despite all their efforts, and financial backing, none of the television networks (public and private) in New Zealand have agreed to screen it for the reasons listed above. (ed. now why is that?) I believe that screening this rubbish would only lend credibility to these characters, and would reflect very badly on what looks like a fine festival that you run. (ed. toadying, an adult is writing this?)

1080 is actually a critical tool in the battle to protect New Zealand ’s beloved native flora and fauna from introduced pests, and one that we cannot do without.

I have posted some links below that may be of interest and there is plenty more material that can be found.

I would appreciate it if you let me know what you decide to do on this matter.

Kind regards

Rxxxxxx Cxxxxxx"

(links are displayed on the Grafboys blog) 

Fortunately the recipient of this miserable missive saw it for was it was and allegedly copied the Grafs into the response:

"Attention: Rxxxxx Cxxxxxx. (Name removed to protect identity of writer)

Our decision to screen this documentary film within the AMRITSA Film Festival network has been made and will NOT be reversed.

AMRITSA Film Festivals are dedicated to and based upon the right of the free expression of opinion. (ed. so he noticed that the film wasn't shown on TV networks in NZ?)

This ‘right’ is one which we will hold to fast and maintain in the interest of debate.

Should YOU and or YOUR organisation (ed. this means R C was writing on behalf of their employer?) wish to present an alternative point of view to that contained within ‘Poisoning Paradise’ then we suggest you submit a ‘film’ and it would be considered for screening.

Thanks for writing

AA"

We here at E2NZ applaud that response and we wait for the "organisation" to produce its own film.

Any worldwide, legitimate debate over the aerial use of 1080 in New Zealand,

 a country that long traded on its '100% Pure' image yet is the world's largest user of the deadly poison, can only be welcomed.

It will also give us a clue as to the identity of this "organisation".  As Rolf may say "have you guessed who it is yet?"

Our readers may also be interested to read our post about the debacle over the editing/censorship of the 1080 page on Wikipedia in which references to the film were removed.

For our many other posts about toxic 1080 use in New Zealand please see those tagged '1080' - link

Today's posts - click here

New Zealand's Double Accounting On Carbon Credits

The Guardian columnist Fred Pearce has published a response to the NZ government's rebuttal of his report last month about the country's shameful attempts at Greenwashing. (See 100% pure myth exposed by British press for background)

In his most recent report he has accused the government of keeping two sets of carbons accounts. Even though he accepts that New Zealand is absorbing more carbon today than it was in 1990, he states that it is only a"bit more" and not enough to bring it under Kyoto compliance. He goes on to say that a spokesman to climate change minister Nick Smith told him that

"those are not the only numbers. "The convention inventory includes a wider set of activities than under the Kyoto protocol." In a nutshell, the Kyoto protocol allows New Zealand to ignore what is happening across the wider landscape and simply report the growth of its 600,000 hectares of new forests, planted mostly during the 1990s.

That sounds dodgy, though within the Kyoto rules. Even so, if these "Kyoto forests" had been specifically planted as part of a genuine policy to cut the country's long-term contribution to global warming – we might still applaud.

Unfortunately it is not quite like that. Those forests are not long-term sinks; they are commercial plantations. As Smith's spokesman told me, they "are likely to be harvested in the 2020s". And, he added: "The government has no intention to ban the harvest." When they are harvested their carbon will return to the atmosphere."

 Which means that New Zealand is simply passing on the problem to a future generation to deal with when the forests are felled in 2020, a time in which even deeper cuts in emissions will be required.

"The government's own civil servants seem to agree. The New Zealand Treasury recently called the carbon accumulating in the Kyoto forests a "contingent liability". It warned that negotiators should take this into account when agreeing future emissions targets – such as a Copenhagen deal on 2020 emissions.

There is a final problem for New Zealand's carbon credentials. The government's scientists have, in the past couple of years, been reassessing all their figures in a way remarkably beneficial to the government. Last April, they reported to ministers of the incoming government that emissions from deforestation were almost 10m tonnes a year less than previously supposed "due to new data showing smaller trees being felled". Meanwhile, they said, the Kyoto forests were absorbing a quarter more carbon than previously supposed "due to the trees not being thinned and being planted on better soils.

Cheat's Charter
Very handy. But even Smith was moved to note the "volatility" of the numbers.
A number of scientists have been pointing out for some years that the Kyoto rules on forests were an Achilles heel in the protocol. "If [countries] plant sink forests and make inflated claims for them, they know it will be impossible to either prove or disprove those claims. It really is a cheat's charter," warned Michael Obersteiner of the forestry division of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), a thinktank based in Laxenburg, Austria, back in 2000.
It may not be cheating, but New Zealand seems determined to prove him right."

Only brave soul has leaped to New Zealand's defence by stating that carbon will be sequestered in construction timber, whilst this may be true to a certain extent New Zealand households burn one heck of a lot of wood to keep warm every winter. One study of a large Lyttleton house with a floor area of 330 sq m, showed it used little electricity but more than 53,000KWh worth of firewood each year whilst another promoted as a zero energy home used an LPG heater and a log burner with a wetback. See NZ's high winter death rate and burning wood to keep warm. 

In June of this year  the Environment Minister Nick Smith admitted that 10 NZ cities and towns are unlikely to meet air quality targets by the year 2013, saying that the overwhelming proportion of pollution is caused by home fires. And the solution to not meeting those targets?.....the goal posts will be moved.

No doubt they too were made of wood.


 
Today's posts - click here

Responses To Guardian Article "New Zealand was a friend to Middle Earth, but it's no friend of the earth"

 The reader responses have been coming in thick and fast to the Guardian's website after the above article was published on Thursday. Please see blog post 100% Pure Myth Exposed By British Press.

Here are a few of the reader comments, starting with a very typical 'Pom Bashing' rant, followed by the usual 'but other places are worse than us' excuse that is often used to shrug off responsibility or accountability. Fortunately some New Zealander's are more enlightened than Koseyboy:

Koseyboy
I'm a kiwi and proud of it. After reading some of the comments below all I can say is if you have such a problem with NZ then don't live here. (that's all you whinging P*ms by the way) All this talk about NZ being one of the top producers of CO2 emissions per head of population is a load of rubbish in the greater scheme of things. We may very well have a bad score per head of population, but as a country we are responsible for only 0.2% of all CO2 emissions produced in the world! Similarly, Australia accounts for around 2%. Behind China and the US, the EU is the third biggest producer of these gasses. Now I may be being cynical, but if you can tell me how "dirty" old NZ can really influence climate change, then I am all ears....I think the not so green EU need to sort there own back yard out before they go pointing their "not so green" fingers at others.

Speedy1
Good points about rampant european consumerism and imports driving emissions from other countries... but we in new zealand are rampantly consumeristic as well and buy a fair amount of our stuff from china (and infact have unfortunately exported some of our industry there aswell ... infact havent we just signed a free trade deal or something?)so we cant really criticise too much.
Again the issue is that we have stuck our head up above that parapet with a ridiculous clean green 100% pure lie that we use to increase our exports and promote tourism. It does not matter what the UK or USA or Australia do because they are not bullsh*tting about being a clean green environmentally friendly country. we are the hypocrites and calling people names when they point it out is unjustified.

JimboB1234

"Auckland city (half the population live there) has a lot to answer for in terms of emissions. Terrible public transport means you can't plausibly survive there without a car.
Insulation in NZ is poor by UK standards. Brick houses aren't the norm, I think this due to the earthquake risks. Still I feel a lot could be done to improve insulation and building standards in NZ.
The farming in NZ produces meat that is consumed for the most part outside of NZ. There is a bit of China-syndrome here, shouldn't the overseas consumers be responsible for the omissions?
I think NZers themselves (I am one myself) also buy into the "we are clean and green" idea. There is a real lack of knowledge about the negative impact we have on the environment."

NZ Nick

When the Dept. of Tourism tout NZ as '100% Pure' they also fail to mention the fact that the Dept. of Conservation indiscriminately aerial drops 1080 to poison any mammals in an area. They have just aerial dropped within 100m of my boundary in an area where I collect my household water from. I've had to road tanker water in at great expense.
1080 remains in the carcasses of dead animals for months poisoning scavengers and the waterways.
Why is this relevant? Tesco's buy almost 50% of the lamb produced over here and none is checked for 1080 residues. Google 1080 and reduce your intake of NZ lamb, especially if you have young children!

Butterbox

"Finally we've been caught out! As a New Zealander I have been holding my head in my hands as decisions are made to help us procrastiate from doing improving our environmental performance. It is nice to see someone point this out, even if it does come from the otherside of the world.
NZ homes are terrible for insulation. However there is some good work going on to provide funding for insulation and install heat-pumps. These are perhaps a better choice than central heating in an environment where cooling is needed in the summer.
Our power generation is predominately from hydro, so at the moment this is not too bad. However, with the lack of new sites for hydro and a need for more base load on the grid we are struggling for other options to help meet our demand (my preferred answer is decrease demand/increase efficiency - but this is too hard to comprehend for some people who love their 2kW oil heater on 24hrs/day). NZ is to small to sustain a nuclear power plant so it has to really work hard to get greener options for power generation.
Although NZ does have a much older car fleet (possibly due to the cheap imports from Japan because we have a very open market) however, I would like to see the difference in Green House gases created with creating a new car from scratch (i.e. the steel production) compared with running an old on for a few more years. I feel it would be a lower amount, but that would not show up on the NZ carbon savings as we don't produce the cars.
Population density is also much lower in NZ compared with the UK (i.e. less apartments/semi-detached housing) so public transport is more costly to run - so less services are on offer and cars get used more.
These are fine excuses, some of which are due to poor planning in previous years. However, NZ politicians will continue to be scared from doing anything until the general population is aware of what how the global community feels. Some parts of the population still think that no one else is doing anything so why should they? Of course this is not true at all, the UK and Europe have been working hard on the problem for years. Unfortunately this message gets lost somewhere in between here and NZ (probably in baggage handling at LAX)...
Well done again on writting the article - hopefully it pops up in the NZ media.
 

Wellybob

The Current NZ govenrment has the view that because NZ makes up 0.3% of carbon equivilent emmissions that they can operate under the radar... Somehow they think 'responsibilty, is someone elses responsibility'.
Since gaining power last year they have:-
1- Curtailed Public Transport expenditure in favour of a new campaign of Motorway Building.
2- Dropped the previous govt's 90% renewable's energy target.
and are in the process of passing lesislation to:-
a- Allow mining/oil extraction in pristine National park area's.
b- amending the previous govt's ETS Bill so that Tax payers sholder the bulk of the burden for large polluters.
and they are planning to turn up at Copenhagen with a Pledge of a flimsy 10% reduction of GHG's on 1990 levels.
If you object to subsidising the irresponsilbe who seek to externalise the cost of climate change to you "vote with your wallet"...as a New Zealander... I ask that you boycott our products until such time as resposible government in NZ is restored.

Hieros

"I'm not surprised to see NZ has high car ownership. Public transport is a problem in a country of this size, with a small population, and lack of infrastructure. However, kiwis are in love with their cars, and the more powerful the better. Cronenberg could have mad Crash here !
NZ has in recent years identified 'leaky house syndrome'. Kiwis pride themselves on their 'No.8 wire culture', where they can make anything out of a piece of wire. It is in fact synonomous with botch-jobs in many cases, and pervades professionalism as well. Not only are houses not made well, they are not built to conserve energy."
Kiwis themselves live in the 'green mirage'. Many seem to think that the '100% PURE' Tourist Industry advertising campaign is real. Much of the countryside here is pristine, but agriculture on an industrial scale is encroaching. The only thing that is 100% pure here, is the epidemic of P!
With the No.8 culture, Kiwis think they can do anything themselves, and not only that, but that they are the best in the world at everything ! There is a lot of innovation in NZ, but there is also much macho arrogance and not much insight.

Today's posts - click here

100% Pure Myth Exposed By British Press

 A UK journalist determined to expose false environmental claims has finally blown the lid on New Zealand's 100% Pure image, and about time too. For some time the contributors to this blog have been highlighting the 100% Pure construct and how it has little, if any, basis in reality being little more than a tourism tag line that somehow found its way into the nation's collective consciousness. Fred Pearce has revealed 100% Pure to be nothing other than 100% Pure Greenwashing.

By Fred Pearce of The Guardian newspaper:

New Zealand was a friend to Middle Earth, but it's no friend of the earth

"Lord of the Rings country trades on its natural beauty, but emissions have risen 22% since it signed up to Kyoto."

"As the world prepares for the Copenhagen climate negotiations next month, it is worth checking out the greenwash that has followed the promises made 12 years ago when the Kyoto protocol was signed.....my prize for the most shameless two fingers to the global community goes to New Zealand, a country that sells itself round the world as "clean and green".

New Zealand secured a generous Kyoto target, which simply required it not to increase its emissions greenhouse gases up by 22%, or a whopping 39% if you look at emissions from fuel burning alone between 1990 and 2010.

But the latest UN statistics show its emissions of some countries with big emissions growth started from a low figure in 1990. Arguably, they were playing catchup. There is no such excuse for New Zealand. Its emissions started high and went higher. They are today 60% higher than those of Britain, per head of population. Among industrialised nations, they are only exceeded by Canada, the US, Australia and Luxembourg. In recent years a lot of Brits have headed for Christchurch and Wellington in the hope of a green life in a country where they filmed the Lord of the Rings. But it's a green mirage.

To rub our noses in it, last year New Zealand signed up to the UN's Climate Neutral Network, a list of nations that are "laying out strategies to become carbon neutral".

But if you read the small print of what New Zealand has actually promised, it is a measly 50% in emissions by 2050 – something even the US can trump.

Where do all these emissions come from? New Zealand turns out to be mining ever more filthy brown coal to burn in its power stations. It has the world's third highest rate of car ownership. And, with more cows than people, the country's increasingly intensive agricultural sector is responsible for approaching half the greenhouse gas emissions.

You might expect the UN Environment Programme to throw New Zealand off its list of countries supposedly pledged to head for climate neutrality. Sadly no. These steely guardians of the environment meekly say that the network "will not be policed... nor will UNEP verify claims".

Indeed, it seems to go to great lengths to deny reality. Check the UNEP website and you will find an excruciating hagiography about a "climate neutral journey to Middle Earth", in which everything from the local wines to air conditioning and Air New Zealand get the greenwash treatment.
After extolling the country's green credentials, it asks: "Have you landed in a dreamland?" Well, UNEP's reporter certainly has. He cheers New Zealand's "global leadership in tackling climate change", when the country's minister in charge of climate negotiations, Tim Groser, has been busy reassuring his compatriots that "we would not try to be 'leaders' in climate change."

This is not just political spin. It is also commercial greenwash. New Zealand trades on its greenness to promote its two big industries: tourism and dairy exports. Groser says his country's access to American markets for its produce is based on its positive environmental image. The government's national marketing strategy is underpinned by a survey showing that tourism would be reduced by 68% if the country lost its prized "clean, green image", and even international purchases of its dairy products could halve.

The trouble is, on the climate change front at least, that green image increasingly defies reality."

See also blog links under the headings of :
100% Pure Myth 
100% Pure NZ - You Can't Be Half Pregnant You Have To Go All The Way, The Age Of Stupid
Pollution - both of the air and water in NZ, plus health hazards
Kaweru Mill Can Continue To Pollute River For 25 Years 
Bonn Climate Change Talks
Statistics Top 3 
1080 - tonnes of highly toxic pesticide broadcast over the countryside from helicopters
Greepeace -  and their actions against PKE importers in NZ

Today's posts - click here

Another Nail In The Coffin For 1080

As we predicted 1080's days are definitely numbered as public pressure against its aerial distribution continues to gather strength in New Zealand.

At the start of the month Taupo passed a resolution calling for the abolition of the aerial dropping of 1080 and demanded a sustainable alternative to it for possum control. Now the mayor of Kaikoura, Kevin Heays, has added his voice to the argument by calling for a ban on the toxin in the Kaikoura District.


View Larger Map of Kaikoura
Earlier in the year Westland District Council voted to end aerial 1080 operations around drinking water catchments after submissions from opponents of the pesticide but suppored the ground application of the bait.

Mr Heays' call comes just hours before the Animal Health Board begins control of possums in the Hapuku Buffer and Kowhai/Swyncombe area.


According to an article in the Marlborough Express:

"In September, Marlborough District Council approved resource consent for the aerial application of 1080 poison in the Waihopai Valley. Contractor to the Animal Health Board, Valley Pest Control, sought a discharge to water permit for the planned drop over 7000 hectares of Department of Conservation reserve and 4200ha of private land in the lower Waihopai Valley and Waihopai-Spray. Ground drops were planned over a further 18,000ha.

The Animal Health Board programme manager for Canterbury and Marlborough, Ron Walker, said this drop would go ahead as soon as the weather had settled.

The amount of 1080 applied annually varied significantly depending on the need for vector control, he said. The 1080 was used to kill possums and rats, but stoats were also killed through secondary poisoning.

In Kaikoura in 2007/2008, 40 tonnes of 1080 bait (60kg of 1080) was applied to 16,000 hectares at a cost of about $420,000. In 2008/2009 no 1080 was applied in the region, said Mr Walker.
In Marlborough in 2008/2009 28.5 tonnes of 1080 bait (42.75kg of 1080) was applied to 14,200 ha at a cost of about $350,000."

 1080 use in NZ:  A Youtube Video Playlist

100% Pure NZ - Kawerau Mill Can Continue To Pollute River For 25 Years

Another example of how the phrase 100% pure NZ is starting to sound a little hollow.

Tasman Pulp and Paper Mill in Kawerau can continue to pump effluent into the Tarawera River, known as the 'black drain' and emit gas and dust for the next 25 years after its resource consent was renewed recently.

The commissioners when approving the consent admitted that the quality of the river was degraded as a result of the discharges, but said called this case an exceptional circumstance, outweighed by social and economic benefits the mill provided in the forestry industry.

 As far as we can tell there is no pressure on the owners (Carter Holt Harvey and Norske Skog) to clean up their act.

Amongst the protestors to the resource consent were  The Green party, mill neighbours and Maori. The June edition of the Whakatane Beacon stated:

"The Green party submission, lodged in the names of MP Catherine Delahunty and her partner Gordon Jackman, a former Greenpeace activist, said the Norske Skog and Carter Holt Harvey applications showed a lack of commitment to further improving their discharges to air and water, and to investigating alternatives.

They said the mills relied on using the Tarawera River as a drain and had breached the Treaty rights of tangata whenua including Ngati Awa, Ngati Rangitihi and Tuwharetoa.

“We do not accept that using the Tarawera as a drain is the only option for the mills to operate and provide jobs in the region,” Ms Delahunty and Mr Jackman said.

They said the 35-year consent terms sought by “a polluting industry” were unacceptable and if the consents were granted the terms should be restricted to 10 years.

They cited the dark colour of the Tarawera River and its “dioxin-contaminated fish”, as reasons for their concerns.

Ms Delahunty and Mr Jackman said the mills emitted a range of highly toxic substances to the air, including benzene, volatile organics and chlorine compounds.

They disputed claims by Norske Skog and Carter Holt the effects of these discharges were no more than minor...."

It doesn't inspire confidence that the same principles won't apply to the mining companies whom the government may allow to access vast tracts of previously protected conservation land to exploit their mineral wealth, estimated to be in the region of $140 billion, almost seven times as much as tourism brings in. The estate under consideration is said to include oil reserves in Fiordland National Park and gold and coal in Kahurangi and Paparoa parks.

Green MP Catherine Delahunty has drafted a Member’s Bill that would prevent polluters from being granted consent to indefinitely pollute waterways under an “exceptional circumstances” clause. It would limit the length of consents granted under exceptional circumstances to five years.



How long until NZ can no longer pretend it is clean, green and 100% pure?

See also: 'Does NZ deserve its clean green image?' in the Herald and the reader responses to this question.

Taupo Council Passes Anti-1080 Resolution

At last, a council strong enough and with the courage to take on the mighty 1080 machine within New Zealand. Taupo District Council have passed a resolution calling for a sustainable alternative to the highly toxic pesticide 1080 (chemical name sodium fluoroacetate) and for all aerial dropping to cease:

That the Taupo District Council, in accordance with the Section 10b of the Local Government Act 2002, advocate with central government and appropriate agencies, viz:

a. To develop a sustainable alternative possum eradication and trapping programme.

b. For the abolition of all aerial dropping of 1080 poison forthwith.

In their press release the council said

"Taupo District Council will advocate to central government to stop the aerial dropping of 1080 forthwith and to find a sustainable alternative to the use of 1080 poison to eradicate possums.

The vote was close but the resolution was greeted with applause from the small crowd present at Wednesday’s (30th September) SPO council meeting.

The decision* has been awaited with interest with attendance at recent meetings in Turangi and Taupo drawing people from far and wide. Today’s meeting was accompanied by a small but vocal group of anti-1080 protestors with placards on Lake Terrace.

Mayor Rick Cooper stressed it was the method of delivery which caused him the most concern “we need to stop the aerial bombardment by helicopters dumping 1080 indiscriminately over large tracts of land. This method is uncontrolled and the risk to the environment and our waterways is too great – we understand 1080 will be used until the powers find and fund a more sustainable method of eradicating possums but aerial dropping must be stopped forthwith.” He said the Council are very grateful to all of those who have taken the time to present their views and arguments to Council which has allowed Council to make a very well informed decision.

Clr Don Ormsby - Chairman of the TT CBD who put the motion to the vote says “It is good to see that the commitment of a small but passionate community can make a difference and I would like to congratulate the Taupo District Council for listening to its communities and taking this bold stand. I know people who have been trying to do something about 1080 for forty years and if we don’t stand up for them who will?”

The debate on the aerial dropping of 1080 was triggered by the Turangi-Tongariro Community Board which was reacting to concerns from their community about the indiscriminate dropping of 1080 poison baits to eradicate possums. Clr Gary Keepa said there is clear evidence of indiscriminate dropping of 1080 in the Turangi area which he was against."

Council tasked Clr Ormsby to take the lead on this issue and stipulated that there should be no undue burden of cost to the ratepayers."

Good for them we say, we hope more councils follow their lead and put an end to the widespread use of this toxin within New Zealand.

See also "Dept of Conservation and the 1080 Fraud": Link

Dairy Giant's Calves Starve To Death

From a report on the site interest.co.nz by Bernard Hickey. Some people may find this video disturbing



"The video shows dozens of calves starving to death at Crafar Farms' Benneydale property between Tokoroa and Te Kuiti earlier this month. Poor management and the pressures of massive debts obtained during rapid expansion meant this farm was so poorly managed that none of the staff trained calves to drink milk, allowing them to die of dehydration in a muddy pen.

MAF's inspectors were called in to this farm many times yet it was allowed to keep operating. Days after this video was taken MAF inspectors visited the property and destroyed many of the calves, yet has said this was just a management issue and not worthy of prosecution.

Farm owner Allan Crafar was on the Fonterra Shareholders council for 6 years, while Westpac, Rabobank and PGG Wrightson Finance lent Crafar Farms around NZ$200 million to buy more than 20 such factory farms despite numerous prosecutions for dirty dairying. Crafar Farms is now trying to sell its farms because it cannot service its debts, which are now worth more than the land."

"Rat Poison Discovered In Dead Penguins"

Taken from NZHerald.co.nz by Eloise Gibson 22 Sept 09

"Traces of the rat poison, Brodifacoum, have been found in two little blue penguins that died in the Hauraki Gulf, a month after the Department of Conservation dropped the poison on Rangitoto and Motutapu islands...

Poison-drop project manager Richard Griffiths said the finding of Brodifacoum was "alarming" and DoC did not know how it had happened....

DoC's resource consent to drop Brodifacoum on Rangitoto and Motutapu envisaged that some of the poisoned cereal baits would end up in the sea, and fishermen reported seeing pellets fall into the ocean at the time...." (See our blog post: Mass poison drops scheduled to wipeoout pests)

Is makes us wonder if these people know what they're doing. We've all read the reports about bait coming down like hail on fishermen in the vicinity of the islands, it doesn't take much to guess that birds in the area, including penguins, may have ingested some of it.

"Brodifacoum is a highly lethal anti-coagulant poison used to control not only rodents but also possums. It's is highly lethal to mammals and birds and extremely lethal to fish. It is a highly cumulative poison.

The American Bird Conservancy cites several studies indicating that secondary poisonings of predatory birds and animals are common due to the extreme persistance of the pesticide within both target and non-target species. It may also be dispersed by insects that feed on poisoned bait without harm and retain the pesticide within their bodies." - Wikipedia

Greenpeace Not "Anti - Farming", PKE Feed Is

A report in today's New Zealand Herald newspaper seems to undermine Don Nicolson's (NZ Federated Farmers President) assertion that Greenpeace's blockade of the ship carrying a cargo of Palm Kernel Extract destined for New Zealand animal feed was because Greenpeace is "anti-farming"

"....Protests continued outside Ports of Tauranga gates, with some New Zealand farmers weighing into the argument against importing the feed.

Greenpeace New Zealand said several maize and grain farmers had offered donations and support for the protest, saying their product had been undercut by cheap imports.

"We've had farmers who say they've never donated to Greenpeace but want to now because they are going out of business," said spokesperson Suzette Jackson."

If Greenpeace is "anti-farming" why are some farmers supporting them?

The Green party has evidence to show that farmers have been damaged by PKE imports into New Zealand and that continuing to do so was damaging the country's 'Clean and Green' brand image. This from a Scoop article back in August :

“Importing massive amounts of palm kernel undermines the priceless ‘clean and green’ brand that underpins our economy and most New Zealanders’ jobs,”said Green Party Co-leader Russel Norman.

“Stopping this sort of economic sabotage requires strong leadership from the Government.”

The Green Party warned about the alarming rise in imported PKE in April 2008, releasing statistics that showed a thousand-fold increase from 0.4 tonnes in 1999 to 455,000 tonnes in 2007. Statistics released today show imports more than doubled in the past year to 1.1 million tonnes in 2008, one-quarter of global PKE production.

“New Zealand’s palm kernel addiction is already costing our economy, and farmers, due to lost sales of our own grain and maize feeds,” said Dr Norman.

“Just this week members of the NZ Grain Council wrote to the Green Party concerned about large-scale PKE imports because it is environmentally destructive, is a biosecurity risk, and is leading to the 'demise of the NZ domestic grain industry'.”

So how long has PKE been a problem for the domestic grain industry? Well, concerns were raised back in early 2007, an article in NZ Farmers Weekly stated:

"Discontent is simmering among grain growers over the standards applied to the huge volumes of palm kernel extract (PKE) supplement being bought into New Zealand.

The MAF phyto-sanitary requirements for PKE are “a joke” and the ministry’s certainty over product quality is based on one arranged visit to several Malaysian plants, Whakatane maize grower Colin Mackinnon says.

“You need to make several visits on purely random, unannounced basis, not go along on an arranged trip to be sure standards are being adhered to,” he says.

He rejects Biosecurity New Zealand claims grain growers are concerned about heavy metals in PKE shipments.

“That is rubbish. The point is we don’t know what unseen contaminants are in PKE when it gets here because they are not checking. That is our whole point.”

Growers who have seen a confidential AgResearch report on PKE are fuming over Biosecurity NZ claims grower support for further research is based on fear of competition from PKE imports.

“We require a strong dairy industry and if it shoots itself in the foot with contaminated feed, we will all be in trouble,” Mackinnon says....

....Canterbury grain grower Gary Wilson says growers are not afraid of competition, but want a level playing field.

Growers here have strict requirements on spray use and standards, keeping diaries and logs on all applications.

He doubts the same applied to imported product.

Wilson also questions the environmental consequences of using a feed sourced from plantations planted in rainforest areas.

Ross Hyland of Seales Stockfood, Morrinsville, says PKE is probably here to stay.

Due to the large volumes being imported, he believes there may be grounds to establish a testing regime for it here."

And by January of this year maize farmers were really doing it hard because low PKE feed prices were causing dairy farmers to cancel contracts for silage. This too from Farmers Weekly:

"Dairy farmers are earning few friends among maize growers this summer as they walk away from silage deals, leaving some contractors with as much as a third of their crop now unsold.

"The dairy industry is really letting us down big time this year. It is hard to see how some contractors are going to be able to survive with portions of their crop now unsold despite contracts being signed," Bay of Plenty contractor Bill Webb told The New Zealand Farmers Weekly....

....Historically low palm kernel prices coinciding with payout slide was also accounting for contracts being cancelled. With prices under $200/t, the lure had proven too great for some of Webb's customers.

He had longtime buyers who had cancelled orders for as much as 200t of maize silage, after he had spent $3000/ha getting the crop planted for them.

Economics aside, Webb has questioned the future integrity and health of relationships between dairy farmers and the maize industry.

"It is a damn good question. What do we do next year, do you go back to these guys and do business with them, or risk simply not having enough buyers if you avoid them?"

So there you have it, which is "Anti-farming" - Greenpeace, or using PKE to make animal feed?

See also: World Bank breaks rules in lending to palm oil companies

Auckland's Toxic Beaches - 3 More Sick Dogs

A warning sign on a North Shore Beach, Rangitoto Island in the background. Click to enlarge.

Just when you thought it was 'safe' to go back in the water 3 more dogs have shown symptoms of poisoning after visiting beaches in the North Shore area of Auckland. Warnings signs like the one above appeared on most North Shore beaches advising people not to take dogs or children onto the beaches until they were (prematurely?) removed only 11 days ago.

As yet we have no news on the results of tests for 'rat poison' there were supposed to have been carried out on a number of dead dolphins from the area. The islands of Rangitoto and Motu were recently bombarded with toxins to wipe out pests. A comment from a marine biologist about bait in the intertidal zone was left on this blog - see link

One news report today about the current poisoning stated:

"Three more sick dogs have prompted Auckland health authorities to renew warnings to take care on the city's beaches.

The seriously ill dogs showed symptoms of tetrodotoxin poisoning.

One dog became ill after walking on Narrow Neck beach and another two became sick after walking on Takapuna beach. Authorities believe they they have the same toxin that killed five dogs and made at least 10 others ill last month.(Ed. this has yet to be confirmed)

The toxin, found in vomit from one of the dead dogs, is known as TTX and was traced to sea slugs found on Cheltenham and Narrow Neck beaches in Devonport.

"If you go back to the beach please, please keep children and pets under close supervision," said Auckland Regional Public Health Service spokeswoman Sally Young.

Emergency doctors have been advised that the TTX found in one small slug on Narrow Neck beach could, if eaten, be enough to kill a dog or a child."

No news yet as to whether the original warning signs (see photo above) will be re-erected, it's a difficult choice to be made now that summer is on its way and pressure is on for people to use the beaches freely, one may only hope that a child does not fall ill, or worse.

For the background to this story please see blog posts:
Questions surround DOC poison drops
Sea Life deaths continue in Hauraki Gulf - spike in dolphin deaths
Auckland beaches' poison - another 30 dogs sick, sea slugs poisoned, dog death in Stanmore Bay.
Mass poison drops scheduled to wipe out pests (first published 24 June 09)

"Questions Surround DOC Poison Drops"

from TV3.co.nz

"New Zealand enjoys the status of clean and green – but what do we do to achieve that?

As a country we lead the world in a series of rejuvenation projects like the weka, the kakapo and the Kiwi. But to achieve this the Department of Conservation has to first clear out areas and continue to eradicate pests like the rat, the stoat and the possum.

Poisons like 1080, cyanide and brodifacoum are used to control these pests.

But lately a large number of animals around the Hauraki Gulf have been found dead – eight dolphins and 150 penguins have been reported washed up on beaches. This follows three major dumps of brodifacoum – a rat poison on Rangitoto and Motutapu islands. (see Sea life deaths continue in Hauraki Gulf)

DOC say it is nothing more than coincidence. Members of the public are not so sure......"

The article then links to a video of Campbell Live's investigation into the sea life deaths in the Hauraki Gulf. The video of Campbell's report may be found here: TV3 and here: Scoop

Read about the complete ecocidal devastation a drop of 1080 poison caused in the Marlborough Sounds and how one evironmental group used traditional trapping methods to control possums and talked DoC out of using 1080 to bombard land in Nydia Bay:

“There was just silence.....It was as if the bush had gone into a state of shock. The dawn chorus should have been in full swing but there wasn’t even a fly buzzing. We all saw 1080 pellets in the streams and dead animals on the tracks; the only noises we could hear were trees creaking in the wind. Weka disappeared from the bay that day and it was eight years before they returned.”

See: Youtube videos
Read comments responding to the Campbell Live article from the NZ public who are outraged over this form of ecocide here: 'Comments'. These are some of them:

"Helen

02 Sep 2009 10:37p.m.

Good on you TV3 for starting to get little bits of this news out there. One thing that needs to be covered is that not only DOC and other agencies are poisoning our environment with large scale dropping of such toxins but also they are doing much smaller, more quieter "campaigns" all over our "100% pure" country.
I live in a small rural valley in Upper Hutt which has recently had Brodificaum used here, and every day I am finding dead birds on my property. I have lived here 12 years and never seen so many dead birds. Other neighbours have also commented on the loss of fish lfe in our streams. Maybe not a big thing for just one little insignificant valley but how many of these valleys make up our 100% pure image right across our country?

If people do not want to get passionate about the wild, domestic and farmed animals being killed, or the threat to humans then consider what our international tourism, meat, diary, wild game markets would think of this. The economic impact could be dire. It makes "100% pure" a sick joke! Please TV3 keep covering what is going on here and please can we see some more in depth investigation."
"Stephen

01 Sep 2009 9:16p.m.

Just whoo do DOC answer to. Seems only to them selves. The Minister of Conservation is no where to be seen when it comes to explaining the use of 140 tones of brodifacom on the doorstep of 1.2M New Zealanders. I am really pleased I do not live in Auckland, but I fear no place in NZ is safe from teh effects of DOC and AHBs mass poison of New Zealand.
It makes me ashamed to be a New Zealander that we have authorities so clearly hell bent on hoodwinking us."
Mr T

01 Sep 2009 6:52p.m.

"fishingnet.co.nz has a detailed discussion on this issue. http://www.oceanaware.info/Home_Page.html is where the concerned public can support Sarah Silverstar with the $1800 to test the penguins' livers for brodificoum poisoning.
I have chosen to live on Waiheke Island so my family has daily access to this beautiful coastline. The silence from ARC, DOC and ACC has been deafening. Well done everybody for speaking up!!!!

Sea-life Deaths Continue in Hauraki Gulf - Spike In Dolphin Deaths

Despite Auckland's beaches being re-opened after the stand down on an alert over a deadly toxin that killed a number of dogs and made scores more sick, one scientist has been brave enough to voice her concerns about the continuing deaths of dophins in the Hauraki Gulf. (The beaches were coincidentally opened a few days ago....just in time for the official end of winter)

Despite her concerns the scientist was told by the Auckland Regional Council that an investigation into the dolphins deaths was "not a line of inquiry" it wanted to pursue:

"A spike in the number of dead dolphins in the Hauraki Gulf could point to a problem other than poisonous sea slugs - if only authorities would do the necessary tests, says a researcher.

Marine biologist Karen Stockin, who is responsible for autopsies on common dolphins that wash up around Auckland, wants authorities to investigate the deaths of eight otherwise seemingly healthy dolphins in the space of three weeks.

She said the deaths were probably not linked to dog deaths that occurred at about the same time, "but that does not mean we should not be concerned".

"The common dolphin is an important biological indicator and if something changes in their system that causes an increase in deaths, that is important."

Ms Stockin said that on average, one or two common dolphins would wash up around the coastline of New Zealand each month.

However, "eight independent deaths from one region [were reported] in just a three-week period", she said.

"Not a single [dolphin] was emaciated or malnourished. On the contrary, the animals examined were seemingly healthy prior to death."

Tissues tests had failed to explain why they died. "These were all mature, robust animals."

Ms Stockin, a Massey University scientist, is pushing for the dolphins' stomach contents to be tested.

She has kept samples from their stomachs and contacted the Auckland Regional Council - which has been leading the investigation into deaths of dogs and other marine life - to ask about testing them.

She was told it was "not a line of inquiry" the council wanted to pursue.....The council and other agencies ruled out a link between the dog and dolphin deaths without testing the dolphins' stomachs.....

....it was up to the Department of Conservation to decide if the dolphins warranted further testing. A spokeswoman for the department did not return messages yesterday."

Testing should be carried out (outside of New Zealand if necessary) without any further delay for two main reasons:

• To exclude any possibility that the pesticide recently dropped on Rangitoto and Motutipu Islands may have entered the food chain

• To identify the cause as part of an assessment as to whether there is a risk to human health from swimming in or eating fish/shellfish from the region.

See also from oceanaware.info

"Update 22/9/09: Pete [name supplied] who has been fishing the Hauraki Gulf for the last 35 years, and regularly fishes off Rangitoto, had this to say about the day of the first poison drops in June. (He was fishing on the rocks. Other fisherman were removed from the area, however he refused to leave):

"there were immense amounts of it [poison] going into the water - there was more going into the sea than the land! It was absolutely horrendous to see.... I have never seen anything like this in all my 35 years of fishing... It was coming in like hail (it stung!), in immense, immense amounts, it looked like every 100 m or so, there was a sack of it going in the water... my dear, what I saw you would not believe" He also expressed feelings that are best not printed here! however he did say, " they need their backsides kicked good and proper!!"

Pete and Paul, another fisherman I have spoken to expressed grave concerns about poison accumulating in the food chain. The fish caught in these areas are being sold at the market - even if people do not become ill from this, they will likely be accumulating poison in their liver.

It does make us wonder if anyone is analysing fish and marine mammals for pesticide residues and why independent environment organisations aren't arranging for their own testing.

For more on the background to this story see: Auckland beaches' poison

Keisha's Castle-Hughes' Response To John Key

After John Key publicly stating that Keisha Castle-Hughes should 'stick to acting' over her stance on climate change she published a very articulate reply (on signon.org.nz) and Key has asked to to meet over a cup of tea to chat about her concerns. Here's Keisha's reply, aired on 6 August:

"I think it's derogatory to state that it's not okay for New Zealanders to stand up and take interest in the world around them.Climate change is a global issue that affects our country as a whole. Before being anything else in my life, I am a mother, and that is why I am a part of this campaign. And as a mother i believe i have a right to speak up if i have concerns about the future of my daughter. Discouraging New Zealand youth to participate, think and speak out is not on for the Prime Minister of NZ.

I'm not claiming to be a scientist nor a climate expert. I am just doing what I can as a good global citizen.

John Key's climate change Minister Nick Smith has spent the last two weeks running a public consultation on what NZ should do on climate change. I was under the impression that the NZ Government was therefore interested in what the public had to say. Is the PM all of a sudden NOT interested in public input?

This week is the Pacific Island Forum, where low lying states are calling clearly for help on climate change from countries like New Zealand. The Alliance of Small Island States is asking for developed countries to cut emissions by 45% by 2020. John Key should spend less time commenting on a Kiwi Mum's right to free speech, and more listening to our Pacific neighbours."

Other Pacific Islands Show NZ The Way With Emissions

Following on from yesterday's blog article we have some more from 'Eco' a publication of the CAN groups attending the Bonn Climate negotiations, August 2009. As you can see not only are other Pacific Island nations stepping-up to the plate but they are also setting an example to their neighbours.

(http://www.signon.org.nz/sites/default/files/08/12/Eco2_Bonn-III_can-talk.pdf)

Leading From Below

"As we now know, New Zealand’s CC Issues Minister has put forward an unacceptably weak target (10–20% on 1990 levels, hedged with conditions). To add insult to injury, as Ludwig noted yesterday, he has had the gall to challenge Pacific Island countries to show themselves willing to reduce their own emissions – which amount to around 0.03% of the global total. New Zealand’s stand at 0.21% (even without allowing for the sheep).

Fortunately the Pacific Islands have done more than show themselves willing, they are already taking action. Here are a few examples, an incomplete list, that the “Hon.” Nick Smith might like to consider:

• The Fiji Electricity Authority aims to generate at least 90% of its energy needs from renewables by 2011.

• In July 2008, the Tongan government announced a major renewables campaign with a target of having 50% of its electricity from renewables within three years.

• Samoa’s adopted national energy policy has a goal of increasing the contribution of RE for energy services and supply by 20% by year 2030, using sources including wind and hydro.

• The Power Utility at Vanuatu (UNELCO) has set itself a goal of generating 33% of its electricity from renewables by 2013. As of April 2008, UNELCO was using coco-fuel for power generation at 25% mix for 200 liters per hour. UNELCO is also installing wind power capacity of 2.75 MW that would in 2010 contribute to 6% of the total electricity generation.

• Nauru has set itself a target of 50% renewable energy by 2015 as part of a national strategic plan on energy.

• Tuvalu aims to be a 100% renewables country by 2020.

These countries have low responsibility and limited capability, but are doing all they can to secure their survival. Developed countries might follow their example, and consider targets that correspond with their responsibility and capacity – more than 40% by 2020 would be in line with the science."