How 1080 baiting exposes Australia’s pest control crisis

Australia’s reliance on the deadly poison 1080 to control invasive species has exposed deep regulatory failures, ethical conflicts and a worsening pest crisis, writes Dr Simon Pockley.

EVERY SIX MONTHS I get phone messages Warrumbungle National Park warns me about “aerial/ground fox/dog harassment.” However, while birds and insects are disappearing, the number of wild boars and goats is increasing.

So I took a closer look. What I found were half-truths, conflicting ethics, corrupted regulatory authorities, and a sense that we were at another tipping point of environmental degradation.

There is no dispute that foxes, pigs, cats and rabbits are causing the high rate of extinction of native animals and causing serious consequences. environmental degradationIn addition, significant agricultural damage occurred. Pest animals in NSW, Biosecurity Act 2015It requires land owners and managers to control them. National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) 1080 (pronounced “ten-eighty”) follows recommended best practice for dispensing loaded baits.

Ten eighty (sodium fluoroacetate) is a water-soluble, odorless, tasteless powder. It is one of the most toxic manufactured poisons in the world, with no known antidote. World Health Organization rates Class Ia — highest toxicity level. This substance, which was patented as an insecticide in Germany in 1927, dark mythology: it is claimed that it was rejected by the Nazis on the grounds that it would destroy the Jews because it would kill the guards, and that it was found by the CIA Saddam HusseinThey have stock.

The name 1080 was simply a trademarked laboratory access number. monsantosold it along with production rights and facilities to Tull Allen. Tull Chemical CompanyIn 1955, Alabama, USA.

In 1972, 1080 was banned in the USA. Although Tull Chemicals has been deregistered by the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), continued to produce and sell the poison. Although banned or restricted worldwide, his grandson Charles Wigley Australia (200 kg per year) and New Zealand (2,300 kg – where they take feed from the air). Both now rely on downstream stocks from Tull’s factory burned In 2024.

The basic rationale for using 1080 is that it is a naturally occurring toxin in some native plants of Western Australia, and native animals, unlike introduced predators, have developed tolerance to it. While this is true for some native animals in Western Australia, this is not the case in the eastern states where such plants are absent. in Tasmaniafor example, 1080 is used to control native mammals in timber plantations.

Species specificity also depends on the 1080 concentration in feeds, feed material, size, location, timing and attention to carcass intake. But, on the fieldoff target and secondary poisoning Eating the carcass kills domestic animals, birds, insects and native carnivores.

According to the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Agency (APVMA)’s Final Review Report and Regulatory Decision:

The most likely bird losses due to carcass collection are; Species such as sparrows, starlings and pigeons appear as scavengers such as currawongs, corvids and kookaburras, and occasional birds of prey in pig poisoning campaigns. Among mammals, dogs are the most common non-target casualties, usually after consumption of meat feeds or contaminated carcasses. Macropods, opossums, wombats and rodents can be killed with grain or carrot baits.

In Australia, APVMA is the main regulatory body for 1080. Regulates 1080 to retail; State regulations then govern its use.

Damn in 2023 Independent review by Clayton Utz The APVMA found serious systemic problems with its management, governance and culture. The regulator had fallen into the hands of the agrochemical industry because of its dependence on taxes from the companies it regulates. Then both the CEO and the chairman of the board resigned.

Senator Murray Watt in question in 2023:

“It was also revealed that the report also included the former Minister of Agriculture. Barnaby Joyce‘s decision to relocate the regulator to Armidale has led to a loss of institutional knowledge, a loss of corporate culture and a loss of experience and knowledge of public sector values.”

Recently the Federal Government rejected a suggestion made the decision to move the APVMA to Canberra for fear of further disruption.

Two main advocacy groups promote the use of 1080: Invasive Species Council (ISC), which promotes political advocacy, and the Center for Invasive Species Solutions (CISS), which drives the research.

Gillian Basnettpreviously from CISS, in question:

“An effective 1080 challenge is the ‘thin green line’ that will save many of our threatened and other native species from extinction.”

Growing ever since the 1960s community opposition Calls have been made to phase out 1080 in Australia and New Zealand. pet dog deathsdingoes, target species and wildlife. In 2005, APVMA responded to the petitions and filed a 1080 reassessment.

2008 final report Single supplier risk ignored and animal welfare excluded:

It was clear from public comments submitted to the review that there was strong public concern regarding the humaneness of 1080 and that the community felt this issue should be considered in the review. While the APVMA took community concerns into account, it did not base its regulatory decisions on this issue as animal welfare is not a specific criterion that can be taken into account when making decisions regarding the future use of 1080 under the Agvet Rules.

Anti-1080 groups include: greens, Coalition Against 1080 PoisonAnimal Justice Party (A.J.P.), And Animal Liberation. Their opposition ranges from humanitarian concerns to rejection of terms such as “invasive, alien, feral, and pests.” human supremacists -Argues that the arrival of non-indigenous people are the ultimate perpetrators of ecological destruction.

In 2020, the Invasive Species Council published a rationale titled: 1080: A Serious Ethical Problemstates:

‘Killing housed animals is often the best overall outcome for both animal welfare and conservation. Before the Tasman Island population of about 50 cats was wiped out, up to 60,000 seabirds were killed a year. ‘If we think over larger timescales, the deaths of these 50 cats will save the lives of millions of seabirds.’

The document ignores Indigenous perspectives but prioritizes testing humane 1080 alternatives. until 2023 Animal Welfare It was concluded that 1080 is inhumane. Pro-1080 groups oppose and debate it opposing claims to create misinformation.

In Australia, dingoes are now at the center of ethical and cultural tensions between dingoes. protection of livestock, conservation of biodiversity, indigenous heritage, tourism and even scientific credibility. They are protected in some states, national parks and territories; in others they are pests.

2021 UNSW genomic study 99 percent of wild dogs found to be pure dingoes or dingoes dingo dominant hybridsnot invasive savages. As a result, control programs target Australia’s top predators that can suppress 1080 targets: foxes, feral pigs and rabbits.

2023 National First Nations opening of the dingo forum produced Dingo DeclarationIt demands non-lethal coexistence. Somehow acceptable dingo predation on wildlife needs to be reconciled with animal losses.

I talked to the dr. Linton StaplesThe pest control expert of 40 years led the baiting of 1080 foxes through Animal Control Technologies Australia (ACTANow kiwicare-owned). He also developed faster-acting non-1080 baits for foxes, cats and pigs.

Dr Staples warns of legal hurdles (especially dingoes), loss of skills and government agencies prioritizing regulation over action.

“We are heading towards a pest crisis. Control options are constrained by a failure to evaluate the balance of benefit over acceptable risk. Being absolutely effective or absolutely safe is an impossible threshold. We need a paradigm shift in approach.”

Staples also warns of the risk of highly contagious African swine fever (ASF) is spread by wild boars; one of many threats. There is no space here to detail Australia’s biosecurity failures.

Dr. Carol BoothInvasive Species Council policy director, It was said recently:

“We are completely shocked by the report’s findings. When biosecurity staff themselves report a lack of criminal sanctions for repeat offenses and inconsistent sanctions due to political pressure, this should ring alarm bells at the highest levels of government.”

Australia spends too much 25 billion dollars annually on pests and weeds. Weeds cost five times more than vertebrate pests. But landowners report an overgrowth of wildlife despite baiting, trapping, fencing and shooting.

Tech optimists point to autonomous robots control weeds and imagine sensing heat armed drones killing invasive pests humanely and cost-effectively. Scaling to large areas – especially indigenous lands – creates regulatory nightmares: CASA approvals, chemical licences, ethics and oversight concerns. Still, there are exciting developments genetic biocontrols and advanced telemetry enables high tech traps.

A radical approach (anathema to government thinking) would be to strengthen top-down government programs by empowering landowners from the bottom up. Landcare’s community-led pest control success.

I spoke to Ranger Cassius in Warrumbungles. He told me he didn’t have the resources to monitor Park’s 1080 annoyance activity, but it would continue anyway.

Despite a decade of worsening State of the Environment reports Since 1996 neither the Albanian Government nor the opposition has shown any desire to address Australia’s collapsing environmental assets.

Public awareness of reported crises is muted by economic and political priorities, policy inertia, and fragmented media coverage.