1080 Report is Scaremongering

The Game Animal Council Establishment Committee Media Release 10th June 2011

1080 Report is Scaremongering

Criticism of the role of new Game Animal Council in the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment’s (PCE) Report on evaluating the use of 1080 lacks fact, balance or impartiality said Garry Ottmann, Chairman of the Game Animal Council’s Establishment Committee

The report poses questions about the possible role of the Game Animal Council such as: “what happens if for instance, DOC wanted to carry out an aerial 1080 operation to kill possums, stoats and rats in an area where there would be a risk of killing deer?” And “Because of the risk of by-kill that 1080 poses to deer, it is not clear what would happen if an agency wishes to use 1080 to control possums, rats and stoats in areas managed by the Council.”

“If the Commissioner’s Office really wanted answers to those questions it would have ben relatively simple to come to the Establishment Committee and ASK” said Garry Ottmann. “This has not happened”

The Report of Recommendations to the Minister of Conservation on the establishment of the Game Animal Council states:

“The Committee recognises that DOC is the manager of public conservation land and retains the overall responsibility for controlling wild animals there. Through public processes such as Conservation Management Strategies and management plans, DOC and the public decide what areas are top conservation priorities, and DOC manages these accordingly.

The Committee is of the view that the Council and DOC should work co-operatively together to identify, by public processes, priority areas where animals need to be actively controlled for conservation purposes. Outside of these areas, however, the Council would be mandated to manage these species for their hunting benefits. This reflects the current and projected future situation whereby DOC carries out only limited wild animal control on some land under its jurisdiction, and has indicated that even if it were better resourced; wild animal control would not be a priority in most areas.”

“The PCE report has selectively taken phrases from our report to support it’s questions and conclusions but has failed to take into account the context of those phrases and the recommendations as a whole” said Garry Ottmann. “The PCE Report makes great stock of good science but fails use good science itself.”

The PCE recommendation on the status of the Game Animal Council also uses words such as; “has the potential to” and “could” in its preamble

“These are words that are used when there is no actual foundation for a statement. Basing a recommendation on innuendo and accusation is again bad science” said Garry Ottmann “The PCE has been badly let down by her office and the quality of the research and work that has gone into this section of the report. We have a number of also unanswered questions but we will take those to the Commissioner directly.”

Ends

© Scoop Media