About four weeks ago, one of New Zealand's leading film festivals - Reel Earth Environmental Film Festival - requested we submit Poisoning Paradise into their annual competition. So a few days later, we flicked the sucker off, and it's now in the boil-up pot, awaiting the proverbial judge's blade.
Of course, if we relied on the likes of New Zealand's highly censored, and Government-owned, TV One to decide on whether this important film was worthy of public scrutiny (without the public freaking out and rioting), we would all grow old, watching Coro.
So, since REEFF was in touch, Poisoning Paradise has been sent to various festivals around the world for festival consideration, and the hope that it may be accepted for screening in some of these others.
Thank goodness there are, believe it or not, uncensored, open minded platforms around the world (film festivals), that are not guided by government policy.
This morning we heard the news that Poisoning Paradise has been selected for a prestigious UK film festival, Swansea Bay Film Festival, which runs in the month of May, and we hope there are more to come.
So, what does this mean for New Zealand's image, its industry, its tourism, its economy, its future???
As long as this country continues to allow the contamination, the cruelty, and this deceitful practice to continue, we deserve what we reap. For those who wish to remain quiet, for fear of retribution, and allow this environmental disaster to continue - you are supporting this New Zealand ecocide.
For those who have an equal right to support the poor science that says that this deadly toxin 1080 (that is capable of killing everything that breathes air), can sustain life in over 50,000 multi cellular organisms, without harm, I pray for your ignorance...
We'll keep you up-dated on further film festival acceptances, so keep logging on.
Posts
Awesome work boys!!!!!
ReplyDeleteunbelievable that not only would you produce this rubbish but you would then defecate on New Zealand by pushing it internationally. Is hunting and pest industry money so good that you would sacrifice our birds and forests??
ReplyDeleteTell me Clyde when our forests are finally dead and silent what will be your next project? justifying the slaughter of whales?
Jeepers, Anon, for a moment there I thought you were talking about 1080 poison, and the pushers you obviously support!
ReplyDeleteIf you are so blind, that you support this ecological disaster, simply because 1080 poison is spouted to be a great thing, by naive university graduates in green uniforms, then you need to head into the bush, and get some observation under your belt.
To tell you the truth, I think the public are tiring of the voice of DoC and F & B appologists, clinging to the romantic notion that because these authorities continue to inform the public, on a weekly basis, what a wonderful job they are doing - that it must be so! It's called propaganda. If it takes international awareness (and it will), to expose this bureaucratic fuelled fraud, then so be it. An independent scientific review (not like the ERMA one) needs to be conducted, without delay. New Zealand has had long enough to get off its butt and act in an environmentally responsible way, but most choose to accept the bureaucrats sales pitch. It's time to put our environment, our wildlife, our future, our civil rights - ahead of the almighty dollar. If the cost of this disclosure is inconvenience, embarrassment and public enquiries, so be it! Clyde Graf.
as you well know the profit of this 'disclosure' will be in dvd sales for the Graff Bros and unhindered killing fields for deer and pig hunters. As a volunteer on species recovery projects throughout Aotearoa I know for a fact that 1080 is an essential weapon in our struggle to protect the last remnants of forests and birds in this amazing country. To see what is really happening on the front line of conservation search trakabat on Youtube and visit www.waiheke.tv
ReplyDeleteHey birdscantalk you are in airy fairy land with the squeak & tweet brigade, the primary use for 1080 is to protect the multi-million dollar meat export industry by reducing TB. AHB have built themselves a lovely empire that spends 55 million/year on pest control, they are proposing to spend another 1.25 billion in the next decade to eliminate TB. You are a volunteer that gets paid nothing while these corporate junkies get fat of spreading deadly poison over our landscape. 1080 is not essential you are just verbalizing garbage that you are being told, the most eco-friendly way is ground control. We are being told that that there are hard to get at places that need 1080, codswollop......where there is a dollar man will go. Dropping thousands of tonnes of chemical across our land does not pass the smell test....deer and pig hunters have done more to protect biodiversity than you ever will through volunteer work.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, by saying that that deer and pig hunters have done more to protect biodiversity than the thousands of conservation volunteers, you reveal your complete ignorance of conservation and biodiversity in the context of the New Zealand ecology, the basics of which I won't bore you with here.
ReplyDeleteSecondly no-one argues that ground control is the more eco-friendly option however untill central government fund the extra millions to replicate aerial broadcast by hand delivery helicopters are the most cost-effective option. However given the ability of 1080, a naturally occuring toxin, to totally bio-degrade in the environment it is money best spent elsewhere.
Thirdly do the research, go to the primary scientific information resources and actually READ what they say, even your American 'scientist' singles out Landcare and DoC scientists who he believes to be credible.
Fourthly, you would do yourself and your readers a service if you would keep your insults and derogatory remarks to a minimum.
.... if anybody is interested in following links to Universities and independant research on 1080 (Impacts of 1080 on Taonga Species, Lincoln University for example) you can start at www.waiheke.tv
ReplyDeleteHey birdscantalk you are still a moron, deer and pig hunters are environmentilists that happen to hunt. You seem to think they want to promote gross big game over population so they can bathe in venison & pork. They are intelligent people that believe in a happy medium without chemicals and provide organic meat for their families & friends. Deer and pig hunters are more intune with the environment than volunteers they spend countless hours in the bush admiring it's intrinsic simplistic beauty chemical free. To accuse Clyde Graf of anihilating birds is absurd, I would prefer to blame a super toxin poison designed as an insecticide that is dropped indescriminently from the sky....put 2 n 2 together insects eat poison birds eat insects...death. I have viewed Waiheke Tv it is crap.
ReplyDeleteDeer and pig hunters are more intune with the environment than volunteers they spend countless hours in the bush admiring it's intrinsic simplistic beauty chemical free.
ReplyDeletehmmmmm .... do they knit, press flowers and bottle plums as well??
Birdscantalk, if I understand your comments above (22nd Jan 2.54pm) correctly, then for the first time we actually agree on something...
ReplyDelete"That aerial application is not an eco-friendly option"
Perhaps you aren't a "moron" afterall. For months and months of reading your banter BCT, I was convinced you believed the more of this (1080) poison dumped across our landscape, the better. After all, it's so effective at "killing" isn't it? Killing everything that is...
Good work Graf's - I sincerely hope the dvd names and shames this whole insestious political / commercial / "conservation" relationship. It all smells a bit fishy.
And as for BCT's comments about the Graf's motives of the doco as a means to line their pockets - you couldn't be more wrong. These guys have dug deep into their own pockets for a genuine cause and they see their greatest rewards being the people they mobilise. They were sick & tired of hearing the usual wish wash and knew this was the only way to mobilise people on the wider issues.
And aside from that, good on them for selling the dvd - jesus, how else would they fund their extensive anti-1080 campaign, travelling NZ giving seminars across rural & urban NZ. Infact, I'd be very surprised if the Graf's have made enough $$ to even cover those costs let alone the expansive costs they've racked up over the last 10 years dedicated to their anti-1080 work. They have been committed to the cause for FAR longer than just the Poisoning Paradise doco.
So if the Graf's do make some money out of their efforts, I truly couldn't be happier, they have done it for a great cause. Hell, that's the very reason I bought three copies of their dvd's and have been lending them out to mates and people in Australia, Rome, and NZ=)
Maybe I'll start inviting people around for screenings too!!!
Kia Kaha boys
Maybe instead of endless re-runs of PP and the echo-chamber of the anti 1080 talk back you actually used your energy to delve into the realities of species preservation you would start to see where some common ground might lie. That is if your professed concern for Aotearoa is genuine and not as most of us suspect a smoke screen to advance your own agendas.
ReplyDeleteSome of the links at www.waiheke.tv
would be a good start. Actually if you like I could organise a compilation DVD of birdscantalk videos for you to show your friends.
Hey nows theres an idea, maybe you and Rebecca Colemann could make a DVD and send it to the Swansea film festival as an answer to poisoning in Paradise? Don't worry we won't try and stop like Rebecca did! never know it may just make best comedy?
ReplyDeletedocu-comedy?.... nah...the Graffs won that with the crying Rottweler breeder!
ReplyDeletehey THAT'S NOT FUNNY, if you'd ever had to watch your dog dying from 1080 you wouldn't say crap like that!!
ReplyDelete..but u know the bit that was funny was LIKE were Clyde is stroking the dead deer going "poor deer, poor deer" ... like blowing it to pieces with a high caliber hunting rifle, cutting it horns off and leaving it's fawn to die of starvation was OK....NOW THAT WAS FUNNY IN A KI8ND OF REALLY SICK gRAFF KINDA WAY
Birds can talk, how do I get a copy of your birdscantalk dvd?
ReplyDeleteYou know what is even funnier, dropping tonnes of super toxic chemicals in our most pristing back country blocks and telling everyone it's good for biodiversity....hahaha my side are splitting. Ironically hinds dont's have horns, stags don't even have horns they have antlers. Whats worse dying in agony for 3 days after ingesting 1080 or a quick death by bullet?
ReplyDeleteshame you didn't know as much about 1080 and native bio-diversity as you do about killing deer and pigs.
ReplyDeleteHere's a question for you: is the death of a kaka female in a nesting hole by being eaten alive by a rat, possum or mustelid better or worse than the death of that same rat, possum or mustelid by 1080 poisoning?
Pointless question - because the female kaka may meet the same fate as the possum, rat or mustedlid due to secondary poisoning from 1080. And even more so if it were female weka, tomtits, robins, moreporks, and keas.
ReplyDeleteMany of your pro 1080 advocates seem to think 1080 selects its victims. Wrong! It kills everything that consumes it - it was designed that way and the more aerial dumps, the more victims we are likely to see across a wide range of (at risk) native species.
So in essence, the answer would be the female Kaka would be "worse" off from 1080. Particularly with aerially applied 1080!
If however 1080 was miraculously able to selectively kill possums, rats and mustelids and presented no risk (at all) to the female kaka, then your question would hold relevance. But unfortunately 1080 is an indiscrimant killer. Plain and simple
Alternatively, selective trapping in prime kaka habitat for instance would "better" off the individual female kaka and many of the other native species in that habitat niche. Regular ground control, using professional pest control contractors is the way to do it. Guys on the ground who know the lay of the land, see the forest and animals on a regular basis and have a good local knowledge of how effective or ineffective ground control measures are etc etc.. Give certain contractors accountability for specific areas.
Birdscantalk (who I assume has posted under anonymous above 24 Jan 12.24), I'm surprised this question has bubbled up from someone who stated aerial 1080 dumps are not an eco-friendly option; implying that more controlled ground measures should be deployed?
Which brilliant really, because I agree with the significantly higher risks associated to aerial 1080 and the support the need to move towards more controlled, handlaid, ground control measures.
Guys on the ground who know the lay of the land, see the forest and animals on a regular basis and have a good knowledge of how effective 1080 is in knocking down mammalian predators know that there has not been one kaka death to 1080, but up to 80% mortality due to rats, oppossums and mustelids. Read "Effects of a 1080 operation on kaka and kereru survival and nesting success, Whirinaki Forest Park" Powesland etal...over 60 radio tagged kaka over 5 years not one mortality due to 1080. But really MM we are really wasting each others time because we are never going to convince each other of the opposing view. I dedicate my life to native bird conservation and am very familiar with all that means. You on the other hand are dedicated to hunting and killing deer.
ReplyDeletethat kinda sums it up don't you think?
Are you (BCT) saying that kaka are more important than many of the other native bird species (and inverterbrates) that fall victim to both primary and secondary poisoning from 1080?
ReplyDeleteSave one species (perhaps), while placing many others at risk. Seems a bit narrow minded don't you think?
And no, until there is more convincing research on the NET POSITIVE benefits of aerial 1080, then we will continue to lock heads. You can't deny that this holistic form of research has NOT been covered yet. Still too many uncertains
You even said it yourself above, aerial 1080 is not an eco-friendly option!! Or I suppose you're now going to argue that someone else wrote that..
I might not be actively involved in bird conservation like you are (which by the way, I genuinely commend you for - your passion for conservation is much to be admired), but to palm me off as a hunter promoting self & sport is not the case.
I strongly view hunting as a form of conservation management and despite your perception, I've never been one to promote free reign (or non-management) for non-indigenous animals such as deer, chamois, or tahr.
Yes, I make it clear that I don't want them wiped out for cultural, sporting, and culinary reasons, but I also make it clear it's imperative to keep populations within the balance of the ecosystem they're co-habiting.
At least with aerial wild animal recovery operations (WARO), they are utilising the product while generally achieving conservation goals. Aerial 1080 dumps on the other hand creates huge wastage and poses far more risks to the environment than other forms of management.
Given that you consistently refuse to read or acknowledge the existing and on-going research into the impact of 1080 on indigenous fauna because it is DoC propaganda it is difficult to know how to further this discussion. However since you recognise, albeit in a qualified field, that DoC research may show benefit to kaka through the use of 1080 i will try.
ReplyDeleteFirstly who are these many native bird species and invertebrates who fall foul of 1080?
Secondly, as to 'net positive benefits" I assume you're talking about the ecosystem level impact of 1080 ..read "Ecological Consequences of Toxin Use for Mammalian Pest Control An Overview" by two scientists singled out by OKeefe as being credible.
...i would also add that this mantra that your tribe chant ...there has been no population level report etc etc ... because out here beyond the wire where people live under nest trees for weeks on end all we care about is getting the chicks away...after that they're on their own...and NO despite your conviction that they're all being knocked over by 1080, native bird mortality is 99.99% due to mammalian predation.
cheers
BCT
Bird species discovered to have been killed by, or at risk of primary or secondary poisoning of 1080 are (and this doesn’t take into account invertebrates, the little critters at the front of the food chain).
ReplyDeleteTomtits
Robins
Moreporks
Harriers
weka
silvereye
kaka
kea
Pukekos
Riflemans
grey warbler
Long-tailed Bat
NZ Falcon
Kereru (wood pigeon)
Kakariki species
Yellowhead
Bellbird
Brown creeper
Fantail
Grey Warbler
Kingfisher
Long-tailed Cuckoo
Rifleman
Shining Cuckoo
Silvereye
South Island Fernbird
South Island Robin
Tomtit
Tui
Ruru
Australasian harrier
Shags
Paradise shelduck
Banded dotterel
Black billed gull
Red billed gull
Banded dotterel
Oystercatcher
Black fronted tern
Mallard
exotic finches
Black backed gull
Blackbird (exotic)
Thrush(exotic)
Starling (exotic)
The following papers make various references to native birds being either at risk or having been found dead due to aerial 1080:
Peterson et al (1994) Possum management in NZ. Office of Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment
Spurr (1979) A theoretical assessment of the ability of bird species to recover from an imposed reduction in numbers with particular reference to 1080 poisoning. NZ Journal of Ecology 2:46-63
Powesland et al (1998) Evaluating the impacts of 1080 possum control operations on North Island robins, North Island tomtits and moreporks at Pureora - preliminary results. Science for Conservation 74: 1-22
Powesland et al (1999) Impacts of aerial 1080 possum control operations on North Island robins and moreporks at Pureora in 1997 and 1998. Science for Conservation 133: 1-20
Powesland et al (2000) Mortality of North Island tomtits caused by aerial 1080 possum control operations, 1997-98, Pureora Forest Park. NZ Journal of Ecology 24(2): 161-168
Nugent (2004) Fallow deer deaths during aerial 1080 poisoning of possums in Blue Mountains, Otago, NZ. NZ Journal of Zoology 31:185-192
And In the (Spurr and Powlesland 1997 - Impacts of aerial application of 1080 on non-target native fauna) report, there is acknowledgement that 12 native species are regularly exposed to 1080 frequently, 15 species exposed occasionally, and 6 species exposed to 1080 rarely. Of the list they chose to illustrate, bear in mind they never even touched on invertebrates in any great detail - so expect the list to be the length of your driveway.
Stop aerial applications and employ more stringent, more environmentally friendly, and more business savvy ground based alternatives.
what a waste of your breath MM... you really don't get it do you? Exposure means they are in the same area as 1080 treatment. This is an entirely differant planet from suffering mortality from 1080 ..and as you acknowledged, kaka( a significant indicator species) benefit from predator control ..why is that ? uuuhhhh maybe because of the 60plus kaka radio transmitered 80% died from being scoffed by fuxing rats and stoats. Stick to killing deer and STOP PRETENDING YOU GIVE A RATS ARSE FOR OUR BIRDS.
ReplyDeleteAre kaka (and kiwi) your jusitification for widespread, blanket dumps of 1080? Think broader spectrum than just kaka will you. And don't yell at me.
ReplyDeleteYou said it yourself earlier; aerial 1080 dumps are not eco-friendly. Perhaps there is reason to use 1080 in very controlled, ground laid conditions, but to keep piping on about blanket dumps as being the saviour for our bird species is not only misleading, but becoming tyring.
I still say NZ employ safer, more controlled & regulated alternatives that provide economic incentives for pest contractors. Why are you so anti this???
I'm starting to think you're infact a bird. Or at least a birdbrain haha
And as for the term "exposed", the very fact that animals (whether they be rats, stoats, possums, pigs, deer, native birds or whatever) die within a 1080'd area - the insects, worms and invertebrates that attempt to clean up the carcasses fall victim to 1080 - and many of our natives feed on insects.
ReplyDeleteSo yes, they are highly "exposed" to secondary poisoning from chewing on affected wee critters and therefore at risk of dying from it.
You seem to use the word exposed loosely as if our native birds are smart enough to avoid eating insects that have been affected by 1080.
People find poisoned birds often after aerial 1080 dumps, and if DoC were transparent about their testing methods and didn't pass the cost to the individuals who brought them in (as if it were a way to discourage it), then maybe we'd see a lot more results of poisoned native birds.
Like for instance the rangioto island in Auck with the aerial dump of brodifacoum... tutt tutt tutt DoC. They tested like what? A couple of specimens out of hundreds, and then fobbed it off to some algae bloom. HA!!
c'mon BCT, you don't buy that do you? you're suppoed to be well informed...
Sorry for the delay in replying, Mountain Man. We've just returned from a highly successful screening at Great Barrier Island, on Saturday afternoon.
ReplyDeleteAnyone interested in contacting our MP's, or government ministers, can go to www.thegraboys.org and click on "what an you do to help". This lists all the relevant minister email addresses, of which individual concerns can be projected to the appropriate minister. Clyde Graf.