Sunday, October 24, 2010

SAFE - take stance on 1080

SAFE (Save Animals from Exploitation) have come out strong with a stance against the use of 1080 poison.

This is more good news in the effort to have 1080 banned in New Zealand.

Good on you, SAFE.  Click here to visit SAFE website 

US bill to ban 1080 can be viewed at congress here


  1. I understand the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" thing - Forest & Bird are working with NZDA against helihunting. But did you read the section on "Alternatives"? These zealots are only interested in 1080 because they want to stop all killing of animals by humans. Best avoided.

  2. I believe certain animal populations need to be managed - as humanely as possible. I also believe that it is healthy to have a range of views, right across the political spectrum, in any society. This allows balance. We can have one lot saying kill everything, and another lot saying kill nothing, and everyone else in between. What is concerning is, when that balance is disrupted by political interference to the degree that the information being projected is incorrect - or to put it another way - propaganda. That's when we get into trouble, because that's when the population are led to believe something that isn't true, so that our authorities or bureaucrats can get their own way.
    When the media is used to do this, on a weekly basis, it's very powerful. Just look at how DoC, on a weekly basis, inform the public of what a wonderful job they are doing. The public buy it, and lap it up.
    Then, when these bureaucracies are exposed for doing the opposite of what they stand for, who's the first to defend them - yep, the public.

    That's exactly what's happening with the 1080 industry in New Zealand. The public are being fed, and have been for the last 20 years, a bunch of half-truths and lies, to help build and sustain an industry dependent on the spreading of poisons.
    It's then the public that defend this atrocity that takes place under their very noses.

  3. zealots? I don't see animal welfare as radical or fanatical. Either a poor choice of words or a lack of understanding. Probably both.

  4. SAFE aren't just an animal welfare organisation, they are an animal _rights_ group. They are opposed to all the alternative lethal methods of possum management, including the 'Henry' trap that is commented on approvingly in the post prior to this.

    Clyde - SAFE would stop you from hunting deer and harvesting possums for fur in an instant if they could. Do you really need support for your cause that bad?

    I may not agree with everything you say about 1080, but I'm a lifelong hunter and farmer and I'd urge caution here.

    Enjoy your hunting DVDs, by the way :)

  5. Hi Aaron.

    Thanks for your comments.
    I am aware of where SAFE sit. I welcome their stance, and I support their right to be opposed to hunting or killing, and I support your right to be for it - should that be the case.
    I don't agree with all of their policies, but I do agree on their stance toward 1080, and that's what I support. We don't always have to agree on all beliefs and all policies. I have friends that like spotlighting, where as I loathe it. I still enjoy their friendship. Cheers.

  6. This isn't about SAFE's right to hold an opinion. They're most welcome to think whatever they like, good on them, I'm not going to call them indoctrinated, or worse.

    Do you accept support from anyone though, or do you draw a line? SAFE are not opposed to 1080 because of any evidence, they are opposed because they start with the premise that killing an animal is wrong - period. The evidence of that is that they are opposed to cyanide and the Henry trap.

    Interesting piece of proposed legislation in the States. If it passes, do you think we should follow suit here?