| Page |
No. |
Source |
Quotes from Decision Documents |
| 467 |
3 |
Agency App. E |
“Limited information is available on dust drift and it is not known how representative this information is” |
| 475 |
3 |
Agency App. E |
“Three aerial operations using cereal baits were monitored for dust drift in 1997 and 1998..The maximum deposition of 1080 falling in dust [from cereal bait] was 25.2 μg/m²..residues in dust inside all treatment areas were significantly greater than outside at day 1, but not at day 5” |
| 475 |
5 |
Agency App. E |
“The main conclusion that can be drawn..is that dust drift can occur over a considerable distance off-site (at least 1 km)” |
| 475 |
6 |
Agency App. E |
“The Agency is not aware of any other studies reporting on dust drift from aerial application of 1080..there is insufficient information to know whether other bait types or delivery buckets would create more or less dust” |
| 476 |
2 |
Agency App. E |
“Trace levels (of 1080) were found in 11 plant samples [after 1080 cereal operations at Whitecliffs and Titirangi]..the maximum measured was 0.014 mg/kg..on day 1..it is unknown whether the residues in plants resulted from dust deposition or uptake from the soil, the authors attributed them to dust.” |
| 477 |
1 |
Agency App. E |
“[1080 concentration in dust, μg/m², inside treatment area] Day 1 3.81 , Day 5 0.1..outside treatment area (day 1) 0.2 at 200m, 0.06 at 1 km” |
| 477 |
3 |
Agency App. E |
“[1080 concentration in dust, μg/m², inside treatment area] Day 1 0.29 , Day 5 0.01..outside treatment area Day 1 none at 200 m – 1km, Day 5, 0.11 at 200m, 0.05 at 400m, none at 600m, 0.03 at 800m, 0.13 at 1 km” |
| 477 |
4 |
Agency App. E |
“[1080 concentration in dust μg/m², inside treatment area] 2.22 (Day 1), 0.05 (day 5), Outside treatment area Day 1 0.03 at 200m, 0.09 at 1 km, Day 5 0 at 200-600m, 0.09 at 1 km” |
| 485 |
1 |
Agency App. F |
“there does not appear to be [an] industry standard [for fine pieces of carrot bait], although the Agency does not have sufficient information to fully assess the matter, having only been provided with the standard operating procedure for one contractor used by the AHB (further information from the applicants, 22 December 2006)” |
| 510 |
5 |
Agency App. F |
“Dust drift from the application of the baits was observed to contaminate the control site” |
| 684 |
1 |
Agency App. M |
“The Agency concluded that there is a limited amount that can be done to address the occupational exposures in an outdoor environment where workers cut open and empty bags into a hopper..it is difficult to control dust [especially] in the vicinity of a helicopter” |
| 685 |
1 |
Agency App. M |
“the Agency concluded that there is a limited amount that can be done to address the occupational exposures in an outdoor environment where workers load possibly dusty material into a hopper as a manual operation” |
| 696 |
1 |
Agency App. M |
“standard controls will apply to address high risks, such as: No loaded aircraft will fly over reservoir lakes or feeding streams..intake for..public water supply will be disconnected from any streams arising in the treated area..any incident involving accidental distribution outside the drop zone will be notified (ignores effects of dust, floods and that streams arise from small tributaries) |
| 723 |
8 |
Agency App. N |
“Available monitoring data indicate that..the extent of any impact [of 1080 on invertebrates] is very localised to within a short distance of a toxic bait” (one trial, artificially laid baits (no dust), no data or statistics, one measurement (no. invertebrates on nearby non-toxic baits), no consideration of secondary poisoning eg maggots, spiders, ants) |
| 799 |
2 |
Agency App. Q |
“The Agency considers that discussion with industry is required to develop a process for ensuring such changes in risk profile [from ageing baits] are appropriately assessed” |
| 223 |
1 |
Applicants’ references |
“A maximum concentration of 25.2 μg 1080 mˉ² was detected in [cereal] bait dust..within the control zone..lower concentrations were found outside treatment areas..there were detectable short-term 1080 residues in water, plant, leaf litter and soil samples after 2 of the 3 baiting operations” (Wright et al., 2002) |
| 13 |
1 |
Submitter 9143 |
“Observation on the day of the poison operation showed that the fine particles and dust were blown across the forest canopy from the helicpter bait bucket” (Meads report) |
| 13 |
2 |
Submitter 9143 |
“181 mm of rain fell in the second fortnight after the poison operation. Thus an influx of 1080 may have washed from the tree tops to the ground” (Meads Report) |
| 63 |
3 |
Committee Decision |
“only a very small number of the total invertebrates present on the forest floor within an application area will be affected” |
| 69 |
1 |
Committee Decision |
“the controls on aerial application..are adequate to protect the public from exposure to 1080 baits” |
| 186 |
1 |
Decision App. A |
“The loading area [for aerial operations]..must be decontaminated; or fenced..signs and fence must remain until the place is decontaminated” |
| 195 |
1 |
Decision App. B |
“low sowing rates result in exposure levels too low to cause effects [to terrestrial plants]” |
