| Page |
No. |
Source |
Quotes from Decision Documents |
| 303 |
|
Agency App. B |
“Fagerstone et al…cited an unpublished skin irritation study (Savarie & Cerven, unpubl.)..[on 6 rabbits]..cited in the USEPA RED..as (Cerven 1987a)..the Agency concluded a 6.3B classification is appropriate..on the basis..[of]..this rabbit study” |
| 304 |
1 |
Agency App. B |
“Fagerstone..cited an unpublished eye irritation study (Savarie & Cerven, unpublished)..cited in the USEPA RED [as] Cerven 1987b..the Agency concluded a 6.4A classification is appropriate..[on the basis of this study]” |
| 304 |
2 |
Agency App. B |
“The Agency was unable to locate any studies on the ability of 1080 to cause respiratory sensitisation…therefore, found no evidence of respiratory sensitisation for 1080. There was insufficient data to assign a classification on the end point is not triggered” |
| 304 |
3 |
Agency App. B |
“The Agency was unable to locate any studies on the ability of 1080 to cause contact sensitisation…therefore found no evidence of contact sensitisation for 1080. There was insufficient data to assign a classification on the end point is not triggered” |
| 305 |
1 |
Agency App. B |
“The Agency was unable to verify that the mutagenicity studies reported..were carried out in accordance with an established international guideline” |
| 305 |
2 |
Agency App. B |
“In vivo [study]..mice (males and females) were dosed orally at 0.75, 1.5, 3.0, 6.0 and 7.5 mg/kg bw. No increase in micronuclei was observed in bone marrow extracts. Lethality and toxic effects were observed in the two top dose groups” (no further information given, Agency was unable to access the study design) |
| 306 |
4 |
Agency App. B |
“The mutagenicity data [from one unseen study on mice] are negative. This indicates there is no reason to suspect that 1080 may be carcinogenic” |
| 307 |
1 |
Agency App. B |
“Eason et al. (1999) cites the results [of a rat birth defect study] in summarised form. The only reference provided..is MPI Research/Landcare Research 1998. The Agency does not have a copy of the study report and assumes it is unpublished..this is the definite study for this endpoint [the teratogenic classification]” |
| 312 |
1 |
Agency App. B |
“The Agency does not have the full study report of the investigation carried out for Landcare..but carried out this assessment based on the summary in the paper, Eason & Turk” |
| 343 |
1 |
Agency App. B |
“In the absence of an LC 50 value for 1080, the question remains how the classifications of the formulas can be derived. The Agency concludes the only basis for a decision was expert judgement [regarding classification for inhalation” |
| 344 |
1 |
Agency App. B |
“No components in any of the formulations trigger this hazard [respiratory sensitisation]” |
| 345 |
1 |
Agency App. B |
“No components in any of the formulations trigger this hazard [mutagenicity]” |
| 345 |
2 |
Agency App. B |
“No components in any of the formulations trigger this hazard [carcinogenicity]” |
| 385 |
1 |
Agency App. C |
“Plants: The applicants submitted a..study on effects of 1080 on seedling emergence and early growth..in oats..and..lettuce. A standard regulatory assessment would normally include a greater number of species in order to assess variability in responses” |
| 389 |
2 |
Agency App. C |
“Based on the independent experts’ opinion, 1080 meets the criteria of having a DT 50 of <30 days and the Agency has assigned soil hazard classifications accordingly [as not reaching the soil toxicity classification 9.2C]” |
| 400 |
1 |
Agency App. C |
“The Agency only had access to the results of the studies [detailed studies on birds] as presented in the open literature, and not to the full reports” |
| 428 |
1 |
Agency App. C |
“The toxicity value used by the Agency is the..honeybee LD 50 (Palmer-Jones 1958)..if the bee value is used [1080 paste] does not trigger the threshold, if the ant value is used..it would classify as 9.4A highly toxic to terrestrial invertebrates” (bee data criticised on page |
| 479 |
4 |
Agency App. F |
“There are clearly benefits to many native fauna from the use of 1080 over large areas of forest in reducing predation pressure, and in reducing competition for food” |
| 480 |
3 |
Agency App. F |
“No alternative to 1080..is available for control of rodent and stoat irruptions..1080..appears [to achieve] significant reductions through primary and secondary poisoning.” |
| 480 |
6 |
Agency App. F |
“much of the monitoring data [on non-target species] presumably exists within various contractual operational reports and is not available to the Agency..the Agency assumes the information reviewed..is likely to be representative of current investigations, and in some cases demonstrates an improvement in practice over time” |
| 521 |
6 |
Agency App. F |
“the Agency does not know whether poisonings [of domestic animals occurred between 2003 and 2006] and were not formally diagnosed or were not reported via [Surveillance, MAF publication, which published cases until 2003] “ |
| 531 |
1 |
Agency App. F |
“Information on the kill rates achieved in DoC operations was..not as comprehensive as the Agency had anticipated..The Agency sought further information..where such information was provided by DoC, it is indicated in the text..DoC indicated that it would take a considerable amount of time to revisit the information..and determine whether ..additional observations [met] the criteria” |
| 531 |
2 |
Agency App. F |
“No information [on kill rates achieved] was included in..the application from the AHB. The Agency sought further information..the AHB was not able to provide any information as its database is still under construction” |
| 531 |
4 |
Agency App. F |
“DoC reviewed possum kill rates..a summary was included..in the application..the Agency sought clarification as to why there [were] so few results..given the time frame…Several criteria [had been applied]” |
| 539 |
2 |
Agency App. G |
“The Agency has carried out its own evaluation of the effects of aerial 1080 on possum density as it relates to Tb control but notes that the committee may require a more detailed assessment” |
| 700 |
1 |
Agency App. M |
“The Agency compared both the acute and chronic exposures that could occur from aerial 1080 operations, based on the water sampling data that have been reported” |
| 723 |
11 |
Agency App. N |
“While invertebrates feeding on poisoned animal carcasses may be exposed to 1080 residues, the Agency has not assessed exposure from this source. Any effects are likely to be minimal” |
| 44 |
2 |
Committee Decision |
“The pervasive damage caused to native flora and fauna species by these pests [possums] poses a significant threat to their ongoing survival” |
| 101 |
1 |
Committee Decision |
“Regulation 50 [concerned with protecting terrestrial vertebrates] is deleted…the benefits of using soluble concentrate..mixed with oats justify deleting the regulation” |
| 132 |
1 |
Committee Decision |
“ten significant beneficial effects..associated with the aerial use of 1080..[include] creation of predator-free zones” |
| 132 |
2 |
Committee Decision |
“ten significant beneficial effects..associated with the aerial use of 1080..[include] reduced predation [of native birds]” |
| 132 |
3 |
Committee Decision |
“ten significant beneficial effects..[associated with the aerial use of 1080..[include] reduced predation [of Powelliphanta land snails]” |
| 133 |
4 |
Committee Decision |
“short-term benefits to species and ecosystems extend for a number of years after each individual operation” |
| 137 |
1 |
Committee Decision |
“exposures are only likely to arise when controls..are not complied with..compliance..should ensure adequate protection for workers” |
| 196 |
2 |
Decision App.B |
“birds most susceptible [to poisoned possum and rodent carcasses] not affected at population level” |
