Chronic toxicity of 1080 and its implications for conservation management: A new zealand case study
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (4) (2006)
| Abstract | Sodium monofluoroacetate (1080) is a mammalian pesticide used in different parts of the world for the control of mammalian pest species. In New Zealand it is used extensively and very successfully as a conservation management tool for the control of brushtail possums (Trichosurus vulpecula) – an introduced marsupial that has become a substantial agricultural and conservation management pest. Possums pose a threat to cattle farming in New Zealand as they are a vector for bovine tuberculosis. In protected natural areas, possum browsing is responsible for large scale defoliation of native vegetation. As with many other pesticides, there has been some degree of popular concern about the use of this toxin and its safety, with particular reference to non-target effects. These concerns have been associated with potential non-target effects on human health, and the health of animals of recreational value (e.g., hunting dogs and game animals). This has led to the development of a strong “anti-1080” lobby in New Zealand. In contrast, this study encompasses a science-based risk analysis focusing on the potential risks to non-target native wildlife with a particular focus on chronic toxicity. It finds that there is evidence that 1080 may have endocrine disrupting capabilities (with potential relevance for non-target wildlife) but that this still needs more detailed investigation. This can be clarified by further targeted research. Further research is also needed to test the degradation rates of 1080 and its breakdown products at ecologically-relevant temperatures (i.e., winter stream temperatures – below 11 °C). Such research may demonstrate that some adjustment to 1080 risk management is warranted in New Zealand, or it may help to put to rest the current controversy over the use of this cost effective conservation management tool. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,679 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesBill Deval & George Sessions (1984). The Development of Nature Resources and the Integrity of Nature. Environmental Ethics 6 (4):293-322.
Kazi Firoz Alam (1993). Ethics in New Zealand Organisations. Journal of Business Ethics 12 (6):433 - 440.
Egon Noe, Niels Halberg & Jens Reddersen (2005). Indicators of Biodiversity and Conservational Wildlife Quality on Danish Organic Farms for Use in Farm Management: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Indicator Development and Testing. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (4).
A. Arunachalam & K. Arunachalam (eds.) (2010). Natural Resources Management in North-East India: Linking Ecology, Economics & Ethics. Dvs Publishers.
Helena Siipi (2004). Naturalness in Biological Conservation. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (6).
H. P. P. Lotter (2006). The Ethics of Managing Elephants. Acta Academica 38 (1):55-90.
Steven E. Kaplan & Susan P. Ravenscroft (2004). The Reputation Effects of Earnings Management in the Internal Labor Market. Business Ethics Quarterly 14 (3):453-478.
Ben A. Minteer & Elizabeth A. Corley (2007). Conservation or Preservation? A Qualitative Study of the Conceptual Foundations of Natural Resource Management. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 20 (4).
Jane Carruthers (2008). Conservation and Wildlife Management in South African National Parks 1930s-1960s. Journal of the History of Biology 41 (2):203 - 236.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads8 ( #123,092 of 549,087 )Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
