One morning at 8.30a.m. A road gang travelled very slowly along Glen Esk Road (at the Conara Main Road end) whilst working on the road edges, meticulously checking and repairing the road verge edges. The day was the first of August 2006, they were travelling slowly, sometimes walking and sometimes riding in the truck, the road gang did not see a dead European Red fox that was claimed by the FFTF to have been killed by a vehicle sometime earlier at that very location. The still warm, finger up its bum, real deal, freshly killed fox. Well after five modifications to the DPIWE’s site they have finally conceded it was killed somewhere else. It is always wise to keep hard copies of ever changing reports, I have found.
Anyway back to Porkies Maximus; three young agricultural contractors travelling along that section of road that same morning, Michael Beams, Jason Powe and Joshua Leeson rang the FFTF headquarters in Launceston and spoke to the FFTF’s Craig Bester and said they had discovered what appeared to be a road killed Red fox On Glen Esk Road; someone would wait until an officer from the FFTF could come to that exact location. As luck or whatever would have it several members of the FFTF were only some minutes (10 -15 minutes) away on the main road in the process of delivering a field stripped FFTF vehicle back to Launceston HQ as two of the FFTF branches were closing that very day. What becomes interesting is all three agricultural workers including Joshua Leeson were interviewed and statements were taken roadside that very morning by the FFTF members and none of them said anything then and there that morning about running over a live or even dead fox.
However on the third of August a DPIPWE press release claimed, “A member of the public has identified himself as the driver who hit the fox on Glen Esk Rd Tuesday morning.”
“The man was the driver of the vehicle and his activity is known to have put him in the area at the time”. “Mr. Davies said that the driver had insisted we do not publicly identify him because he does not wish to become the subject of speculation.”
“He was driving east on Glen Esk Road. The fox emerged from the left-hand side of the road, ran across the path of the vehicle and was struck by a tyre.”
“He stopped to find what he had hit and saw it was a fox. He then continued on his way”... Well my oh my! Problem is Josh Leeson was the anonymous driver who ‘phoned the DPIWE it now seems, he is still as nervous as a cat on a hot tin roof and wishes he had not been involved. I am very reliably informed by a Police Officer that Joshua made a phone call to the DPIWE the next day under threatening instructions.We are aware who issued the instructions. Joshua denies saying anything like the text of the press release. They should have left the fox where it was originally found and not caused themselves all this worry. Later independent pathologists confirmed that this fox was killed much earlier than claimed and was not killed at the claimed original location…Glen Esk Road. Another independent expert has claimed to me that this fox was not living in Tasmania and all its body signs show it to be a high country fox with it’s origins more likely Alpine Victoria or the A.C.T.
However this “Glen Esk Road” fox is still one of the anchor points used as hard evidence to justify the FFTF/FEP/ISB ongoing 1080 baiting program.
Show Comments
Comments (82)
Is it possible that the identity of the ‘anonymous driver’ was someone other than Joshua Leeson? Such phone calls are common after incidents like this that get media coverage. He admitted at the time that they moved the fox. Why would he later try and further complicate things? From what I understand he had done nothing wrong. Is this due to the ‘intimidation’ the author refers to? I also note the omission of mention to a call to the ABC which was also apparently from Leeson using a different name (I might have gotten this bit confused?) that referred to the fox being ‘roadkill’. Is it possible that this was the same driver Davies refers to and that Leeson is telling the truth?
Putting out the press release was clearly a mistake which was eventually conceded. My understanding is that members of the Fox Program were on a different page and bemused to see the speculative information released. There is certainly a pattern of confused messages from DPIPWE that is typical of any Govt department. Certainly does nothing to help matters.
NB I ask these questions purely out of personal curiosity and do not challenge the facts of the story or the credibility of the author. I am not an apologist for 1080 baiting, do not support the current methods of the ISB and believe that the eradication effort has been plagued by serious errors from day one. I also acknowledge that quibbling over these details will not help bringing an end to the baiting and agree that we should all be able to recognise the sounds of foxes by now…….
Oh, and I do not support Greens policy on this issue.
When you go through and carefully disseminate all the fox carcass “evidence” you end up with a big fat nothing…what they have always had.
Symmons Plains fox, shot in Victoria and imported with two others…one being used in the famous Longford road sign fox photo.
That photo displays the same brown jumper and the same BRNO rifle that was submitted for testing re the Symmons Plains fox “shooting”.
Remember the two foxes were DNA matched as siblings when it suited, later the Longford fox (photo) was admitted to be a hoax. Actually that fox was used for testing the waters for a reward that was never paid.
Click on show transcript:
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/earthbeat/out-smarting-tasmanias-foxes-can-it-be-done/3643598
Burnie October 2003 “fox in the box” A fox that had been contained for some time in captivity without breeding and hadn’t eaten for a week, was found at the same time certain people were going backwards and forwards on the Toll and Brambles ships doing risk assessments.
The Lillico fox cub squashed remains (match box sized remains) first claimed to have been seen at Christmas 2005 but not reported from ‘Canberra’ until the 23rd February 2006.
None of the above would stand scrutiny in a court.
Sightings? In the same trash bin as the Yowie, Big Foot, Loch Ness Monster and for the last forty years - the Thylacine.
More than 3,000 “fox sightings” in Tasmania but not one in the vicinity of any of the FEP’s/ ISB’s 200 remote infra red, heat/movement cameras?
Bit strange don’t you think?
Scats?
I think the answers to Senate question number 1266 says it all:
http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2011-11-25.134.7
Blood Old Beach? Chicken Blood contaminated with fox product according to one of the FEP members (X member).
Then we have an incredibly clean, unchewed and unmarked fox skull from a shed in Latrobe, about as credible as the Yowie.
Fox skulls in bottom drawers? How many would you like?
Saw a feral cat driving through the hellyer gorge on the weekend.
That pest should be the focus and its idiot owners.
Re # 1 Jason Powe actually called the ABC and used the name Basil Brush.
In that interview he joked that the fox had been run over by “terrorists” - local jargon for tourists.
The interview was the evening of the 1st August 2006 and was conducted by the ABC’s Roisin McCann. I have a transcipt of the interview.
Joshua Leeson is not the sort of person that would have been seeking any publicity.
He was told to ring the DPIPWE ...
When interviewed by DPIPWE personnel on the morning of the 1st August 2006 NONE of the three, Beams, Powe or Leeson admitted moving the fox.
Your efforts and the efforts of others on the fox program and in the political arena are not working ...
Ian Rist’s credibility and his knowledge on this issue are beyond question.
#4 how did it get into the back of the ute before Mooney and McKay arrived if no one moved it? That’d be even harder than crossing a road for a dead fox.
#3, A cat that can drive shouldn’t be shot. And I wouldn’t call it’s owner an idiot either. Imagine the amount of skill it takes to teach a cat to drive.
#3 - you saw a feral cat driving through Hellyer Gorge- now that is news.
What was it driving?
sorry, couldn’t help it.
Re # 2
Scats?
I think the answers to Senate question number 1266 says it all:
http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2011-11-25.134.7
Yet for years after 2007 it was categorically denied that the FEP/FFTF were in fact importing fox scats.
The Hansard of the Parliament and the Hansard of the 2009 PAC Inquiry clearly shows this denial.
When I was first sent a copy of the ad requesting hunters to collect fox scats in April 2008 (that ad was placed by the DPIPWE in Orange, NSW) - questions were asked in Budget estimates and the Parliament.
Wouldn’t the persons that gave the untruthfull answers be in contempt of the Tasmanian Parliament?
Tas. inc. may think they have this covered…but I don’t think so.
Similarly covered like the illegal baiting in several plantations at Calder?
I don’t think so.
By the way what happened to Paulie’s big statement about all the vets being told to compensate all dog owners that have had dogs poisoned with 1080?
Statements by Simon d comment 22 and comment number 30 “Paulie” Tasmanian fox- a litany of lies and deceit.
From comment number 22 this thread.
“I was informed that prior to baiting all local vets are briefed on the effects of 1080 and protocol is recommended.. Furthermore, the ISB offers to cover all costs of toxicological analysis if anyone suspects their pets have been poisoned, contrary to what you have claimed.”
Posted by Simon D on 12/11/12 at 05:14 AM
From number 30 this thread:
“Since sometime last year, the fox people have apparently had a policy of paying for vet bills and toxicology testing for any dog presented to a vet anywhere within cooee of baits.”
“I’m informed that just about every vet clinic in the state was advised of this, plus the procedures.”
Posted by Paulie on 12/11/12 at 08:15 PM
More hot air?
If #10 is serious in interpreting what I actually wrote as “Paulie’s big statement about all the vets being told to compensate all dog owners that have had dogs poisoned with 1080”, then I would humbly suggest that s/he has got a serious comprehension problem.
But it appears that quite a lot of interpretations have taken liberties with the truth.
It’s 3:30 am EDST. Just in from spotlighting-again!
No fox sighted for the nine hundred and ninety ninth time trip out into a “very special place”.
Beautifull night, wildlife everwhere, still where I have been tonight there is no 1080 and never will be.
Had to have a chuckle yesterday, the fox squad were baiting in a paddock opposite Wynyard airport gate number 10-again.
This is so much madness…on Deep Creek Road at the junction of the main airport road there is a large dam belonging to King’s, approximately fifty geese, swans and ducks live there in peace and utter bliss.
None have had a feather ruffled by a fox in the last ten years!
Yet is listed as a prime fox hotspot!
This is how stupid it all is, just a giant crock of scat.
However there are farmers that love 1080 on their properties just in case a stray dog or a Devil may threaten a lamb…just in case.
That’s the way they think, they have told me as much.
There are a couple of mean old bastards that live in that area, they will poison or shoot anything that threatens a blade of grass or the even the docked tail of a lamb. The fox squad must be the answer to their prayers…keep the banjo twangin’.
This is the same attitude of farmers that dig deep pits with meat as bait on a balancing board that the Devils try to get - over balance, fall in, and drown.
As one farmer said to me, laughingly, they can only swim for so long!
#10 to negate the confusion that is caused by writing the same question on multiple threads (not a good idea) I will bring my reply over here -
re. the Vet information, you may well be right. I was just passing on what I was told when I made enquiries. If you believe I was lied to by the manager of the ISB then perhaps it is something that can be taken further. I’d be happy to contact your vet friends and get to the bottom of it if you privately email me (.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)) who they are. I won’t even mention you. Whoever you are.
Yes “Paulie” # 11
“But it appears that quite a lot of interpretations have taken liberties with the truth.”
“I’m informed that just about every vet clinic in the state was advised of this, plus the procedures”
Posted by Paulie on 19/11/12 at 09:24 PM
I would suggest you have been seriously misled again Paulie, or you are deliberately not conforming with fact or truth.
Re # 1 Dear boy you say “He admitted at the time that they moved the fox”.
No he did not, not from the claimed area on Glen Esk Road (according to the FOI witness reports.)
What they didn’t say was the fox was moved from the farmers gateway 20 kms away on the Esk Highway because the farmer didn’t want the FFTF “crawling all over the place”.
Also from the fifth ammended DPIPWE report.
http://www.dpiw.tas.gov.au/inter.nsf/WebPages/EKOE-6T873S?open#Updatedreportontheau
At about 0930 hrs, Witness 1 reported a dead fox on the roadside by mobile phone to Witness 2 following at some distance in a truck who immediately picked the fox up, reportedly to prevent further vehicle damage to it, placing it on a tool box. There was a discussion about whether to report it because it of the likelihood of public ridicule, one Witness even making the comment that “he didn’t want to become another Bosworth” (referring to the intense public ridicule a Mr Bosworth and his companion suffered after publicly claiming to have shot a fox in 2001) but eventually they decided to. The fox was transferred to an accompanying ute, a mobile phone photo of the fox being held by the tail being taken about then (published in the Mercury newspaper 3 August 2006). All of these witnesses were agricultural contractors going to work, hence their proximity and exchanges. A brief drive gave better phone reception and the report was made to the Taskforce (via a switchboard). The ute driver then returned with a colleague to the site of finding and they waited for the Taskforce, the other drivers continuing to work.
The two witnesses waiting for the Taskforce (Witnesses 3 and 4) were not present when Witness 2 actually picked up the fox so were not sure of the precise place but Witness 2 returned on request and showed the location to the Taskforce.
A person (Witness 5) passing the site at about 0830 reportedly saw no fox there (this suggests but does not mean the fox was not there).
2. Claim of running the fox over
At 1030 hrs on 2 August a man reported to the Taskforce that it was he who hit the fox on the morning of 1 August. He identified himself to the Taskforce but asked not to be publicly named because he feared ridicule. He was met and reported driving along the road sometime between about 0930 hrs, feeling a bump under a tyre and on checking saw what appeared to be a dead fox orientated as though it was travelling north to south (his left to right). He reported an impression that he “saw something to his left” before the collision but could not be absolutely sure. He assumed he himself had road-killed the fox. Subsequent to the collision, the vehicle concerned was used extensively; he said it bore no evidence of the collision, a heavy-duty tyre being the only point of contact.
Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive. Sir Walter Scott.
Nothing like a good old mainland road kill to stir things up a bit.
Goodness they could have chosen another day, not the very day two branches of the FFTF were closing (Derwent Park and Turner’s beach),
then again like a lot of other things it could have been purely coincidence?
I am actually keen to get to the bottom of the Vets thing…now you are back from Kiwi Country - what say you Dr Obendorf?
Refer comments #22 and # 30 Tasmanian fox-a litany of lies and deceit: Tasmanian Times.
It seems to me that the FTF must have a shed full of 1080 and are in a panic to get rid of it.
“Hey, a paddock with a pond full of ducks and geese, better dump a truckload of bait around it”.
Don’t forget the paperwork!
Unravelling the Glen Esk Road dead fox incident was not dificult; it was a rather patheticly orchestrated set up. The time of death, the cause of death and the place of death were not as DPIPWE published in the Glen Esk Road Fox ‘Authenticity Report’.
It took another three years before DPIPWE conceded that their version of events defied reality! The difficulty for DPIPWE was the extraordinary press release of 3 August 2006 from the DPIPWE Manager of Wildlife Management, Mr Gary Davies. This D{PIPWE release was said to be based on a phone call from a person who claimed he hit and killed a fox crossing Glen Esk road on the morning of 1 August 2006. I don’t know who that caller was and his identity was never made public.
At the Parliamentary Inquiry into foxes in 2009 DPIPWE representatives finally explained to the 6 Tasmanian politicians on that Committee that the fox had been killed somewhere else. The DPIPWE spokesperson suggested another story had now arisen to explain that incident. That fox was killed somewhere else and its dead body moved to Glen Esk Road and dumped there. The problem for DPIPWE was the tell-tale pathology conducted on this fox; the fox was decomposing and had been dead far longer than Mr Mooney’s cursory finger up the fox’s bum temperature test could detect.
This incident is but one of the fabrications that litter Tasmania’s government-sponsored fox program from 2001 onwards. None of the physical exhibits of fox found in Tasmania can actually be linked to the Tasmanian environment and yet 11 years on and at a cost of $50 million we are still laying 1080 meat baits willy-nilly across Tasmania to kill a claimed ‘up to 300 foxes’ [Ref: Nick Mooney 23 Jan 2007 Examiner] that are (or were) widespread on the island.
The ‘eradication’ program has been quite underwhelming. After 11 years they has not produced a single Tasmanian fox by their efforts at trapping, photography, spot-light shoot[mg or the deployment of over a quarter of a million 1080 baits.
In the land of fabled thylacine sightings, even the roughly 3000 public reports of fox sightings have not flushed out a single real live deal for the DPIPWE officers to find.
Even Tasmanian Times’ $5000 Fox Reward could not bring in a reynard posted for 4.5 years.
And embarrassing for the Government, ordinary Tasmanians are pitching in to bring WA fox tracker, Eddie Juras to Tasmania to look for our elusive scarlet pimpernels.
Expensive business eradicating a fox population that wasn’t there!
Mmmm it seems that the whole ‘dog’s tale’ that set off this discussion of vets has nothing to do with the ISB. The dog in question was killed by a farmer quite a while ago trying to control wallabies. Absolutely tragic and unjustified. 1080 has no place in Tasmania as far as I am concerned.
And it just proves that the money being wasted by the ISB bating for foxes would be much better allocated to more urgent pest control.
Also, as I was trying to point out, attempting to link these tragedies to the Fox Program will not help the cause to stop this absurd baiting program unless evidence can be produced to back up such claims. If fox baiting is killing animals and you can prove it, for god sake bring it forward. Otherwise it’s piss in the wind coming back in all our faces.
Apology for messy metaphor. Been a long afternoon..
#10 thanks for information. Is in the works.
# 19 So we are still not conceding that the FEP/ISB ARE NOT picking up the tab for any dog that has been within cooee (Paulie quote) of a 1080 bait?
I think you both owe me and mark and others an apology. The Volpone has taken you for a big magical mystery tour.
Simon [#19], are you saying ‘the dog in question’ died as a result of - secondary poisoning - i.e. after eating a wallaby that been 1080 poisoned to control wallabies on his farm?
Where did that information come from?
Did Craig Elliott provide you with any official document confirming that DPIPWE would pay vet bils and toxicology costs for investigating suspicious poisonings/deaths of companion animals around fox baited areas?
#21 Ed: Comment challenged and deleted. Who said what to whom is an issue for private correspondence).
#20 I am still unsure as per my statement- ” thanks for information. Is in the works. ” Even if what you say is proven correct I will not be offering an apology as I have never said you are wrong.
The difficulty with TT on-line comments is the ability to create confusion in the minds of readers. This IS a definite turn off.
Please be clear and please be gentle with one another… it is so easy to turn civil discussion between potential allies into angry outbursts that destroy trust.
Exaggeration, stray words, misunderstood commentary and speedy reactive posts can make enemies of former friends.
Is that what the intention is here? Please don’t do this.
This issue is important, so let’s try to keep to the facts and not fall into that futile game. Talk to each other direct if you have some matter to clarify - you know each others’ numbers and email addresses!
No one wants to read angry exchanges on semantics and personal allegations.
Our greatest difficulty is that the Invasive Species Branch management is not willing engage in public discussion on these topics. They may be content to just observe the TT parody and keep on baiting Tasmania and be paid for it by the taxpayer.
Anyone for a group hug? ;-)
I again repeat that my intention is not to create animosity but simply to establish arguments that can be used to stop the baiting program. Isn’t that what we all want? I am deeply disappointed that another comment has been deleted that was only intended to clarify aspects of this issue in response to a question. If it was taken as a personal attack then I apologise but I am bewildered as to how such an interpretation was arrived upon.
Agreed Dave. I think we could all use a hug.
Having given it some thought and re-read the TT code of conduct I would like to challenge the deletion of my point at #22. It was entirely on topic and relates to information that was stated on this site to be fact and the lengthy discussion that followed. Prior to this I was I challenged and called “delusional, schizophrenic, smoking too much or has (having) an alternative agenda” because I simply asked a few pertinent questions about details. I never once the said the other party was lying.
Having taken up his challenge to get the facts elsewhere, I did so only to have my explanation of this process deleted.
I can not see how I have breached the code and feel that my comment was perfectly relevant, respectful and my motives as later described #24 were decent.
What I said in # 11. Tasmanian fox - a litany of lies and deceit on the 7/11/2012 was this ...“I received the sad news of another dog poisoned yesterday”.
de Little questioned with # 14 Has the ISB accepted responsibility for the dog’s death?
Never at any stage did I suggest the ISB was responsible. To suggest so is slanderous and misleading.
So you are now suggesting Phil’s dog wasn’t poisoned with 1080?
When this was first brought to my attention I was travelling up Calder Road past Phil’s house that he had just purchased, his son and Phil were building a fence.
Phil’s dog ( a Blue Heeler) ran across the road in front of my vehicle into a paddock that had fox bait signs on the main gate and the fences.
The property that had the bait signs was PID Property Identification number 7083232 at the address 588 Calder Road, Wynyard 7325.
I pulled up and reversed back and said “I would secure your dog mate, there are fox baits in the paddock your dog is running around in”.
Phil’s immediate reaction was to instruct his son to secure the dog.
His exact words to me were “I have already lost one dog to 1080, I do not want it to happen again”.
He then went on to say he had approached the DPIPWE and their reaction was “your problem”.
What was I supposed to do interrogate him?
Ask him if the 1080 poison was in corn, apples,carrots, salami, roast lamb or what?
The fact is the dog was poisoned with 1080 - you can rehash it anyway you want using clever words, it doesn’t change the facts.
Simon, I can’t see what is wrong with posting up that when you talked to the bloke with the dead dog, he said it had nothing to do with the fox program. His name was not edited in the original post from memory?
#26 That’s all fair enough but ANY reading of that thread (not just a cherry-picked quote) would give the impression that his dog was killed by the Fox baiting program. You could have said otherwise at ANY time but chose not to and continued to try and discredit me for asking for details.
But, I am not going waste my time arguing about this stuff anymore. It’s not worth the trouble for us or the Tas Times editors.
Mr Rist and his disciples can enjoy their mutual admiration society without any further interruptions for details from me. I will continue to lobby public servants behind the scenes until the baiting is brought to an end and eventually, past mistakes are acknowledged. Hopefully between us all we can do some good. It’s not going to result from out bickering about ‘facts’ on these pages though. We all want the same outcome and I have the greatest respect for everyone who puts their personal time and efforts into achieving this end (Mr Rist especially).
I’d respectful request that all future personal references to myself are treated as ‘off topic’ so I can get away with out temptation to come back and respond to correct the record.
All the best folks.
Re # 27
27.Simon, I can’t see what is wrong with posting up that when you talked to the bloke with the dead dog, he said it had nothing to do with the fox program.
How do you know this? Or was it just another “impression”?
Slightly off topic this thread but I would like to mention it here because it really is the bottom line in all this fox deception.
I have noticed on Bonham’s new blog site he refers to me as the Tasmanian fox conspiracist.
My answer to that would be that I believe the persons that continue to promote the belief of a fox population in Tasmania are actually the ultimate conspiracy theorists, mercenaries that are prepared to do or say anything to receive blood money.
But as one doe deer said to the other “any buck will do”.
That is a shame Simon if you do not continue to try to keep things honest in these comments section. I interpreted Ian’s comments about the dog deaths as being due to 1080 fox baits also. He may not had meant it that way but a review of the comments certainly shows it reading that way.
With your indepth knowledge of all the sides opinions/arguments, it is refreshing to see your comments which do attempt to keep a balanced view.
I understand if you are sick of defending yourself, but your efforts are well worth it as all peoples opinions on these blogs should be open to review and questioning and if you don’t comment many people will not see alternative views or potential holes in opinions.
Much like the whole Tasmanian fox saga, people tend to perceive what they want to see.
For the past eleven years I always have dealt in the facts not perceptions.
I could safely say if I was betting on who really are the conspiracy theorists I would feel very safe in placing a bet…I have eleven years of very good odds.
My case rests on no live foxes shot, trapped, recovered from 1080 poison or even photographed.
Their case rests on what I call “easily transportable evidence”.
So far I haven’t been proven wrong and as each month goes by I’m looking more and more correct.
Then again even if a fox jumped off a boat tomorrow and was presented it would in no way excuse the shenanigans and the deception of the last eleven years.
The fear of foxes is a story that has to be maintained to keep the money flowing between Hobart and Canberra.
The key to the funding (many millions) that they both get directly from the Commonwealth hinges on the CRC program. They need relationships with a university and private company in order to justify their funds - that’s what a CRC program is all about. Hence without Linton Staples family owned company ( Animal Control Technologies and other private companies), Tony Peacock would not get funds. Without the “Tasmanian fox” issue (and other major pest related issues) that CRC could not justify re-funding. That is why the dollars from profit are really not as important as the issues and relationships - that the Commonwealth matches dollar for dollar.
Wouldn’t it have terrible ramifications if the lid comes off this whole fox thing before the next round of funding?
I would nearly have a bet on that happening too.
Chris Havill are you suggesting anything that I have put up in articles or comments isn’t honest?
I would appreciate a yes or no answer.
If the answer is yes please elaborate carefully and in detail.
It is the use of bait attractants like Feralmone - that has been shown to allow a variety of target and non-target carnivores to locate a buried 1080-meat bait.
The manufactures of Feralmone instruct bait-layers of 1080 baits to kill foxes and wild dogs to spray this ‘smell in a can’ on the ground over the top of each buried bait; it remains active as a smell for up to 4 days.
The concern would be if this Feralmone smell also is an attractant to native carnivores who then might dig up and eat a bait. They then might go looking for another place with a similar smell in the vicinity - i.e. another buried bait station.
So how many consumed baits would it take to kill a 400 gm young quoll or a 1000 gm dispersing juvenile Tasmanian devil?
Domestic dogs on the roam in these circumstances might go missing and just die in the bush.
Fox trappers on the mainland tell me even raptors and corvids [birds] are attracted by the use of the Feralmone smell at 1080 bait stations.
Any dead devils or quolls or birds of prey or raven found around Calder Road, Mr Rist?
Re #26 and #32, I submit the relevant context of your posting #11 from Litany of Lies
“They cannot prove a single fox has taken a bait but they do know they are poisoning native animals and dogs.
I received the sad news of another dog poisoned yesterday.
This madness should lead to people being sued, they are baiting illegally and are not adhering to the lawful requrements for laying 1080.”
That reads, to me and most thinking people, that you equate the fox baiting (and hence the ISB) with the dog’s death.
David in # 33 you ask…
Any dead devils or quolls or birds of prey or raven found around Calder Road, Mr Rist?
The answer David is yes.
What appears to be the hardest hit are the Kookaburras and Magpies.
Two white Goshawks I used to see everyday haven’t been seen for three weeks.
David apparently in the Parliament today the ISB have admitted using Feramone (smelly bait station attractant) this admission makes a complete mockery out of the “carefully regulated baiting program” with precautions taken to avoid native animal uptake of 1080 baits.
If their credibility was low before it is non-existent now.
Re # 34
“They cannot prove a single fox has taken a bait but they do know they are poisoning native animals and dogs”.
Suggest you try and slide out from under this one:
This is the person that had his champion sheep dog poisoned by a fox bait.
He is the one that put an ad in the papers asking had anyone had similar experiences.
He received quite a few replies.
He did present at DPIPWE Prospect, Launceston and had “doors slamming everywhere”.
Sammy Watts
0419 524 476
Source retired Cressy policeman Bill Williams.
Re # 34
“This madness should lead to people being sued, they are baiting illegally and are not adhering to the lawful requirements for laying 1080.”
This refers to the illegal baiting that was conducted in the Calder plantations Property ID number 2903692 and Property ID number 7059590.
More than a dozen baits at the two sites were placed within one(1) metre of a formed gravel road readily accessible to the public.
Also the baits were placed at only 40 – 50 metre intervals.
One bait was only 20 metres from a main bitumen road.
Clear and precise photographic evidence was taken and is available from Chris Kidd photographer (64 32 1202 ), Dr Mark Witcombe (0429994058) and Ian Rist (0400949809), time and dates on exposures.
Ian, since you ask this one drew my interest in the litany of lies debate here http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/article/tasmanian-fox-a-litany-of-lies-and-deceit/
You say at #18 “Phil Jones Calder Road…Advised authorities and was told he would have to pay vet and any toxiclogy costs.
This is actually the thirteenth dog I have been made aware of since this stupid, criminal and ill-advised baiting program commenced.”
Are you telling a porkie here or not? It seems to me you are saying he rang about having his dog tested for death by fox bait but Simon in his edited post confirms he rang said person who denied accusing the fox program and never rang them.
If I have missed something please point me to my error.
PS: I restate I do not support fox baiting in Tasmania and think it is a serious waste of taxpayers money and not kind to individual native animals. What I do support is ensuring we have fair debate with facts and no constant bickering ...
Thursday 22 November 2012 – Question Time Legislative Council
Mr DEAN: My question is to the Honourable… the Leader. Will the Leader please advise: (1) Has the Invasive Species Branch (or its predecessor, the Fox Eradication Program) sought to research the use of odour-producing ‘attractants’ in the Tasmanian fox baiting program. (2) Has the Invasive Species Branch (or its predecessor, the Fox Eradication Program) sought to purchase and use quantities in any form of ‘bait attractants’ such as Feralmone? (3) If so, how does the use of these attractants assist the fox eradication efforts?
Mr FARRELL: Thank you madam President and I thank the Honourable member for Windermere for his question. Number (1): There has been a wide range of research conducted into the use of attractants nationally and internationally for use on canids, including foxes. The Fox Eradication Program has not sought replicate this research. Ahh… answer (2) Yes. (3) The Fox Eradication Program uses auditory and olfactory attractants primarily in the monitoring activities.
So on 1 November the Government claimed Fox Program did not use odour-producing attractants and on 22 November they admit that they did use these attractants.
Maybe the person who devised the answer to question 1 for the Leader was not ignorant of this Tasmanian research on Feralmone?
“Use of SFE (synthetic fermented egg) in areas of high quality quoll habitat should be undertaken with caution until completion of studies on the response (if any) of quolls to SFE, and their resulting behaviour when exposed to bait stations treated with synthetic fermented egg. In areas where quolls are known to occur the attractant could be placed adjacent to the bait station to limit the likelihood of quolls digging for baits (J. Durrant pers comm.) however recent research in Tasmania is encouraging, with quolls and Tasmanian devils showing little or no interest in FeralMone™ (S. Lapidge pers comm.) Further research is required.”
Reference: Hunt, R. 2004 Field Report: Effect of a synthetic lure on site visitation and bait uptake by foxes and wild dogs.
NOTE: SFE is the odour-producting copound in FeralMone™.
(A) You say at #18 “Phil Jones Calder Road…Advised authorities and was told he would have to pay vet and any toxiclogy costs.
(B) This is actually the thirteenth dog I have been made aware of since this stupid, criminal and ill-advised baiting program commenced.”
(C) It seems to me you are saying he rang about having his dog tested for death by fox bait but Simon in his edited post confirms he rang said person who denied accusing the fox program and never rang them.
(A) Authorities are the DPIPW, Jones rang them.
(B) This is the thirteenth dog I know of - 1080.
(C) You musn’t “assume” anything.
I have already explained exactly what happened in # 26.
I not wasting anymore of my time with the “foxes are everywhere” believers.
You go on in your own little Worlds and believe what you like…problem is you have had ten years to prove it and can’t.
Some people are just slow learners.
The using of a stinking rotten egg smelling Feramone is about the stupidist thing that could be done.
How can they be begging for money to save the Devil when they are using smelly attractors?
This is enticing Devils into danger, but then again I have witnessed many times violations of the own code of practice.
A code of practice that was one of the conditions The Greens and the TCT agreed to endorse 1080 fox baiting.
Where do the two mentioned entities stand now?
Simply madness.
Ian, who are the foxes are everywhere believers you refer to?
I myself am of the opinion there are no breeding foxes in this state, maybe a few get thru the ports now and then. I think the management of the eradication program in this state has been ordinary at best and at times is laughable in how they go about their business.
You asked me to point to an issue I had queries over so I did. I am still completely confused by your posts over the dead dogs and the link to fox baits and Simon’s follow up phone call.
If there are 13 dog deaths from fox baits this is serious and should be pursued.
Well Chris we certainly agree on some points.
I refer again:
Sammy Watts
0419 524 476
Source retired Cressy policeman Bill Williams.
It is my information from one his close friends that he actually received some seventeen replies to his advertisement inquiring about 1080 dog poisoning.
Extracting information from the DPIPW is nigh on impossible.
I will simply have a Federal politician to request all records on said 1080 dog poisoning under a FOI/RTI again.
Last lot of FOI/RTI resulted in 140 pages of very interesting paperwork including internal emails which finally put to bed the fox scat import denials.
Re # 37
What else is Steven Lapidge going to say… “recent research in Tasmania is encouraging, with quolls and Tasmanian devils showing little or no interest in FeralMone™ (S. Lapidge pers comm.) Further research is required.”
Steven Lapidge is the program Leader at Invasive Animals CRC.
Pestat manufactures Feramone and Pestat is part of the Invasive AnimalS CRC.
I’m yet to see a Devil or a Quoll that isn’t interested in ANYTHING smelly.
Many years at the coalface certainly taught me that.
In earlier statements on 1080 bait deterioration Nick Mooney claimed Devils and Quolls can’t find 1080 fox baits until they start to smell and are therefore safe because by the time the Devils can smell them the 1080 has degraded. W.T.F ?
Why then is the ISB using Feramone?
Can’t everybody see what has been going on here?
Mr Rist, the people who should be noticing these comments are the Tasmanian Greens MPs who are sending out bland responses to concerned Tasmanians who ask them questions on why that Party still accepts the use of 1080 baits when not one Tasmanian fox has been photographed, shot, trapped or poisoned since this costly war on phantom foxes began.
The Tasmanian Greens still seem to accept the unconvincing dead fox exhibits and a small number of scat samples whose provenance is dubious after 11 years of sensational fox media backed up by reviews written by organisations with a direct pecuniary interest in perpetuating this fox program in Tasmania.
And not one scientific peer-reviewed paper to demonstrate a link between any of these exhibits and a free-ranging fox population in Tasmania in a decade!
Little wonder hookwinkers successfully control the agenda in this State.
This thing (FFTF) has been a going concern for over ten years ($58 000 000). Like most things administered by our long failed National Parks & Wildlife Service/DPIPWE it is a self perpetuating bureaucracy, staffed by people who range from the good natured simpleton, the gormless idiot through to the insane psychopath, think OC spray seals/poisoned wildlife/complete professional silence whilst our unique animal habitats are razed and sold for a handful of magic beans.
The guilty inhabit the whole echelon and strata, although their worst examples are sitting right this minute in upper management roles, they are the ones who defile OUR bush/wildlife whilst towing the line in exchange for their comfortable fat public service perks. Well shit on that dumbness, I piss down the throats of these bastards. Today’s pig is tomorrows bacon. (Thanks to Dr HST for the words)
Yes David O I get quite a few responses flicked my way…one that needs explaining is this statement from Cassy O’s office to a constituent.
> The loss of up to 90% of our devil population also needs to be
> considered, as they may have been the reason deliberate attempts to
> establish foxes in Tasmania for hunting purposes failed.
What deliberate attempts?
That comment from the renumerated Bill Harvey in Cassy O’s office needs to be explained.
OK it’s all good to put bullshit out there, but please, let’s have some substance to the claims.
I would guarantee Cassy O will not make any decision on foxes other than what Nick Mooney tells her.
I doubt very much either will ever admit they got it wrong on the 1080 baiting…it is a severe embarrassment for them, but the longer it goes on the worse it will become.
The quality of the politicians we elect were on display in Thursday’s debate over the Tas Forest Agreement Bill in the Lower House.
The Green MPs have been trying to land the mother of all forest fishes, so friggin’ around killing phantom foxes is either the best bait on their hook to achieve their No. 1 catch or…. they’re disinterested and they couldn’t give a scat where those millions of dollars disappear within DPIWE.
This sort of duplicity in gatekeeping the fox program suggests to me the Greens continue accepting nonsense from DPIPWE and their co-funded Invasive Animal CRC partners.
It’s the sort of arrogance and dismissal that’s affecting the Tasmanian Greens credibility with Tasmanians currently.
The absence of credible evidence is rather clear but if the Greens want to continue even after 10 years to accept the broad-scale use of 1080 baits - just as a precaution - to prevent the establishment of an unsubstantiated fox population.
They’re sillier (or more ignorant) than I thought.
Why didn’t the Greens Party come out recently to publicly support bring an experienced fox tracker - Eddie Juras - to Tasmania?
The DPIPWE hookwinkers must have convinced the Greens as well as they originally did to Dr Clive Marks in 2001. Thank goodness Dr Marks went back and realised that what he was told was based on fabrication, rumours, innuendo, allegations and down-right lies.
Phantom fear was also the reason Australia took part in another expensive and brutal war in Iraq over non-existent Weapons of Mass Deception.
Andrew Wilkie saw through that deception and blew the whistle.
As a Society keep on getting duped by nonsense.
Editor’s note: deleted on legal grounds
Ian, I recommend that you submit a full article on DPIPWE’s fox baiters activities around in October-November 2012 in Calder.
It’s the only way to have concerned Tasmanians and elected politicians understand what is being done in their name by DPIPWE.
It is simply outrageous that the Greens continue to sanction by their silence a program that should be an anathema to them! The use of 1080 poison that has the potential to attract Tasmanian wildlife.
Nick Mooney acknowledged in his bait trail studies in 2003 that 1080-Foxoff meat baits attracted Tasmanian bettongs. The Program acknowledges an average of 1 in 5 baits are taken or dug up.
Why are the Greens missing in action?
#48. I look forward to it.
Ah Paulie I bet you will!
You lot think you are untouchable don’t you?
So did Al Capone until the discovery of the jury-rig.
Al always had the spine to use his own name.
Hey Paulie we haven’t seen your authentication of the vets/DPIPW paying for any dog that’s been within “cooee of a 1080 fox bait.”
Just as I suspected, more hot air.
But you know what really,really disturbs me is that baiters, the admin and the hierachy are all prepared to accept blood money.
They ALL know there are no fox populations in Tasmania but are prepared to put out and sanction 1080 baiting.
In my opinion that is about as low as human morals and ethics can go.
Still the political system here depends on swindling the Federal Government and the taxpayer…it all fits.
Comment challenged and deleted
David re # 52
“And on the topic of your phrase ‘blood money’, Mr Rist, perhaps one day make some inquires into what the Government is prepared to pay the TCT for that organisation’s complicity in this ongoing 1080 poisoning campaign.”
That’s a fairly simple question to answer David,
$30,000.00 I believe, sanctioned by the head of DPIPW himself.
Oh and the RSPCA? $200,000.00.
Money rules in this world, Mr Rist. If payments of this nature can induce compliance amongst NGOs, little wonder salaried public servants who know what’s going on don’t blow the whistle on mismanagement, fraud, maladministration, embezzlement, workplace harrassment and even workplace safety.
It becomes clearer every day as the evidence mounts and the truth becomes blindingly obvious. The Department of Primary Industries Parks Water and Environment is completely compromised as a wildlife management entity. Ministers have been approached, enquiries held, nothing changes. What will it take for this putrid state of affairs to be rectified? Or is it naive to expect justice, honesty and integrity from OUR elected representatives and OUR relaxed and comfortable public servants?
Winston [comment #55] - one very useful service Tasmanian Times fox blogs provides is awareness. DPIPWE can’t suggest that we didn’t forewarn them. They can obfiscate and demur and reject all they want; they might want to reiterate deceptions on past fox storylines that didn’t ever have any legitimacy to support a failed program… but they get away with it because they are in control.
Simple as that - money and power rules and clouds judgement. Admission of fundamental errors in risk assesment in 2001 after misappropriating over $50 millon in taxpayer funds would be a bridge to far. Putting to much credence on the opinions of one or two individuals led to this non fox-producing eradication charade.
Crazy as it may seem DPIPWE deluded themselves that they had a multiple fox release problem in 2001 and then they co-opted their Minister; they then bullied the federal Government into opeining their cheque book and finally they and the Invasive Animal CRC group convinced themselves and the local media that Tasmania had a very serious problem it needed to eradicate.
For the last 11 years they’ve been spending shit-loads of money eradicating a phantom-like animal that they cannot detect or even measure the effectiveness of their efforts.
Alice in Wonderland stuff!
The saddest aspect is that certain organisations like the Tasmanian Greens and the Tasmanian Conservation Trust that should have known about Tasmania’s legacy of hook-winking and sensationalism were sucked in and they have stayed that way!
Yes… despite being given access to information as to why this Fox Eradication Program does not make sense; is not evidence-based and cannot work as it currently operates, they continue to support the board-scale use of buried 1080 baits across Tasmania.
These are matters that the Tasmanianian Greens and the TCT need examine, Mr Smith. Have they taken on blind faith and ignorant trust the explanations from this Agency that has failed to produce anything meritorious but a smattering of self-collected scats with no definitive link to Tasmania.
The discovery of just one DNA fox positive scat with pademelon hair in it would have been enough to provide legitimacy in their efforts… but there have been none!
Craig Elliot - We haven’t used attractants at baits for at least 18 months We may have in the past but records were not kept so we couldn’t say definitively ‘where and when’ but it is definitely not a current practice.
#49 yes, Ian’s report will be a fascinating read. Given he has had the ‘evidence’ for so long, one wonders why he is still stalling and making empty threats. The accusations of regarding Feralmone are quite frankly, a bit on the nose, if you’ll pardon the pun.
Basically, someone is not telling the truth but only one of them says they have evidence to support their claims.
But where is it?
#50, Actually Al Capone frequently used the alias Al Brown.
The flagrant foxes, as they are being progressively eradicated, appear to simply vanish. No trace. Into thin air? It reminds of FT’s systemic anti gravity resource patent that pushes soil back up onto the hills after clearfelling. They should patent this vanishing eradication caper. It could prove to be lucrative for future dis-appearance applications of who knows what, whenever and wherever. Whatever, plenty more funds in the taxpayers limitless pockets. First you see it? Then, you don’t. The vanishing eradication project as applied to our taxes has certainly proven effective dis-appearing them with annoying regularity. What’s to show? Fog?
..and blah blah blah blah. Next time anyone has any truck with the FFTF make your first question an enquiry as to what professional qualifications they hold and on what basis were they employed by the department. Any functioning agency responsible for wildlife matters would surely have a post graduate qualified Zoologist at the helm right? Wrong, who are these (people)? What qualifications do they hold? These people know nothing about wildlife apart from their own estimation of their prowess which is obviously wanting, only in Tasmania. The part that gets up my nose is these (people) are permanently employed on OUR taxes.
Nice try Horatio S ? Paulie’s mate?
....49 yes, Ian’s report will be a fascinating read. Given he has had the ‘evidence’ for so long, one wonders why he is still stalling and making empty threats. The accusations of regarding Feralmone are quite frankly, a bit on the nose, if you’ll pardon the pun.
Specifically what Feralamone accusations Horatio Windblower?
The evidence is there, you just must wait a little longer, besides I like things cooked slowly.
Winston # 59 which only goes to confirm my original definitive conclusion…after all this time and “evidence” either the FFTF/FEP/ISB are painfully incompetent or there are no foxes here, take your pick.
#40 - The “foxes are everywhere believers” is a term that seems to be frequently used in reference to anyone who doesn’t blindly accept (or dares question) every utterance from those who are adamant that the whole Tasmanian fox issue - despite at least three reviews by a variety of national and international fox and eradication experts, a range of supposed earth shatering revelations to State and Commonwealth politicians, and attempts to involve AFP (and, for all I know, ASIO) - is all one big gigantic hoax. Good god! The Tasmania fox people ought to be snapped up by international espionage agencies (and in fact, were probably involved in faking the moon landings and the assassination of JFK).
#52, #53 and #54 - do you have any proof to support your claim that these organisations are compromising their position on foxes due to receiving government funding support?
Is that you ***** ?
- despite at least three reviews by a variety of national and international fox and eradication experts…
Don’t make us laugh “Paulie”.
About as independent as Dracula in the blood bank.
All with vested interests, 2003 Kinnear head of 1080 poisoning for CALM W.A.
CRC 2006, members receiving a lion’s share of the taxpayers funds.
Landcare NZ biggest promoter of 1080 in NZ, industry colleagues of the CRC Invasives.
2009 PAC Inquiry ...what answers do you want Minister. 15 witnesses called, 13 of them has an employment or pecuniary interest in promoting the belief of foxes in Tasmania.
Oh and by the way Horatio windblower # 57 the Hansard gave us the answer we wanted on Feramone…thank you.
Still no secure fencing around Toll’s Burnie wharf, Paulie?
The most likely entry point has no containment structure to capture any stowaways. Ditto TT lines wharf at Devonport. Some clown smuggle a fox in, a fox dog sniffs it out and the boot is opened, fox jumps out and runs way. Duh.
I live amongst the poison littered around the place over the last 2 months. Did it ever occur to any of you geniuses that it might be clever to distribute fox call cd’s amongst the landowners in this “prime fox habitat”. Of course it didn’t, because the only thing being eliminated here is the taxpayers coin.
The incompetence is truly amazing. What is even more amazing is that it has been allowed to continue for so very long.
Why is that?
Who are you Horatio S?
Your comment #57 appears to quote a statement attributed to the Manager of the Invasive Species Branch (aka The Fox Eradication Program) suggesting that: “We [FEP] haven’t used attractants at baits for at least 18 months. We may have in the past but records were not kept so we couldn’t say definitively ‘where and when’ but it is definitely not a current practice.”
For the time being, let’s overlook the failure of DPIPWE to keep records on its 1080 baiting practices.
Now Horatio, did you directly communicate with Mr Elliott to get that response?
Horatio, did you ask a specific question about the use odour-producing attractants including Feralmone to Mr Elliott?
So are we to understand that you accept this quote allegedly from Mr Elliott just because it comes from the ISB Manager, but we are not to accept Mr Rist’s statements because it comes from Mr Rist? is that correct?
Both Mr Elliott’s and Mr Rist’s comments need corroborating. So what suggests to you Horatio that one man’s statement has more believable than the other man’s?
Horatio, I learnt from another person that also received this quote from Mr Elliott on attractant usage.
So did the buried 1080 bait stations in the Calder area have a smell associated with them and if so, was it caused by the use of an odour-attractant by the bait layers?
DPIPWE replied to a question in Parliament last Thursday stated they have used such attractants including Feralmone but apparently Mr Elliott is denying any knowledge of the use of these attractants in the last 18 months - i.e. since he has been managing this fox eradication program. He would do well to check with his bait laying staff.
It appears a smelly bait ball is play…. over to Mr Elliott and Mr Rist.
Notice how those with a vested interest (# 62) attempt to defuse the obvious odour aroused by most everything FFTF by introducing their idea of humour/conspiracy theory/loony ? Not a peep about the Animal Ethics Committee complicit in torturing seals in tasmania. No! Only the FFTF/ DPIPWE, accused of poisoning wildlife and fostering a keystone cops/three stooges style of inept incompetence in place of professional qualified professional staff, not forgetting inappropriate expenditure of OUR tax.
How swiftly the snotty faced tax sucking bird-brain (tasmanicus bird-brainius.) is referred to as some kind of highly qualified professional population worthy to be trusted with $58 000 000, and the rest.
If we were talking zoological science the next logical association would be felis catus OUR feral cats, in OUR National Parks. Managed as a kind of rotten gold coast ‘Dream World’ by OUR old tired National Parks and Wildlife Head Rangers. Hey, we aren’t talking zoological science, we are talking Commonwealth money swindled during the reign of the ruddy red faced boof-head Premier Paul Lennon, sneakily procured from Commonwealth funds, cart before the horse stuff.
So, what about the $33 000 000 Two CapesTrack (FTCT) ? Both the FFTF and the FTCT have an estimated known total expenditure of $91 000 000. The total figure for expenditure on poisoning wildlife/employing anybody but those professionally qualified/subsidizing petroleum-motor car suppliers/poison suppliers/ etc etc from Flinders Island to Macquarie island, and everything in between may never be known in dollar or life terms.
both are administered by the same half dozen or so senior DPIPWE public servants, both stink! As our chums from the USA say, ‘you do the math’. And there are no knights in verdant pateena armour, only us.
#50 - MY authentication? You’re in a much better position to authenticate. Best I can do is make a phone call or two. You have the luxury of getting your polly mate to put in an FOI.
Besides, you’re unlikely to believe anything I say.
Or maybe you’d rather not know the truth - for fear it’ll put another hole in your ‘case’?
“Besides, you’re unlikely to believe anything I say.”
Why should I ?
Paulie, the first thing you could do to improve the reception your comments receive would be to come out under your own name.
I post on Tasmanian Times under my own name; and I can be contacted on 6234 5561 or 0458 647 946 or email: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Thank you.
#69 - Exactly. Why would you. And yet, you’re quite willing to accept as gospel truth any other snippets of information being bandied around, as long as they fit in with your preconceived view of the world.
#70 - you and I both know that full disclosure of my name, rank and serial number would do absolutely nothing to increase the acceptance of anything I said.
If I was to be a Task Forcer, my post would be regarded as propaganda.
If I was involved with the CRC, there would no doubt be allegations as to pecuniary interests.
If I was a public servant, I’d be accused of towing political doctrine.
If I were a conservationist, people would say I was blinded by propaganda.
If I had nothing to do with any of the above, and simply weighed in because I’d got time on my hands and a mind that latches on to something that intrigues me, then no doubt I wouldn’t know what I was talking about and should just butt out of Tasmanian business.
Fences around ports, Paulie. What about them, seeing as how you reckon you have the knowledge?
The red fox Vulpes vulpes has been brought to these shores before, for a variety of reasons, never for the good of the workers/taxpayers who now fund the loopiest government funded swing-show (see FFTF) since the black line stumbled across these shores.
Our fox is a clever fellow, with ease our fox sleeks through the landscape, assured of wildlife fillets at the next stop. Hey, why would our fox move if there was no pressing need, maybe post #71 asks the question, if ifs and buts were fruit and nuts it would be Christmas every day. Questions like these abound, but we’re here not to talk Vulpes vulpes, we are here to examine wildlife mismanagement by our DPIPWE ...
What will this summer hold, wildlife stories? Hang onto your hats folks, aside from running side shows to do with wildlife these same public servants light little fires and turn them into treasury funded petroleum boons, and it destroys the evidence…
I will attempt to have this posted again…
69 - Exactly. Why would you. And yet, you’re quite willing to accept as gospel truth any other snippets of information being bandied around?
What other snippets Paulie?
Unlike you I always attach a name to any claim I make, always have, always will.
Anyone ... prepared to be complicit and duplicit in the poisoning of our wildlife under the banner of a lie… A bright shining lie ... I hope the screams of the poor dying animals haunt them ...
Anyone that is prepared to poison our wildlife under the banner of a lie and get paid for doing so is ....................
Are we going to get a straight answer to this question or not?
“Hey Paulie we haven’t seen your authentication of the vets/DPIPW paying for any dog that’s been within “cooee of a 1080 fox bait.”
For all the huffing and puffing earlier on this thread and ‘Tasmanian fox- a litany of lies and deceit’ the wind seems to have dropped right out.
Typical.
The performance on ABC’s mornings today was nothing short of pathetic.
http://blogs.abc.net.au/files/thursday-29-nov-blog-final.mp3
Craig you really should give up, the game is up, the public are tired of this outrageous waste of taxpayers money and particularly the risk to native wildlife and pets.
Or will you be another paid mercenary and hold on until the money just simply runs out?
Mr Elliott I challenge you to an open fox debate at any media venue of your choice.
Be a man Craig and do not let your minder Mr Scott disallow it.
How Mr Elliot keeps thinking he can pull the wool over the Tasmanian public’s eyes is beyond me. It is beyond the point of being ridiculous now, nobody believes the line he keeps pushing. Its become so much of a looped recording you can almost hear the machine jam as the play button gets pushed when he leaves the room. Its like dealing with Gordon Brittas from the Brittas Empire. I wonder does he blink when people say “but Mr Elliot there are no foxes in Tasmania.” This ... should have died a natural death long ago amazes me, no wonder Tasmanians are so angry about this, they have every right to be.
Penelope # 77 You are absolutely correct, Tasmanians are sick and tired of it and there is now zero support… (well there is some support from those employed, paid and profiting from it and the complicit politicians caught up in the ever tightening web.)
Especially the 1080 baiting side of it, it’s outrageous to even expect Tasmanians to believe this constant propaganda.
But the charade must be played out between Tasmania and Canberra, there is a lot of money hanging on it.
The sideshow is part of the guarantee of dollar for dollar to the CRC, money from the Govt. flows both ways.
My goodness what will happen when this is exposed for what it really is?
The organisations that give comfort for this foxless ‘eradication’ program that Mr Craig Elliott wants to see run for another 5 years are the Tasmanian Greens and the Tasmanian Conservation Trust. For their own misguided reasons they have been prepared to accept nonsensical, sensational propaganda peddled by DPIPWE’s experienced fox-spruikers and accept transportable fox exhibits; none of which demonstrate that there is, or ever has been, a resident fox population in Tasmania.
Hookwinking has become the stock & trade for getting the Commonwealth to pay the salaries of DPIPWE’s conservation programs. Orange-bellied Parrots would now be the most expensive feral cat food ever produced with taxpayer funds. Little wonder this key threatening process for remnant wild OBP has gone unmolested by the threatened species management in State Government agencies feeding from the OPB slush fund.
Fox hunting in Tasmania has become the ‘farce that every body knows about but dares not speak its name’.
FRom Statewide Mornings 29 November 2012:
Leon Compton: And I’m sure though it might help though with a bit more community support, if you showed a Clarendon Vale fox eating a Clarendon Vale bait.
Craig Elliott: It… it probably would… but again it’s, it’s one of those things where, ahhm… I think some parts of the community are fatigued by this program. Ahhm… in the early days, what I’m picking up… people expected the program would be finished within one or two years. Eradication efforts like this do take many, many more years than that and we’re past the 10 year mark on this. Ahhm… and we’re certainly hoping in the next five years to, ahhm… completely wrap it up, ahhm… all things working in our favour.
Craig, all things are working in your favour - you promote the nonsensical ‘fox-science’ and then you get the money to continue kill foxes that you can’t find with your claimed ‘improving’ detector dogs.
—
Editor’s note: minor edit for legal reasons
Simon De Little has confirmed that registered Tasmanian vets do receive information about fox baiting and protocols in the event of pet dogs becoming poisoned.
And from my reading it appears DPIPWE has offered to cover vet and lab testing costs in cases confirmed to be 1080 related:
From their Animal Health & Welfare Newsletter dated October 2011 to registered vets:
“Confirmation of 1080 poisoning is best
ascertained from pesticide residue analysis.
Provisions are made in the recommended
protocol for this to be undertaken at the Fox
Eradication Program’s expense to provide
resolution on suspected 1080 poisoning cases.
Practicing vets apparently also receive a proforma letter by email from the Manager of the ISB when baiting is to be carried out in their servicing area.
Even still, the vets Ian and Mark contacted might still not have been aware of these forms of professional information on 1080 poisoning and DPIPWEs offer.
How many dogs have been pesticide residue analysed and tested for 1080 fox baits in Tasmania?
The answer from all my extensive and exhausting inquiries is none…not one.
So it’s as I suspected all huff ‘n puff again.
#81 Interesting.. So how do you know that the Fox program, Greens and TCT have the blood of over 13 dogs on their hands? Can’t have it both ways.