I was forwarded an email recently appealing for help for these farmers. Those who buy real milk aka by the newbies as ‘raw’ (ie non-treated to the extent all the goodness has gone) will be aware of the tough time these farmers have had in recent years as the system imposes more and more costs to stay afloat. Not difficult to see the agenda in light of the push toward fake food world wide. I’m copying their letter below (or see info at the link). If you are able to help I know that will be gratefully appreciated. EWR
The New Zealand Ministry for Primary Industry (MPI) has brought criminal charges against as many as 16 farmers for violations of that country’s Raw Milk for Sale to Consumers Regulations 2015 (the “2015 regulations”). As far as is known, none of the cases have actually gone to trial. At least five farmers have settled their cases by pleading guilty to a reduced number of charges and agreed to pay fines of as much as $50,000; in two other court actions where the farmers had plead guilty to violations of the raw milk laws, judges discharged the cases without convictions. Most of these farmers, whether or not they had to pay fines, owe tens of thousands of dollars in attorney fees. Of these seven farmers, only one remains in the business of selling raw milk for human consumption. An attorney representing one of the farmers has been unable to find evidence that any of the charged farmers made anyone ill with the milk they produced.
ACTION TO TAKE
A GiveSendGo fund has been set up to help pay legal expenses for five of the prosecuted farmers (listed on the fund page). None of these farmers became rich selling raw milk—they were dedicated to producing healthy food for their customers and community. Please be there for them and help the farmers recover some of the losses they have suffered due to the unjust government enforcement actions.
The 2015 regulations were the catalyst for the prosecution against the dairies. The farmers are being prosecuted for a violation of laws designed to put them out of business. In addition to having to register with MPI, dairy farmers under the new regulations are required to:
The 2015 regulations had little to do with science and protecting the public health. Many farmers, believing that they would not be able to afford the cost of compliance with the new rules, distributed milk through contractual arrangements such as limited partnerships and herdshare agreements—arrangements they thought would exempt them from the new rules. When MPI saw that not many farms were registering, it launched a sting operation, “Operation Caravan”, against the unregistered raw milk farmers, leading to the ongoing criminal prosecutions.
The 2015 regulations have been a big success for MPI in driving raw milk farmers out of business. Shortly before the ministry issued the new regulations, there were upwards of 200 dairies selling raw milk; today there are around 25.
Please help the Weston A. Price Foundation restore nutrient-dense foods to the human diet through education, research and activism. westonaprice.org
On Friday (16th July 2021) NZ farmers and supporters turned out country wide to protest the government’s latest proposals for environmental / conservation changes (in accordance with the UN Agenda 2030 plans). Shelley Krieger has explained what exactly the protest was about ….
Excerpt: “Once parts of land are classified as an SNA you lose your rights to that land… you have to fence it off at your own cost and still pay the rates on it but you can no longer use it … one Farmer near Inangahua is about to lose 80% of his 600 hectare farm …”
“In case anyone was confused as to why the Farmers were protesting on Friday I thought I would just put something here so people have an idea of why. Firstly SNA’s (Significant Natural Areas), these are areas of people’s farm land or lifestyle blocks that the Government is getting the councils to survey. This is native blocks of land that have wild flora and wild animals that pass through it.
Once parts of land are classified as an SNA you lose your rights to that land, can not farm it or build on it. You have to fence it off at your own cost and still pay the rates on it but you can no longer use it. In some instances it is 80-90% of peoples land. One farmer near Inangahua is about to lose 80% of his 600hectare farm (1482 acres, of which he will lose the ability to farm or sell 1185 acres). So you could see how that could be upsetting. Next is the clean water accord. We as farmers are all for cleaning up the waterways and huge work has been done. The building of sediment traps to stop dirt eroding into rivers, fencing, riparian plantings (planting flaxes and trees along the waterways), effluent management, reducing nitrogen and fertiliser use, and trying to do more regenerative farming. I know that the perception from the media is that we are doing nothing and I’m sure there are a few die hard older farmers that are not prepared to change, but the younger ones coming in are fully aware of their obligations to the environment. And believe it or not farmers are the first ones to ring MPI if they see an animal welfare issue or the council if they see bad practices happening. In the “Good Old Days” Dairy sheds were actually built alongside rivers so they could pump the cow poop into the rivers, because they didn’t know what the outcome would be, same as the meat works, they used to let all their waste go into the rivers too! Times have changed and we are making changes. The thing is, its not as easy to make some of the changes that everyone wants straight away. We ourselves have been using compost instead of fertiliser, are using natural grass stimulant instead of Urea and are spraying fish fertiliser onto the paddocks to stimulate growth to try to move away from synthetic fertilisers, and put our cow effluent on with pods that put it on lightly. Its hit and miss. Some of the things work well and some don’t. Grass and crops take the nutrients out the soil so we must replace it, you can not just deplete the soil of all its nutrients otherwise it won’t grow anything. I know of 3 other farmers that went organic and all 3 sold up because they weren’t making any money. The costs involved in being organic made the farms uneconomical. We also have another Farm close to us that has been trialing Regenerative Farming, he is a generational farmer with very little debt and he is having to sell the farm off 100 acres at a time because he’s not making enough money to pay the staff. So you can see it is a balancing act. When we borrow to buy the farm and the animals the bank only lends to us under the proviso that we do a certain amount of production to be able to cover the mortgage repayments. If we fall behind in production then the bank starts to put pressure on for payment which is an added pressure on top of the public pressure, the media pressure and the environmental pressure.
To top that off the Government has also said that we have to have our winter crops in the ground by the 1st of October or we will be fined. In the South Island it is impossible to get the crops in by then, it’s still winter and it is either raining or snowing and the ground is too wet to get a tractor into the paddocks to get the seed in the ground.
There is also new legislation coming in that says we have to pay to get resource consent every year to plant our crop paddocks if they are on more than a 10 degree slope, and that pugging of the paddocks must only be to a certain depth or we will be fined. We have to produce a farm map to council with a detailed plan of which paddocks will be cropped, and how each one will be fed. No farming costs can be passed on to the consumer! Every time you go to the supermarket and are outraged at the prices, so are we! Dairy farmers only get about 12cents out of that block of butter. Next time when you drive past a farm instead of thinking “those lucky buggers”, think instead of how big their mortgage is. If a Tradie has to buy something for the job at your house and the price has gone up on that item, then he/she can add that extra cost on to the job. Farmers can not. We get given the price the Global Dairy Auction or the Meat Works set for us. Any extra costs we have lumped on us have to get taken out of our living costs, and some of us now can not afford to employ as many people.
We are also extremely concerned about the Government introducing legislation that we have to slaughter up to 30% of the farmed animals that we have in NZ.
That is millions of beautiful cows and sheep so NZ can reduce their carbon emissions. For us who have a small herd and have generations of cow families this will be devastating for us to kill our beautiful cows, not only that but it puts us in a terrible position with the bank.
We are also getting pressure from the Activists that are trespassing on our farms and using drones during the day, and drones with lights at night that terrify the cows and push them into boggy areas so photos can be taken. They are also taking down reeled electric fences and moving the cows into boggy areas to get a “good shot”.
If they have an issue with how someone is grazing their cows they only need to ring the Regional council or MPI and an inspector will be sent out, but putting it on TV, even though it is taken out of context seems to be the “in thing” nowadays to outrage people. In Australia they could be fined $100,000 but unfortunately we don’t have such laws here. I’m not saying there won’t be some issues out there but everyone is trying their best, and the rules keep changing so some farmers are actually confused about what they are supposed to be doing and need help to get it right. Unfortunately a lot of the people they are training up as Inspectors who have degrees in environmental things have never actually been on a farm before and don’t know what they are doing, and have very little knowledge on how to actually help the farmers, other than fine them.
Another thing that doesn’t affect us, but I know it does for a lot of other farmers and growers, is the Government not allowing immigrant workers in or out through the border.
It has been devastating for most fruit growers not having anyone to pick their fruit. The thing with seasonal work is that the workers are only needed at certain times of the year, so Kiwi’s don’t want to do it, but someone has to do it! We went through the Central South Island last week and the fruit lying on the ground is heartbreaking. Also the immigrants who are here on work visa’s can’t go home and see their families and come back, so some are leaving for good. This is wrong. Another bit of legislation that is in the wings is the 3 Waters Scheme which everyone should be worried about. They are spending $4.5million at the moment promoting it on TV, but most people probably go and make a cuppa while it is on during the ad break.
In this proposal the Government want to take over all the Council water infrastructure for a pittance payment so they can get control of the water. Once they have control of the water they can do whatever they want and may start charging us all for it, and by that I mean every time you turn on the tap you will be charged for every litre.
At the moment you pay for the water to get to your place, and pay to have it leave, but you don’t actually pay for the water, so this is going to be another cost for everyone even though the water falls from the sky and is therefore free. The Ute tax was just an add on. It was new legislation that came out after the protest had already been organized. It doesn’t affect us because we can’t afford a new ute, but I can see where everyone is coming from, that you shouldn’t be penalized when there is no alternative to purchase. It should have been a tax on all vehicles if they were really that serious about everyone getting EVs.
In one of the more draconian enforcement actions ever taken against raw milk producers, the New Zealand Ministry for Primary Industry (MPI) brought criminal charges against the farmers of nine different raw milk dairies for violations of that country’s Raw Milk for Sale to Consumers Regulations 2015 (the “2015 regulations”). Some of the defendants have also been charged with violations of the Animal Products Act (APA). The raw milk charges assert that by engaging in the supply of raw cow milk “a direct or indirect risk to human or animal health would be created.”
The Weston A. Price Foundation (WAPF) is aware of specific charges against three of the farms (two of the three are operated by pensioners). Cedric Backhouse and his wife (WAPF chapter leader Susan Gales) of Alt Energy Farm are each being charged with 26 violations of the 2015 regulations and the APA related to the distribution of raw milk and meat through a herdshare agreement; the potential penalties for each defendant are up to 19 years in jail and $1.8 million (over $1.25 million in U.S. dollars) in fines.
Phillippa (Pip) Martin and John Martin of Manna Milk are each facing seven charges with penalties of up to 12 years in jail and $545,000 in fines (over $380,000 US) for alleged violations of the 2015 regulations and the APA related to the distribution of raw milk through a limited partnership agreement.
Paul and Christine Ashton of Lindsay Farms are each facing five charges with penalties up to eight years in jail and $320,000 in fines (over $225,000 US) for alleged violations of the 2015 regulations related to the distribution of raw milk through a limited partnership agreement.
A majority of the farmers charged were operating under a herdshare or a limited partnership business model as a matter of survival after MPI issued the 2015 regulations affecting raw milk production and sales (the regulations went into effect in March 2016). The ministry promulgated the regulations as a result of a 2014 foodborne illness outbreak associated (or blamed on) raw milk consumption where seven people became ill.
The number of dairies selling or distributing raw milk is a fraction of what it was before MPI imposed the new regulations. It is considerably more difficult for the remaining dairies to make a living than it was five years ago. MPI’s enforcement action against the farmers–in addition to putting the charged farms out of business–is designed to create a chilling effect on the remaining farms and on farmers thinking of starting up a raw milk business.
ACTION TO TAKE
WAPF, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, is accepting donations to help pay legal expenses for the charged farmers. Donations are tax deductible to the fullest extent of the law. To donate, please use the link here (westonaprice.org/donate) and indicate the fund for ‘New Zealand raw milk’. (For those wanting to send a check, please specify that it is for “New Zealand raw milk”.)
Before the 2015 regulations went into effect, it was estimated that as many as 200 farms were selling or distributing raw milk in New Zealand; today there could be less than 20% of that number still left.
A. Compliance Barriers
The cost to raw milk farms to comply with the 2015 regulations was in the range of $10,000-$20,000 per year for each farm regardless of what the farm’s production volume was—an expenditure that many farms could not afford. Beyond that, there were several ways that the new requirements significantly hurt the farmers’ ability to make a living.
1. Depot Permits and Burdens
Before 2016, farmers were able to deliver raw milk to a central distribution point (also known as a “depot”), a necessity given the distance between most farms and their customers plus the substantial amount of extra time it takes to deliver door-to-door. The new regulations required a permit for each depot the farmers were delivering to; otherwise, sales were limited to on-farm and to customer premises. Given the estimated cost of permitting each depot, out of the 26 raw milk farms that have registered with MPI (registration was also a requirement in the 2015 regulations), only one has obtained depot permits. Any customer wanting to pick up milk at the depot had to be registered with MPI as a transport operator. There are numerous recordkeeping requirements for a transport operator even when that individual is picking up milk for his or her own family.
2. Sell-by and Use-by Constraints
The most damaging provisions for farmers in the new regulations were sell-by and used-by requirements for raw milk. The regulation for a sell-by time states the following:
“The sell-by time for a lot of milk is the time that is the 30 hours after the commencement of milking for the oldest milk in that lot. (For example, if milking commenced at 7am on Monday 4 June, the sell-by time is 1pm on Tuesday 5 June, even if milk from a subsequent milking is added to that lot.).”
One of the registered farms estimated that this mandate cost them 30% of their business since the farm was unable to meet the time constraints in getting the milk to its more distant customers.
The requirement for the use-by date for raw milk “is 4 days after the commencement of milking for the oldest milk in the lot.”
Another onerous mandate for the farmers is on testing. Dairies are required to test for five different pathogens, coliforms, plate count, somatic cell counts, and “inhibitory substances” every 10 days. Estimates for the cost of testing are around $750 per month.
Lastly, the regulations require that farmers not only keep customer names on file for MPI inspection but also every transaction with each customer as well.
B. Alternate Business Models
Many dairies, knowing they couldn’t afford the cost of compliance with the new regulations, went out of business before the new law took effect. Others–believing their only way to stay afloat was to not have to comply with the 2015 regulations–set up business models such as herdshare programs and limited partnership agreements, proceeding in good faith that giving their customers an ownership interest in their dairy livestock would exempt them from the new requirements.
C. MPI Raids
When fewer raw milk producers registered than MPI had anticipated, in 2019 the ministry launched “Operation Caravan”, an investigation of dairies that MPI suspected were not complying with the new regulations. The investigation included the extensive use of MPI undercover operatives. In December 2019 MPI obtained search warrants and raided eight raw milk farms and farmers’ homes around the country, seizing everything from customer lists to computer hard drives. Some of the raided farms shut down; others kept on going. After a year-long investigation, MPI filed criminal charges in December 2020. The Ashtons had registered Lindsay Farm with MPI months earlier, having been told by the ministry that any potential charges would go away if the farm was registered.
Backhouse and Galea are each charged with 17 counts of selling or offering to sell illegally home-killed meat; each count lists the amount allegedly sold as under $100 and one was for only $15.40. The potential fine for each of the 17 charges is up to $75,000. MPI has never accused Backhouse and Galea of making anyone sick with the milk or meat they produced.
An attorney representing one of the charged farmers has been unable to find evidence that any of the charged farmers made anyone ill with the milk they produced. Under the law, MPI can only prosecute those whose products pose a public health risk.
Arraignment for defendants is scheduled to take place in March.The accused farmers and the 250,000 New Zealand residents who consume raw milk need your support.
Please contribute to this effort to protect freedom of choice, strong local food systems, and the right of small farmers to make a living producing nutrient-dense food.
To donate, please use the link here (westonaprice.org/donate) and indicate the fund for ‘New Zealand raw milk’. (For those wanting to send a check, please specify that it is for “New Zealand raw milk”.)
Thanks for your generosity and your help in spreading the word.
HUMAN BEINGS FALL BETWEEN THE CRACKS WHEN IT COMES TO 1080 POISON
by Carol Sawyer
I did a post earlier today about the Ministry of Primary Industries’ Official Information Act response to an OIA request. Their response (see below) quoted the Animal Welfare Act. The AWA said “If a non-target animal is killed despite using 1080 in accordance with the approved controls, then there is no offence committed under the AWA (section 30A (5))”.
With regard to the AWA comment Peter Marshall pointed out, on ‘Upper Clutha Community Notices’ Facebook page, that “… that includes humans then.”
I thought Peter was onto something, (well, wouldn’t you ?) and I wrote a Facebook post about it. However later, when looking at the section regarding “interpretations” in the AWA I found that, for the purposes of the Animal Welfare Act, humans are not classed as animals.
So I deleted my post. Apologies to those who had shared it.
But that is pretty interesting really, isn’t it? The Animal Welfare Act says we are not animals. What are we then?
Also, if as a human being you suspect you have suffered 1080 poisoning you can’t get tested either, despite many ‘Dept of Conservation’ signs at 1080 poison drops saying that if you suspect poisoning you should contact the National Poisons Centre.
See my conversation with the National Poisons Centre here:
The authorities need to go after the real criminals, the corporations that pack our food with sugar and chemicals, known to cause health issues. Instead they hound folk & make it increasingly more difficult for them to produce & sell a pure whole food that we have consumed since forever. As kids we would walk to the dairy with a billy can where they ladled it full from the big milk can. No probs. It was also fed free not so long ago to Kiwi school kids. It often sat for hours in the heat before being distributed at morning break. Funnily I don’t ever recall anybody either getting sick or dying from it yet we are being told, with no evidence, that many are getting sick from drinking it.
Yeah right. EWR
From the NZ Herald
An elderly Manakau couple have sought legal advice after a Government raid on their farm made them feel like drug dealers.
Their crime? Selling milk.
John and Phillippa Martin run a dairy farm in Manakau, south of Levin, that has been in the family for 103 years.
Two weeks ago four cars and six men swooped on their house during breakfast as part of a coordinated Ministry of Primary Industries raid on eight farms around New Zealand.
Their cowshed and house was searched. Investigators loaded all phones, electronic devices, files, financial records, delivery sheets and private agreements into plastic bags.
The men sifted through rubbish bins. Mr and Mrs Martin were required to hand over all their passwords. They were then read their rights.
“We wondered if we were farmers milking cows or gangs of drug dealers,” she said.
At 76, Martin said he’s farmed his entire life and has lived through massive changes to the dairy industry.
He, like many New Zealanders, had grown up drinking raw milk. He started in a wooden shed with 50 cows, milking six at a time. Now the herd numbers nearly 350.
“We started producing market milk and I can remember going down to the train station to load cream cans…tankers started collecting the milk in 1966,” he said.
They started selling raw milk 10 years ago in response to demand from people who wanted an authentic product, citing an increase in health and well-being from raw milk.
They set up a small bottling plant and formed MannaMilk, allowing them to distribute that milk to partners of the limited company.
Mrs Martin said less than 10 per cent of their daily production was distributed under partnership, or herd share, where essentially partners sourced milk from their own animals.
MannaMilk partners paid for the costs of animal husbandry and bottling the milk, with a majority living on the Kāpiti Coast, Wellington and Hutt Valley.
“People need and want real food – milk with its correct full cream, its protective bacteria, enzymes and high levels of vitamins and protein,” she said.
“What we should be raiding are soft drink vending machines and purveyors of high sugar energy drinks and fake foods loaded with chemicals.”
Many limited partnerships were formed after new regulations were introduced in 2015. She described the new rules as impossible, impractical, unreasonable, unrealistic and uneconomic.
“The guts of it is the MPI doesn’t want limited partnerships,” she said.
Mrs Martin had received massive support from partners and milk drinkers who emailed her in frustration at the shutdown. There were 215 emails on her inbox.
“We have had hundreds of emails from people who cannot tolerate shop-bought pasteurised milk telling us how disappointed, irate and angry they are,” she said.
An estimated 100,000 New Zealanders drank raw milk each week.
The Martin’s had received a notice last year detailing new rules around the distribution and had since engaged legal representation.
“Ideally we would place the bottles into the loving hands of the customer waiting at home by their doors, but that is totally unrealistic when people have jobs and lives,” she said.
Instead, they had chilled stations for shareholders to collect their milk. But the new rules amounted to hand-to-hand delivery.
Meanwhile, Manawatū farmer Cedric Backhouse had 25 cows he knew by name on an certified organic farm that solely provided raw milk for customers he also knew by name.
The raid effectively had shut down his business and source of income.
After 25 years, he had 300 partners. To hand deliver milk to them “would take all day and all night”, and the new testing and delivery regulations were over the top.
As his farm was certified organic he couldn’t have people turning up to the gate. It was a biosecurity risk.
Two weeks after the raid, he is still waiting for his phones to be returned.
He shuddered at the cost to taxpayers of the raid, which was a year in the planning. He believed MPI should work with raw milk providers to come up with workable solutions, rather than a raid their properties and shut down livelihoods.
Backhouse said the raid was “draconian” and worried it set a precedent.
“It was heavy-handed. It was beyond the pale,” he said.
“If they can do this to us every farmer in the country is vulnerable.”
He had sought a request under the Official Information Act for details around any illness related to raw milk consumption, as he suspected any complaints were “anecdotal, at best”.
“They should have said we would like to talk to you about it rather than a heavy hammer destroying your business and scaring you with prosecution,” he said.
He said if the raid was done a month or so earlier he could have raised calves with his herd to offset losses.
Meanwhile, Ministry of Primary Industries detailed reasons for the raid earlier this month.
MPI had directed unregistered milk suppliers across the country to stop selling their product until they complied the new rules.
MPI staff searched farms in Auckland, Hawke’s Bay, Manawatū, Horowhenua, Nelson, and Southland, following a year-long operation.
MPI’s manager of food compliance Melinda Sando said they wanted to gather evidence of and further investigate non-compliant sales.
“We believe that the suppliers we visited today are operating outside of the regulatory framework. By not adhering to the rules for selling raw drinking milk, they are putting consumer health at risk,” she said.
“There have been multiple instances in the past of people getting sick after drinking raw milk from some of these suppliers. We can’t let this continue.”
“Raw unpasteurised milk is a risky product as it hasn’t been heat-treated (pasteurised) to remove illness-causing bacteria including E. Coli, listeria and Campylobacter.”
“These types of bacteria most commonly cause severe diarrhoea and vomiting, but occasionally some have been linked with more serious complications that include miscarriage, paralysis, meningitis and serious kidney problems in children. Raw milk may also be a source of tuberculosis (Tb).”
“We support consumer choice. We’re not saying people can’t drink raw unpasteurised milk.
“What we are saying is that when people do choose to drink raw unpasteurised milk, they’re able to make that choice with a degree of confidence that the milk they’re consuming is produced within the regulatory framework.”
“Purchasing from MPI-registered suppliers who are being audited regularly to ensure they are managing risks and testing regularly helps consumers reduce the risks if they choose to drink this product.”
“The suppliers need to stop selling unregulated product immediately and will only be able to resume selling once they have met all requirements to make them compliant.”
A number of raw milk suppliers NZ wide have just been raided by MPI. As a consumer of raw milk myself I’ve watched this with interest over more than a decade. The regulatory conditions have gradually tightened up over the years, so that suppliers I’ve spoken with have said it’s become more and more expensive to keep up, costing thousands of dollars, jumping through impossible hoops to remain registered with all boxes ticked. These raids will all of course have the effect of frightening people off supplying altogether, or simply price them out of business as has already happened with many. (Note in the very apt meme below raw milk is not as yet banned in NZ but as I say, I’ve been watching the signs and it certainly looks to be headed that way).
Note raw milk is been described in the articles as ‘dangerous’ for heaven’s sake. And it’s reported people have been sick from drinking it? Really? No details of exactly who and where though. Enough to rark up some suspicion & bias among us by mainstream media doing its job well as always. Humans have consumed raw cows milk for hundreds of years and not died. Whilst I am all for health compliance, let’s face it, the authorities are simply making it all non viable with their hefty costs. Enjoy it while you still can people … they won’t rest until it’s completely gone as has happened in other countries already.
Please do read this article on how raw milk completely healed a little girl of very pervasive eczema that literally controlled her life:
In 2016 the Ministry for Primary Industries released a warning to trout fishermen, not to eat trout from 1080 poisoned rivers for at least 7 days. However, as the MPI warning was based on incomplete, and erroneous information. In this video clip Brett Power demonstrates why trout fishermen should be far more cautious when consuming trout from New Zealand forest streams …
WHY DID THE AUTHORITIES NOT CONTACT THE PIG HUNTER WHO SOLD THE POISONED FAMILY THE WILD PIG ?!
This comment is from Lloyd Hanson a NZ hunter of 53 yrs experience. He raises some important questions that reflect more inconsistencies in the case of the poisoned Waikato family:
There is a lot of misinformation coming from mainly the pro poison side so here is a small attempt to rectify this :
Here is my opinion, based on over 30 years studying 1080, hunting and observing 1080 aerial drops on the ground. Also as an ex possum hunter I know the bush well.
LD50 rates/pig/human are irrelevant as this is the amount it is meant to take to KILL the animal/human concerned, not to cause ILLNESS, and in the human case has never been studied extensively so the rate is……..?????
Clyde Graf, Steve Graf and I observed a margin 1080 aerial drop in the Teme Valley, Marlborough a few years back, and after 12 hours we discovered 7 dead red deer hinds and a 50kg pig dead in the river.
We found the deer that we believe the pig had fed on, and it had eaten out the paunch (gut) area which resulted in it’s death a few hours later !
The deer of course had taken a lot more pellets than was necessary to reach its LD50 rate as one could stand in one place under the helicopter’s course and observe several pellets, making it easy for the hind to smell and pick up the scented cereal based baits in a short time period.
Now in the case of the poisoned wild pork consumed by the Indian people who were admitted to hospital in a critical condition :
The hunter who caught the pig was hunting in an aerial 1080’d block! He may have been unaware, as some hunters have access through the back of farms or through isolated, unsigned areas.
He may have been using holding dogs which latch onto the head or ear area if possible, and will bite somewhere to get a grip, resulting in ingestion of blood or saliva from the pig. It depends on how long it takes the hunter to get to the pig how much blood can be ingested ! Also some hunters feed offal to their dogs to reward them for their effort at the time of capture.
The word on the street is that this pig hunter’s dog was fed the heart of the pig.
It is unknown how deadly this poison is to humans. It may well be as toxic to humans as it is to dogs. No testing is done on humans and the research used to defend the poison is mostly anecdotal from years ago.
I will only cover this aspect of the whole sorry affair but will leave you with this thought:
How come Ministry of Primary Industries, or Waikato District Health Board, or NZ Police didn’t contact the hunter concerned, because if these people had died it could have been a manslaughter case, could it not? The poisoned family’s lawyer managed to contact him without a bother !
Hunter for 53 years.”
Postscript : The dog died, presumed to be of poison. See this film “DHB coverup” for the whole story :
Does anyone out there know a forensic pathologist – a medical expert – who can make a determination on what poison is likely to have caused the following effects-symptoms in the poisoned family from Putaruru? The family that the Waikato DHB said was suffering from botulism? (If so, please email email@example.com – in confidence, or contact through messenger on FB).
Points to note
Shibu, one of the victims, stated he believed the poisoning was caused by 1080 (sodium monofluoroacetate) based on what he recalled the pig hunter had told him when receiving the pig, and upon gaining consciousness after 3 weeks in a coma. The pig hunter also reportedly told Shibu that the pig was fine to feed to his family (as is also stated by DoC, TBFree and regional councils – you’d need to consume a huge amount of poisoned flesh to get a dose that would harm you).
The New Zealand Government-owned factory that imports and manufacturers the baits currently says it’s mix is 0.15% pure 1080 in bait. And that just 30 grams of bait, or 2 and a half standard sized 12 gram baits, may kill an adult human. 166 of these twelve gram baits are currently spread (@ 2kg bait/Ha) across every hectare of land and water in New Zealand aerial operations. Enough bait to kill over 60 million people every year… https://www.pestoff.co.nz/assets/sds1080pellets.pdf
Also note – Shibu stated that the pig hunter told him that his dog had died on the same day, assumed to be from 1080 poison.Also note – over 70% of New Zealand’s forests are aerially spread with 1080 poison every 2 – 3 years … the poison is spread across forests, and also across all waterways within those forests, in most aerial operations around New Zealand. (See www.tvwild.co.nz for information about aerial operations across New Zealand)
Here are the symptoms to consider …
Symptoms mentioned in medical notes:
Reduced verbal response
Opthalmoplegia (paralysis of muscles within or surrounding the eyes)
Eyes rolling back in head
Reduced GCS (eye, verbal and motor response)
Spontaneous jerky movements
Repetitive muscle twitching and eye flickering
Dystonic posturing of legs
Spasmodic rigid movements
Legs flipping backwards 180 degrees
Legs in frog position
Flailing arms and legs that need to be restrained to avoid injury
Arms out to side or above head
Convulsions that required six staff members to hold the patient down
Tonic clonic seizures
Rising inflammatory markers
Elevated levels of CK (highest about 5000)
Unresponsive to pain
Tongue protrusion at times
Arching and flinging head, arms and legs against side rails
Inability to think clearly
Very unfortunate, because although 1080 was suspected early on, they didn’t test for it until EIGHTEEN days later. As the esteemed & so called health professionals would have known at the time, testing for it after 7 days is useless as all presence of 1080 would be gone from the urine & that is according to DoC’s own documentation. So the tests would have been USELESS. (See Charles Eason’s Vertebrate Pesticides Toxicology Manual for further details). This would explain why the family had such difficulty in acquiring their medical notes in the first instance.
So … unfortunate? Or deliberate? Why in a suspected poisoning ask yourself, do you NOT test for the glaringly obvious? And even more importantly, why do you keep telling the public via the media that the diagnosis is botulism when three days in that diagnosis has been eliminated. And by a SPECIALIST. The media (stuff) was headlining ‘botulism’ on 4th December still – the poisoning occurred on 10th November. We published an article on 10th December with comments from a Neuroscientist (who wished to remain anonymous) posing questions about the diagnosis & claiming the symptoms did not match botulism:
“Rehabilitation from sub lethal 1080 poisoning is simple. Time. Botulism treatment takes a long time, years. Whereas recovery from sub lethal 1080 poisoning is much faster. This family could have been treated for alzheimers, for mumps, for shellfish poisoning, for botulism, for polio, for meningitis. The results would be the same, they would recover. The timeline of the recovery is just as diagnostic as the timeline of the illness, and the time line does NOT fit botulism” … Serena Maja, Neuroscientist
So on top of all of the above, unbelievably, they did NOT test the meat for 1080!! Is this not all screaming ‘cover up’? Go figure.
The article below is from mainstream media with the family’s lawyer expressing concern. For a change mainstream is challenging the official stories. Quite rare really, however they still fail to really nail the authorities down to a why? Why did they not test the meat, or why did they not test the family earlier? Then wander off into the possibilities of mushrooms or other plant life, still skirting that 1080 issue. The point is, the authorities in question have been caught with their proverbial pants down, and are still remaining silent.
You should be concerned that we have a large public hospital here that appears to be officially lying to the public, going by their own notes “… there was no evidence to suggest botulism”. This has implications for your future treatment should you fall ill and be at their mercy. Worse, should you fall ill from suspected 1080 poisoning, you should be very concerned in light of what happened to the young woman in 2006 whose heart incredibly, the NZ lab lost.
May we finally hear some truth on all of this.
Note: to read all articles on this topic scroll to the end of this article for a timeline, or for all articles on 1080 use the categories drop down box at left of the news page.
Poisoned Waikato family’s medical notes concerning, lawyer says
Medical notes about a mystery poisoning that plunged three family members into a coma suggest inadequate testing, the family’s spokeswoman says.
Shibu Kochummen, 35, his wife Subi Babu, 33, and his mother Alekutty Daniel, 62, were found in a vegetative stateon the floor of their Putaruru home on November 10 shortly after eating a wild boar curry.
Botulism was the original – but incorrect – diagnosis. And nerve conduction tests as early as November 13 – three days after the trio’s hospitalisation – indicated the illness wasn’t botulism, the family’s lawyer and spokeswoman Sue Grey said after obtaining the medical notes.
“The diagnosis was that there was no evidence to suggest botulism. A specialist was asked to look at [it] and that was his conclusion. “That does raise questions about why the health board was continuing to say it was botulism for such a long time after they had so many results indicating it wasn’t.
“If that botulism thing [was] ruled out at the start when the first negative tests were coming in they would have had ACC by now.
“There are politics but you’d like to think that politics aren’t interfering with medicine.”
Grey said she hadn’t seen any food tests other than the negative botulism result from the pork dish consumed.
“When we met with the CEO on Wednesday he told us that MPI, the Ministry of Primary Industries, had done the food sample tests. So I’ve written and asked them for their information but I still haven’t got that back.”
While the MPI have an “informal” involvement in the case, they are not testing implicated food, a spokesperson said.
“The Waikato DHB is the lead agency and MPI had a very minimal involvement at the initial stages in working with ESR (Institute of Environmental Science and Research) on some testing procedures,” the spokesperson said in a statement.
“We do not believe there are any public health concerns as this incident/issue appears to be confined to one particular family.”
Grey said she’s still going through the family’s notes but understands 1080 was an early suspected cause.
“That is really concerning because as far as we can ascertain at the moment, the only testing that was done on 1080 was that single test 18 days after [hospitalisation].”
Professor Steve Flint, an expert in food safety and microbiology at Massey University, said he hoped more food testing had been conducted by MPI or the DHB.
“My surprise – from what I’ve read from media reports – is that there isn’t a full scale investigation into this.
“I’m quite surprised that no one has actually looked at the food and analysed the food.”
Toxins in some kind of plant could have caused the violent illness, Flint said.
“[Wild] mushrooms can also be quite toxic. You get almost hallucinogenic.
“There’s always the possibility of something that we haven’t discovered yet, something new.
“If it is, it would be unusual but this whole scenario is unusual.
“In a country like New Zealand, you often think about our native plants and things that people may not have reported any illnesses from.
“If it’s not botulism then what is it, because we need to know.”
Waikato Regional Councilor Kathy White, having read the finally released medical notes for the Kochumman family poisoned by wild boar in Putaruru, has raised some important questions. Developments with regard to the anomalies surrounding this case have been curious to say the least. Read our previous articles and posts on topic *below.
The questions that need to be asked of both the Waikato DHB and the MPI are:
(1)1080 was the number one suspect, according to the poisoned patients’ medical notes. The Waikato DHB states that they have tested for 1080. However the date of the urine test was 18 days after hospitalisation, which is outside of the time that 1080 is detectable in urine (it is excreted from urine within seven days of ingestion – See Charles Eason’s Vertebrate Pesticides Toxicology Manual for further details). So why was this test not done within the correct time frame?
(2)(Incredibly) none of the meat collected by MPI has been tested for 1080. This was confirmed in a meeting with the WDHB yesterday. Why was it was not tested, when the patients’ medical notes say the wild boar meat should be tested for 1080?
(3)Why did they continue to say it was botulism when they knew early on that the symptoms didn’t fully align?
(4) Why has neither the WDHB nor MPI followed up with the person who provided the wild boar meat to Shibu’s family? This information is held by the WDHB. It could be a public health risk as this person has probably supplied meat to others.
Responding to these issues was never rocket science. Why would the family’s meat not be tested for 1080? Why would you wait 18 days to test the family for 1080 knowing perfectly well that the results would be useless?
How safe people do you feel about eating your hunting catch now? These are all issues people have been trying persistently to address with little success as our country continues to be showered relentlessly with a poison that has no known antidote.
So, at 2:20 min on this video the family’s lawyer states “as far as we know the original meat samples were only tested for botulism, they weren’t tested for 1080 so we don’t believe at this stage that 1080 can be excluded”!
The Putaruru family incorrectly diagnosed with botulism poisoning is now clear for ACC cover after an urgent meeting with the family spokesperson, family lawyer, and the Waikato DHB chief. Click on the video for the full story …
What is laughable about this is the council’s pledge to make the waters swimmable! It is DCs & Horizons that pollute them in the first place with their consents to industry & farming, that they don’t even police correctly. See the links here as witness to that as the pollution of waterways plays out in the Horowhenua district. Same scenario, but not 1080. Nevertheless blatant pollution that is flatly denied by those responsible. Two DC Crs and local iwi Ngati Whakatere have vehemently opposed and exposed this corruption, one Cr stating that the DC is a “top drawer polluter”. We saw recently also the polluting of Auckland’s public water supply with Council’s blessing.
This is playing out also in many NZ regions (see our LG Watch pages). It is mere lip service. Read their site spin then see what they actually do (or don’t would be more appropriate). So now they’re going to clean up the rivers by adding dead 1080 infused carcasses? This is about Agenda 21. And note who will have to pay out the millions, farmers & property owners, doubtless like everything else they try to shut down, it will become an unmanageable burden & drive them off the land. See our Agenda 21/2030 pages for more info on that, particularly, watch Anne Bressington’s video there, a former Australian politician who caught on to what is really going on. This plan is global.
Check out also our pages on 1080 and other chemical pollutants.
Waikato Regional Council Permits Poisoning of Waterways to Kill Deer …
A massive collaboration process has taken place over the last three years to clean up the Waikato, and Waipa river catchments in the Waikato Region of New Zealand. To make them “swimmable”.
Waikato Regional Council has championed the project from the get-go, back in 2013. The idea is to place tighter restrictions on private land use, and reduce pollution to the waterways by monitoring both direct and indirect pollutant discharges. The targeted contaminants are Nutrients (N & P), sediments, and E Coli.
It has been suggested that farmers and property owners will have to fork out over 500 million dollars to implement the policies, over time. Stakeholders involved with the round-table meetings have reportedly included Fonterra, Dairy NZ, Beef & Lamb, energy companies, and many more. The dream is big and it’s bold, but does it go far enough?
The following video released by New Zealand film makers Clyde and Steve Graf appears to provide strong evidence that 1080 poison baits (a deadly pesticide made in America) are cast across forests and directly into forests streams in the Waikato Region. And to top it off, it is implied that the Council that is leading the Healthy Rivers – Wai Ora project, is the same Council that writes the permits that allow the aerial poison discharges to take place, and directly into water – running water.
The video also highlights contradictions within the Ministry for Primary Industries. MPI, as it’s known in New Zealand, is shown making a public plea on TV One News for all New Zealanders to stand up against animal cruelty, and to inform MPI if they should encounter it.