I’ve never encountered that theory before. As far as my exposure has been, most opposition to 1080 is based around bykill; the effect of the poison on non-target species.
The scientific evidence suggests that the number of natives killed unintentionally by 1080 drops is more than compensated by the increased survival rates of those who now suffer less predation, but walk into any pub and you’ll find half a dozen people throwing out anecdotes about silent forests in the days after 1080 drops.
A lot of them also seem to refer to earlier forms of 1080 etc. Given the “silent seas” I suspect what this is really about is a sort of folk response to climate change and ecological collapse.
But the rabid activist ones seem to have linked the “Agenda 21” conspiracies, chemtrails etc with 1080. The covid/5G stuff as well, Sue Grey (antivax lawyer) was mixed up with the ban 1080 movement.
I’ve never encountered that theory before. As far as my exposure has been, most opposition to 1080 is based around bykill; the effect of the poison on non-target species.
The scientific evidence suggests that the number of natives killed unintentionally by 1080 drops is more than compensated by the increased survival rates of those who now suffer less predation, but walk into any pub and you’ll find half a dozen people throwing out anecdotes about silent forests in the days after 1080 drops.
A lot of them also seem to refer to earlier forms of 1080 etc. Given the “silent seas” I suspect what this is really about is a sort of folk response to climate change and ecological collapse.
But the rabid activist ones seem to have linked the “Agenda 21” conspiracies, chemtrails etc with 1080. The covid/5G stuff as well, Sue Grey (antivax lawyer) was mixed up with the ban 1080 movement.