Federal Agency Kills Thousands of Birds with Pesticide

[knightfisher]

A series of articles have appeared daily from January 24 to the 27, 2009, in the Jersey Journal and Star-Ledger regarding the large numbers of dead birds falling from the sky alarming residents in Somerset County, New Jersey. The black carcasses of starling were strewn on cars, porches, lawns and snow-covered roadways. Many residents were unaware that the deaths of some 5,000 starlings were as a result of intentional culling.

Imagine going outside and counting 150 dead birds on your property. On January 24, 2009, New Jersey resident, Andrea Kepic, called the police to report this very situation. She was told she would have to clean up the birds. Police read from a prepared statement recommending using a shovel, gloves and plastic bags to get rid of them. She planned to freeze one or two and take them to Rutgers University for an autopsy. "You have to wonder, what are the ramifications, and are they telling the truth?" she said.

Spokeswoman for the NJ Department of Health and Senior Services, Donna Leusner, confirmed the dead birds were part of a USDA program to reduce the European starling population. Although the state health department was not part of the culling program, they had been notified of plans to feed the birds a "controlled substance." Leusner also read from a USDA advisory which states "the dead birds pose no hazard to people or pets because the substance has been metabolized inside the bird."

USDA spokeswoman, Carol Bannerman, said a bird-specific pesticide called DRC-1339 was used. This pesticide is commonly used to protect farms and feedlot operations from European starlings, considered an invasive species by the USDA. The starlings were troubling an area farm where they were eating feed intended for cattle and chickens and defecating in feeding bowls. Federal employees dispensed the pesticide on Friday. Bannerman said, "Birds that ingest it usually die within three days, so the die-off should have ended by yesterday." She also said the poison is not specific to starlings, but USDA workers closely monitor its application to make sure it targets only the intended bird population. Workers lure the intended birds to a designated area with bait in wooden trays. Once they are certain the bait has attracted the birds they want to cull, they mix poison in the pellets.

On January 26, the USDA acknowledged making a few mistakes by not more fully warning people around the Princeton Township farm where it applied a pesticide on Friday to kill 3,000 to 5,000 starlings. While the pesticide was used in the past in densely populated New Jersey, the starlings moved far off Mercer County farm where they ingested it.

State agriculture and wildlife officials were notified two weeks prior along with Somerset County officials. But the Franklin Township`s administrator, Ken Daly, said "The township was told too little, too late. The only notice given was a second-hand phone call from the county health director that somewhere, sometime the USDA would be culling birds. No one knew what that meant. If we had known it was coming, we could have gotten word out to residents."

Source:

Jersey Journal, January 27, 2009 " N.J. community alarmed by dead birds"

Star-Ledger, January 26, 2009 "Dead Birds by the hundreds but few answers"

January 27, 2009 "Feds apologize but insist birds had to be poisoned"

[smerchly]

I don't have a problem with the method used to kill these birds providing it was done properly . They need to make sure other birds or animals don't eat the remaining pellets , and I hope when they say the poison within their dead bodies is no longer volatile since they may be eaten by other animals . The people should have been told this was going to happen ......but maybe they feared a backlash from certain groups like the birdwatchers etc......

[Dan Andrews]

Only problem is when you announce such an operation in advance, thousands of City dwellers with a soft heart and pots and pans will either interfere or make a media campaign out of it.

I hope their correct about the chemical as I'm sure allot of these birds will be ingested by wildlife. We didn't know DDT's would kill so many raptors. Lets hope DRC-1339 was tested thoroughly in the lab.

[knightfisher]

While the cull was deemed necessary, it was stated the poison was not

specific to just starlings, though closely monitored.

Does the poison become inert, once it does it's job.

I don't think so.

Regardless, I thought it was an interesting article as it

caught the residents off guard.

[FishyWishy]

Damned if you cull animals.

Damned if you don't (see the thread on imports).

No matter which way you go someone is complaining.

Oh, and the article says:

"the dead birds pose no hazard to people or pets because the substance has been metabolized inside the bird." Therefore it is inert. I just don't know how a dead bird can metabolize poison

[smerchly]

FishyW. , I agree you never know if the carcas is inert ......like using rat poison , the rats system is full of the stuff & should be disposed carefully. Would we eat a chicken that died of poisoning ? ......nope !

It looks like we have a local problem with these starlings.....just read this about swarms of them over in Merriton , they are crappin everywhere ......

http://www.stcatharinesstandard.ca/Article....aspx?e=1420470

[bigugli]

FishyW. , I agree you never know if the carcas is inert ......like using rat poison , the rats system is full of the stuff & should be disposed carefully. Would we eat a chicken that died of poisoning ? ......nope !

It looks like we have a local problem with these starlings.....just read this about swarms of them over in Merriton , they are crappin everywhere ......

http://www.stcatharinesstandard.ca/Article....aspx?e=1420470

There used to be a bounty to keep starlings under control (another accidental invasive). That disappeared some time back. Public whining. Then again the public complains about bird bangers and poison.

[Dan Andrews]

I think poison should be a last resort but I understand if its a necessity.

[longmayyourun]

I can not see any circumstance where the use of pesticides on birds would be necessary. Being non specific and introducing them into the food chain is asking for trouble. Must have been a slow news day in St. Catharines. I think fouling of cars is the least of our worries, salt in the winter doing much more damage. It would make sense that the vinyards attract starlings, and they seek refuge in the warm suburban areas. People moving into rural areas should accept the fact that bird bangers be used. Netting is also a viable solution. Pesticides for birds....NO. Natural population controls will take care of any increase in population. In many cases the solution causes more problems then the problem.

Whirlpool

[bigugli]

I can not see any circumstance where the use of pesticides on birds would be necessary. Being non specific and introducing them into the food chain is asking for trouble. Must have been a slow news day in St. Catharines. I think fouling of cars is the least of our worries, salt in the winter doing much more damage. It would make sense that the vinyards attract starlings, and they seek refuge in the warm suburban areas. People moving into rural areas should accept the fact that bird bangers be used. Netting is also a viable solution. Pesticides for birds....NO. Natural population controls will take care of any increase in population. In many cases the solution causes more problems then the problem.

Whirlpool

Government logic. Poison is fast and cheap. Many organic poisons/compounds can be metabolised/broken down in as little as 48 hours. Rendering it harmless.

I don't agree with poison but I do understand the reasoning