Letter to the editor: First-hand experience of Fipronil dangers

Read Time:4 Minute, 51 Second

Thank you yet again for The Point! I was particularly interested in your article on the use of Fipronil baitboxes in the environment.

A Fipronil baitbox was placed, without my knowledge, on my neighbour’s property here at [de-identified to protect the privacy of the author]. It was close to my side boundary, within a few metres of a storm watercourse.

I noticed the box because of my free range chooks’ behaviour.

They suddenly started making a beeline (!) for this particular area on the neighbour’s property, foraging intently for long periods of time.

I then noticed more native birds than usual in this area, including kookaburras, swallows and egrets.

In a short space of time, I found a dead egret and a dead swallow within 20-50 metres of the baitbox.

Not a feather out of place, no obvious external injury.

In this same time period one of my chooks became ill, seemed to recover but subsequently died.

When I told my partner about the bird deaths, he commented that he had seen the egret behaving oddly. Staggering, swaying, not seeming to notice him, then flying wobbily.

My chook had also been very lethargic and unsteady. As you would be aware Fipronil is a neurotoxin.

I reported my concerns to DPI field officers attending the baitbox.

They stated that they had had to withhold one Fipronil spiking because of my chooks foraging in that area, and advised me to lock up my free ranging chickens.

They also stated that many dog flea collars use fipronil, so there was nothing for me to worry about.

If there was nothing to worry about why did they withold Fipronil spiking when my chooks were present? And why advise to lock them up?

I did explain that there is a significant metabolic difference between a topical application and an ingestion of a toxin.

I asked that my concerns about the dead birds and the proximity of the baitbox to a watercourse be reported back to DPI management along with a request that the baitbox be removed.

No response.

I contacted my local vet regarding sourcing toxicology testing.

The vet confirmed that Fipronil is highly toxic to birds if ingested.

The vet clinic contacted the DPI who responded the same day.

Initially the DPI again used the argument that Fipronil doses are so tiny that they do no harm, that Fipronil is often used topically etc.

However, the DPI officer agreed with me that there is a metabolic impact difference between ingestion and topical application.

I asked for information re required setbacks from watercourses.

I was told there were no prescribed setbacks.

I explained that the baitbox was placed within 5 metres of the stormwater course which quickly floods the baitbox area in heavy rain and then drains to [name withheld] Creek.

This is a fourth order creek that is designated Key Fish Habitat and Platypus Habitat. It flows into [another creek] which flows into Tuggerah Lakes.

I asked about breakdown rates of Fipronil in the soil/environment and was told that there would be no significant residue as all dead bees in the box vicinity are picked up and care is taken when placing or removing the Fipronil spikes.

I did point out that the unusually large numbers of birds gathered in that specific area of the baitbox suggests that there was an easy feed in the offing.

I requested that the DPI conduct soil analysis as well as source toxicology testing (I have not yet found an independent toxicology lab).

DPI stated they would study the dates of Fipronil spiking and look for any co-relation with my observations.

I wrote an email to the DPI manager as a record of our conversation, DPI undertakings and I attached photographs.

That was many weeks ago and I still have birds sitting in my freezer.

The whole issue regarding the use of fipronil in the environment is very worrying.

Not only because of the very real risk of ongoing environmental harm but because it also reveals the extraordinary power that a public authority can wield.

The Fipronil baitbox was removed from my neighbour’s property within days of the announcement that the Varroa mite eradication program would be replaced by a management strategy.

I must stress that my neighbours were helpful but did not want involvement.

It is nearly four weeks since I had the phone discussion with the senior DPI officer and sent my emails.

I have had no response at all in that time.

Even if the DPI has been extremely busy with Varroa mite eradication/management programs, I find it extraordinary that such little attention has been given to the raised issue of potential fipronil toxicity affecting both native and domestic birds and the failure to remove the Fipronil baitbox from a storm watercourse proximity when alerted to both of these concerns in August initially, then again in September.

My sense from both the field officers then senior DPI officer was a polite attempt to minimise my concerns. The senior officer, after some lengthy conversation did agree to look into the matter.

I certainly accept that Fipronil may not have been implicated in the deaths of these birds.

However, there is a very real possibility that Fipronil played a role, as the observed bird behaviour, both wild and domestic, indicated that there was an unusual feeding opportunity in an area not normally frequented so intensely. An area that just happened to be in the vicinity of a Fipronil baitbox.

The DPI, at the very least, had a duty of care to quickly, thoroughly and objectively investigate my reported concerns, but have failed to do so.