RE Official Information Act request WCDHB 9291
I refer to your letter dated 28 February 2019 and received in our office on 4 March 2019 requesting the following information under the Official Information Act from West Coast DHB. Specifically:
1. Official Investigation Report on – and –
As per response to OIA WCDHB 8954 (12/6/2017) – the West Coast Medical Officer of Health, Cheryl Brunton is quoted as saying “I have enclosed a copy of our initial report to the EPA on this incident. A copy of my full report will be available before the end of the month and I will send you a copy as soon as it is available.”
a. I am requesting a copy of this report.
A copy of the report is attached as Appendix 1. Some of the content of this report (i.e. Appendix 4) has been withheld pursuant to Section 9 (2)(a) of the Official Information Act 1982 as it contains personal medical information.
b. Why has this report not been sent as promised?
The undertaking to provide you with a copy of the report was unfortunately overlooked. I apologise that a copy was not sent to you as promised in the response to your previous OIA request (WCDHB 8954).
2. Harold Creek contamination
I understand an investigation was carried out as a result of a large quantity of baits being found in the Harold Creek bed, the water catchment for Hari Hari water supply and a number of rural households and the source for stock water supply.
a. Has the results of the investigation been completed and a report issued?
An investigation was carried out into an alleged misapplication of baits in the area of Harold Creek. I attach a copy of the report of the investigation which was sent to the EPA (Appendix 2).
b. What actions are being taken as a result of the investigation?
The actions taken are referred to in the attached report.
3. Prefeed aerial
On 4th August 2018 an aerial prefeed application of supposedly non-toxic bait was applied around Hari Hari – no public warning was given and no warning signs erected.
a. Was there a requirement for signs to be erected and the public to be warned?
No, there was no requirement for signs to be erected or for the public to be warned of the application of non-toxic pre-feed baits. All controls for aerial 1080 operations, including those imposed by public health permissions, apply only to the application of the toxic agent.
4. 1080 Dust (frass)
1080 dust was witnessed and filmed during the operations both in loading the helicopters and when the 1080 was being aerially spread with the helicopters flying at times within 200m of households and over farmland and livestock water supplies.
a. I am requesting a copy of the 1080 dust health report as reported in the Greymouth Star February 2019.
This part of your request was transferred to the Ministry of Health (12/3/2019), as the report referred to in the Grey Star article was commissioned by the Ministry of Health and the article refers to the report being “ongoing”.
The report on a scoping study of dust drift from an aerial application of 1080 carried out in 2015 is publicly available at
b. What monitoring of 1080 dust and wind is required?
There is no requirement for routine 1080 dust monitoring either within the loading zone or outside it. Public health staff have no involvement in any wind monitoring so I am unable to provide any information about this.