Should NZ use contentious gene tech in our war on pests?

Genetic technology is among several areas canvassed in a future-focused briefing by the Department of Conservation and Land Information New Zealand. Photo / Nga Manu Nature Images

Gene-altering technology could offer “breakthrough opportunities” for saving our pest-threatened species, a new future-scoping report says, but there’d be some tricky issues to address before it’d be a realistic option.

Scientists have already been exploring how these contentious tools - among several areas canvassed in a new future-focused briefing by the Department of Conservation and Land Information New Zealand - might aid our ongoing war on pest predators.

But it’s doubtful that would happen anytime soon, given the tech isn’t yet ready, and the Government has little appetite toward making law changes that’d likely be needed to unleash it in our environment.

The briefing, just put out for public feedback, explained how gene-editing tools like Crispr-Cas9 could be used to change particular genes or introduce new traits.

These might be used to make protected species more resilient to disease or climate change - or to make “gene drives” that could target pest populations, such as through spreading genes that suppressed fertility.

One ongoing project by Otago University scientists, recently awarded more funding from Predator Free 2050, was investigating specific genes that could drive reduced fitness among possums, and gradual population decline.

The briefing noted another international programme researching gene drives in rodent species.

“This could be a breakthrough opportunity for biodiversity in Aotearoa New Zealand because rodents kill approximately 26.6 million chicks and eggs of native bird species each year.”

However, there there were “complex” ecological, social and cultural issues at play, such as potential effects on ecosystems - not to mention clear hesitancy among the public.

One recent survey suggested only a third of New Zealanders supported gene drives in pest control, with more people in favour of other potential solutions like pest-specific toxins.

That underlying concern had to be respected and addressed, the briefing said, as did cultural considerations - particularly how the tech aligned with te ao, mātauranga and tikanga Māori.

“For example, we need to consider how gene-altering technologies affect whakapapa,” the briefing noted.

Similar points were noted in an August stocktake prepared for DoC, which also found our current legal definition of genome editing limited the potential for research and funding.

“Consequently, data evaluated in an international context may be misinterpreted in the absence of local knowledge and may not adequately capture mana whenua values in data use and applications,” it said.

Despite its deployment here in the near future being unlikely, it said the tech was nonetheless “advancing rapidly” and “rigorous transdisciplinary evaluation” was needed to put it in a local context.

Several recent studies have now suggested New Zealand’s bold dream of being predator-free by 2050 won’t be realised without some kind of breakthrough wonder-tech, although this didn’t necessarily need to be gene editing.

And while perhaps the most contentious, gene-editing wasn’t the only topic the report traversed.

It also looked at how genomic and genetic data might aid conservation management, through efforts such as mapping the make-up of critically-endangered kākāpō, and investigating disease resistance in kauri trees.

Elsewhere, the report covered possible benefits from satellite imaging, monitoring habitats using drones, and steering more artificial intelligence and big data toward hard-to-solve conservation challenges.

One major study published in September did just that, by using machine learning to analyse how current pest-busting tools could be used more efficiently across the country over the next 10 to 15 years.

Unfortunately, it also confirmed what conservationists have long warned - these wouldn’t be enough to finally rid our country of possums, rats and stoats.

A separate scientific review in 2019 also found today’s approaches would fall short, and singled out some genetic techniques - although the most promising ones could still be a decade or two away.