Kangamail, kangaroo newsletter archives 42ACT Kangaroos A Freedom of Information search by WPAA has revealed that 37 licenses were issued to kill 4027 kangaroos in the ACT this year, plus two more Licenses to kill 3325 on ADF sites at Majura and Belconnen. The License kill locations, and the applicant’s names, were blacked out by the ACT government before releasing the documents. This year up till the end of July, the ACT government issued licenses to kill a total of 7352 kangaroos in the ACT. Given that most of the ACT is developed, with limited rural leasehold areas, that makes it by far the largest kangaroo kill than in any other Australian State or Territory. For an area of this limited size, no other State or Territory has ever attempted to kill so many kangaroos as the ACT. The ACT covers an area of only 2300 sq kilometres, of which around 50% is National Park or Conservation lands. The City of Canberra covers another 805 sq Kilometres, or around 30% of the ACT, leaving less than 20% of the ACT able to be shot. The issuing of licenses to enable 7352 kangaroos to be shot in such a small area is tantamount to an eradication program, and by area, is by far the highest kangaroo kill ratio in Australia. No other State or Territory comes close. Even discounting the wise ADF decision to not shoot 3325 kangaroos on their land, to kill the 4027 kangaroos that the ACT government have issued rural Licenses for on the limited amount of leasehold land in the ACT is disgraceful and unsustainable. Overseas news websites are calling Canberra the "Kangaroo Shooting Capitol of Australia." *WPAA Media release, 30/8/07 ************************************ The Humane Society of the United States placed a full-page ad in the Sacramento Bee pressuring the governor to block legislation allowing kangaroo skins to be sold in California. California is one of only two states that ban the importation of kangaroo products. Senate Bill 880 passed the legislature last week and would allow kangaroo hides to be sold in California if the animals were legally harvested in Australia. "Kangaroos can't hop backward," reads the Humane Society ad. "California shouldn't either." The ad refers to legislation signed in 1970 by then-governor Ronald Reagan banning the importation of kangaroo skins. The Humane Society is urging readers to contact Gov. Schwarzenegger's office to urge his veto of the legislation. According to a legislative analysis products made from kangaroo leather, like soccer cleats, are readily available on the internet and the California ban puts local merchants at a competitive disadvantage. There are 55 species of kangaroos in Australia, only the four most abundant of which may be commercially harvested on the Australian mainland. Among those supporting a repeal of the kangaroo skin ban are Adidas, Major League Soccer, and the Australian government. ** *************************************** Kangaroos: Maligned and misunderstood icon of Australia Worldwide the kangaroo is indisputably the most recognisable symbol of Australia. In a study by the Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism, a representative sample of Americans were asked to associate a symbol such as the Statue of Liberty, Eiffel Tower, Kangaroo, Panda and so on with a country. The recognition of Australia through its faunal symbol, the Kangaroo, was near perfect, second only to the Statue of Liberty, and much better than France and the Eiffel Tower in spite of Paris being the world’s number one tourist destination. Not surprisingly kangaroos are used in promotional literature, are associated with sporting teams, adorn the uniforms of Australian peacekeepers, fly on the tail of Australia’s international airline and bear Kangaroos are maligned and misunderstood by an exploitative and ecologically damaging farming community one side of the nation’s coat of arms. You would therefore expect Australia and especially the wildlife authorities to cherish kangaroos and for the tourism industry to promote wild kangaroos as the flagship of the country’s burgeoning nature-based tourism industry. Sadly reality is anything but this! who use them as scapegoats for most of their self-created management woes. The Australian Government promotes their use as a readily available natural resource to feed cheap meat and hides to a marginal commercial kangaroo industry full of collusion and corruption. The only vision is to continue the relentless and myopic colonial exploitation of Australia’s natural resources which has so damaged and changed the fabric of the continent. Some claim that the salvation of Australia’s rangelands will be to take off traditional European livestock and to eat and wear products from the shooting of free-ranging kangaroos. After all, didn’t the Aboriginal peoples do this successfully for millennia? True but these people exploited kangaroos with empathy for these animals’ place in the natural world and to sustain a subsistence lifestyle. • When the First Fleet landed in Australia in 1788, following the subsistence lifestyle of indigenous peoples was an anathema to the colonial enterprise. The aim was to exploit natural resources and to create agricultural enterprises to not only feed and clothe the colonists but to export to their homelands and beyond. Exploitation of kangaroos for meat and hides continues with this goal of an industrial scale enterprise, mass markets and export – not subsistence! Thus 30 million kangaroos from four species have fallen under the bullet in the last decade. Why does this mass slaughter of kangaroos occur and be promoted by governments – state and federal – as sound and necessary wildlife management and utilisation? The answer is a relentless stream of self-serving propaganda to an ill-informed and at times indifferent populace. Let’s review a sampling of these myths against the realities of kangaroo behaviour and ecology. Firstly there is the absurd claim that kangaroos have never had it this good. Supposedly there are now more kangaroos than ever before because farmers opened up the country and provided the kangaroos with water through dams, bores and reticulation for livestock. In reality kangaroos evolved several million years ago and no doubt went through unfathomable cycles of abundance and scarcity with climate change and continental drift. The propaganda is based on supposition about changes in the populations of four of the more abundant species - the red, eastern and western grey kangaroos and the common wallaroo – through selective use of early explorer’s accounts and biased recollections of landholders. It doesn’t add up! Apparently we can now take thousands of gigalitres of water out of Australia’s major river system, the Murray-Darling, for people and produce, but apparently before farming, kangaroos could not get a drink. We have five major rivers flowing inland through Queensland to the central Lake Eyre basin and a huge grassland now supporting millions of cattle and sheep but kangaroos apparently had nothing to eat and drink until Europeans came along and settled the country. And most amazingly, the colonists have been so clever as to create pasture now for 105 million sheep and 22 million cattle but 20-50 million kangaroos would have starved in the past! Based on dry sheep equivalents (DSE), the standard measure of stocking in Australia, the sheep and cattle herd is equivalent to at least 339 but as many as 1185 million kangaroos depending on the estimate of an average kangaroo’s energy needs. Kangaroo behaviour and ecology is conveniently misunderstood because the Australian landscape is looked at through a livestock manager’s eyes with the need to water thirsty stock and people. This has distorted any appreciation of the adaptation of kangaroos to frugal use of any water source down to the smallest puddle. Secondly, Australians and the rest of the world are told that kangaroos are in ‘plague proportions’ and must be controlled to secure a livelihood for farmers. The reality is that if kangaroos are allowed to move freely across the landscape then they follow the natural system of temporarily exploiting favourable pasture as found for native populations of wild deer, antelope, sheep and goats in the rest of the world. Domesticated livestock are maintained at high densities on the same pastures all year round. Competition is predominantly within the herds of livestock held at inappropriate densities for too long in the same paddock and not between livestock and kangaroos. Kangaroo numbers in the rangelands follow the run of seasons and increase when forage is abundant and of high quality and decrease through drought. Claims of massive increases are often spurious results of convenient changes in counting technologies when the commercial industry needs a boost in quotas. For example, in the western plains of New South Wales we started with 5.3 million red kangaroos in 1997 and ended with 2.2 million in 2003 which farmers and governments claim is a population ‘out of control’! Nationally counts in commercial zones of Queensland, NSW, South Australia and Western Australia show recent declines of from 9% (western greys), 54% (wallaroos), 55% (red kangaroos) to 63% (eastern greys). The notion of ‘plague proportions’ is propaganda to support kangaroo killing on a massive scale. The message we should be receiving is that if the best-adapted native herbivores have suffered massive declines in recent droughts – a national catastrophe if it we true of sheep and cattle – then the resilience and sustainability of the Australian landscape is in big trouble. Of most concern is that kangaroos are claimed to be killed humanely and said to probably suffer less stress than livestock transported to abattoirs. Furthermore, killing kangaroos and reducing populations is justified by the claim that it leads to less suffering in drought because fewer individuals need to die. In reality, the commercial kangaroo industry follows a ‘code of practice’ which is not monitored at the point of kill but by spot checks of carcases in refrigerated containers where they are stored after a night’s shooting. The code of practice is silent on the fate of dependent young-at-foot which have permanently vacated their mother’s pouch but continue to suckle for 4-6 months until weaned. The young-at-foot have no commercial value and are abandoned to die of starvation or predation. The industry claims these represent a small percentage of the population and hence the welfare problem is minimal but the scale of the industry is so large that the inhumane treatment affects hundreds of thousands of individuals each year. Of the 30 million kangaroos killed in the last decade, about 12 million were females and conservatively 25 % had dependent young-at-foot leaving 3 million of the latter abandoned to a cruel and unnecessary death. Claims of reducing suffering in droughts are fatuous. No shooter has the prescience to know when a drought will occur and which individuals are likely to die as a consequence. There is no commercial value to a starved kangaroo so the healthy residual is targeted. The commercial industry was born in part to reduce the abject cruelty of the past persecution where poisoning, gut shooting and bludgeoning were common. However, by any objective standard it fails to meet community concerns about animal welfare and humane treatment. We don’t have to kill, eat and wear an animal in a use-once manner to get economic value when there are valuable multi-use alternatives with the living entity. The KANGAROO is indisputably ‘BRAND AUSTRALIA’ and the whole community prospers from its continued presence and use of its fascinating character. Tourists don’t go to Africa to see one wildebeest standing in a sea of grass but to see thousands. When Australia’s unpredictable climate and battered landscape allow kangaroos to increase to hundreds if not thousands the nation has an incomparable asset to exploit as one of the world’s great wildlife experiences. We are all made the poorer if cheap meat and leather from a denigrated and persecuted animal, which has done nothing more than survive the onslaught of European colonisation and is too big to hide, is the extent of our horizon! Some enlightened Australians have learnt to live with kangaroos and all their kind and prosper spiritually and commercially through sharing this empathy with wildlife, rooted as it is in humanity’s evolution, with others. Come to Australia and share the spirit of the kangaroo mob – the supreme athletes of the bush. Demand that they continue to roam wild, free and unharried by the short-term greed of the kangaroo killers! ******************************** Wacol Kangaroo Management Plan Contents 1 Summary 2 Introduction 2.1 The Wacol Government Precinct 2.2 The Eastern Grey Kangaroo 2.3 Legislative and management environment 3 Management issues 3.1 Vehicular accidents 3.2 Tick Fever Research Station 3.3 Conservation 3.4 Other negative impacts 4 Management strategies and objectives 4.1 Traffic management 4.2 Management of habitat and non-natural food and water resources 4.3 Monitoring the effectiveness of management 4.4 Direct management of kangaroo population 5 Future landuse and development at Wacol 6 Implementation 7 References 1 Summary The Wacol Government Precinct is an area of approximately 1200 ha of state and local Government-owned land located between Wacol and Gailes in Brisbane’s south-west (see Figure 1). The area is bounded to the south-east by the Ipswich Motorway and to the west by the Brisbane River. The site currently supports a population of some 1300 eastern grey kangaroos and since the mid-1990s the EPA/QPWS have been working with landholders and the community to conserve and manage this local kangaroo population. The existence of an eastern grey kangaroo population in the midst of such an intensely urbanised part of Brisbane has led to a number of management issues and conflicts. These have included road accidents involving kangaroos and impacts on pastures and sporting facilities. Due to its proximity to the Brisbane CBD the kangaroo population is valued by sections of the local community. The EPA/QPWS has convened a working group of landholders, scientists, and conservation and animal welfare interests to assist in the development of strategies for the management of the population. Aerial surveys conducted by QPWS in April 2007 estimated a total kangaroo population of 1,352 over the 1,231 ha2 area representing an average density of 1.10 kangaroos/ ha. Conserving kangaroos in the Wacol Government Precinct and reducing the incidence of negative kangaroo-human interactions will depend on the application of a range of management strategies. Information compiled from past and present studies has guided the development of strategies to manage kangaroos in the Wacol Government Precinct. This information is summarised in the supporting document attached to this draft management strategy. The strategies centre on: • traffic management; • management of habitat and non-natural food and water resources; • monitoring of effectiveness of management; and • if required after monitoring, direct management of the population. The overall objectives of this draft kangaroo management strategy are to: • conserve a sustainable wild kangaroo population at Wacol; • reduce the risks along regularly used public roads in the Wacol Government Precinct; • reduce the potential for other negative impacts by kangaroos on residents, users and environmental values of the Wacol Government Precinct to the greatest extent practicable; Achieving these objectives requires a co-ordinated and integrated management response by the various affected and interested parties. The following strategies to manage kangaroos in the Wacol Government Precinct form components of that response: Strategy 1 Traffic management actions and awareness programs promoting appropriate vehicle speeds and driver behaviour in order to reduce vehicle strikes on kangaroos in the area. Strategy 2 Programs reducing/limiting the availability of non-natural food and water sources for kangaroos in order to bring the existing kangaroo population into balance with the seasonal availability of natural foods. Strategy 3 A program of further monitoring and review will be conducted to determine the effectiveness of kangaroo management strategies in achieving the objectives of the strategy. Strategy 4 Consideration will be given, including community consultation, to further managements options, including direct management of the population, if monitoring shows the population is not in balance with the seasonal availability of natural foods and if negative interactions, including vehicle strikes, cannot be reduced effectively using other means. Actions involving direct management of kangaroos such as culling may not be required but, if they are, these should not need to continue indefinitely. The components of the overall strategy that will require ongoing implementation are those involving changes to driver behaviour and measures to limit non-natural food and water sources. If these strategies are successful during the first few years of the program, direct control of kangaroo numbers may not be required. Implementation of this draft strategy would be by landholder groups including state government agencies, local government, community, individual groups and private sector organisations with interests in the Wacol Precinct. 2 Introduction Conserving kangaroos in the Wacol Government Precinct and reducing the incidence of negative kangaroo-human interactions will depend on the application of a range of management strategies. The purpose of this draft management program is to propose strategies and to provide a means of informing the effected parties and the general public about the diversity of issues affecting kangaroo management in the area. 2.1 The Wacol Government Precinct For the purposes of this management strategy, the Wacol Government Precinct is considered to encompass both the state government and adjacent lands, including land administered by Brisbane City Council and a small number of freehold residential and industrial properties. The Precinct has an area 1230ha, dominated by state government (790ha); Brisbane City Council (260ha); golf courses (~75ha); and some residential and industrial properties (~105ha). The state government interests incorporate several institutions and facilities including a number of correctional facilities (such as the Sir David Longland Correction Centre); the Mental Health Centre (The Park); the Wacol Waste Water Treatment Facility; and the Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries (DPI&F) Tick Fever Research Station. Brisbane City Council owns and manages a significant bushland reserve to the east of the Precinct, colloquially known as “Pooh Corner”. Two golf courses (Wolston Park and Gailes); and approximately 250 residential and industrial properties are also encompassed within the Precinct for management purposes. The Precinct is located 16km from Brisbane CBD, between Wacol and Gailes in Brisbane’s south-west (Figure 1). The Precinct is bounded to the south by Woogaroo Creek; to the east by Ipswich Motorway and the Ipswich to Brisbane railway line; to the north by easements for electricity transmission lines and the housing estates of Riverhills and Sumner; and to the west by the Brisbane River. These barriers have effectively isolated the resident kangaroo population as a geographically independent group, and necessitates their administration as a single management unit as described by Moritz (1994).
2.2 The eastern grey kangaroo The eastern grey kangaroo is primarily a grass eater and indications are that it is selective. Dietary studies show that it is not averse to coarse native perennial grasses in its woodland and forest habitats but that it appears to select shorter, low fibre grasses if these are available. Investigations of the population dynamics of M. giganteus have found that populations have a maximum rate of increase of 35% per annum where rainfall is above average, and a rate of increase of 25% per annum at average rainfall. Due to this the species is susceptible to rapid increases in population size in response to temporary or long term increases in the availability of food and water. Populations decline only when rainfall is well below average. Aerial surveys conducted by QPWS in April 2007 estimated a total kangaroo population of 1,352 over the 1,231 ha2 area representing an average density of 1.10 kangaroos/ ha. This density is extremely high when compared with densities recorded for free living “wild” kangaroos from other rural regions of Queensland. Broad scale aerial surveys across Queensland record maximum regional densities for eastern grey kangaroos in the range 0.2-0.5 per ha. 4 2.3 Legislative and management environment Under the Nature Conservation Act 1992, the eastern grey kangaroo is a protected species. Consequently, an eastern grey kangaroo cannot be interfered with unless the chief executive has granted a permit or authority. The eastern grey kangaroo is listed as ‘least concern wildlife’ under the Nature Conservation (Wildlife) Regulation 2006. Under the Nature Conservation (Wildlife Management) Regulation 2006 a damage mitigation permit may be granted for ‘least concern wildlife’. Before issuing a damage mitigation permit, the chief executive must be satisfied: • that significant economic damage is being caused or is likely to be caused by specified least concern wildlife; or the ecological sustainability of nature is likely to be harmed; or • wildlife represents a threat to human health and well-being; and • the proposed method of taking provides an effective method of minimising the impact of the wildlife; and • that any technique used for taking the wildlife is humane; and • the impact of the activity will not detrimentally affect ecological sustainability. The QPWS also has obligations to ensure that its management of kangaroos is ethical and humane. 3 Management Issues Since the mid 1990s the EPA/QPWS have been working with landholders and the community to address a number of concerns with regards to the management of the eastern grey kangaroo population at the Wacol Government Precinct. The EPA/QPWS has convened a working group of landholders, scientists, and conservation and animal welfare interests to assist both in identifying management issues and in developing and implementing strategies for the management of the population. 3.1 Vehicular accidents Kangaroo-vehicle accidents have been an issue in this precinct since the mid 1990s. Figures provided by RSPCA for the 20 months prior to April 2007 showed 80 vehicular accidents or an average of 4 per month. However, the accident rate escalated between 1 April 2007 - 19 April 2007 with 14 incidents over the 19 day period, equating to almost one report per day. Records from Brisbane City Council relating to dead animals for collection and disposal represent additional animals not reported to the RSPCA. Between 23 April 2005 – 5 September 2006 Brisbane City Council reports showed 34 dead animals in the precinct with the majority located on Wacol Station Road (13), Grindle Road (11) and Wilruna Road (5). 3.2 Tick Fever Research Station The Tick Fever Research Centre of the Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries (DPIF) at Wacol first contacted QPWS in 1997 regarding the kangaroo population at Wacol. Their concern at the time was three fold; 1. consuming pastures grown for the cattle; and 2. compromising the quarantine status of the facility; and 3. vehicle /kangaroo collisions. In December 2000 DPIF commissioned the University of Qld, School of animal Studies to conduct a survey of the population of eastern grey kangaroos on DPIF controlled land at Wacol. This survey estimated the numbers in the DPI controlled land as 1000 animals and recommended a 50% cull as the preferred short term solution. The recommendations also suggested that chemical contraception may become viable in the future. No Damage Mitigation Permit was sort by the DPIF and the recommended cull never took place. In May 2003 a further survey was conducted by the University of Qld. The estimate from that count was 1800 animals. The action by the university was only a survey of numbers and did not propose any management solution. No application for a damage mitigation permit was made. During mid to late 2003 the DPIF commenced fencing part of the land used for cattle in order to limit/exclude kangaroos. 3.3 Conservation In the longer term, overpopulation of kangaroos may lead to overgrazing of the vegetation and erosion of the areas. There are small numbers of red neck wallabies in the area and historically there were swamp wallabies. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the numbers of these species have dwindled as the numbers of eastern grey kangaroos increased. It may be that the conservation of other species may be compromised with excessive numbers of kangaroos. 3.4 Other negative impacts The Wacol area presently has two golf courses and a number of sports grounds. While it is a pleasant experience to view animals in the wild around these facilities there is potential of danger from large aggressive animals. The proposed Police facility may also have several management issues. Because the facility will attract international visitors, the capacity to see an iconic animal in the wild in the Brisbane area will be a major asset that will require some management to ensure visitor safety. There will also be other training areas where the presence of kangaroos may not be appropriate. Because animals are forced to seek out food particularly in dry times, they are often found in suburban backyards where they may become aggressive. There have been a number of such incidents in other parts of South-east Queensland where urban development has encroached on kangaroo habitat. 4 Management strategies and objectives Information compiled from past and present studies has guided the development of draft strategies to manage kangaroos in the Wacol Government Precinct. This information is summarised in the supporting document attached to this management strategy. These centre on: • traffic management; • management of habitat and non-natural food and water resources; • monitoring the effectiveness of management; and • if required after monitoring, direct management of the population. Although public education is not identified as a strategy in its own right, efforts to increase public awareness of the issues involved in managing the Wacol kangaroo population form important elements of several actions. The short-term objective of this draft kangaroo management strategy is to reduce the risks posed to vehicles by kangaroos along regularly used public roads in the Wacol Government Precinct. This objective seeks to minimise risks to both animals and motorists. The overall objectives of this draft kangaroo management strategy are to: • conserve a sustainable wild kangaroo population at Wacol; • reduce the risks along regularly used public roads in the Wacol Government Precinct; • reduce the potential for other negative impacts by kangaroos on residents, users and environmental values of the Wacol Government Precinct to the greatest extent practicable; A number of alternative management actions within the overall strategy were considered but rejected on the basis that they are unacceptable, not viable or unsustainable or at odds with existing legislation and management responsibilities. These rejected proposals include: • establishing feeding stations to supplement the diet of kangaroos that are perceived by some people to be unnaturally malnourished; • relocating animals to other sites (national parks, state forests or similar); and • eradicating kangaroos from the area. 4.1 Traffic management A combination of factors including the current size of the Wacol kangaroo population, the behavioural characteristics and ecological requirements of kangaroos, and the volume and speed of traffic on roads in and adjacent to the Wacol Government Precinct has led to a higher number of vehicle-kangaroo collisions. This problem is particularly evident on Wacol Station Road and Grindle Road. Action is required to reduce the number of such collisions for the sake of the animals and motorists alike. While potential strategies to reduce the potential for kangaroos to come into contact with vehicles will only take effect over the medium to long term, various shortterm approaches are available. Strategy 1 Traffic management actions and awareness programs to reduce vehicle strikes on kangaroos in the area. Actions Signage and lighting • Increase public awareness of the potential dangers by installing kangaroo road signs along the key thoroughfares (Wacol Station Road, Grindle Road). • Erection of specially designed signage indicating those areas that are ‘hot spots’ for collisions with kangaroo. • Enhanced lighting along key sections of Wacol Station Road to enable motorists to spot kangaroos on road verges from much greater distances at night, providing drivers with more time to brake and avoid potential collisions. Management actions involving the erection of fencing or modification of habitat adjacent to roads within the precinct that may contribute to reduced kangaroo related vehicular accidents have been included under the section detailing management of habitat and non-natural food and water resources. 4.2 Management of habitat and non-natural food and water resources The current abundance of kangaroos in the Wacol Government Precinct is probably almost entirely due to the past provision of improved and irrigated pastures, and to the ongoing provision of food and watering points for the small number of cattle remaining on site. Under the present drought conditions in which grazing opportunities are virtually non-existent over much of the area and previous natural watering points such as Wolston Creek are no longer available because of the increased effects of salinity, a large percentage of the kangaroo population appears to have become dependent on these artificial sources of food and water. Strategy 2 Actions to reduce/limit the availability of non-natural food and water sources for kangaroos in order to bring the existing kangaroo population into balance with the seasonal availability of natural foods. Actions • Implement a program to reduce the number of artificial food and watering points available to kangaroos in a staged fashion in conjunction with the imminent change in land use within the Wacol Government Precinct. • Reduce and/or eliminate all irrigation of pastures and lawns in the area so that grazing resources are not artificially enhanced. • Limit access to the triangular patch of cleared land immediately adjacent to Wacol Station Road through either fencing or revegetation of this area or a combination to these approaches. • Provide exclusion fencing for open grassed areas adjacent to key thoroughfares. 4.3 Monitoring the effectiveness of management Determining whether the various actions outlined in this draft strategy have been successful in managing the kangaroo population at Wacol and reducing the adverse impacts of this population on humans utilising the site will require data derived from an ongoing monitoring program. Strategy 3 A program of further monitoring and review will be conducted to determine the effectiveness of kangaroo management strategies in achieving the objectives of the strategy. Actions • Reporting on implementation of the various kangaroo management actions annually for the first three years of this Strategy’s implementation. • A repeat survey of the kangaroo population should be conducted within 3 years of the commencement of implementation of this management strategy to derive an accurate estimate of the kangaroo population over the entire extent of the Wacol Government Precinct 4.4 Direct management of kangaroo population Direct management of the Wacol kangaroo population offers a potential means by which to actively reduce the currently overabundant population to a size that is sustainable and in balance with the available natural resources. These options, which would variously operate over the short or long term, include surgical sterilisation, contraception, translocation and culling. A previous report on recommended approaches to manage the kangaroos at Wacol argued strongly against implementing the first three of these options (Finch 2000, 2003). Under the current circumstances, seven years later, the justification for not adopting sterilisation, contraception or translocation as techniques for population control remains. Strategy 4 Consideration will be given, including community consultation, to further managements options , including direct management of the population, if monitoring shows the population is not in balance with the seasonal availability of natural foods and if negative interactions, including vehicle strikes, cannot be reduced effectively using other means. Actions • None at this stage. Reconsideration if results of monitoring programs conducted after the implementation of all other management actions reveal that the kangaroo population is not declining at a rate that is considered ecologically sustainable in the long term, if the number of kangaroo-related vehicle collisions on public roads within the site has not diminished. The objective of any cull would only be to produce a sustainable kangaroo population. The total elimination of kangaroos from the Wacol Government Precinct would not be considered. 5 Future land use and development at Wacol The information provided in this Strategy and the array of management actions that are recommended relates primarily to the current circumstances prevailing at the Wacol Government Precinct. Some acknowledgement is given to certain change in land use that may occur once DPI&F vacates the site and Corrective Services resumes management. However, a number of planned or proposed infrastructure projects with varying timelines will or could occur within the Wacol Government Precinct over the coming years and these have the potential to impact directly on the kangaroo population, on the habitat and resources available to the kangaroos and on the human use of the site. The planned and potential changes associated with development proposals including the: • Western Corridor Recycled Water Project, • Goodna Bypass Development, and • Westgate Strategic Plan will need to be considered as the situations arise. 6 Implementation Whilst the Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service has taken the lead role in developing this draft strategy, implementation will be effected through affected and interested parties such as state government agencies, local government, community groups and private sector organisations with interests in the Wacol Precinct. 7 References Finch, N. 2000. Survey of a population of the Eastern Grey Kangaroo at the Tick Fever Research Centre, and a proposed management plan for the population. University of Queensland, School of Animal Studies, Gatton. Moritz, C. (1994). Defining 'Evolutionary Significant Units' for Conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 9, 373– 375.Paruelo, JM, Epstein, HE, Lauenroth, WK, and Burke, IC (1997). ANPP estimates from NDVI for the Central Grassland Region of the United States. Ecology 78: 953-958. ******************************** Toxoplasmosis It's been accepted as common knowledge for some time now that a parasite carried in cat feces and flushed down Californians' toilets in cat litter was responsible for killing sea otters along the central California coast. On a tour of an area near Monterey Bay, participants in the annual Society of Environmental Journalists conference learned from a guy who heads up something called The Otter Project that the explanation is probably more widespread – and potentially much more important for human health – than previously believed. Steve Shimek says that explanation really makes him mad because it's oversimplified. Toxoplasmosis gondii has been around for a long time, is relatively widespread, and it doesn't just come from cat poop, he says. While it's being found in dead otters, it shouldn't be killing them – if their immune systems are working right. And there lies the potentially blockbuster story for other species, including humans: Maybe something's mucking with our immune systems. What's going on with California's sea otters, he says, sounds a lot like what we've heard from scientists who are studying Puget Sound's orcas: "You have an immune-suppressed sea otter population swimming around in a ever-thickening sea of contaminants." In fact, research shows the otters are being exposed to another parasite carried in California only by possums, Shimek says. And again, that's a widespread critter that oughtn't be laying anyone low, furry beast or human. You could hear the buzz in the room as SEJers started realizing: Hey, this guy's saying that what's going on here could be much bigger than just otters and cats. Posted on a Blog by Robert McClure at September 7, 2007 7:53 a.m. Ed Comment; Toxo is rife in kangaroo and other game meat and has been the direct cause of two widely reported infestations in humans. More on the www.kangaroo-protection-coalition.com website under "Toxoplasmosis". ******************************* A Healsville woman had a lucky escape after a kangaroo jumped through her car's windshield as she travelled along the Maroondah Highway. ``The kangaroo leapt on to the windscreen of the car which was travelling at about 80-90km/h at the time,'' Healesville Sgt Tony van Gorp said. ``The kangaroo buckled the roof and it went through the window and ended up in the back seat.'' The driver managed to stop the vehicle safely and suffered only minor injuries. However, the kangaroo was killed in the accident. ``Wildlife poses a significant danger to drivers, and in this incident the driver had a very lucky escape,'' Sgt van Gorp said. The accident occurred near Coldstream on Sunday, September 2, about 8.30pm. ***************************** Cruel kangaroo shoes Gov. Schwarzenegger should veto an attempt to roll back the ban on kangaroo leather. By Michael Markarian September 12, 2007 When David Beckham arrived in the United States this summer to play for the Los Angeles Galaxy, he was the subject of a media frenzy. One detail that did not escape reporters was that the international soccer superstar chose to have his cleats -- Adidas Predators -- crafted from synthetic materials rather than the company's traditional kangaroo leather. In progressive, animal-friendly California, Beckham's gesture resonated. Since 1970, the state has prohibited the sale of kangaroo-skin products, a bold precedent. But now Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will be at the center of the debate as he decides whether to sign or veto a bill that would roll back the kangaroo protection law. Soft, pliable kangaroo leather is used not only to make soccer shoes but handbags, golf gloves, baseball mitts and other leather items. The 'roo-skin sporting goods and accessories are often labeled "K leather" or "RKT" (rubberized kangaroo technology) to obfuscate their origin as the pelts of the iconic Australian marsupial. About 7 million kangaroos are brutally killed each year in Australia for pet food and leather, and 3 million of their hides are exported to supply the global commercial trade. The killing itself is callous and inhumane. Many kangaroos are spotlighted from trucks and shot at night in the outback, where there is scant scrutiny or regulation. When female kangaroos with joeys are killed, the youngsters are pulled from their mothers' pouches and stomped on, clubbed, decapitated or left for the scavengers. Although some kangaroo species are plentiful, others are threatened with extinction. The commercial hunting of kangaroos often leads to the killing of the rare "look-alike" cousins -- heightened by the nighttime slaughter and the financial incentive to "harvest" as many of the animals as possible. In 1970, then-Gov. Ronald Reagan signed the law to stem the tide of kangaroo imports in California -- and to add the state's voice to the protection of an imperiled species abroad. There are plenty of examples of governments implementing domestic policies that protect animals outside their own borders -- even when the animals are not threatened or endangered. For example, the United States doesn't allow the sale of pelts from dogs or cats from China or seals from Canada, even though they are plentiful and are killed by the millions to supply the fur trade. The state Supreme Court in July unanimously upheld the law barring kangaroo leather. Adidas had argued that only the federal government could decide to protect the kangaroo -- such as by listing it under the federal Endangered Species Act. But the court saw it differently, stating that the law "addresses an area typically regulated by, and historically within the traditional police powers of, the states -- wildlife management." The court further noted: "Notwithstanding Adidas' contrary argument, the scope of this power has long been recognized as extending even to regulation of foreign species." It's an important judgment not just for California but for all state fish and wildlife agencies across the country. As the Bush administration hastens to remove federal protections for wildlife, including grizzly bears and gray wolves, states will be left to decide whether these species should be protected or commercially hunted. But it may be a pyrrhic victory at best for kangaroos. At the request of Adidas and other retailers, California lawmakers passed SB 880, written by Sen. Ron Calderon (D-Montebello), to repeal the 1970 ban. The bill is opposed by the California Department of Fish and Game and animal welfare groups. It awaits action from the governor. Just as Reagan saw fit to protect the kangaroo, Schwarzenegger should veto the Calderon bill and retain those protections. The Golden State prides itself on setting nationwide trends for the humane treatment of animals. If it rolls back protections for one of the most charismatic creatures in the world, what chance do the rest of our animal friends have? Michael Markarian is executive vice president of the Humane Society of the United States. (humanesociety.org) ************************************ AS a wildlife lover and advocate, I am concerned about the vulnerability of them in our developing urban areas of Melbourne. I was recently in Whittlesea to visit some new estates that have caused kangaroos to be trapped in fragmented areas. These creatures are likely victims of road accidents, dogs and people and their survival is being threatened. The estimated resident population of Whittlesea is projected to increase from 118,118 people in 2001 to 194,132 by 2031. This equates to an average annual increase of 1.67 per cent between 2001 and 2031. In the same period Victoria's population is projected to increase at an average annual rate of 0.87 per cent and Melbourne by 0.90 per cent. This above-average rate of population increase, that we are supposed to have for our economy, is threatening our native wildlife and they have seemingly been ignored in our expansion. More and more areas in our state are being developed and native animals are just given tokenism. In one street there is a statue of kangaroos and the names of streets are reminiscent of previous views that have been eroded by housing estates and shopping centres. The irony is not lost. We really need to do something now before more animals are trapped and we lose our natural resources. The Plenty Gorge needs to be extended to include a wildlife corridor, possibly along Plenty River, to cater for future developments before it is too late. A corridor should have natural habitat and interconnect existing areas and join into reserves and Kinglake National Park. There needs to be protection from dogs and other domestic animals. Whittlesea needs to learn to appreciate the areas that people are building on and not just override natural vegetation and animals. Residents should have participation in this project and be able to enjoy (without dogs) the conservation corridor. Maybe some vandalism can be avoided by including local community groups and businesses in the corridor development and restore it to a pristine condition. Vivienne Ortega, Australian Wildlife Protection Council vice-president ********************************************
|
