Author Archives: AWPC

A safe haven for Night Parrots – thought extinct but given a second chance!

One comment

The Night Parrot (Pezoporus occidentalis) is one of the most elusive and mysterious birds in the world. It’s a nocturnal and mostly ground-dwelling parrot, endemic to Australia, but for around 100 years it was presumed extinct.

Night-parrot-pic1-1000x400

Incredibly, we now have a second chance to save it!

First recorded in 1845, the last living specimen was collected in Western Australia in 1912. It then disappeared, with no confirmed records of the bird between 1912 and 1979.

In 1989 Australian Geographic’s founder, Dick Smith, even joined in on the hunt, offering a reward of $25,000 for the discovery of a night parrot, dead or alive.

It was assumed to be extinct until July 2013 when ornithologist John Young announced that a decade of scouring the spinifex clumps, gibber plains, caves, gullies and salt lakes of the outback had paid off!  The location was shrouded in secrecy to prevent birders flocking to it. The find was so surprising it made the front page of The Australian.

Bush Heritage announced a fundraising campaign to help them secure donations needed to buy a 56,000ha block of pastoral land surrounding the population of night parrots, estimated at 10–30 individuals.

Now, a secretive 56,000-hectare conservation reserve has been established in Queensland in an effort to protect a tiny population of endangered night parrots.  South Australian Museum collection manager Dr Philippa Horton called the find: “One of the holy grails, one of the world’s rarest species probably”.

One of only five ground-dwelling parrots, the night parrot was described in 1861. The Night Parrot is a medium-sized parrot measuring 22 to 25 cm in length, with a wingspan of 44 to 46 cm. It is a medium-sized green parrot with a dumpy body and short tail. Its plumage is generally green, with yellow-and-black streaks, spots and barring. In flight it shows a pale-yellow wing bar.

Interest in the bird is so high that poachers are also a concern.  A live bird or eggs could be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars on the black market.

Research scientist Steve Murphy (The Australian, August 29, 15)  believes the parrots have hung on at this site,  an arid hillside at a secret location in southwest Queensland, because of the terrain, habitat and paucity of introduced predators. His research has established that the birds favour large, old-growth clumps of spinifex. Each bird has its own roost, buried deep within a spinifex clump. The birds leave the roosts soon after sunset, travelling up to 7km during the night to feed.  Most of the parrots are within a 10km radius of John Young’s discovery.

Murphy believes the presence of dingos in the area is an important factor in controlling cat numbers. As part of a management strategy being implemented, the owners of the one million hectare property where the parrots occur have agreed not to cull dingoes.

Bush Heritage negotiating to purchase a 56,000 ha section of a pastoral property in western Queensland where the bird was found. The population size is estimated at between 30 and 100 individuals. It’s not a large number, but enough to be excited about.

Donate here to help save the Night Parrot.

Share This:

A tribute to Elsie Quinn

One comment

ELSIE QUINN – a poem of tribute

I met a lady named Elsie Quinn Her love for animals knew no bounds

At ninety years old she fought for them still She couldn’t live without them around.


There was no special preference As she did her own thing. Kangaroos, pigs and chickens

Were taken under her wing


If it could walk, fly or swim Or pulled a milk cart. All living creatures Were dear to her heart.


Her generosity knew no bounds The animals always came first

For her faith in humans was already lost And she always thought the worst.


She always struggled for animal rights This was the reason she lived.

Protesting or manning a local stall Were other ways she would give.


And she was famous for her home-made jams Her baskets would fetch a huge price.

Just like the lady who made them. They were sweet and ever so nice.


Now Elsie has gone where all good people go But her legacy lingers still

Through all of the animal welfare groups That were named as a part of her will!

Bill Charlton c 2015

Elsie was born on 5th June 1917 died 28th May 2011 Originally from New Zealand and then lived at 12 Adderstone Neutral Bay on the water.
Elsie Quinn had no children and devoted her life to the care and protection of animals everywhere. After the death of her husband John Quinn she ensured that a substantial amount of the monies to be left in her will were to go to a selection of her favourite animal welfare organisations.
She was a beautiful kind-hearted lady with a niece, family, many friends. Elsie always helped out on the
various stalls in her local area raising money for animals and she was famous for her home-made jams
which were often raffled as prizes at the various animal functions.  This was a prowess of which she was enormously proud.
She is so sadly missed as an aunt, a friend and as an stalwart in the animal welfare world who had no peer.
94 year old Elsie Quinn passed away after devoting many, many years of voluntary help to many organisations, including AWPC, that helped animals and we continue to remember her.

AWPC President Maryland Wilson says:

One of the dearest people on earth, Elsie was beloved by all.

She cared deeply about animals and worked tirelessly help them.

RIP dear Elsie… you will never be forgotten.

 

Share This:

ACT Roo killings: Who profits? Behind the Earless Dragon mask

2 comments

Human Population growth impacts on wildlife

The endangered Earless Dragon is being used to justify killing thousands of Eastern Gray kangaroos in Belconnen and Majura, but the motive is really developers’ profit. As grasslands are turned into building sites, as human population growth is encouraged.. Kangaroos are in the way, as is democracy, so both are being buried.

When an Earless Dragon is like a smoking gun we should ask who fired the gun.

Did the ACT government organize the mass killing of thousands of Eastern Grey kangaroos in Belconnen and Majura, near Canberra, in a sudden uncharacteristic and galvanic effort to save the endangered Earless Dragon?

Thousands of Eastern Grey kangaroos have recently been shot and bulldozed into pits in Belconnen and Majura, [1] Australian Capital Territory (ACT), in fatal massive round-ups which have not been seen since early last century. In a torrent of official reports and statements, scientists and politicians have fingered the Eastern Grey Kangaroo for overgrazing rare grasslands and thus threatening their other inhabitants, notably the endangered Earless Dragon.

Who would have thought that the little Earless Dragon had such powerful friends in government, planning, universities and business – even the Canberra International Airport? [2] The Grasslands Earless Dragon doesn’t pay taxes and doesn’t directly contribute to political fundraisers, but it is often associated with grants and development programs these days.

Were these culls really for the benefit of the Earless Dragon? Or was the Earless Dragon only an excuse for this macropod massacre, in which case, what was the real motive?

Although these planned culls aroused public ire and many questions, formal responses were highly selective. Many questions about the Belconnen cull went unanswered and remain unanswered. When the Majura cull came up on the agenda, the same angry questions received the same infuriating non-responses.

2008bntsroobodiesthrownintopitinmajura

(image: https://wildlifecarersgroup.wordpress.com/category/kangaroo-issues/)


The public and the kangaroos deserve much better.

It was so difficult to make sense of what was happening. Could the whole thing actually be as cruel and stupid as the kangaroo-cull protesters claimed? Or were the protesters really childish people who could not accept the obvious need to put some animals which had ‘bred like rabbits’ out of their misery?

After all, the Royal Society for the Protection of Animals (RSPCA) had given its seal of approval. That meant it must be okay, right? Right?

My own preoccupation over the months intervening between the Belconnen and the Majura kills had been to ascertain what population theory was used to arrive at the diagnosis of overpopulation or to assert that there should be only one kangaroo per hectare. My search failed. This question has now become one of whether there was any population theory at all.

A theory of how kangaroo populations behave is necessary for any outsider to be able to test the validity of the judgement that the Majura Roos or the Belconnen Roos or any other roos were overpopulating and needed ‘culling’. Saying that there should be one per hectare or that they may die of starvation are remarks which, on their own, do not justify culls.

I was amazed that official reports did not begin with a description of how kangaroo populations were thought to operate, how this theory had been tested and the populations measured. In an effort to find out if any real theory and application had taken place, I attempted to contact officials and scientists involved in kangaroo management programs of one sort or another. No population theory of any kind, whether or not demonstrating lemming-like multiplication tendencies in kangaroos, has yet surfaced as a reasonable basis of the culling of the Belconnen or Majura roos.

What did emerge was that there was an overtly declared perception of conflict between human activities and the presence of kangaroos in grazing and a less overtly acknowledged conflict between land-use intensification in urban development, such as roads and new suburbs, accompanying the promotion of radical human population growth policies in the ACT. (See, for instance, this description of planned expansion and intensification in the area.)

shameful-pit

Dr Fletcher’s thesis oddly at odds with Canberra culls

One scientist who was closely associated with the Belconnen cull and the Majura cull, was Don Fletcher. Fletcher is the Senior Ecologist in Research and Monitoring in Parks, Conservation and Lands, Department of Territory and Municipal Services, ACT. His involvement in the Belconnen Roo cull seems to have been officially limited to capturing then releasing female survivors after inserting contraceptives in them. He was one of the writers of the public consultation document leading up to the Majura cull.

He defended these culls and has defended the assessments leading up to the Majura culls in a public consultation document. Yet his own thesis on the “Population Dynamics of Eastern Grey Kangaroos in Temperate Grasslands,” (pdf 4.27mb) seemed to discredit claims at the basis of these culls, which were too high population density and a need to manage it down to one kangaroo per hectare. For instance, he wrote on page 237 of his study that :

“The study did not provide evidence that high densities of kangaroos reduce groundcover to the levels where erosion can accelerate. Unmanaged kangaroo populations did not necessarily result in low levels of ground cover. Groundcover had a positive but not significant relationship to kangaroo density, with the highest cover at the wettest site where kangaroo density was highest. Weather has an important influence on groundcover.” [3]

He also wrote that some of the populations he was studying were at the highest density recorded. They ranged between 4.5 and 5.1 kangaroos per hectare. The density in the studies below was expressed in square kilometers. To get density per hectare, divide by 100. [4] Fletcher wrote:

“The kangaroo density estimates reported in Chapter 7 for the three study sites (mean eastern grey kangaroo densities of 450, 480 and 510 km2) are the highest kangaroo densities reported. For comparison, the maximum density of combined red kangaroos and western grey kangaroos in the Kinchega study was less than 56 km2 (Bayliss 1987) and the density of eastern grey kangaroos at Wallaby Creek (Southwell 1987b) was 41 to 50 km2. The next highest kangaroo density outside the vicinity of my study sites appears to be that of Coulson et al. (1999a) for eastern grey kangaroos at Yan Yean Reservoir near Melbourne, which was 220 km2.”

Coulson’s study of kangaroos at 2.2 per ha was published in 1999 as Coulson G, Alviano P, Ramp P, Way S “The kangaroos of Yan Yean: history of a problem population”. [5] Graham Coulson’s Yan Yean article is frequently cited by kangaroo population students and he seems to be thought of as the originator of the “one kangaroo per kilometer” ‘rule’.

I did contact Dr Fletcher by email, and he was initially quite friendly, but when I attempted to ask him questions about his thesis responses to my emails ceased, even though I re-sent the emails.
For every assertion a contradictory one remains unanswered

The ACT Kangaroo Advisory Committee Report No.1 (issued prior to the Majura cull) reported conflict between kangaroos and the rural community which uses 23% of the ACT.

“A key issue for rural lessees is the conflict between kangaroo grazing and pasture and fodder crop production.”
(ACT Kangaroo Advisory Committee Report No.1. )

It stated as fact anecdotal reports that kangaroo populations ballooned due to man-made pasture improvements.

“There is general consensus that, in other parts of Australia at least, land clearing and swamp drainage to extend areas for introduced pasture, together with the increase in the number of farm dams has improved habitat for Eastern Grey Kangaroos and some other macropods, leading to increased numbers.”

But these anecdotal reports are very selective and easily countered by others, for instance in Dr John Auty’s comprehensive review of original documents forming the history of kangaroo populations from the time of European settlement in Australia. See “Red Plague Grey Plague – Kangaroo [numbers] myths and legends”

Other ACT researchers have also questioned the logistical principle of blaming kangaroos for human pressures on the environment, i.e. why blame kangaroos when we know that the damage is outstandingly done by sheep and cattle? In the Olsen and Low report case cited below the researchers are talking about farming, but they could just as much be talking about new suburbs, i.e. why blame kangaroos when the damage is obviously being done by human population growth, accompanying infrastructure and housing development (roads and suburbs), and human activities (driving cars, growing lawns, shopping, expansion of production, etc.)?

The discontinuation of damage mitigation as grounds for harvesting is in many ways a more honest approach to kangaroo management given that damage is difficult to monitor, predict and even to prove empirically to be an issue. It also removes the implication that kangaroos are pests.

However, some landholders still perceive damage mitigation to be the main reason for harvesting and continue to call for greater quotas, mainly during the recent years of low rainfall. Arguably, this is a socio-economic problem rather than an ecological one. Certainly, the issue of land degradation will never be redressed by simple reduction in kangaroo numbers when there is no concomitant control of sheep and other introduced herbivore grazing impacts.” Olsen and Low Report. [6]

Is the real conflict over the grasslands between developers and kangaroos rather than kangaroos and earless dragons?

Fletcher, in his thesis, describes Kangaroo density in the ACT as having “increased more rapidly from 1996 to 2000 after sheep and cattle grazing had ended.” [7] Sheep and cattle had been allowed to graze in the threatened grasslands. In some cases they have even been returned to the areas where kangaroos have been ‘euthanazed’ to protect those fragile grasslands.

The question asked here should not be whether the kangaroo density increased to take up pasture vacated by sheep and or cattle. The real question should be: Did such a reduction in sheep and cattle grazing then bring the unfortunate kangaroos into conflict with urban developers over the rezoning of agricultural land for rural use?

In fact, if we drop the non-issue of kangaroo numbers, the relevance of developer-ambition conflicting with retaining grasslands for any indigenous animals becomes obvious.

Kangaroos graze there, which is obviously better than sheep and cattle grazing there, but property developers want to raise far more lucrative crops of humans there by building roads and houses where kangaroos now graze, along with earless dragons.

Unfortunately the government is encouraging developers. Maxine Cooper, Commissioner for Sustainability, in her report on ACT Lowland Native Grassland Investigation, says that the “ACT is fortunate in being in a strong position to be able to advance the protection of lowland native grassland, in particular Natural Temperate Grassland communities and the species it supports,” … BUT… [she adds]:

“Protecting lowland native grassland from development is also a challenge as these areas, being generally flat to gently undulating with no trees, are often prime potential development sites. Much of Canberra’s development is on lands that were once lowland native grassland.” Maxine Cooper Report, p. v.

“Development that potentially affects lowland native grassland is either underway or planned for the ACT (see Section 5). This development has the potential to sever corridor and connectivity between grasslands and woodlands and/or other adjacent habitats. Many of the recommendations presented in this report reinforce the importance of connectivity.” Maxine Cooper Report, pp 74-75,

Now most of the competition with kangaroos is from property development. Stimulating property development is government policy and the means of stimulus is a policy to encourage interstate immigration and natural increase through baby bonuses.

This government decision to stimulate human population growth in the ACT and to expand development in the ACT causes pressure on the local kangaroo population and the population of the Earless Dragon in the ACT.

Grave failure of public education and democracy

The commercially-based decisions about human population policy which cause these pressures, however, are kept entirely out of official calculations, negotiations, and rationales pertaining to kangaroo culls and definitions of kangaroo overpopulation in Belconnen and Majura, ACT. This omission means that the public do not have the information to hold the government responsible where it should be held responsible, nor to question the costs of its policies. This represents a grave failure of public education and democracy.

Oddly, Maxine Cooper, in her “Report on ACT Lowland Native Grassland Investigation,” 12 March 2009, mentions and notes the threat to the grasslands from development, yet she does not factor this logically into the reasonableness of blaming and killing kangaroos.

Instead, she uncritically accepts the illogical explanations which she is provided with about kangaroos. She even provides further faulty measures of kangaroo population densities by rate of car-kangaroo collisions.

“The 2007–08 State of the Environment report states that motor vehicle accidents involving kangaroos has increased by 38% (from 563 in 2005–06 to 777 in 2006–07). Rangers have advised that they now attend more than 1,000 roadside kangaroo incidents per year in Canberra.” [8]

Although Maxine is aware that the building of roads and suburbs is impacting the grasslands, she does not stop to think that these are also impacting the kangaroos through an increasing rate of driving them out of their habitats and onto the roads to make way for houses.

If, however, commercial development pressure were properly assessed, then its role as the primary population impact on the grasslands and the cause of ACT policies to depopulate kangaroos would become obvious and the government would no longer be able to deflect criticism of overdevelopment and cruelty to kangaroos.

Who profits? When an Earless Dragon is like a smoking gun we should ask who fired the gun.

What of the Earless Dragon in all this? Small and scarce, it is not hard to imagine it fitting into a developer’s pocket-size native-style garden. You could even imagine thirty-something refugees from housing prices in Sydney and Singapore cultivating it in garden pots in new high-rises. Imagine is the key, since who would check up?

Pardon me for being skeptical, but the high profile of the Earless Dragon makes me think of advice to writers about mentioning loaded guns in detective stories. If there is a gun it is there to shoot a victim for a motive. The huge importance suddenly given to the humble Earless Dragon bespeaks a greater purpose than the self-evident worth of its own preservation.
Cherchez le maccabe. [Find the cadaver.] The Dragon is the weapon to get rid of the much-loved kangaroos. There can be no argument there, for we hear little else but how the kangaroos are threatening this little animal. Once the kangaroos are gone, the tiny Dragon’s profile will almost certainly sink back to the level which escapes most humans’ notice, unreported by the mainstream press.

Let us ask the ever-useful sociological question here. Who benefits? Developers and their friends do.

Let justice be done

You wouldn’t think it from listening to politicians, but I have it from a reliable source that, in the ACT, the biggest source of public complaint is cruelty to animals. People should realize that they are not alone in their horror at the cruelty entailed by all this unwanted (except by its few focused beneficiaries) and costly population growth and development. The Earless Dragon has been deployed with the effect of sowing paralysing confusion among nature groups by implying an ungenerous bias for furry kangaroos against ugly dragons.

”To save the beauty, or the beast; that is the question”

Eastern grey kangaroos are among the most appealing of mammals (Figure 12), while Ginninderra Lepidium, Grassland Earless Dragons, Coorooboorama Raspy Crickets (Figure 4), Striped legless Lizards, Perunga Grasshoppers (Figure5), Golden Sun Moths (Figure5), and other grassland-dependent plants and animals, are all ugly. Well that may be one opinion, but if so, it is irrelevant. Governments are legally and morally obliged to protect each species. Beauty is not a consideration.” ”A Pictorial Guide to the Kangaroo Culling Issue, Dept of Territorial and Municipal Services, ACT Government” [ 9]

This has the hallmarks of a straw man argument.

Let the community be heard as it rises to save the grasslands and return them to their rightful management by kangaroos and Earless Dragons. Let due opprobrium be publicly dealt the Growth Lobby by exposing its greed and cowardice in orchestrating the cold-blooded execution of thousands of living, breathing, social creatures for economic and ecological crimes they could never have committed, merely to defend its exceedingly narrow and debt-ridden interests. Let us sheet home to the Growth Lobby and its minions in government the depravity with which they attempt to corrupt our wider society. We are not cruel or injust. We do not support cruelty and injustice.

It seems amazing that Maxine Cooper can support a kangaroo cull when she also writes that the Majura Valley grassland is “arguably one of the largest areas of Natural Temperate Grassland remaining in southeast Australia” but that it has no long-term planning protection and there is no commitment for any, and that to protect it by defining it as a reserve would

“[…]constrain future development options, for example, the potential Canberra International Airport northern link road and the potential east-west Kowen road [… and] would also ensure that the Natural Temperate Grassland, the Grassland Earless Dragon and other threatened species are not adversely affected through incremental developments, as would be the case if the potential Canberra International Airport northern link road and the potential east-west Kowen road were to be progressed according to existing concept plans.” [10]

In other words, Maxine Cooper is aware that plans for several new roads and urban expansion are planned for the Majura grasslands and sees that it will be necessary to curb this development to protect the grasslands. [11]

Some of Cooper’s other recommendations (apart from those which promote the culling of kangaroos on illogical grounds) are good. I provide these in the appendix to this article.

Earless Dragon scarcity previously coincided with kangaroo scarcity in ACT

Don Fletcher, in “Population Dynamics of Eastern Grey Kangaroos in Temperate Grasslands,” describes how, in the 1940s and 1950s kangaroos actually became rare in the ACT due to competition by European grazing stock. Even when these stock were removed, they remained rare for some time. Salt blocks were put out in the 1960s to attract kangaroos to the Tidbinbilla Fauna Reserve, where in 1963 employees went for three months without seeing one.) [12]

Oddly, at the same time as kangaroos were banished from the ACT, the Earless Dragon also became scarce. It couldn’t have been because of too many kangaroos.

“The Grassland Earless Dragon was very common in the ACT up to the 1930s but there are now very few left. This is mainly because there are so few areas of its native grassland habitat remaining. There are now only two main populations known in the ACT; and there is one near Cooma in NSW.” Source: The ACT Conservation Council, http://www.consact.org.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=47&Itemid=34#GED
[13 ]

Note that the Earless Dragon was also found in 2001 in Mount Tyson on Queensland’s Darling Downs. [14]
APPENDIX: Maxine Cooper, in her “Report on ACT Lowland Native Grassland Investigation,” 12 March 2009

Recommendation 23: Plan a Majura Valley Reserve to protect Natural Temperate Grassland and its supporting species, particularly the Grassland Earless Dragon, by defining the boundaries of this proposed reserve in the near future.”

“Findings that informed Recommendation 27
During the investigation, the Commissioner’s Office found it difficult to identify the location of lowland native grassland sites relative to planning zones that guide land use. To help the community and developers gain information on grassland sites relative to planning zones it is recommended that a map of the location of lowland native grassland sites relative to planning zones be published.

Recommendation 27: Publish a map that shows the location of lowland native grassland sites relative to planning zones. This should be readily available through the ACT Planning and Land Authority and the Department of Territory and Municipal Services.” Source: Maxine Cooper, Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment, “Report on ACT Lowland Native Grassland Investigation,” 12 March 2009, pp 73-74

“In terms of biodiversity conservation, the ideal approach is to establish a series of conservation reserves (which may include voluntary schemes) that are of sufficient size and biodiversity to maintain a full range of ecological communities (and hence species) on a long-term basis. It is also desirable for such reserves to be located to enable connectivity for animal movement and other interactions between them. 125
The natural connections between grasslands and adjoining woodlands have mostly been severed, but should be retained where they still exist.

Important grassland sites for connectivity between woodland and grassland are at:

• Mount Ainslie Nature Reserve and Campbell Park (MA05)
• ‘Callum Brae’ (JE02)
• Jerrabomberra West Reserve (JE03) and woodland to the west
• Gungaderra Nature Reserve (GU02) and Gungahlin Hill
• Aranda Bushland and Caswell Drive (BE10)
• Majura Valley at the Majura Training Area (MA01).

Important grassland sites for connectivity between grasslands are at:

• Campbell Park (MA05) and Majura West (MA06)
• adjacent grassland on either side of the ACT and New South Wales border via Harman Bonshaw North (JE06) and Harman Bonshaw South (JE07), Jerrabomberra East Reserve (JE05), Woods Lane (JE06), and Queanbeyan Nature Reserve (Letchworth, New SouthWales)
• adjacent grassland between the Canberra International Airport (MA03) the Majura
Training Area (MA01) and ‘Malcolm Vale’ (MA04). Pp. 74-75

NOTES

[1] “Majura roo cull targets 6000, Canberra Times, 2 May 2009, http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/majuraroo-cull-targets-6000/1502384.aspx and
Victor Violante, “Roo cull under way: 2000 shot”, Canberra Times, 9/05/2009,
“About 2000 eastern grey kangaroos at the Department of Defence’s Majura Training Area have been culled this week, with a further 4000 expected to be shot. Defence confirmed yesterday that culling had begun on Tuesday and contractors doing the cull had already achieved about a third of their target.
Defence spokesman Brigadier Brian Dawson said there were about 9000 eastern grey kangaroos on the Defence-owned site, and they would reduce the population to the ”sustainable level”, a density of one per hectare. This would reduce the population to about 3000.
‘The cull is being conducted humanely by licensed and experienced professional contractors,” Brigadier Dawson said yesterday.’”
[2] Kangaroos Threaten One Of Australia’s Last Remaining Original Grasslands, And Endangered Animals (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/ 080521114923.htm) “The eastern grey kangaroo (Macropus giganteus) has always been part of the cityscape of Canberra, also known as the “bush capital” of Australia. But even Leipzig-based scientist Dr Marion Höhn and Anett Richter of the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ) are surprised by the high numbers of them. In her doctoral thesis, Anett Richter is investigating how selected invertebrate species such as ground beetles are affected by landscape fragmentation and habitat alteration in natural grasslands in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT). Yet during her fieldwork she discovered that there were far fewer of them than expected.
What she found instead were dry grasslands, grazed bare and scarred by the worst drought to hit Australia in a century. Particularly, she was surprised to find large quantities of kangaroo dung, especially in the enclosed military areas: “The results of the fragmentation studies are not yet available. But we assume that there is a relationship on individual sites between the extremely high density of kangaroos and species diversity among the invertebrates – especially in times of severe drought.””

In Peter Robertson & Murray Evans, /files/earless-dragon-management-2009-tympanocryptis-pinguicolla.pdf National Recovery Plan for the Grassland Earless Dragon Tympanocryptis pinguicolla, published by the ACT Department of Territory and Municipal Services, Canberra, 2009: http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/43f24013-b621-4ff6-bf09-34da942e8ced/files/tympanocryptis-pinguicolla.pdf the Canberra International Airport is listed as responsible for the management of earless dragon habitat at the airport (p.9); as possibly relatedly suffering economic impacts (p.12); as supporting ongoing studies p.19.

The Airport legal framework for protecting dragon habitat, including land management agreements and conservation directions, is outlined in section A5.1, p.4:

“Development at the Canberra Airport requires approval for Major Development Plans (MDP) (defined under the Airports Act 1996) from the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government (Infrastructure Minister). The Infrastructure Minister, under Section 160(2)(c) of the EPBC Act, must obtain and consider advice from the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts (Environment Minister). Although an approval may be given by the Infrastructure Minister for a MDP, a permit from the Environment Minister under Section 201 of the EPBC
Act to move, take or kill is required to harm a Grassland Earless Dragon or its habitat. In issuing such a permit the Environment Minister must be satisfied that the action will not have an adverse impact and will contribute significantly to the conservation of the species.”

[3] Don Fletcher, “Population Dynamics of Eastern Grey Kangaroos in Temperate Grasslands,” was on line as a pdf, which is the form I downloaded it as. A copy is preserved now under this article, linked here: /files/Fletcher-kangaroo-thesis.pdf because the pdf is now of limited availability, although copies are still at the University of Canberra Library, reference: http://nla.gov.au/anbd.bib-an42269526. A book by the same title and author has also been published.
[4] There are 100 ha in one square km. So if density varied between 450 and 510 kangs per square km, then that is 4.5 p ha or 5.10 per ha. With 220 per square km 2.2 per ha.
[5] Coulson G, Alviano P, Ramp P, Way S (1999). “The kangaroos of Yan Yean: history of a problem population”, Proc R Soc Vic 111: 121–130.
[6] Penny Olsen and Tim Low, “Situation Analysis Report Update on Current State of Scientific Knowledge on Kangaroos in the Environment, Including Ecological and Economic Impact and Effect of Culling”, School of Botany and Zoology, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200
26 Henry Street, Chapel Hill, Queensland 4049, Prepared for the Kangaroo Management Advisory Panel, March 2006
[7] Don Fletcher, “Population Dynamics of Eastern Grey Kangaroos in Temperate Grasslands”, p.40
[8] In Note 11: “The 2007–08 State of the Environment report states that motor vehicle accidents involving kangaroos has increased by 38% (from 563 in 2005–06 to 777 in 2006–07). Rangers have advised that they now attend more than 1,000 roadside kangaroo incidents per year in Canberra.” Although Maxine is aware that the building of roads and suburbs is impacting the grasslands, she does not stop to think that these are also impacting the kangaroos through an increasing rate of driving them out of their habitats and on to the roads. Nor does Don Fletcher, in his thesis, where he accepts reports on increasing rates of car collisions with kangaroos in Victoria, also a state with a population growth policy which manifests in rapid population growth and development and rapid depletion of kangaroo habitat.
[9] A Pictorial Guide to the Kangaroo Culling Issue (2006) from the ACT Department of Territorial and Administrative Services.

[10] Maxine Cooper Report, pp. xv-xvi
[11] Maxine Cooper Report, pp.74-75 and pp xv-xvi:

“Development that potentially affects lowland native grassland is either underway or planned for the ACT (see Section 5). This development has the potential to sever corridor and connectivity between grasslands and woodlands and/or other adjacent habitats. Many of the recommendations presented in this report reinforce the importance of connectivity.” pp 74-75

“Majura Valley’s large, intact lowland native grassland area, which consists of a number of sites under the control of various government agencies, does not have long-term planning protection; it is not in a reserve and there is no commitment for this to occur.

Given the significance of the Majura Valley grassland, arguably one of the largest areas of Natural Temperate Grassland remaining in southeast Australia, the presence of five threatened species including the Grassland Earless Dragon, it is strongly recommended that a commitment be made to create a reserve in this locality.” [xv-xvi]

[…]defining the site of the proposed Majura Valley reserve would constrain future
development options, for example, the potential Canberra International Airport northern link road and the potential east-west Kowen road, it would provide a more certain context for potential developments. It would also ensure that the Natural Temperate Grassland, the Grassland Earless Dragon and other threatened species are not adversely affected through incremental developments, as would be the case if the potential Canberra International Airport northern link road and the potential east-west Kowen road were to be progressed according to existing concept plans. [xv-xvi]

The lands for the proposed reserve could be the subject of a formal conservation agreement between the ACT and Australian governments.”
[12] Don Fletcher, “Population Dynamics of Eastern Grey Kangaroos in Temperate Grasslands”: “3.3 History of eastern grey kangaroo populations on the sites
All three sites had been grazed commercially for 50 – 150 years until withdrawn in recent decades for conservation or water supply purposes. Each site supported an unmanaged population of eastern grey kangaroos, which was at high density. Kangaroos were scarce in the ACT region in the 1940s and 1950s (Schumack 1977; ACT Kangaroo Advisory Committee 1996, p. 9). This included the study sites. The first employees in the Tidbinbilla Nature Reserve lived there for three months in 1963 before seeing a kangaroo (Mick McMahon, former employee, personal communication; ACT Kangaroo Advisory Committee 1996) and salt blocks were put out to attract kangaroos in the years before the reserve was opened to the public (ACT government official file: Tidbinbilla Fauna Reserve Advisory Committee – 1966).”
[13] Source: The ACT Conservation Council description of the Grassland Earless Dragon – Typanocryptis pinguicolla.
[14] Mt Tyson’s Grassland Earless Dragon: not extinct after all
“Chocolate bilbies are facing stiff market competition from the Grassland Earless Dragon in Mount Tyson on Queensland’s Darling Downs. GED (as the Grassland Earless Dragon is affectionately known) was thought to be extinct, but was rediscovered in 2001. An adult GED grows to around 12 centimetres long and has spotted spiky skin which makes it a camouflage specialist. […] The Landcare Group has received more than $7,000 from the Australian Government to fund a variety of activities designed to promote awareness of GED and create a conservation management strategy for the species. […] The Group had previously received funding through a State Government Community Natural Resource Awareness Activity Grant, which they used to commission the chocolate mould that was provided to manufacture the chocolate dragons. Support has also been provided by local businesses such as Ergon Energy in Toowoomba and by the Queensland Museum and the University of Queensland Gatton campus.”

Original article

Article by Sheila Newman, an environmental sociologist, editor of articles on energy, population, land-use planning and resources. She co-edited the 2005 edition of The Final Energy Crisis, Pluto, UK. Her blog is at http://candobetter.net/SheilaNewman
She also makes environmental and sociological films, including a series on wildlife corridors and kangaroo populations.

Share This:

Arguments for not feeding native animals

Leave a comment

Part of the enjoyment of living in a regional area with garden space is creating a habitat for our native animals in the backyard.

But while birdbaths and frog ponds provide a useful service for native species, a bird feeder full of seed does not.  The NSW Office of Environment and Heritage has published an information document called ‘Keep wildlife wild: please don’t feed the animals’.   The Office of Environment and Heritage even pointed out that feeding lorikeets sugar-based foods like fruit, could cause the birds to die at an unusually young age.

While we desire to commune with Nature, and our wonderful native species, we may be doing more harm than good by feeding them inappropriate foods.

KONICA MINOLTA DIGITAL CAMERA

KONICA MINOLTA DIGITAL CAMERA

(image: Rainbow Lorrikets, photographer Pamela Rose)

Feeding  Kookaburras, Magpies and Currawongs with meat, mince or bread can produce imbalances in their nutritional requirements causing severe deficiencies.

Currawong_in_peppercorn02

(image: . "Currawong in peppercorn02" by Taken byfir0002 | flagstaffotos.com.auCanon 20D + Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L - Own work. Licensed under GFDL 1.2 via Wikimedia Commons)

For Rosellas, Cockatoos and Galahs, introduced fruit is not natural part of their diet and  seed mixes are rarely nutritionally balanced.  Many people acting with the very best intentions feed them meat from a butcher such as cheap mince, sausage etc. Unfortunately those products are loaded with chemical additives that are lethal to birds. 

Aggression may also result from competing for food offerings. Sometimes species such as Currawongs and ravens can become so numerous that they drive other species away by aggressive behaviour or by preying on them or their young.

The digestive system of some birds is designed for a predominately liquid intake. Bread seed mixes and fruit quickly fill the bird and slow the digestion process leading to vitamin and mineral deficiencies predisposing the birds to disease through bacterial and yeast infections.  Diseases such as beak and feather diseases are easily spread through communal feeding trays.

A study of mass deaths of lorikeets in NSW showed that the birds had been killed by a condition called necrotizing enteritis. That’s a disease caused by a combination of inadequate diet and poor hygiene. In the case of that study, it turned out that the birds had been crowding onto tiny, dirty feeding trays — a situation very much different to their normal behaviour where a flock of birds might be spread across several trees.

Birds could lose their “wild-ness” and become sedentary, mate at the wrong times, and lose their nomadic drive.

For ducks, food could sink at the bottom of ponds, and in turn rot, causing increased levels of bacteria, and diseases.  Bread can ferment in the gut causing bacterial infections.

Kangaroos are designed to eat large amounts of low protein roughage such as native grasses and browse. Human food is a poor substitute with little nutritional value and will disrupt their natural intake. It’s a far cry from their natural foods, such as grasses.
Smaller macropods such as wallabies also eat fungus and insects.

In regard to feeding orphan joeys and young native mammals that cow’s milk is really not appropriate and may lead to fatal diarrhoea.Eating processed foods can cause bony growths toform in wallabies’ jaws (‘lumpy jaw’). This can lead to a slow and painful death

Fruits are not digested easily by ringtail possums, it ferments in the gut and produces vast quantities of gas – death is usually the end result. They should be fed bark, grass and leaves, eucalypt trees being the favourite for both the leaves and flowers, including native fruit and small insects.

WIRES- let Nature feed itself

Lots of people know that chocolate is poisonous to dogs, but bread causes a lethal jaw disease in wallabies and kangaroos.  When you feed wild animals you’re training them to lose their fear of people. While that might seem fine at first glance, all too often it ends badly.  An ugly minority of people exists, who desire to kill and maim animals sadistically, so then it’s going to serve the animals well to be wary of people. All people. Even the good ones.

Wildlife can still be encouraged to live in or visit gardens or properties by providing and maintaining areas of suitable natural habitat harbouring natural food sources.

If you are interested in attracting native birds to your property, there are a number of other ways you can do this which includes planting locally indigenous plans and providing nest boxes.  Fallen timber provides ideal habitat for a range of insects which provide other local native fauna such as Sugar Gliders with ample food.

Parks and Wildlife: WA Why you should not feed wild animals

Most young native animals are fed using a special formula or specialised diet to accurately replicate their natural diet, as human foods can be very harmful for them. They often need feeding every two hours when they’re tiny, with feeding routines gradually changing over a few weeks or months until they’re weaned.

To find out more about how you can become involved in wildlife care, contact your local rescue group.

(featured image:  Rainbow Lorikeet Trichoglossus moluccanus on a garden bird feeder, Sydney, Australia)

Share This:

Arid Recovery’s success – an ‘overpopulation’ of Bettongs

Leave a comment

From Arid Recovery’s initial 30 burrowing bettongs, released in the reserve in 1998, there are now between 6,000 and 8,000. Bettongs were previously vanished from SA.

“The Government’s approach to this road project has all the hallmarks of their usual philosophy when it comes to the protecting the environment: ‘ignore the science, develop and clear, and ask questions later.'”  

General Manager of Arid Recovery Dr Katherine Tuft said while the program’s success is great, there are issues with having too many of the animals. So, they are victims of their own success, of over-breeding?

Being free from feral cats and foxes, she now claims that “bettong population is so high now that it has a negative impact on the condition of native vegetation within the reserve and is causing concerns for more sensitive threatened species that compete for the same resources, such as the endangered Greater Stick-nest Rat.”

(http://www.arkive.org/burrowing-bettong/bettongia-lesueur/image-G9689.html)

Due to their overpopulation, some will be relocated to other reserves. They are planning to reintroduce a native predator – the Western Quoll – in 2018, and we expect that quolls will eventually help to regulate the bettong population naturally. so the Cat will be let loose among the Pigeons! Nature’s way of population control, with natural, not introduced, predators!

Bettongs are also known as rat kangaroos, that have a spring in their hop. These small marsupials are endemic to Australia and were once widespread throughout the country, but now are only usually found on islands or inside fenced reserves where they are safe from feral foxes and cats.

Maybe the animal’s demise is partly because people don’t like “rats”, or even kangaroos?  A bilby might get sponsors, but a “rat”?  Even world-famous iconic koalas aren’t safe though!

They’re in the same family as potoroos and the now extinct Desert Rat-kangaroo. A bettong is about the size of a rabbit, with body length ranging from 30cm to 38cm among species.

Arid Recovery researcher Katherine Moseby said their findings had shown for the first time that exposing threatened native animals to small numbers of predators in the wild taught them how to avoid their enemies. “We’ve got one area where we put them in with cats and we’ve got another area where they’re not in with cats.

“This is an idea to try and improve their ability to co-exist with cats by just exposing them to really low levels of cats for long periods of time” . The key word must be ‘low level’ of cats, not being out-numbered!

Arid Recovery manage a 123 square km wildlife reserve in the arid north of South Australia. Wildlife are protected across the Reserve using 80 kilometres of fencing that excludes feral cats, foxes and rabbits. They recognise that conservation fencing is only an interim solution to saving Australian mammals that are vulnerable to cat and fox predation. For this reason, they have dedicated the remaining 67 km² of the Reserve to developing the science that may one day allow vulnerable animals to survive alongside feral animals outside of fenced reserves.

It’s a lofty aim, an ideal, that our slow-evolving, heavily-threatened species may learn strategies to survive against the odds of recently introduced predators, since European settlement? They need to adjust to a quick learning-curve and evolve quickly! Pity they can’t also learn to battle bulldozers, chain saws, axes and property-developers and other economic threats to habitats!

Last year lead researcher George Wilson, a conservation biologist and wildlife manager from the Australian National University in Canberra, said that keeping vulnerable animals such as koalas, Tasmanian devils, rock wallabies, bettongs and bandicoots on private property would shelter them from cats, foxes, agriculture and other rising threats.

For example, “golf courses that have suitable trees and provide protection from dogs would welcome the opportunity to breed koalas,” he said.  Sounds promising if golfers were to agree to share their natural resources?

AWPC policy has always been in support of interlinking wildlife/conservation corridors, however, the many pressures on land has meant this idea has not been give much priority.

(featured image: with permission from Arid Recovery)

Share This:

Australia to Kill Goats Using Self-Destructing Dingoes

One comment

MBekoffMarc Bekoff Ph.D. Animal Emotions Australia to Kill Goats Using Self-Destructing Dingoes New Zealand plan is to exterminate all introduced predators and other animals July 25, 2016
New Zealand’s comprehensive plans to kill millions of animals challenges conservation psychology and anthrozoology.
How do we react to New Zealand’s plans to kill millions & millions of animals using the most egregious, inhumane methods other than to wish t it were a very bad dream. However, it isn’t, It’s time to make the world aware of their killing ways. My l inbox this AM was overflowing with messages about New Zealand’s plans. It was then I realized it was a real plan supported with a good deal of pride by some New Zealand wildlife “managers” and others. The emails were from professional biologists and other interested and infuriated people from all over the world. What I read was utterly sickening. It wasn’t a bad dream. And, it was in stark and stilling contrast to my previous essay called “United Nations Harmony with Nature Stresses Justice for All.”
“Death row dingoes set to be the environmental saviour of Great Barrier Reef’s Pelorus Island”: Using time bombs to kill dingoes, reads the headline of an ABC news article by Dominque Schwartz (read more about this plan and sickening quotes by the killers here). Her essay begins: A Queensland council is releasing dingoes onto a Great Barrier Reef island to kill feral goats that [sic] are destroying its endangered ecosystem. The four wild dogs, two of which [sic] have already been released on Pelorus Island, will not have a chance to become pests themselves, as they’ve been implanted with a time-activated poison, Hinchinbrook Shire Council said. it turns out that these self-destructing dingoes are being used in sort of a kamikaze-like mission.
This reprehensible plan led by father- son dingo experts Lee & Ben Allen, who take pride in their killing ways. In Ms. Schwartz’s essay we also read some interesting words from  Hinchinbrook Shire Council Mayor Ramon Jayo, namely, “This is nature. The dingo is a predator, the goat is the source of a dingo’s affection, so we believe that, yeah, just put nature together and that’ll sort out the problem.”
Mr. Jayo fails to note that the dingoes are desexed and pre-loaded with a capsule of 1080 poison that will then kill them if they don’t die of natural causes. So, this reprehensible slaughter is hardly putting nature together.  And, to quote the heartless Ben Allen:
“The plan is: dingoes wipe out goats, we come back and humanely shoot those dingoes ’cause they’ll have tracking collars, so we can find out where they go. If for whatever reason we can’t come back and shoot them, well then those little time bombs’ll go off.” (my emphasis)

Of course, Mr. Jayo fails to note that the dingoes are desexed and pre-loaded with a capsule of 1080 poison that will kill them if they don’t die of natural causes. So, this reprehensible slaughter is hardly putting nature together.
It gets worse. Hinchinbrook Council’s Matthew Beckman notes, “Once this island is successful, it will set the platform for many other island managers to follow through and carry out similar projects.” What a deplorable model for youngsters and future conservation biologists. Now for an “exciting”, “ambitious” “world-first” plan from NZ to exterminate all introduced predators
I next learn of another essay by Eleanor Ainge Roy: “No more rats: New Zealand to exterminate all introduced predators.” The subheading reads, “Possums, stoats and other introduced pests to be killed in ‘world-first’ extermination programme unveiled by PM.” Notes Prime Minister John Key, “Our ambition is that by 2050 every single part of NZ will be completely free of rats, stoats and possums.”
We further read, “Existing pest control methods in New Zealand include the controversial and widespread use of 1080 aerial poison drops, trapping and ground baiting, and possum hunting by ground hunters (possum fur has become a vibrant industry in New Zealand, and is used for winter clothing). Emeritus Professor of Conservation Mick Clout from the University of Auckland said he was ‘excited’ by the ‘ambitious plan’ which if achieved would be a ‘remarkable world first'”.
New Zealand youngsters are imprinted on killing animals
You can read all about these exciting and ambitious plans all over the web. And, please keep in mind that this killing mind-set seems to be set in motion early in life as New Zealand youngsters are encouraged to kill wildlife as part of school programs (please see, for example, “New Zealand Kids Kill Possums for Fun and Games” and “Vermin hunt benefits school”).
New Zealand’s killing ways challenge conservation psychology, anthrozoology, and compassionate conservation: Cruelty can’t stand the spotlight
I’ll let people draw their own conclusions on the ethics and ecological impacts of New Zealand’s killing ways (please also see Tony Orman’s “The Self-Poisoning of New Zealand by Name and by Nature” in which he asks, “Why then does New Zealand persist on such an illogical course of ecological insanity?”). However, I do want to emphasize that there clearly is a great need for humane education in New Zealand’s schools.
In addition, the attitudes of the people who advocate killing, using doomed death row dingoes among other inhumane and brutal methods, provide a gold mine for researchers in conservation psychology and anthrozoology, both of which interdisciplinary fields are concerned with human-animal relationships. And, the growing international field of compassionate conservation could also help get the discussion going in non-killing directions (please see, for example, “Compassionate Conservation Meets Cecil the Slain Lion“). Indeed, there is a Centre for Compassionate Conservation at the University of Technology, Sydney.
Mr. Orman also writes, “1080 is a cruel unethical poison – 1080 is a slow acting poison, non-selective, and taking 24 to 48 hours or more to kill an animal – Dogs go through agony in dying from 1080 poison. So do wild deer and farm stock such as horses, cattle and sheep.” He also notes, “1080 by its nature is not just an animal poison – it is an ecosystem poison.” So much for the “claim of ‘clean and green’ used to promote exports.”

Along these lines, what I find utterly astounding and deeply disturbing is the incredibly detached and utterly cold attitude of the people behind the killing, with not a word of compassion, empathy, or sympathy being voiced. I’m glad I’m not their dog.

A few people asked me what they could do and all I could say is that there surely are other places to visit on holidays, and they also could rather easily spread the word globally because, as the late and incredibly passionate animal advocate, Gretchen Wyler, once wisely said, “Cruelty can’t stand the spotlight.” Nor should it.
Note: After writing this essay I learned of another essay titled “New Zealand Grants Human Rights to a Former National Park.”
Marc Bekoff’s latest books are Jasper’s Story: Saving Moon Bears (with Jill Robinson), Ignoring Nature No More: The Case for Compassionate Conservation, Why Dogs Hump and Bees Get Depressed: The Fascinating Science of Animal Intelligence, Emotions, Friendship, and Conservation, Rewilding Our Hearts: Building Pathways of Compassion and Coexistence, and The Jane Effect: Celebrating Jane Goodall (edited with Dale Peterson). The Animals’ Agenda: Freedom, Compassion, and Coexistence in the Human Age (with Jessica Pierce) will be published in early 2017. (Homepage: marcbekoff.com; @MarcBekoff)

Marc Bekoff is a former Professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of Colorado, Boulder, and is a Fellow of the Animal Behavior Society and a past Guggenheim Fellow.

Share This:

1 … 8 9 10 11 12 … 37