Dugongs extinct? The clash between indigenous custom and global conservation, scientists and marine management agencies warn controls are needed urgently! AWPC Newsletter Volume 9Number 1 April 1998

Dugongs

Dugongs are large grey mammals which spend their entire lives in the sea. Fully grown, they may be three metres long and weigh 400 kilograms. The dugong resembles an overweight dolphin. However, it is actually more closely related to the elephant!

They are often called the “sea cow” for its habit of grazing on seagrass meadows.

Unlike whales and dolphins, dugongs are not predators, they are strictly herbivorous marine mammals. Because its seagrass diet is hard to digest, the dugong has an extraordinary large intestine. It’s as thick as a fire hose and stretches some 30 m long!

Dugongs have a similar lifespan to humans, living up to 70 years. The female has her first young, called a calf, between 12-17 years of age. Only one calf is born per pregnancy, which lasts up to 14 months, and pregnancy occurs every three to seven years.

Dugongs have played an important part in traditions and cultures of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island people for thousands of years, and are still harvested today.

Threats

Dugongs are subject to a range of human-caused threats throughout their global distribution, including entanglement in shark and fishing nets (e.g. mesh and gill nets),marine debris, and also through loss and degradation of important habitat such as seagrass meadows, unsustainable traditional use and boat strikes). Australian waters are home to at least three-quarters of the global population and are a vitally important stronghold for the species.

Protected dugongs and sea turtles are being cruelly slaughtered in Queensland’s Torres Strait to supply an illegal meat trade, an investigation by ABC’s 7.30 report has found.

The program has aired confronting footage that shows the brutal methods used to hunt the animals, with turtles being butchered alive and dugongs drowned as they are dragged behind boats. The investigation throws into sharp relief the conflict between Indigenous Australians and animal rights activists over traditional hunting methods and exposes a black market in animal meat.

Activist Rupert Imhoff spent a fortnight in the Torres Strait, filming the hunting of the turtles and dugongs, both listed as vulnerable to extinction. He used a secret camera to film scenes of animal cruelty, including the slow death of a sea turtle. “It didn’t actually die

until they took off the bottom shell, actually peeled off the shell,” he said.
Read and watch video …

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-08/dugongs-cruelly-slaughtered-in-illegal-meat-trade/3877908?section=qld

Indigenous elders agree to changes in cruelty laws that LNP are committed to changing.

http://vimeo.com/38491354

Turtles and Dugong

Traditional hunting occurs in far-flung places that policing the practice is “diabolically difficult” without co-operation of indigenous communities, federal Environment Minister Tony Burke says. The Queensland government ordered an immediate investigation into allegations of cruelty, after confronting footage was aired showing hunters on the Torres Strait slaughtering a turtle and dugong. Mr Burke backed Bligh government’s investigation, but an election promise by Queensland’s Liberal National Party to close a loophole in the state’s cruelty legislation was unlikely to make a difference on the ground.”Allowing local community leadership is more respectful — it’s more decent and it’s the only method that has half a chance of having outcomes on the ground,” Mr Burke said, adding that many communities already had self-imposed hunting restrictions.

“Unless the LNP are promising a massive injection of enforcement funds, I don’t see how changing the law actually makes a difference on the ground. “I’ve acknowledged that the remoteness of the area makes the law diabolically difficult to enforce without co-operation of communities.” Traditional hunting is enshrined as a right under the federal Native Title Act. Since footage aired on ABC TV, there has been a political stoush about which level of government could stop alleged cruelty to hunted animals.

The LNP plans to scrap an exemption for traditional hunting in state animal welfare legislation, which it says would allow for criminal prosecution for cruelty.? Former Premier Anna Bligh has said that would not work because it would be overridden by federal law. In March 2012, a spokeswoman for the federal Attorney-General’s Department said it would depend on the “nature and terms of the amendment” proposed. “The Queensland act could only be amended in a way that does not conflict with the Native Title Act,” she said. The spokeswoman confirmed the federal law did not refer to cruelty.

Cruelty law changes ‘won’t work’ – The Australian

Biosecurity Queensland says no-one will be charged following allegations of cruelty to turtles and dugongs aired on the ABC earlier this year. However, Thanks to the efforts of Animals Australia supporters and other caring Australians the Queensland government has removed animal cruelty exemptions for ‘traditional’ hunting of turtles and dugongs.

The $2.6 m plan, to boost indigenous ranger programs to stop illegal and turtle poaching, and for programs to clean up marine debris, was among several green policies announced by the Queensland Coalition in Cairns in October this year.

This is a huge win for turtles and dugongs in Far North Queensland, who will now be fully protected under the Animal Care and Protection Act and spared the suffering caused by cruel ‘traditional’ hunting methods.

AWPC Policy:

• We support Native Title for indigenous peoples, but this does not over-ride animal welfare and mean that ocean animals are resources for human use, and thus need to endure torture, torment and killings.
• Dugongs are threatened by sea grass habitat loss or degradation because of coastal development or industrial activities that cause water pollution. The status of animals as Endangered needs to make extinguish Native Title.
• The traditional custodians of this land need to be made responsible for the protection of native animals, and ensure their humane treatment and survival. They should be funded as such to quash the black-market in dugong and turtle meat.
• There should be no fishing or nets in Dugong territories, and their seagrass feeding grounds need to be protected habitats.

Dingo Starvation Issues from AWPC on Vimeo.

Dingo FAQ’s

What is the problem on Fraser Island?

The problems all began on FI due to the Heritage listing in 1992 which brought about two responses; the implementation of the dingo management strategy; and the increase in tourism.

The FRASER ISLAND DINGO MANAGEMENT STRATEGY (FIDMS) as it is known was implemented in 1999 after a progressive forced reduction in dingo-human interaction . The FIDMS HAS NEVER BEEN INDEPENDENTLY peer-reviewed and the background papers have never been published in academic journals which IS A PRE-REQUISITE for any serious scientifically based management program.

The Management practices include: hazing and collaring; tagging; and CULLING which can cause pack destruction; in SFID’s opinion the strategy also causes misunderstanding and misrepresentation of dingo behaviour and lacks appropriate education for tourists.

What’s Wrong With Ear Tagging?

The tags are round the size of a 50 cent piece, and have a shaft that is approx 5mm thick. If not placed correctly this can make the ear droop. Dingoes’ ears work independently to each other. If one ear is damaged, dingoes can’t hunt properly. Ear tags often become infected. Ear tags can delaminate; which means the colour comes off, within three months of application and are useless.

The pups are trapped, drugged, tagged, DNA samples are taken, and then they are let go without being sanitized. Sometimes, dingo parents abandon the pups because they don’t like human scent on the pups. Other times, very sadly, the parents kill the pups.

What is Hazing?

This is a type of aversive conditioning, where the dingo is shot by a projectile, often a marble from a slingshot, or else rat shot.

Hazing is painful to the animal, and has been condemned by the RSPCA. It has been shown to be ineffective. On many occasions dingoes merely run from the rangers, only to return once the rangers leave the area. Unfortunately, hazing can have a detrimental effect on the animal and change its behavior and make it become aggressive.

Hazing is undertaken with no respect for dingo requirements such as patrolling territorial boundaries. Dingoes have to patrol their boundaries every day and the beach is part of that boundary. They need to scent mark their territory; make sure no other dingoes are using it; and look for food.

What is wrong with aversive conditioning collars?

Aversive conditioning collars are put on ‘problem’ animals and they are given an electric shock every time they do something that is perceived to be wrong. The use of electric collars has been condemned by the RSPCA in other states and researchers such as Deakin Uni behavioural scientist Dr Nick Branson tell us that dogs are not able to associate punishment with a certain behaviour.

What about tracking collars?

It is widely considered by experts that no surveillance method should be used which is likely to interfere with the animals’ ability to function naturally but we believe these tracking collars will disrupt normal dingo behaviour and cause instability amongst the packs. Some animals may be ostracized or even killed by other members of the group, the collars will also interfere with normal foraging habits, and with the denning and whelping process.

In this day and age of microsizing where we can fit transmitters to frogs, dingoes should not have to wear collars that were in fact designed for bears and large animals like cougars. Clearly these collars are cumbersome and ugly. Do we want to see wild dingoes on Fraser Island with collars around their necks?

What is wrong with culling?

Method of destruction of dingoes on FI is NOT HUMANE. It is not like taking your dog to a vet and giving it an injection of anesthetic. The dogs are trapped and given an injection of Valabarb directly into the heart. This is an excruciatingly painful death for the animal. Many times the injection misses the heart and has to be repeated.

Indiscriminately killing pups does far more damage than human habituation. DERM opinion is that feeding dingoes may increase a subordinate dingo’s chances of gaining rank within the pack. Thus natural pack structure is altered. However killing up to 4 members of a pack at a time is more harmful. Each year alpha male and female dingoes need one or two of the previous year’s pups to help them raise the next litter. Without this extra help starvation/mortality of the new pups increase.

Likewise if alpha male or female is destroyed the pups have no one to teach them how to behave. This is akin to leaving children or teenagers alone on the street to fend for themselves. The result can be; either the pups die because they don’t know how to survive and we end up losing a whole pack or else the pups grow up without social skills and cannot relate to other dingoes.

Would feeding dingoes cause an increase in population?

According to DERM, in 1998 when the FIDMS was first introduced the Island dingo population was at a saturation point of 200 animals and being sustained predominantly by human-derived food (Report to Queensland Department of Environment by ERA Environmental Services Pty Ltd Author: Dr Laurie Corbett April 1998. Strangely, despite the cull of 32 animals in 1996 (Dingoes in Queensland, Australia: Skull Dimensions and the Identity of Wild Canids. Peter F. Woodall*, Peter Pavlov and Keith L. TwyfordC 1996) and another 30-40 after the Clinton Gage tragedy, and subsequent destruction of approx 80 ‘problem’ dingoes, and despite natural attrition, DERM tells us that the dingo population is still at 200 animals, and that artificial feeding would increase this number. So far, the question still needs to be answered: how many dingoes are in fact on FI and how many dingoes can the island support. Until we know this answer, we cannot condone slow death by starvation.

Are dingoes generally dangerous to man?

experts report: NO.

Dingoes have never been known to kill Aboriginal children.

There is an average of 3000 attacks per year in each state by domestic dogs. Dingoes are classified least aggressive dog in some states of Australia making them less dangerous than the Maltese terrier. The experts in our group comprise some of Australia’s leading canid and animal behaviorists some of whom have studied lions, orangutans and bears and have written up to 20 books an published up to a hundred papers. These people all state unequivocally that dingoes are not dangerous to man.

Laurie Corbett DERM’s expert stated in 1974 that ‘There was no case on record of an UNPROVOKED ATTACK on a man by a dingo’  *dingoes don’t bark Lionel Hudson

Are dingoes attacking or playing?

There is a significant relationship between the human stimulus behaviour and the dingo response.

Each time a dingo is sighted in a human-use area a report is made. There are three main codes for reports; C which is usually a sighting (minor incident such as ‘loitering’); D which is an interaction (minor incident such as stealing food); and E (major incident which may involve a bite and means the dingo must be destroyed). If a dingo has too many C or D reports made against it; it then is classed as an E category animal. Many C & D incident reports state that the dingo was ‘non-aggressive’.

A dingo’s most common solicitation of play is the ‘play bow’; the forequarters drop to the ground and the hindquarters stay up in the air, the tail wagging. This is sometimes accompanied by howling or an openmouthed ‘grin’. On other occasions, dingoes solicit play by rushing at a prospective opponent and pushing them over. If people are not educated to stand still and remain calm when approached by an excited dingo their response may be to run because they think that they are being attacked. If something runs a dingo will chase it.

Why are dingoes not protected by legislation or the RSPCA?

As far as legislation goes, the Island is governed by three separate Acts, the Rec Areas Management Act, the Nature Conservation Act, and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (World Heritage). All of these Acts give complete control of all matters (including cruelty) to the FIDMS (Fraser Island Dingo Management Strategy), and it is written into the Acts that staff administering the FIDMS cannot be prosecuted for any action whatsoever that is sanctioned by the FIDMS. The legislation is anthropocentric rather than ecocentric.

RSPCA Qld is not obligated to help starving wildlife. It is allowed to investigate Acts of Cruelty, but Acts sanctioned by the FIDMS cannot be considered as cruelty.

Why does SFID undertake so much fundraising?

We are undertaking specific research trips to the Island, and have other experts volunteering their services, but primarily we need funding to supporting urgently needed external and independent scientists and veterinarians. We also need these experts to analyse data including incident reports, tag registers, and necropsy reports.

We need immediate figures on prey availability, analysis done on DNA/scat to determine dingoes’ current diet and also to determine what dietary requirements may be missing. We need to establish sustainability of prey/food sources, as well as sustainability of tourist numbers as they interject with dingo breeding cycles.

Fairly detailed research on visitor attitudes and their understanding of the dingo behavior must be undertaken, in order to develop clear educational material which will inevitably improve human/dingo interaction. Our long-term goal is to establish funding for a full-time vet and a 24 hour emergency veterinary centre on the Island, also to establish an Educational Centre/Cultural Centre on the Island in conjunction with Indigenous advisors.

J Parkhurst – Jen with Jae before she was destroyed from AWPC on Vimeo.

(image: Australian freshwater crocodile)

Crocodiles are the worlds largest and perhaps most exciting reptiles. They are also great survivors and their prehistoric ancestors, the Archosaurs, date back over 240 million years to the Triassic period. Today, crocodiles are one of the few remaining links to the prehistoric past. As predator and prey, crocodiles play a valuable role in the health of many aquatic environments.

There are two kinds of crocodile in Australia.  They live in the hot north of Australia.

The Freshwater crocodile (Crocodylus johnstoni) is endemic to Australia. It is found nowhere else in the world. The Freshwater Crocodile is slender-snouted and considerably smaller in build and overall size compared to its cousin, the Saltwater Crocodile Crocodylus porosus.  It grows up to 3 meters. The species occurs along all but the near coastal reaches of the rivers, streams and creeks that flow into the waters off northern Australia.  Freshwater Crocodiles may shelter in burrows among the roots of trees fringing the water bodies they inhabit.

The Estuarine crocodile, while it can live in salt water, is able to go quite far up river into fresh water. It is one of the most dangerous of all the crocodile family, being the biggest and heaviest. It grows to between 4 and 7 metres long.  This apex predator is formidable, opportunistic and adaptable, with a considerable range it is found in suitable habitats from northern Australia through Southeast Asia to the eastern coast of India.

The Estuarine Crocodile has a broad snout that is less than twice as long (from tip to midpoint between the eyes) as the width of the head.  The largest Estuarine crocodile reliably measured was caught in the Mary River in the Northern Territory in 1974. The headless carcass measured 548±8cm and the skull (midline length) measured 66.6cm, giving a total length of at least 615cm.

In 2009, croc attacks, two of which were fatal, prompted immediate calls for a mass slaughter of the reptiles – almost 40 years after the saltwater species was first listed for protection.  Trophy hunters were then allowed to pay to shoot saltwater crocodiles, which will not be subject to a cull, under a plan to control their numbers in the Northern Territory.

Trophy hunters invited to kill crocodiles

This is despite the fact that these crocodiles are native animals, and their existence should not have to be justified by the tourist industry.  Encroachers should enter warily.  Safari hunters were allowed to destroy up to 25 large saltwater crocs – all larger than 3.5 metres – as part of a trial designed to provide financial benefits to Aborigines.

Until 1974, estuarine crocodiles in Queensland were hunted to the brink of extinction for their prized skins. Both species are now protected throughout Australia, but other pressures continue to threaten these animals.
Wildlife campaigner Bob Irwin recently said his famous son Steve Irwin would be turning over in his grave to think wild crocodiles could be killed by safari hunters.

Overheating, flooding and predation by goannas and feral pigs claim a high proportion of unhatched embryos (an estimated 70–80 percent). From the small numbers that do hatch, more than half die in their first year of life, mainly from predation by birds of prey, fish, snake-necked turtles and other crocodiles. Once they have reached maturity their only enemies are each other and humans.

Queensland Government: living with crocodiles

The crocodile “harvesting” industry means that hunters have a license to catch and shoot crocodiles for their skins and skulls as trophies.  In 2012 the Federal Environment Department has received 265 submissions on the Territory’s push for limited “trophy” hunting of large saltwater crocodiles.   The Territory Government wants to trial trophy hunting for two years, with up to 50 of the large protected crocodiles killed annually.  The AWPC and the Humane Society International believe very strongly that there is far more potential in the remote areas of the Top End in eco-tourism than there are for elitist safari hunting activities.  There are few benefits for indigenous peoples, and the traditional owners need to be consulted.

Indigenous to be consulted over crocodile safari hunting

The NT Government admits that safari hunting has nothing to do with managing the crocodile population and it certainly won’t help control problem crocodiles. The welfare of these hunted animals isn’t monitored, suggesting to us that promoting the humane treatment of hunted animals isn’t a government priority.

If the NT crocodile safari plan goes ahead, the lives of 50 saltwater crocodiles would basically be sold to the highest bidder for ‘thrill kills’, every year. By allowing amateur hunters to slaughter crocs – there is a very real risk that crocs will be maimed and suffer terribly before dying. This is a cruel fate for these magnificent reptiles who – like any other animal – can experience joy, fear and suffering.  There are genuine reports of crocs at Kakadu National Park being baited and trapped by hooks, and left for many hours so “sarfari” hunters can shoot them!  Crocs might not be the cutest or cuddliest of animals, but they don’t deserve to be injured and killed for kicks.

Take Action: Animals Australia
Animals Australia: take action against crocodile hunting