Submissions

The following is the AWPC submission sent by AWPC President, Maryland Wilson, to the project director, Land & Biodiversity White Paper Project Team, Department Of Sustainability and Environment
PO BOX 500
EAST MELBOURNE 3002
EMAILED TO: land.whitepaper@dse.vic.gov.au

This is in reponse to the DSE's call for Sumissions to the White paper as detailed in the pdf document available for download here (829kb) or check the website: www.dse.vic.gov.au/landwhitepaper
All page numbers below correspond to the DSE publication.

Land and Biodiversity in a Time of Climate Change

Introduction ~ ‘Land and biodiversity at a time of climate change'
Page 3 ‘Our plants, our animals, our future' Minister John Thwaites

 There is a certain dichotomy and hypocrisy in the Vic. Government/DSE ‘Land and biodiversity at a time of climate change' White Paper . Minister John Thwaites shows concern about ‘Our plants, our animals, our future' on page3, but DSE states on page 14, ‘The White Paper will not cover Wildlife Exploitation .' Fragmentation and failure to provide a framework for holistic solutions are evident. To not address the serious issue of wildlife exploitation is a critical omission, a gross breach of serious wildlife protection commitment. DSE and government lack an integrated ‘biodiversity concern' credibility for the future health & survival of our native plants and animals.

 Kangaroos, for example, are a living, behaving and biological entity, with specific behavioural and nutritional needs. The soft padded feet and long tail of the kangaroo are integral to the ecological health of the land, as regenerators of native grasses. Kangaroos have been living harmoniously and in balance with their environment for at least 16 million years and they are perfectly suited to their natural habitat and environment. Any seedling that falls into the long-tapering footprint of the kangaroo is buried into the hole left by the toenail. Covered and with moisture concentrated at one point, the germinated seedling has a chance of survival. Their tail drags along behind them while they are grazing, pressing the ground, rolling seeds into the earth. Kangaroos play an undeniable role in biological diversity and ecological integrity. Their urine and faeces is a natural fertilizer, essential to the health of the land and biodiversity.

But kangaroos and other species are treated with contempt, mismanaged and exploited in Victoria . Planning mechanisms are on an ad hoc basis. Government wildlife authorities fail to provide an integrated and holistic approach to save remaining wildlife habitat. Any semblance of legal ‘protection' is undermined through endless regulations and omissions. Transgressions of regulations regarding kill permits, occur.

The White Paper won't address wildlife exploitation because it would expose the grim realities and deficiencies in the present system. Government says it has been devised to ‘prioritise the Victorian Government's policy and investment in natural resource management, land health and biodiversity for the next 20 to 50 years.”

 But by failing to address wildlife exploitation, the Victorian government admits

  • that wildlife is very low on its priority list, is not worth protecting; and
  • that wildlife habitat loss will continue, while they continue to ignore solutions, which should and must be implemented urgently to stop the escalating crisis.

The government will do nothing to protect native animals unless they have reached the critical threatened, rare or endangered category. But by then, it's too late!

Is the White paper a cynical public relations exercise about decisions already made? How can there be any acceptable or meaningful dialogue about “the health of the land and biodiversity at a time of climate change” without discussing wildlife exploitation?

  • Is the White Paper a deliberate act of deception through non-transparency?
  • Biodiversity is the existence of a range of plants and animal species in their natural environment, and integrated planning and protection are required.
  • Page 3 Minister asks “how do we sustain our native biodiversity in a way that allows our diverse primary industries to grow? ”

This question is mischievous. Why would or should primary industries keep growing when they have clearly been shown to be destructive to the environment and biodiversity and they will continue to be so ad infinitum.

 The first step should be to address wildlife exploitation. Its omission is an affront and demonstrates a lack of understanding and real comprehension about biodiversity.

  • DSE needs to designate wildlife corridors, minimum100 metres wide, linked to national parks, reserves, sanctuaries, private land, to restore native habitat.

Dr Dan Ramp UNSW wrote in Kangaroos Myths and Realities pages 208-209 “ If one group of species was to typify how humans have altered the natural balance in the environment and then tried to rectify the situation with short-sighted management strategies, often at the expense of the species, it is the kangaroo. With proper planning and foresight, ‘control' methods like culling and fertility programs should be relegated to our unflattering past.”

“Our ‘Common' Wildlife May Be the Next ‘sleeping' Threatened Species” a research paper written by Dr Dan Ramp UNSW in collaboration Erin Roger: “Considerable conservation effort has been invested to protecting threatened species, including large-scale endeavours to quantify the roles threatened species play in ecosystems functioning and resilience. Focussing on the present, declared threatened species warrant this attention because of the more immediate risk of their contribution to biodiversity loss; however, it is also important to quantify the roles that common species play in maintaining ecosystem integrity, particularly in light of threatening drivers like rapid climate change, We argue that conservation efforts must increase their scope to include both threatened and species typically considered common; focussing on those species that contribute to functional roles in ecosystems. This includes many native herbivores, such as kangaroos and wombats, that play vital roles in ecosystem functioning but are often victimised and treated with a lack of concern because of socio-political factors and historical value judgements, rather than heeding biological and ecological factors.”

 Our classification of native species

HUMAN VALUE CLASSIFICATION OF WILDLIFE
Zoologist Peter Rawlinson La Trobe University 1982

Human Value Category - Population Status - Management Strategy

Wildlife - Wild - Conservation
Game (kangaroos classified as
Game in 1989 by Commonwealth) - Wild -Exploitation
Vermin kangaroos as vermin - Wild - Extermination
Pests kangaroos as pests - Wild - Extermination

  • Vermin and pests are seen as a threat to human interest and are subjected to extermination campaigns .
  • True wildlife species however, are seen as of potential or intrinsic value, and in need of active conservation which should aim to minimize or eliminate human interference.

Australia is the driest most fragile continent on Earth, yet since white settlement this once pristine land teeming with the most extraordinary wildlife has been treated with contempt. We have the dubious record of having the world's worst record for species extinction. “ Australians are the worst wildlife managers in the world. We've lost more species in 200 years than North and South America in 500 years.” – John Warmsley - warnings about global warming have been ignored for years.

To demonstrate how perilous the situation is for wildlife, proposed laws to reduce red tape and give developers more certainty in environmentally sensitive areas were introduced in Federal Parliament October 12, 2006. Politicians just do not get it!

How well are the current institutional arrangements working for sustainability, land, water and biodiversity? Page 4

  • They are not working ~ we are losing biodiversity ~ our rivers and streams are polluted, dried up and dying ~ inappropriate, destructive agricultural practices have destroyed the natural world, plants, birds and animals ; politicians cater to real estate developers and rural land holders because they need their votes.
  • A scientific committee intended to review flows to the Snowy, five years ago, has not yet been set up, despite a promise to do so. The crisis facing biodiversity at a time of climate change is barely a blip on politicians' radar.

The Victorian government is obligated to protect kangaroos, and all biodiversity by the original intent of the Wildlife Act 1975 under Victorian Law: but political interference and expediency, socio-political manipulation, regulations, omissions and an ‘Authority to Control Wildlife' make a mockery of the process. Legal frameworks and planning systems need to be coordinated and integrated to protect biodiversity. Laws are too fragmented and open to abuse.

There are no iron clad, legally binding wildlife protection laws or plans in place and those that are, can be over-ridden to suit the socio/political climate. There is absolute disregard for the ramifications of ‘stealing', ‘seizing', ‘usurping', ‘acquiring' wildlife habitat upon which all biodiversity depends for survival. Developers rule.

 Minister asks: Page 3 What does the health of animals like the rock wallaby and plants like the river red gum have to do with the state of our economy and Victoria 's future?

  • The rock wallaby and red river gum trees are both critically endangered:
    but the economy counts before native species, like the rock wallaby, and; the demands of irrigators come before stressed and dying majestic red river gums; introduced livestock fouls the landscape, and emits carbon, a major cause of global warming, thus threatening biodiversity.
    Why should farmers continue to graze their stock along the banks of the Murray River when they are so destructive to the land, take so much water and pollute the landscape, because they have for the past 200+ years?
  • We are destroying our wildlife heritage and with it the health of our land and biodiversity.
  • It is the responsibility of government and DSE to provide leadership and not bow to every pressure that adversely affects biodiversity, like farmers holding our natural heritage hostage, as below:

Farmers from Queensland , NSW and Victoria have threatened to cut down one tree on 1 st July, two on 2 nd July, and so on, to protest a perceived joint government conspiracy against farmers (Sydney Morning Herald, 5 th June 2007 ).

Australia 's natural heritage held hostage by farmers 6.6. 2007 Humane Society International Extinction Denied program ~ Michael Kennedy Director  

 ‘Recent threats from farmers to cut down trees because of a perceived ‘conspiracy' between State and Federal governments to destroy farmlands (through climate change programs and vegetation clearing laws) should be sounding loud alarm bells throughout the country. They indicate just how precarious is the continued survival of vast swathes of our remaining natural resources, which can evidently be destroyed at the apparent whim of those who suggest they care for them.'

The most significant threat to the natural world and the diversity of life, and a major contributor to climate change is the clearing of native vegetation. “ Land clearing is restricted by law in order to limit the devastating effects that it has on our unique natural heritage. Hundreds of species are found in Australia and nowhere else on the planet, and with attitudes such as these displayed by our farmers, it is not surprising that we are still losing species at astonishing rates – not to mention the increased release of greenhouse gases .”

“ Native landscapes provide a vast range of benefits far beyond simply being a sink for carbon, not only to the landowner but to the wider community,” said Mr. Kennedy. “ They provide habitat for native plants, animals and birds, allow water to percolate down to recharge water tables, prevent soil erosion, clean the atmosphere and provide shade, as well as a number of more subtle benefits on an ecosystem level .”

  • Farmers have, since white settlement, been threatening to poison waterholes, wildlife, cut down trees, and break the law to get their way, ad nauseum
  • The goal should be to protect biodiversity, not to aim for exponential growth and export dollars in Australia , the driest most fragile continent on earth. Dire climate change predictions that water will be extremely scarce, temperatures will be scorching, and we face a horrific loss of species, must be heeded.
  • We need new directions, new parameters, we need to get smarter and we need to stop relying on primary production and concentrate on secondary industries.
  • Above all we must protect our biodiversity and stop taking into consideration other issues that sidetrack us from the main objectives at hand ~ saving our biodiversity, and the health of the land, without which , systems will collapse.
  • It matters that we have the world's worst record for species extinction.

Our government should be ashamed of this abysmal record of wildlife extinctions. Do something urgently to rectify this embarrassing state of affairs. Victoria has cleared more land than any other state in Australia and threats from the Victorian Farmers Federation to deliberately chop down trees demonstrates how destructive they can be.

  • Linking wildlife corridors are essential to save biodiversity/native species

Objectives: White paper will – terms of reference Page 4

  • Managing the land and protecting our terrestrial biodiversity

 In order to address this issue, a holistic approach to the land and biodiversity at a time of climate change means that all future Australian planning projects must include an environmental impact assessment to protect wildlife habitat and the welfare of native animals, before any planning approval is given . The Planning Minister Justin Madden must realise that all biodiversity depends on his future planning decisions.

  • Set direction for INVESTMENT priorities in natural ‘resource' management, land, health and biodiversity for the next two decades. Make sure Government policy and investment is responsive to new threats and opportunities

 Melbourne 2030 means unprecedented, industrial and residential development, with no environmental impact assessment for impact on wildlife habitat loss or wildlife welfare. This frenzied push for population growth means loss of wildlife habitat for frightened, displaced, injured native animals trapped, disorientated and distressed.

Development cuts a swathe through native animal habitat leaving kangaroos and joeys stranded, along with all the other species that once lived there and no one accepts responsibility for this damage to the natural world. But humans will pay the price for their greed, lack of compassion, and cruelty to Mother Nature as she will fight back! Government must urgently invest in wildlife corridors urgently to save biodiversity.

Key Policy Questions page 4 - What are the environmental, social and economic values provided by healthy land and biodiversity?

There are intrinsic values attached to healthy land and biodiversity and social reward. There is also a deep sadness, that Australia once had the most beautiful landscapes and flourishing wildlife of any where in the world. But no more, as politicians lurch from one election to the next, held captive to those whose votes they need, to get in and stay in power. They lose all sense of ethical and moral perspective or principles, and fail to recognise their Duty of Care. The present grim, seemingly hopeless outlook facing biodiversity needs dramatic attitudinal changes.

How does one put a value on wildlife? To many of us wildlife is sacred, to others, an irksome distraction from their economic goals. We do know that climate change is having a devastating effect on Australia 's unique plants and animals. Horrific bush fires, heat waves, scarce water, has seen a virtual collapse of healthy ecosystems, with alarm bells ringing for threatened and rare species, fighting for their very existence.

What impacts will climate change have on these values? Page 4

One would assume that given this appalling record of species annihilation, protection of habitat would and should be the Victorian Government's number one priority, and linking wildlife corridors to protect native species would be paramount. But it is not.

Despite a CSIRO report indicating the adverse, devastating effect climate change will have on society and biodiversity, ludicrously, the government mantra is still economic and population growth~ growth, and more people , is the catchcry;

Ever increasing wildlife habitat destruction, due to exponential growth, housing to cope and cater for an unsustainable population explosion is having a catastrophic effect on biodiversity. This scenario must change. Overpopulating Victoria means increased chaos on public transport, water demands, species loss guaranteed!

 What are the roles and responsibilities of individuals? Page 13

Minister for Planning Justin Madden: to ensure that all future planning projects must include an environmental impact assessment to protect wildlife habitat and the welfare of native animals, before any planning approval is given.

Attorney General Rob Hulls: to ensure that our wildlife protection laws really do protect biodiversity; and to foil loopholes that allow developers/ projects that threaten biodiversity

And how can we maximise the effectiveness of our joint effort?

 Wildlife may be considered under three separate Government bodies, all of which fail to take into consideration the behavioural and nutritional needs of wildlife:

•  Planning
•  Native Vegetation
•  Reserve Systems

RMIT environmental science lecturer Dr Sarah Bekessy said urbanisation was the biggest threat to native species and habitat in Australia . Interviewed April 5 th 2004, for the Whittlesea Leader, she said “kangaroos were under threat and that local wildlife rather than housing developments should be the number one priority in planning. Houses. We all need them but it is the rapid urbanisation of Whittlesea proving to be the biggest threat to the nations' beloved icon – the kangaroo. And that threat would only increase without a strategic approach to planning.”

 Clay Lucas wrote further in The Age Nov 18 th , 2006 that “McMANSIONS are winning out over wildflowers and bandicoots on Melbourne's fringes, according to a three year study of urban growth, - funded by all levels of government, and the housing industry - It slammed the state and federal governments for their efforts to protect our most endangered animal and plant species in Melbourne's last remaining grasslands and native habitats. The group's research shows neither State Government planning blueprint, Melbourne 2030, nor the Federal Government's environment policies have frameworks to protect biodiversity hotspots in Melbourne 's growth corridors.

“It is analysing the impact of outer-urban housing developments on Melbourne 's richest refuges for vulnerable species, such as the south-western corridor of Wyndham. More rare animals live in that corridor than in Kakadu National Park , according to Dr Bekessy , who also said that the State Government had not:

• Done enough mapping of key areas on Melbourne 's fringes to find out which plants and species were there.

• Recognised that Melbourne 's biodiversity hotspots overlapped with areas also identified as housing growth corridors.

•  Identified key species likely to become extinct due to habitat loss caused by housing developments.

• Done enough strategic planning to manage biodiversity on Melbourne 's fringes, leaving it all up to councils struggling to cope with a deluge of development applications from developers.

"People need to be aware that we are making the decision to sacrifice a bunch of species for development," said Dr Sarah Bekessy, lead author of Biodiversity Planning in the Urban Fringe.

"The data that the State Government has on our threatened species is pathetic," Dr Bekessy said. "Of course, the state Liberals' policy is to completely get rid of Melbourne 's urban growth boundary, so they don't have any solutions either."

More than 50 per cent of Victoria 's threatened flora and fauna lives on Melbourne 's fringes. But highly significant areas remain under threat, according to Environment Victoria, including grasslands earmarked for development on the former Laverton air base, red gum woodlands on VicUrban's flagship Aurora development at Epping and the Barnbam Swamp wetlands near Cranbourne.

"People care about driving things to the point of extinction," she said.

At a meeting with DSE hierarchy December 14, 2006, we raised these allegations with DSE personnel, and they were dismissed. Is Dr Bekessy wrong? We think not! In disputes, wildlife is not considered, as they cannot vote and so have no voice.

Decision by VCAT allowed a farmer to cut down 50 Buloke trees upon which the endangered Red-tailed Black Cockatoo depend :

Laws supposed to protect biodiversity, deliberately use vague and ambiguous words such as “should” and “may”, designed to leave loopholes to protect the exploiters, not native wildlife/ biodiversity. The VCAT go-ahead to destroy 50 buloke trees, upon which the Red-tailed Black Cockatoos depend, is just one more example of how deficient and ineffective the legal system is for protecting biodiversity.

Notes from a lecture February 2007, La Trobe University by an EDO Carlton lawyer: Case - Pretlove vs. VCAT and Wimmera Shire Council: A Wimmera producer sought to cut down 50 endangered Buloke trees, that the also endangered Red-tailed Black Cockatoo need to survive in order to install a new irrigation system. That meant cutting down all the trees, because he wanted to stock beef cattle

“The lawyer and other experts said the trees should stay but VCAT had the final say - no Red-tailed Black Cockatoos were seen nearby so VCAT said “go ahead!”

Unbelievable, considering their endangered status. It takes about 100 years for the Buloke trees to grow. VCAT gave its approval despite the advice!  All the farmer had to do was comply with the Native Vegetation Framework which says they should compensate by replanting what they destroyed for the native scrub already there - a token. So, if the Red-tailed Black Cockatoo populations improved, which is unlikely given climate change, they would have nowhere to nest and nothing to eat! This has a cumulative effect - the economics first colonial mentality and the death of a species.

As long as the habitats of native animals is fragmented into neat ‘Green Wedges', little categories all separate, isolated one from the other and disconnected, Victoria will continue on its slippery, slide to being the worst wildlife managers in the world. Human demands, too many timber plantation investment schemes, too many Mc Mansions, too much sacrificing of wildlife habitat, destroying homes of irreplaceable native species. Despite our rate of extinctions, politicians remain in complete denial.

Government should publicise and develop corridors with national parks a starting point, and set out requirements, and strategic plans:

  • - permeable roads
  • - revegetation of cleared land (already legislated)
  • - need for private land holders who are willing, to donate minimum 100 metres in width, land for wildlife corridors; this needs government sanction.
  • - land revegetation and wildlife rehab zones should be connectors in corridors. 
  • - Habitat restoration could be used to lift the standards of developers, which at the moment is interpreted by VCAT, as not affecting or including wildlife
  • - regulations are not enforced, in any case
  • - land revegetation needs to entail thriving biodiversity .

 Animal movement and habitat connectivity: can we design permeable roads?
In Australia , roads bisect the landscape, resulting in significant barriers to wildlife and leading to the dissemination of pest species. (Dr Dan Ramp UNSW)

Roads prevent animals from moving freely through the landscape, affecting normal behaviour and preventing access to feeding and breeding areas. Roads also directly result in the mortality of individuals involved in collisions with vehicles.

•  Roadside habitat has often been lauded as the only remaining habitat for some species of fauna and flora, but the presence of fast-moving vehicles through the centre of this habitat is commonly ignored.

For Australia's large mammals, such as kangaroos, wallabies, wombats and emus, roads present an extensive problem Populations of these animals utilise resources at both small and large scales, obtaining a diversity of shelter, food and water requirements from their natural environment. Fragmentation resulting from roads severely impacts their ability to subsist at pre-existing levels. At high road densities, sustainable population levels become untenable. Our current level of understanding of how these species are impacted by roads, as barriers and as causes of mortality, is extremely poor.

Researchers in Europe and the USA have been pioneering the development of knowledge bases and mitigation technologies. They set a fine example of how Australia should be approaching this issue, integrating road managers, wildlife managers, local land-holders and academic researchers to properly address concerns. The adoption of social considerations into landscape management is one area where Europe is a world leader, particularly in Switzerland and Germany , where

landscape planning includes corridors for human movement along with those for animal movement. These corridors often connect large conservation areas established for ecological and aesthetic design purposes. For example, in some rural areas, paths for pedestrian and bicycle movement through well-planned landscapes occupy space in corridors that are also designed for animal movement.

The interaction between roads and wildlife, where roads traverse fragmented pockets of remnant habitat, also has substantial safety and economic implications. Costs to motorists through loss of life, vehicle damage, trauma and high insurance premiums are considerable. Recent estimates by Australia 's leading insurer, the NRMA, estimated that costs nationwide for the organisation as a result of wildlife-vehicle collisions were in excess of $20 million per annum. Litigation resulting from collisions is commonplace. While modification of road development procedures will require substantial resources, the total costs both economically and socially will be considerably less than if this issue is ignored.

Regional and rural communities will also benefit economically from improved public relations through demonstrable commitments to animal welfare and biodiversity conservation and improved tourism as roads are safer and the strong negative impressions of roadkill are removed.

Road kill in major nature-based tourist destinations draw strong negative comment from domestic and international tourists inhibiting expansion of these tourism industries. Further tourism is inhibited by high accident rates amongst international visitors on regional and rural roads, of which roadkill is a significant contributor.

A range of industries will benefit from gaining an understanding of how roads impact on wildlife populations, including road transport, vehicle hire, vehicle insurance and tourism industries. All road users will benefit through a reduction in human fatalities and injuries, and a reduction in distress to vehicle occupants.

 All Australians and the world's biodiversity will benefit from a reduction in the loss of a wildlife resource. The result will be safer roads for us and our wildlife . Dr Daniel Ramp ARC Postdoctoral Research Fellow the University of New South Wales

The RSPCA and ACT government are currently undertaking a number of studies, including some new technology which is mapping movement patterns of kangaroos.  This intelligence is being used to assist the government when planning new roads to ensure underpasses and corridors etc are created for kangaroos. It is a pity this type of technology wasn't available 20 years ago, but the good thing is future roads and urban planning is now looking like considering movement patterns of wild animals. (email)

 What are the roles and responsibilities of individuals, community and Government and how can we maximise the effectiveness of our joint effort?

 We'd like DSE to be the respected authority it should be, but at present, it is not a body we trust to protect our wildlife. We need to be and must be proud of DSE... If short staffed, then funds must be provided to enable them do their job properly.

Some problems and threats:

An out of date (2003) and highly inflammatory Flora and Fauna Fact Sheet about kangaroos can be downloaded on the internet and is sent to anyone requesting information about kangaroos.

NOTES: Problems caused by kangaroos and wallabies Problem : “Kangaroos can cause damage to fences, compete with domestic livestock for grazing and water, and graze and trample crops. Some individual kangaroos harass or physically threaten humans at picnic areas where they have become accustomed to being fed by members of the public. Black wallaby browsing can cause damage to young trees in plantations.” DSE Flora and Fauna Branch September 2003

It should say: How to live in harmony with kangaroos and wallabies

The DSE kangaroo Fact Sheet continues to use and promote out of date information which says: ‘Kangaroos only compete with livestock for pasture when total grazing pressure exceeds dry matter production. To estimate the contribution of kangaroos to total grazing pressure, research has shown that one dry sheep equivalent (DSE) equals 1.6 kangaroos or one kangaroo equals 0.625 DSE.” ( Gordon Grigg University Queensland )

 Gordon Grigg, wrote the kangaroo industry's bible “The Commercial Harvesting of Kangaroos in Australia “; it's on his research that the kangaroo industry developed. But he was forced to admit in 2002, that he was wrong, as he had over estimated by up to 500% the damage done on grazing lands by kangaroos.

Stating the obvious, he adds: “This would mean that kangaroos are a much smaller component of the total grazing pressure than is generally accepted.” Please note there is no longer talk by farmers or scientists about Total Grazing Pressure caused by kangaroos. But why has the FACT sheet not been corrected and inflammatory language used to portray kangaroos, taking the worst case scenarios as examples?

The above example illustrates that the very wildlife Authority to whom we look for wildlife protection often fails to provide the level of help for which we search. “Where farmers and pastoralists (with sheep, cattle and crops) are in competition with any native animal, the government administrators always favour the land owner. Whatever native animal is involved, that animal is marked for destruction.” South Australian marsupial expert Doug Reilly says in ‘The Kangaroo BETRAYED!' (1999)

Wildlife Exploitation is alive and well and flourishing in Victoria !

 March 18, 1999 Phil Davis MLC, and Parliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Premier and Minister for Agriculture and Resources, wrote in private correspondence re Wildlife Utilisation (Exploitation). “ The Victorian Wildlife Act 1975 allows for kangaroo culling and destruction on conservation grounds ( e.g. in parks and reserves ) and for damage control on private and leasehold land. The issue of commercial utilisation of Victoria 's flora and fauna is currently under consideration by the Environment and Natural Resources Committee of Parliament (ENRC).”

Macropod expert Dr David Croft UNSW Fowlers' Gap Research Station Manager: “…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.”

 If government respected wildlife they would ensure that wildlife exploitation was relegated to our convict past. They would ensure it was covered in the White Paper. They would link wildlife habitat through wildlife corridors as a matter of urgency. The White paper would address these deficiencies and failures, but it fails to do so.

Wildlife Exploitation continues
Robert Begg, former manager flora and fauna, allowed the private keeping of wildlife under the Wildlife Trade and Possession of Wildlife Regulations, and the hunting of game birds in ‘GAME ‘parks. He said changes from the 1992 Wildlife Regulations, which were about to expire, simplified the wildlife licensing system ~ a poor excuse and the damage was done. It demonstrated that respect for native species (animals and birds) was wanting, was non-existent within government, and remains so today.

The new Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS) 2002 specified the wildlife that could be kept privately (pets) and commercially for the pet industry.

 ‘Pet Law Peril for Wildlife' ( Herald Sun- May 22 nd , 2002) published “…that Vets have warned against changes to wildlife laws that would allow children as young as ten to own native animals.” AVA Victorian president Matthew Makin said children were not experienced enough to own native animals. “People could theoretically get pets that even zoos have difficulty caring for and keeping alive,” he said. “We've got serious concerns about people holding wildlife who don't have the skills needed.”

 Peter Myroiuk, President Wildlife Victoria wrote May 14 th , 2002: ‘The Regulations specify the wildlife that can be kept privately (pets) and commercially. Let the DSE know what we think about the wildlife Pet Industry and the commercialisation of our wildlife.”

The ratio of number of wildlife officers to licenses holders was too high~1-1,291 particularly for the Port Phillip Region ( 1 Officer: 1,291 licenses

  • This impinged on the States' ability to monitor and enforce the Regulations. The rate of reporting back was only 40-60% and only half were desk audited let alone inspected. The 60% cost recovery was unsatisfactory.
  • A serious welfare concern that is difficult to measure is the dumping of wildlife
  • Wildlife Victoria recommends that all mammals should be deleted from the Private Wildlife license categories.
  • To allow children as young as ten to obtain a private license without parental consent is a retrograde policy and must be abandoned.

 Wildlife Exploitation Continues:

 Mixed Messages do not protect wildlife habitat ~ Planning Minister Madden

 Ben Schneiders –Property Editor wrote in The Age December 22 nd 2006 ‘Joint-venture deal gives family 85 million reasons to get out of farming.'

“A family in Mickleham, 30 kilometres north of Melbourne , is believed to be $85 million richer after it sold about 320 hectares to a joint venture of Folkestone and an AMP Capital Investors property fund. The land was inside the urban growth boundary and is likely to be subdivided and converted to industrial use after it is rezoned. It is also close to the Hume Highway and the Craigieburn by-pass.”

  • What now happens to the wildlife that lives there?
  • Which Minister will even give them a second thought? Madden? Thwaites?
  • Further down the road lives the Somerton kangaroos, trapped along the Roxborough Park rail line and industrial development, struggling to survive.
  • Craigieburn grasslands should be made accessible for the kangaroos and other small native species, with a link to provide safe passage and sanctuary, an alternative to being crushed under the bulldozers. Council not doing enough.
  • Rod Stoner, One Steel, Occupational, Health and Safety Officer said: Herald Sun newspaper July 2006 : DSE wanted to issue permits to kill the kangaroos and their joeys originally, but the outcry was too great . We are all still working together to save this little mob, a year later…but what of all the biodiversity that has been and will continue to be exterminated at this site and other sites?
  • Rod Stoner waiting for help to stop bikie hoons and dogs harassing the roos
  • The displaced Mill Park mob trapped at the Westfield shopping centre have been relocated, but not before 21 roos were killed over one weekend recently
  • What of the other species, displaced, abandoned, by those in government?

Senior Principle research scientist, CSIRO, Division of Wildlife and Ecology and Dr Graham Arnold wrote in AWPC book ‘The Kangaroo BETRAYED!' (1999:

“One of the costs of agricultural development in Western Australia over the past 100 years has been the loss of most of the native vegetation and, consequently, massive reductions in the numbers of most of our native fauna. Unless the community manages remnant vegetation to minimise degradation and enhance the regeneration of native plants, kangaroos and some other native species will disappear from much of Western Australia over the next 100 years. The active conservation of what bush we have left in the wheatbelt is essential if the wildlife species that still live there are to survive, for future generations to enjoy and marvel at.

“Pests is an emotive word. It conjures up visions of animals destroying crops. I can think of no situations where this is likely to be true for kangaroos. They, like rabbits, may cause localised reductions in yield in paddocks i.e. within 100 metres of their bushland home ranges. But the effect has to be considered on a whole paddock basis. For a 100 hectare paddock with a km frontage, it can only amount to 10%.Very few paddocks are in such a situation.”

 The question is whether such a loss justifies the killing of such beautiful animals”

  • The WA scenario can be seen across Australia and especially in Victoria which has cleared more land than any other State in Australia
  • Why do we persist with propping up farmers on marginal and uneconomic land, giving them drought relief for years on end, when our tired brown land needs them to go ~?
  • The early white settlers tried to make Australia into their English homeland and did not understand the land or the animal. They still don't!
  • Wildlife issues are political hot potatoes, yet are not addressed. The White Paper will not discuss wildlife exploitation, which diminishes its' standing.
  • Attitudes towards the other creatures with whom we share this planet must change. If government does not see it, climate change will make them see.

Ethics and Killing Wildlife ~ Laureate Professor Melbourne University Peter Singer and Patron of AWPC

“Within the last 25 years two radical ideas have become significant, both politically and philosophically, animal liberation and biocentrism (concern for the environment). Both question the right of our species to assume that our interests must always prevail. We have to remember for virtually all of the history of western civilisation, the right of human beings to trample over all the species on this planet and over nature itself has been taken for granted.” Foreword ~ ‘The Kangaroo BETRAYED!' 1999

Ethics of Commercialising Wildlife ~ Laureate Professor Melbourne University Peter Singer and Patron of AWPC
To drive a species to extinction is a crime against the ecology of our planet, and against all who will come after us, inheriting a world that has lost something irreplaceable. The same is true of the death and suffering we inflict on individual animals. The fundamental problem is one of attitude: are this planet and all its non-human inhabitants to be regarded as the rightful possessions of those humans who presently live on it?

“At least since Darwin , we have known that the forests and animals were not placed on the earth for us to use. They have evolved alongside us. Once felled, the virgin forest can never be restored. The animals we kill for their skin and for pet food have similar nervous systems to our own, and can presumably feel pain, or enjoy life as we do.”

“When we remember that the attitude of the first European settlers to the Aboriginal inhabitants of our continent was little better than it was to the animals they so ruthlessly slaughtered, it is not surprising that many of us still do not question what we are doing to Australian wildlife. One day we will look back on what we are doing to wildlife in horror, as we now look back at what the first Europeans to land in Australia did to the aboriginal people who were living here.”

“We need a Mabo decision for Australia 's wild animals, a legal recognition of their special status as original residents of Australia , alongside its original inhabitants. The only ethical approach is one that gives their interests equal consideration alongside similar human interests.”

Kangaroos Myths and Realities 2005 Edited by Dr David Croft UNSW and Maryland Wilson

We, in the Australian Wildlife Protection Council thank you for the opportunity to address some of our concerns in the Government and DSE ‘Land and biodiversity at a time of climate change' White Paper.

We strongly recommend that the Minister John Thwaites urgently appoints a Wildlife Advocate to assist him in protecting our biodiversity.

In conclusion:

The Minister for Water, Environment and Climate Change, John Thwaites has too many responsibilities, and demands on his time, to do justice to biodiversity. The needs of biodiversity are simply not being met at this time of climate change.

Minister Thwaites also has demonstrated that wildlife does not have a high regard or profile on his agenda. For example, with water and climate change, it is possible that this is due to poor advice, or lack of time. Needless to say, biodiversity, water and climate change are all linked and connected, and each one is as important as the other. Yet we do not see this in any government action. In fact, the White Paper failed to have any discussion about, regard for, let alone elimination of, wildlife exploitation.

Each of the three categories …Land Water and the Environment, is vitally important for the future survival of biodiversity. To expect that the Minister be adequately researched, informed, briefed, and able to understand, comprehend and address the pressing needs and requirements is simply not possible.

Victoria needs a Wildlife Advocate to assist the Minister at this most critical time of need, in order that we may have some semblance of attention to and for biodiversity.