Plea on wallaby cull plan | The Mercury A SPECIALIST vet wants to see hard evidence that exotic wallabies exist in Tasmania before a cull is planned. The Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Wildlife and the Environment said a mob of up to 200 agile wallabies -- which have survived despite coming from Australia's tropical north -- posed a threat to native wildlife, the environment and farms. The wallabies, rumoured to have escaped from a wildlife park and living around Bicheno, are likely to be culled, probably shot. But biosecurity specialist and veterinary pathologist David Obendorf said he was yet to see a carcass. "If they are to be eradicated, you've got to have a method that is sympathetic to animal welfare standards and not an excuse to blow away wildlife, either with 1080 baits or guns." Dr Obendorf has had long-standing concerns over the fox hunt and said he feared a repeat. This is dated Dec 2013, but I hadn't seen it before...
I'm sure there must be a lot of what Obendorf said missing from that article. According to that report (and some others I found) he is saying he wants to see a carcasse to confirm that agile wallabies are present before the department starts a cull..... but they're not going to start a cull unless the wallabies are actually there because there'd be nothing to shoot, and it is in any case well-known that the agile wallabies are there! You can find photos and video of them quite easily on the internet. They derived from escapes from the East Coast Wildlife Park. I think there may be a lot of misquoting going on. I haven't found anything later than Dec 2013 myself, so not sure what the story is now though. It seems all the opposition is about cuddly animals being shot and them being "native". Agile wallabies are common in their natural range; they don't belong in Tasmania!
This is yet another infuriating case of an animal facing a cull in Australia that it's hard to get exported legally. I am sure most UK enthusiasts would be pleased to see Agile Wallabies, but unless they're prepared to go up to South Lakes the option does not exist.
That is not the point; the issue is that Australia refuses to let *any* agile wallabies out of the country to go to European collections no matter how commonplace they are. See also Tammar Wallaby and Brush-Tailed Possum.
Australia has exported native species on a few occasions: Tasmanian devils being the last species, but done so as well with wombats and Lord Howe Stick Insects to Budapest and before they exported some budgies to Koln. So if zoos abroad are interested in species there are possibilities even if they are limited and the process is challenging. At the same time Agile wallabies have no place on Tasmania and culling is the only option even if foreign zoos are willing to bear the costs and take some it would still mean that a cull is needed for a large majority of the animals.
Without wanting to start a fight, please re-read this, and think about a process governed by common sense and humanity, not procedure. Culls require skilled marksmen, who will not carry out unpleasant work for nothing. A cull will not be cheap and will doubtless get progressively more difficult since the warier animals will take longer to track down. Doubtless it doesn't matter a damn what zoo nerds in NW Europe think, but the point needs making that Australia is a lot keener on culling its indigenous wildlife than it is on exporting it.
I completely agree with you on that and I realise that culling is costly and challenging, but export is not a solution for a population of this size unless they also want to offload animals to private breeders, which will be considered controversial.
1. What puzzles me is that it seems unbeknownst to Dr. Obendorf that agile wallabies roam these parts of Tasmania. 2. For scale: what does an eradication exercise of this magnitude cost the wildlife department? 3. What is actually true about this fox non-existence story-line? 4. Any other methods of capture would / could be more effective? 5. What about removal and re-introduction to the mainland? I really do do do … see the capture and perhaps sale of agile wallabies to interested accredited zoo parties could be a good alternative.
someone in Australia will know about this stuff better than myself, but: 1. I don't understand Obendorf's comments either (hence I assume the journalists are mis-reporting, or only reporting the things he said which they understood or thought would make good copy) 2. No idea. 3. The fox situation was complex. Undeniably there were foxes present in Tasmania. I'm not sure of all the politics behind the situation (I haven't looked into it for a few years). 4. Killing the wallabies is the most cost-effective way to remove them. Shooting wallabies is not difficult, although as Ian said earlier it gets more difficult the fewer the number, but that is true for any removal scheme, whether live or dead. It need not be that expensive to have a few hunters do it, certainly far far cheaper than live capture and all the attendant costs involved. Poisoning I would not agree with at all, especially as one of the reasons for removing the agile wallabies is to protect the local wallaby species which would be poisoned at the same time! 5. Live capture and transport of that many wallabies would be extremely expensive. I'm not sure of the logistics of releasing them into the wild on the mainland (and it would certainly increase the cost even more due to vet checks etc). All that said, I do (of course) agree that catching them all and exporting them to overseas zoos would be brilliant. But it isn't going to happen. The overseas zoos would have to foot the bill to start with, and it would be astronomical. The Australian government isn't going to pay to catch and export a couple of hundred wallabies for European zoos! Secondly there would almost certainly be issues with exporting wild-caught animals from Australia, and possibly with importing wild-caught animals into other countries (in both cases, as opposed to captive-bred animals from zoos). With regards to Australian animals being available for foreign zoos: they are. Australia isn't going to send out just any species (you're not going to get platypus or honey possums, for example), but there are many which they do export to zoos, including such archetypal Ocker species as koalas and Tasmanian devils! The ban on exports is for commercial or private reasons -- animals exported for zoos are in a separate category. It is done on a case by case basis and there is a lot of paperwork obviously, but it is quite wrong to say something like "Australia refuses to export species A". (In the specific case of tammar wallabies and brush-tailed possums though -- just get them from NZ! We don't want them!). A lot of the "Australia refuses to export animals which they are culling" nonsense comes from the private sector and relates to things like cockatoos. Of course Australia isn't going to export thousands of wild-caught cockatoos for pets, but that is not at all equivalent to exporting select animals to zoos.
I actually did some research into the economics of an export-programme of cockatoos instead of culling them, although it can be very profitable in the beginning the numbers Australia needs to export, to actually have a decrease in populations, need to be so high it will bring the prices down so fast that the programme will become it's own downfall. Next to that there will be some unwanted side-affects like a decrease of breeding of cockatoos abroad and a lot of cockatoos ending up as house-pets, which with the intelligence of this group of parrots is a bad idea for most people.
I doubt there was more than one. The fox task force cost million a year and never killed one or produced evidence of one. Fox scats were found, but these are easily collected on the mainland and planted but someone not wanting to see the fox task force disbanded. If they had DNA tested the scats to prove they came from related individuals I would be less skeptical.
Foxes in Tasmania. So is it now generally accepted there aren't( or are no longer) Foxes living wild in Tasmania? They were very lucky if that is the case as it did appear(didn't it?) that some were liberated deliberately some years ago. Did they fail to establish,, or was that not true either?
In the past (particularly in the 70's and 80's) there have been some very vocal people wanting to export cockatoos, but they turned out to be people who were employed by farmers to trap cockatoos. Most of the birds they caught were killed, and a few were sold as pets (for around $50 each if they were lucky). They wanted to export to the States because in the USA they were going for around $6000 each and they thought they would make a mint, as each netting would catch a few hundred birds. Actually, in Australia it's the noise factor that makes them bad pets. They scream like nobody's business, and are extremely destructive. Both traits the result of an intelligent bird being bored. Hix
@Chlidonias, thanks for your reply. On the subject of Australian / NZ wildlife exports to overseas. For starters; I never believed this "not willing to export .." stuff, there has to be a determination to do so to make it happen (and not be put off by extra paper work). I do believe there is a good methodology to this. I just do not believe an individual zoo to zoo deal would cut it. I am much more in favor of a consortium of zoos vying for an import or export and developing relations between zoos across Continents to do so. I am happy with the Tasmanian devil and Goodfellow's tree kangaroo examples …! Could anyone think of any good examples Europe / US-Canada to Australia / New Zealand (as the same applies the other way round ..)? On the shooting of agile wallabies in the Tasmanian territories, it will have to be experienced hunters who can distinguish between the local fauna and the - exotic - agile wallaby.
That is good, because in fact exports of Australian fauna happen all the time. There are two broad conditions that the Australian government lays down (although there are plenty of exceptions to these, too): 1. The animals should be going into a program to maintain that species into the future. That is the Government does not want zoos coming back time and time again for the same species. Therefore approval is far more likely for a number of animals going to several zoos than say a single pair going to one zoo. So obviously one constraint is there must be sufficient zoos with sufficient places for a species to make a program viable. 2. The animals must be captive bred. So the second constraint is that there must be sufficient surplus animals in the Australian zoo system to make up the numbers needed for export. Exceptions usually come about for diplomatic or trade reasons. However the recent export of post-reproductive Tasmanian devils is positive, as the Australian program is likely to produce large numbers of surplus animals into the future. Export would seem like a good solution to that problem.
