Hans Brunner

The proposed solution for bandicoots (SBB) in the Botanic Ridge and Devon Meadows urban development area has a number of problems. Bandicoots are expected to cross extremely busy roads via inadequate corridors. I ask, "Would it not just be so much more cost effective to simply exchange SBB’s from the RBGC to the Pines and from the Pines to the Royal Botanical Gardens Cranbourne? (RBGC)"

The Department of Environment, Land,Water and Planning (DELWP) believes that 30m wide corridors for SBB’s to other areas will compensate for the loss of habitat and lack of contact with other bandicoots . This is my response.

The corridor from the RBGC to the Pines is about 8 km long and has to cross Pearsdale Rd, Cranbourne-Frankston Rd, the extremely wide Western Port HWY (double road), Potts Rd and McClellend Drive in order to lead into the Pines and this reserve needs to be fenced in with a predator-proof fence and no dog walking allowed in the reserve.

Road crossings are not only costly but also create bottle necks and it is every ones guess how SBB’s can cope with the extremely wide Western Port HWY underpass alone.

Four to six times a year of fox baiting on both sides of the corridor on an ongoing basis is not only extremely expensive but there is no guarantee that it will be successful.

There is also the need for a fence on both sides of the corridors in order to guide the SBB’s to where they are expected to go.

A further question is whether the whole length of this corridor can be properly provided with suitable vegetation.

If one walked the whole length of it there would be surely some more difficulties encountered. A Population Viability Assessment would surely cause laughter at all of this.

And what about the yet unspecified and prohibitive costs involved?

Would it not just be so much more cost effective to simply exchange SBB’s from the RBGC to the Pines and from the Pines to the RBGC?

Further more, such an extremely narrow and long corridor is still untested and there is definitely no proof that it will work. SBB’s deserve much better than this and need to be treated with dignity in large reserves.

The corridor from the RBGC to the Western Port Bay is also an extremely narrow corridor and is about 10 km long and has to cross Browns Rd, North RD, Smith Lane, Baxter-Tyabb Rd and many more smaller roads and finishes up at nowhere in particular near Western Port Bay. It encounters the same extreme difficulties as the corridor above.

The rest of the proposed corridors will surely encounter very similar problems.

This nationally endangered species needs to be properly protected within large reserves and protected within a predator proof fence, rather than to try to condemn them into these corridors.

I have now attended three workshops on how to compensate for the loss of southern brown bandicoot (SBB) habitat because of urban expansion adjacent to the Royal Botanical Gardens Cranbourne.

At the first meeting I went with a totally open mind in order to see what was on offer for the loss of SBB habitat adjacent to the Royal Botanical Gardens Cranbourne. I was willing to see how corridors would work, where they would be located and how wide they were to be. I also wanted to know what other alternatives there were on offer. To my disappointment, there were nothing else but corridors recommended as compensation for habitat loss and b pop loss. Large reserves did not get a mention. There were also no considerations about the effects of climate change.

At the second meeting, things somewhat improved. While corridors were still the main subject, some reserves and trans-location of SBB’s was also suggested. After examining the viability of the proposed corridors I found that at least two of them, one to the Pines and one to Western Port Bay were, in my view, a ridiculous idea in too many ways which I have already detailed in an earlier report. For the rest of the corridors I decided to wait until I could see the area where they were to be placed and to examine the presence of remnants of SBB’s in the Koo Wee Rup area.

At the third meeting and bus trip I became clearly aware that corridors in this region were subject to the same limitations as the previous two corridors. I had to conclude that all of the recommended corridors were not only ridiculous but also extremely so. On the last stop we were shown a drainage lane with good vegetation and flowing water. In spite of this, SBB’s were still trying to move to each side of this corridor and into totally unsuitable habitat. My question is, how much longer can they survive there while exposed to further urban development and the presence of foxes and cats and floods?

Collectively, a Population Viability Assessment (PVA) applied to all of these corridors to estimate whether they will work for SBB’s would fail totally. (A standard PVA estimates the species population survival potential for the next 100 years.) My own assessment is that these untested corridors will be a total waste of money. They will not work and SBB’s deserve better than just a piecemeal solution.

Lets think about the SBB’s. What would they prefer? If one honestly wanted to provide the best for them, they would have to be properly protected as they are at the RGBC and should be so, in some other, similar reserves as well. We have a moral obligation to properly protect this species by keeping them in reserves such as the RBGC and some other similar reserves. I have no objection to maintain existing pockets of SBB’s in the wild by intensive fox and cat control for as long as they can survive there. However, for them to be able to exist in new, untested corridors is, in my opinion, nothing but a costly gamble and is guaranteed to fail. Have we not learned as yet from the untold failures that occurred with the Eastern Barred Bandicoots where they became nearly extinct before they were eventually protected in large reserves only or on islands. I therefore beg the Department of Environment Land Water and Planning (DELWP) to think clearly and honestly about the many problems with those far too narrow corridors for bandicoots and respond properly to the outcome of a realistic PVA study on them.

Wildlife corridors appear to be the ideal solution in most people’s mind when it comes to the protection and enhancement of wildlife. There seems to be a deeply embedded corridor mentality that makes people believe that wildlife corridors will cater for everything. However, there needs to be a closer examination as to what type of wildlife will use corridors? And what type of corridors can be of a positive benefit to wildlife.

In the case of the Southern Brown Bandicoot (SBB) , to promote ONLY corridors in the Royal Botanical Gardens Cranbourne region for their survival is totally unacceptable and unproven. SBB’s should not be simply used as a bargaining point in order to create wildlife corridors. SBB’s are not a corridor living species by nature and therefore I can not see how, especially in brand new corridors, and with so many obstacles, that these corridors could be successfully used by bandicoots. They would also be severely isolated in corridors for long periods which will result in in-breeding and incest, problems which could be easy overcome if they lived in large reserves.

I therefore totally disagree with the proposal in TRYING for SBB’s to live within corridors ONLY and especially where they are exposed to foxes, cats, dogs and cars as well as the disturbance from adjoining urban housing estates.. They cannot, and will not, survive in these conditions! The unfortunate bandicoots would be condemned to a network of narrow corridors where they have to try to survive in what is left for them.

Even while some old, isolated remnant bandicoot populations still just survive in some linear fragments, such as road sides or drainage lines, it should not be expected that they will survive in newly created corridors and all will be OK for the future of this species.

These are cruel expectations and there is no real future for the SBB. They will not survive A proper scientific evaluation needs to be carried out, know as Population Viability Assessment. Bandicoots living under the above proposed conditions would never pass this test! Another situation, which has not been fully considered, is what if the corridors are considered a fire hazard, passing between housing estates? Vacant building blocks in these estates have to be cleared and slashed before each summer. In addition, the corridors will be most likely be used by people to walk their dogs, making predator control virtually impossible.

In respect of new corridors, I have never heard of a case where a long and narrow, brand new corridor was able to connect two substantial colonies of bandicoots. I have no objection to a short and wide corridor linking with two substantial colonies of bandicoots with appropriate protection such as predator proof fencing. However, such a possibility does not exists in these regions, due to the fact that SBB’s living outside the Royal Botantical Gardens Cranbourne and in the Koo Wee Rup swamp area can now only be found in some linear fragments. Fox and cat control will not be able to protect them there for ever.

Strangely, when a corridor for bandicoots is still seriously considered to link the RBGC with bandicoots on Quail Island; with Koo Wee Rup, and into the Frankston area it becomes obvious to me that no proper thought was given to the implication encountered .

The distance to Quail Island alone is 10 km and to Koo Wee Rup much further.Disastrously, the latest news is that there are at present fewer than 100 bandicoots remaining on Quail Island due to feral pig disturbance. Bandicoots will have to swim from the island at exactly the right spot to find the entrance of the open-ended corridor on the mainland visa versa. The corridor needs to be at least 200 m wide but Malcolm Legg, the local ecologist, suggests they should be 1 km wide. In addition, to provide any form of protection, the corridors need to have a predator proof fence on both sides (therefore 20 km of fencing is required for the Quail Island corridor alone) and all of these corridors have to be re-vegetated to suit bandicoots. This type of scenario applies also to the proposed corridors to Frankston and the Pines.

Another problem is that the majority, if not all, of these corridors have to cross several roads and many will have serious bottle necks. These corridors were recently approved by the former Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the Environment, Senator Simon Birmingham, after “serious consideration” , and were recommended in the most recent strategy AS THE ONLT SOLUTION. There is no costing for them or for the cost to obtain some private land. This and other such proposed corridors, will do absolutely nothing for the long-term protection and well-being of the SBB. This deeply inbred corridor mentality is the reason why all of the Government’s strategies to protect the SBB’s have so far failed. A PHD student, Sarah Maclagan, currently caring out research into SBB’s in this region, agrees that corridors are only a small part of a solution for the ultimate protection of them.

I further question why the SBB’s are expected to mostly survive in corridors within this region when for a closely related species, the Eastern Barred Bandicoot in western Victoria, no corridors have been considered for them, and for good reasons.

To my dismay, I am absolutely amazed that in all of those failed strategies there was never a mention of keeping bandicoots within large reserves surrounded by a predator proof fence. In the Pines Flora and Fauna Reserve at Frankston North, there were at one time at least 400 bandicoots. The $ 1.6 million allocated for predator proof fencing was taken away, in spite of the $ 20 millions spent in the reserve on underpasses for this bandicoot as well as for the re-vegetation of large areas to suit them. To allow dog walking in this nature conservation reserve seems to be more important to Parks Victoria then the protection of this nationally endangered bandicoot,.

I note that, beside the Pines, there are several other reserves on the Mornington Peninsula which have suitable habitat for bandicoots and should be considered such as the Briars Park at Mt. Martha which already has a predator proof fence around their nature reserve as well as many other reserves where bandicoots used to be in their hundreds.

In order to prevent the extinction of this species, some ‘insurance’ colonies within large reserves should be a priority.. Bandicoots will be so much happier and safer in a much more natural environment where they can retreat in the hot summer into cool gullies and freely spread out in all directions in winter . It will be more natural or akin to ‘wild’ conditions, than being crammed into narrow corridors and exposed to all the threats that are created by corridors. As to the health of the gene pool, bandicoots can be easily exchanged between reserves by trans location.

Anyone really and sincerely concerned with the survival of this species must first and foremost make recommendations for SBB’s to be re-located within reserves such as the Pines, the Briars and possibly two other reserves, surrounded by a predator proof fence.

Why not copy the proven success experienced in the RBGC and follow this example rather the risk trying to condemn bandicoots into corridors?

To invest millions of dollars as a long-shot in unproven corridors for bandicoots is an expensive way to achieve even more failures. There is, at present, already $20 million wasted on under passes in the Pines and this could be exacerbated by loosing yet more money in the construction of unproven corridors especially created for SBB’s.

There are at present far too many pseudo experts who seem to know better than people involved with bandicoots for over 40 years. Their recommendations are based on emotions only rather than on clearly evaluated and scientific evidence which, unfortunately, unfortunately resulted in a long history of failures for this species.

While I strongly support the creation of corridors between housing estates for other wildlife and in order to prevent wall to wall urban development, we should not use the endangered bandicoot as bargaining chips for the establishment of corridors, and in this way, restrict the ways they should be properly protected.

Therefore, the creation of corridors and the protection of bandicoots must remain two distinctly separated issues! For the prevention of regional extinction of this species, they must not be provided with just corridors only.

Introduction by candobetter.net editor: This article reflects interviews with Frankston natural scientist, Hans Brunner, who has spent decades of his life trying to save the southern brown bandicoot, as many of those who know Hans are aware. Here the ABC takes up Hans's argument about the $20m promised by the State Government to be spent protecting bandicoot habitat that was threatened by Peninsula Link was never used as promised for a fox-proof fence. "Peninsula Link dutifully spent $20 million of taxpayers' money on the underpass, and handed over $1.6 million to Parks Victoria for the fence. But Parks Victoria never built the fence. At the completion of the freeway in 2013, and with only a single bandicoot hair detected two years prior, Parks Victoria chose to direct the money intended for the fence to bandicoot programs near Cranbourne..." in an area now allocated for a projected housing development. This is totally outrageous by Parks Victoria and by the government with which it is too closely aligned. Surely the current Parks Victoria Board should be sacked. Planning documents from 2011 show wide reserves with predator-proof fencing. But a 2012 revision made them a dotted line — an option if Federal Minister for the Environment Greg Hunt required it. Mr Hunt failed to do so. His dereliction with regard to this unique creature in the world, the southern brown bandicoot, seems to be his support for by Melbourne's [over]development. A Dubai conference recently named Greg Hunt 'the best environment minister in the world' seems a reflection of extreme cynicism or a calculated insult to the Australian public. Good on the ABC for promoting this investigation. Article by Sara Phillips, first published on http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-28/survival-of-rare-melbourne-bandicoots-under-threat/7181580

Photo:
The southern brown bandicoot once thrived in the Melbourne region. Now the Melbourne population is down to the 400 or so inside the Cranbourne Botanic Gardens. (Supplied: Hayley Davis)

Map:
Cranbourne 3977

Wildlife corridors that experts say are crucial to the survival of Melbourne's last remaining population of southern brown bandicoots may not go ahead if documents from the Victorian State Government are any guide.

Revisions of state planning documents for a new housing development near the bandicoots' stronghold in the Cranbourne Botanic Gardens downgraded the wildlife corridors planned for the suburb to a "contingency project".

The Victorian Government's own bandicoot strategy said the corridors were not cost effective.

Development is yet to commence, but bandicoot lovers said the Government has all but written off the species within Melbourne city-limits.

The small brown marsupial is listed as nationally endangered. They were once abundant across Melbourne and they are found scattered throughout Victoria and South Australia in small pockets.

For bandicoot enthusiast Hans Brunner, the threat to the Cranbourne bandicoots is a case of history repeating.

Bandicoots once thrived at The Pines Flora and Fauna Reserve, a patch of bush in the back blocks of Frankston on Melbourne's urban edge, just 10 kilometres from the Cranbourne Botanic Gardens.

Mr Brunner campaigned to save The Pines' bandicoots as urban development, feral foxes and cats took their toll. When help finally came it was too late.

The Pines was split by a freeway in 2010. Federal environment laws aimed at protecting the bandicoot dictated that an underpass must be built for the bandicoots and a predator-proof fence installed around the 220-hectare reserve.

Peninsula Link dutifully spent $20 million of taxpayers' money on the underpass, and handed over $1.6 million to Parks Victoria for the fence.

But Parks Victoria never built the fence.

At the completion of the freeway in 2013, and with only a single bandicoot hair detected two years prior, Parks Victoria chose to direct the money intended for the fence to bandicoot programs near Cranbourne.

Chris Hardman, regional director for Melbourne for Parks Victoria said: "With so many pressures on that small parcel of land, it's really difficult to secure a species. And that's why I think the investment in [the Cranbourne area] will better secure the future of the southern brown bandicoot than we could possibly ever achieve than in such an impacted landscape as The Pines."

Mr Brunner was outraged that $20 million was wasted because of the failure to spend a fraction of that on a fence.

"$20 million of our money has been spent and now they've abandoned the bandicoot plan completely for The Pines and this money's just wasted. Public money's wasted."

But Mr Hardman said the area from the Cranbourne Botanic Gardens to Westernport Bay has a larger population of bandicoots, more space to work with and a fighting chance of securing their long-term survival.

Wildlife corridors were planned to run through the proposed Botanic Ridge housing development, aiming to allow bandicoots in the Gardens behind predator-proof fencing to breed, slip out through special bandicoot gates and spread into nearby suitable areas.

"Linking landscapes is a really important thing to do and that's one of the great opportunities with the Westernport reserves, that we are much easier able to link those landscapes with large parcels of land," Mr Hardman said.

Terry Coates, a bandicoot expert who works at the Cranbourne Gardens, agreed that corridors were key to the species' long-term survival.

"We've been very keen to see those corridors leading away from us out into the surrounding landscape, not to see our population isolated and locked up," he said.

But the corridors favoured by Mr Hardman and Dr Coates are looking increasingly unlikely, meaning the future for this endangered species is far from guaranteed.

Planning documents from 2011 show wide reserves with predator-proof fencing. But a 2012 revision made them a dotted line — an option if Federal Minister for the Environment Greg Hunt required it.

When asked whether the Minister had required the corridors, a spokesperson for the Federal Department of Environment said Mr Hunt had "endorsed the Program of the Victorian Government for Melbourne's urban growth".

These Victorian documents from 2014 included the option of corridors but noted that the corridors were "less cost-effective than alternative conservation measures".

The Victorian Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning was unable to provide further details on the future for the corridors.

Dr Pia Lentini, a research fellow at the University of Melbourne, said governments have a responsibility to protect Australian wildlife.

"They have a mandate to protect these species and make sure they don't go extinct. And in order to do that they need to consider more carefully what's going in Australian cities and towns," she said.

Cities are surprising refuges for endangered Australian species, according to recent research from Dr Lentini.

"If you pick a random point across Australia if it's in a city you'll find about 10 threatened species and if it's outside a city you'll find about three," she said.

"At the moment there seems to be a bit of a perception that cities are a bit of a write-off for threatened species conservation — that populations in cites are too far gone or a too small.

"But our analysis really shows that if we put in a bit of effort we can make a big difference just by focusing on cities."

See new ABC report about this here. The ABC has interviewed Hans Brunner about the problems of bandicoots in Victoria. The interview will be screened on Sunday 22 February 2016 on the 7pm news, we believe. (The schedule changed from this Sunday.) Hans Brunner is well-known to professional ecologists and wildlife enthusiasts in Frankston and the Mornington Peninsula, where he has continually championed the rights of bandicoots to safe habitat in the face of ever-increasing obstacles and stone-walling by government. Hans continues to be involved in the defense of preserving a full natural ecology in Frankston.

The inventor of a revolutionary hair identification system, Hans is known nationally as a key expert witness on dingo hair identification in the Azaria Chamberlain appeal case which freed Lindy Chamberlain. Among other cases, Hans is known internationally for his work to identify the nature of hair samples linked to the Orang Pendek, a mysterious upright ape or hominid sighted in Sumatra.

Hans is the author of Hans Brunner and Brian J. Coman, The identification of mammalian hair, 1974 and Hans Brunner and Barbara Triggs,Hair ID : an interactive tool for identifying Australian mammalian hair, 2002.

Pictures in this article were provided to Hans by the ABC.

Fraser Island provides the last opportunity to secure the protection of purebred Dingoes. It is therefore our obligation to look after them as we look after elephants, tigers, lions, rhinos,monkeys etc.
(dingo searching for food on Fraser Island- Jennifer Parkhurst photographer)
While we spend millions of dollars on these exotic species we not only neglect our own iconic dingoes, we actually demonize them and especially so on Fraser Island.

(image: Fraser Island hungry dingo looking for food from a fisherman- Jennifer Parkhurst photographer)
These dingoes need to be looked after and as well fed as all the exotic animals in zoos and wildlife sanctuaries are.

Well fed dingoes will not need to beg for food from tourists and will leave them alone. All the so-called trouble by dingoes is only caused because of their plight of malnutrition and the constant persecution by public staff.

(image: very skinny dingo Jennifer Parkhurst photographer)

Therefore, the protection of the Fraser Island dingoes must be the ultimate top priority, long before any other activities, while tourism should be the absolute, bottom last. If there is any better controlling needed on the island it must be the tourists and definitely not the dingo.

This article describes the important contribution of bandicoots to tree health and ecology. It raises the much wider costs of bandicoot extinction and tree die-off associated with such extinction.

Bandicoots are a unique marsupial abut the size of a guinea pig. Females have a pouch like kangaroos but their pouch is opening backwards so that the young have to get in and out through the “backdoor”. This is because bandicoots dig in the soil for grubs and, hence, would fill their pouch with soil.

They have a long nose with a highly developed olfactory system. Their long nose is lined with lots of sensitive receptors and neurons in order to detect food buried deep in the soil. They can detect the exact location of a grub 20 cm deep under the soil and pin-point exactly to it when digging for it.They dig very rapidly with their long fore-claws and within seconds they find their meal.

In addition, their conical diggings left behind are of great importance to the environment (Patricia Flemming etal). These diggings increase soil turnover, alter plant community composition and structure, trap rainwater for better water infiltration, capture bio-mater for nutrient cycling, and add to fungal and seed dispersal. The presence of diggings can also prevent tree mortality and tree-die-off while the dispersal of fungal spores will speed up leaf-litter break down and so reduce the fire hazard.

Sadly, bandicoots are extremely vulnerable to the introduced predators such as dogs, foxes and cats as well as the reduction and fragmentation of their habitat. One would think that the extreme usefulness and aesthetic value of these cute animals would be enough to want them to be protected at all cost.

"My question is: what is gained by delisting SBBs? Will the government be able to save some money on fox and cat control and will developers receive the green light to build houses in bandicoot habitat? We certainly have not been told everything. To declare SBBs safe because in one or two areas where fox control slightly increased their numbers is absolutely ridiculous. Take that money away and see what will happen." If readers want to make their voice heard on threatened species the address is species.consultation[at]environment.gov.au

The Director
Marine and Freshwater Species Conservation Section
Wildlife, Heritage and Marine Division
Department of the Environment
PO Box 787
Canberra ACT 2601

Re: Delisting of the Southern Brown Bandicoot

I have been involved with Southern Brown Bandicoots (SBB) for more than 40 years. I live in Frankston where I remember finding SBBs all over the Mornington Peninsula, in the Frankston area and especially in the Pines Flora and Fauna Reserve where they were recognised as the largest and strongest colony in the region. Sadly, I have observed them gradually disappearing from all of these areas and in many of these places they have become extinct.

How could this be allowed to happen? Since 2001, when the species was put on the endangered list, a SBB recovery group was established and SBBs were selected as the flagship species in the Western Port Biosphere Reserve so that they would receive special attention. At least five major workshops were held involving hundreds of people, among them many scientists, government agencies, private consultants and landholders. In addition, countless meetings of the SBB recovery team were held at many different places. During the same time the Victorian government created strategy after strategy for the recovery and protection of them but so far, none of them work.

Sadly, no SBBs or habitat areas were recovered anywhere in this region. At the Pines, where some SBBs were still remaining, at least $120,000 was spent on fox and cat control. It was unsuccessful and the last SBBs were lost as well. It is now high time to admit to the grand failure in protecting this species especially in this region.

As for my understanding, SBBs are not a corridor living species by nature and need to be provided with habitat in large reserves as is the case at the Royal Botanic Gardens Cranbourne and can be in the Pines Reserve, Briars Park in Mt Martha and several other reserves that are surrounded by a predator-proof fence. We desperately need some insurance colonies before we gamble with the rest that still survive in the wild.

If not, and if this current scenario goes on much longer, we will soon reach the point where the species will come down in numbers as the Eastern Barred Bandicoot did when, at the lowest stage, only 50 animals survived and where captive breeding had to prevent them from becoming totally extinct on the mainland. Even after some numbers were increased, the government managed to make some huge blunders with them (long story). Why have we not learned from this?

My question is: what is gained by delisting SBBs? Will the government be able to save some money on fox and cat control and will developers receive the green light to build houses in bandicoot habitat? We certainly have not been told everything. To declare SBBs safe because in one or two areas where fox control slightly increased their numbers is absolutely ridiculous. Take that money away and see what will happen.

Hans Brunner
M. App. Sc. Deakin University

A few days ago wildlife biologist, Hans Brunner, came to see me to ask me to publish the following report on the continuing failure of Victorian government to responsibly protect bandicoots. He also reported his personal experience on a recent visit to the Department of Environment and Primary Industries (accompanied by Gillian Collins, Michelle Thomas, and David Nichols).

He described what I have experienced myself in two past visits to the Department several years ago. What seems to happen is that citizens concerned about wildlife ask for a meeting with those responsible in the Department. A meeting is granted but in the manner of an audience with a dignitary. For years now the people in the department have worked in a high building in the city where the entrances to actual offices are guarded by security guards. This gives the impression that they know that they are not doing what they are supposed to be doing (actively protecting fauna under the Fauna Guarantee act) and fear public anger. Visitors must sign a book and wait under the eye of the guards until more staff come to escort them. Meetings are brief and conducted in barren, isolated offices that do not look as if they have any permanent occupants. There are no cosy couches, no friendly and understanding ears, citizen to citizen, just a distant official taking notes. Criticism is fielded with statements implying that the matter is in more qualified hands than yours. Maybe they will put you on some marginal email list for a while. Numbly, you walk back out through a large foyer where glossy posters give the impression that all is well with our fauna, and public servants sell and distribute glossy pamphlets on the same note. You leave feeling that you have had a conversation with a disapproving brick wall and drive back through the city and back into the areas of bushland you are trying to defend with a deep sensation of wasted energy and disempowerment.

#HansBrunner" id="HansBrunner">The awful and unnecessary plight of the Southern Brown Bandicoot

After such a visit, Hans Brunner writes:

The Southern Brown Bandicoot scenario is so extremely frustrating and full of contradictions!

1. Department of Environment and Primary Industries (DEPI) argues that because there are possibly no more bandicoots in the Pines, where there were hundreds before, that they will not re-introduce them into the Pines anymore. Yet, they introduced the Eastern Barred Bandicoot on at least four occasions into areas where there were none in existence before. What is the difference?

2. Department of Environment and Primary Industries and Parks Victoria accepted the conditions of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Donservation Act’s (EPBC) request to install a predator proof fence around the Pines at the completion of the freeway. Yet, they suddenly decided not to do so. Is this honourable ?

3. Department of Environment and Primary Industries and Parks Victoria stated that the Eastern Barred Bandicoots could not be protected by fox control alone and that they had to be enclosed within predator proof fencing. Yet, in one of their recent strategies they recommended that the Southern Brown Bandicoots’ protection will depend on fox control alone and even scrap connective corridors. What has changed?

4. Parks Victoria elaborately explained why dog-walking at the Devilbend Reserve is totally unacceptable form many reasons but they recommend dog walking in the Nature Conservation Reserve in the Pines with prime habitat for the nationally endangered SBB. Hypocritical!

5. Parks Victoria used a 17 page report, with lots of irrelevant and ridiculous arguments to explain why a predator proof fence does not work to keep out foxes. Yet, predator proof fences have recently been constructed for the protection for the EBB’S. So, what is behind this?

6. The number of recent strategies recommended by DEPI for the so-called protection of the Southern Brown Bandicoots are constantly changing, each contradicting the previous one. This is total incompetence.

In contrast, our own people, concerned with the ultimate protection of the Southern Brown Bandicoots have, right from beginning, lobbied without changes to our plan to put the Southern Brown Bandicoots back into the Pines where they belong, within a predator proof fence and to make use of the $ 20.000.000 of underpasses already spent and provided for them. When do Department of Environment and Primary Industry and Parks Victoria finally come to their senses and accept their responsibilities?

[1] The reference to Kafka and to DEPI's castle relates to Franz Kafka's novel of this name. Here is a description, from Wikipedia: "The Castle (German: Das Schloss, later also Das Schloß) is a novel by Franz Kafka. In it a protagonist, known only as K., struggles to gain access to the mysterious authorities of a castle who govern the village for unknown reasons. Kafka died before finishing the work, but suggested it would end with K. dying in the village; the castle notifying him on his death bed that his "legal claim to live in the village was not valid, yet, taking certain auxiliary circumstances into account, he was permitted to live and work there". Dark and at times surreal, The Castle is often understood to be about alienation, bureaucracy, the seemingly endless frustrations of man's attempts to stand against the system, and the futile and hopeless pursuit of an unobtainable goal."

The recent strategy of these organisations for the management of the Southern Brown Bandicoot is based on 99% of bias and negativity. It is a declaration of war against this species. Their barbaric program is full of hypocrisy as well as hiding the real evidence in order to bolster their arguments. Their proposals are too opaque and misleading and often quite ridiculous, simply all in order to save money!

The Department of Environment and Primary Industries (DEPI) and Parks Victoria propose to monitor Southern Brown Bandicoots in the Pines for the next ten years while they, at the same time, suggest that they have become extinct there. (This amounts to funding window dressing.)

They propose to monitor for many years how the $20 million worth of underpasses work for the absent Southern Brown Bandicoots. (A waste of public money)

They carry out re-vegetation activities especially suitable for the Southern Brown Bandicoots but don’t want them in the Pines. (Hypocritical)

They propose to conduct regulars fox and cat control programs in the Pines for the protection of this species knowing very well that Southern Brown Bandicoots are not there anymore.(Already costing well over $ 100,000.00. (Failed every time because of presence of dogs)

They refuse to install a predator-proof fence around the Pines which is the only realistic way to protect the Southern Brown Bandicoots in the Pines once re-introduced. (The DEPI and Parks Victoria just want that money, not the responsibility.)

They refuse to tell the real truth why the Southern Brown Bandicoots were lost in the first place in the Pines. (Parks Victoria’s total mismanagement and neglect)

They make it sound unnecessarily difficult about the re-introduction of SBB’s into the Pines. (Scaremongers)

They now want to spend the money specifically provided for the fence in a biodiversity damage-mitigation undertaking with EastLink in an area where they have, in their last strategy, severely undermined the safety of this species by axing connective corridors. (They will spend it elsewhere.)

They now depend entirely on fox control to protect this species in the Sub-Regions of Koo Wee Rup which they insisted did not work for the protection of the Eastern Barred Bandicoot. (What has changed?)

They have deliberately misinformed the politicians, hence the wrong decisions were made. (Common practice)

They play unfair politics with both these critically and nationally endangered bandicoot species, both close cousins of the much loved Bilby. (Cannot say what I am thinking on paper)

They really HAVE declared war on them both.

[Candobetter.net Editor 4 April 2018. Our attention has been drawn to the fact that the title of this article could make people think that candobetter.net is generally in agreement with Dr Yugovic on this matter. The fact is that we do not agree, but we have permitted him to put his argument here, in response to other articles that find that tree dieoff has many other causes. These articles can be found under the general topic of 'predator restauration>.]In response to Hans Brunner’s post, I note he does not actually quote me and if he reads my article ("Do ecosystems need top predators?" on the SPIFFA website and in the journal Indigenotes) carefully he will find there is no recommendation for more foxes, cats and dogs. The term ‘plague’ of possums is not mine and I use it in quotation marks in the article. It is a term I have heard locals use, and with some justification.

(Photos provided by Dr Jeff Yugovic)

Possum induced tree decline is very real and is a very serious threat to indigenous trees on the Mornington Peninsula, with thousands of trees dead or dying in many locations. Just drive down Old Mornington Road, Walkers Road or Kunyung Road in Mount Eliza or visit Mount Martha Park to see for yourself, but you need to be able to identify indigenous eucalypts as the many planted non-indigenous eucalypts are generally not eaten by possums. I also attach further photographic evidence.

The evidence of possum damage is all too abundant and there are several consultant reports on this issue (see my article for some references). Mornington Peninsula Shire has an unreleased tree pathology report on tree decline on the Mornington Peninsula which says in relation to Mount Martha Park:

Diagnosis: The sparse crowns of the trees in plots appear to be indicative of browsing damage. Eucalyptus pauciflora appeared to be the main species affected. The probable cause of browsing animals is supported by the banded trees in one area of the park, which show significant crown recovery following the installation of the bands (Figure 20A). Prognosis: Continued unsustainable browsing will result in further defoliation and dieback and eventual death of trees in the Park.

We need to recognise the problem of possum induced tree decline, and move on to analyse what is causing this imbalance and how it can be addressed, noting that the phenomenon was not reported by early Europeans when Victoria was in its original and natural condition and seems to have developed since European arrival.

Jeff Yugovic

Mornington Peninsula[1] The writer of an article about ecosystem need for top predators claims that "Observations on trees and experience with possum guards by the author indicate that possums are the major cause of tree decline on the Mornington Peninsula ..."

Hans Brunner: I am somewhat alarmed that a highly respected ecologist, Dr. Jeff Yugovic, can declare that possums on the peninsula are in plague proportions (published in the journal Indigenous, “Do Ecosystems need top predators?”) and that this was supported by Carol Shelton on behalf of Mt Eliza Association for Environment in form of a press release. There are probably many other people who would agree with Yugovic and Shelton merely because they don’t like possums jumping about on their roofs during the night.

I myself believe in scientific evidence.

Where are the regular spotlight counts that establish the real numbers of possums compared to the number of trees available to them in a given area?

Where are the true numbers of trees that actually die from possum browsing compared with trees dying from the many other reasons?

I have inspected lots of sick-looking trees without finding possum droppings under them and no signs of browsing. I can find more possum droppings in built-up areas under power-lines used by possums than under trees and in those areas all the trees look healthy.

The assumption that there is a plague of possums on the Mornington Peninsula resulting in the destruction of the tree canopy is in my view only a hypothetical observation and is definitely not based on rigorous scientific and unbiased research.

Over the last three years Victoria has experienced each year one or two severe heat waves. As a result, thousands of possums died in those years from heat exhaustion. So, where now is this “plague” of them?

With more heat-waves predicted in the future they may even become endangered.

The suggestion that we overdo predator control and that, on the contrary, we need more foxes, cats and dogs to reduce possums is totally irresponsible.

Because of these predators - foxes, cats and dogs - on our Peninsula, nine (9) native mammalian species have already become extinct, five (5) species have become extremely rare and another two (2) are endangered. And this is just mammals!

This same ratio or worse applies to species of birds, reptiles and amphibians.

While I think, and hopefully all of us agree, that in large natural environmental ecosystems a balance between predator and prey species is essential, here on the Peninsula the situation is very, very different.

The expectation that an increase of predators may reduce a few possums would surely be badly out-weighed by the risk of losing proportionally even more of our rare, native wildlife species.

Putting flexible plastic sheets around the trunk of trees, to be effective, would require being done to every tree on the Peninsula, because if possums can’t go up one tree they would soon find another one. Even if this were possible, practical, or desirable, the risk is that it will also exclude koalas, sugar gliders, marsupial mice and reptiles accessing these trees in the same manner as possums.

So, please don’t make possums the scapegoat and declare war on them!

Hans Brunner

NOTES

[1] The Mornington Peninsula is in Victoria, Australia.
Comment by Candobetter.net editor: It was declared part of the UN Biosphere series a few years ago, in one of many attempts to save its biodiversity and considerable natural ammenity, but despite this, it is sadly being covered in roads and housing by successive troglodyte Victorian governments.

Originally published under another title on 2013-03-26 20:40:25 +1000.

Dingoes on Fraser Island, Australia are dying of starvation, with sand and grass in their stomachs. One woman tried to alert the world to this and was sentenced and fined for her trouble. On 25th of August 2012 Jennifer Parkhusrt received a national award from the Australian Wildlife Protection Council in recognition of outstanding contributions to the preservation and protection of Australian native Wildlife. What a contrast to the treatment she received from the Queensland government!

(Jennifer Parkhurst's website. More information about donations at end of this article.)

Dingoes on Fraser Island are protected because of their purity. This may be, at first sight an ideal situation and would find acceptance by most people and dog- or specifically dingo lovers. As for the tourist trade it has boosted the numbers of tourists to the island who wanted to have a dingo experience. From the outside it looked very good and only very committed people objectively examined how these beautiful creatures are actually managed.

One of these people is Jennifer Parkhurst and I refer to her as the Dingo Lady who has lived on Fraser Island for seven Years. She loves and adores dingoes and has observed them throughout the island. She scrutinized their behavior and took hundreds of photos of them. Her entire life was committed to them.

Frazer Island dingo pups dying of starvation, eating sand and grass

To her horror she discovered that most of the dingoes were starving and only ten percent of pups survived to adulthood. Stomachs examined of dead pups contained only grass and sand. This is partly the result of the shooting of their parents while they are desperately searching for food along the beach where tourists, who do not know how to behave, make reports of “dangerous” dingoes. But it is not only the pups that are starving. Her photos show adults with all their ribs clearly visible. When the alpha female goes looking for food and returns, her pups run eagerly towards her only to realize that she did not find food for them. Then, they scratch around in the soil to possibly find a grub or they chew on bark of woody plants like rabbits do in drought situations.

There is no game to hunt for dingoes on this island. They have become desperate scavengers and beach combers.

To make matters worse, large areas are unnecessarily burnt, reducing their food source and shelter even further. If one would examine the food remains found in their droppings the way it is done regularly in food habit studies on the mainland, it would surely expose embarrassing results. Often dingoes are ear-tagged and radio-collared unnecessarily as if they were criminals in order to follow their movements on this restricted island. Culling dingoes, especially adults, has serious implications for their family structure and learning, resulting in subsequent misbehavior and breeding problems. If this maltreatment of dogs in refuge and dog shelters occurred, the owners of these shelters would certainly be heavily fined and their shelters closed. What then is the difference on Fraser Island?

What is it about dingoes and women that bothers Australian governments so?

And now back to a REPEAT of the savage miss-handling of the Azaria Chamberlain Case. The dingo lady, who noticed the many starving dingoes struggling to survive, gave some poor animals a few pieces of coconut. For this she was convicted and fined $40.000 as well as sentenced to a 9 month jail term suspended for three years and has now a criminal record! She could just not control her distressed feelings for these ailing animals. The “stone-walling” of her defense and the brutality of the prosecution resulted in her inability to work and she lives now on a disability pension while she still has to pay off her fine. You can make up your own mind as to what the government is trying to hide and why they try to silence the Dingo Lady.

Dingoes were brought to this island by the Aborigines where they became dependent on the Aborigines to compensate them for the dingo’s lack of prey species. In recent years some exotic, large animals were introduced to the island which benefited the dingoes. The Forestry workers wormed and fed the dingoes, and before the island was heritage listed, rangers fed them. Fishermen were also allowed to give the dingoes their offal. But now, all these extra food sources have been removed and there is now no real hunting opportunity left for them.

Please ask for food supplements for the dingoes

I would implore people to write to their local MP’s or the federal minister for the environment, and ask that random food drops be introduced to Fraser Island. I would also ask that people request a complete moratorium on all culling of dingoes. While Fraser Island is in Queensland, and seems far away from us down here in Victoria, it is a Heritage Listed Icon of Australia and belongs to us all. One day you might like to take your children there to show them a world-famous dingo. Without action this may soon be impossible.

I was fortunate to be present when on the 25th of August 2012 the dingo Lady, Jennifer Parkhurst, received a national award from the Australian Wildlife Protection Council in recognition of outstanding contributions to the preservation and protection of Australian native Wildlife. What a contrast to the treatment she received from the Queensland government!

Hans Brunner (M. App. Sc.)

More Information

Australian Story featured Jennifer Parkhurst's horrible experiences with the law and her attempts to represent dingoes. You can see the program here: http://www.abc.net.au/austory/specials/dogsofwar/default.htm or just click on the picture at the top of this article.

Donations to help Jennifer pay her fine can be sent either to SFID or to your local Magistrates court. Payee is ‘State Penalties Enforcement Registry’ and her Party ID is: 62883053. Please be sure to get a receipt, and she asks if you would be so kind as to post her a copy of the receipt for her records, she would be most grateful.

Mail can be sent to Jennifer C/O SFID: 50 Old Maryborough Rd Pialba Qld 4655

The magistrate who convicted and so severely punished Jennifer Parkhurst with a suspended sentence and a $40,000 fine was Magistrate John Smith in a case at Maryborough Magistrates Court. Adam Randall , who was Jennifer's partner at the time and fed the Dingos with her was fined only $2500.

Hans Brunner is one of many scientists and other people who have tried to stand up for the Fraser Island dingoes. Australian Story gives others. Another example is:

Dr. Alan Wilton (1953-2011) Prominent Australian Geneticist, Assoc. Professor of the School of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences at the University of NSW. Dr. Wilton devoted much of his academic life in studying the ancestry and significance of the dingo in Australia. http://savefraserislanddingoes.com/

Check out Dr Earnest Healey's Dingo Care Network here: http://home.vicnet.net.au/~dingo/ffg.htm

The Lindy Tapes documentary premieres on Channel 7 this Sunday Hans Brunner was the man who finally identified the dingo hairs in the Azaria Chamberlain Appeal in 1988. He also examined the jump-suit she had been wearing and experienced the attitudes of Northern Territory officials involved in the case. Here we publish his remarks on the recent coronial verdict. He is refreshingly candid. He also defends dingos and comments unfavorably on the the fining of a woman who fed hungry ones on Fraser Island. Brunner's remarks add to the evidence that Australians should not just assume that the Australian justice system and media are basically reliable. Nor, particularly, should we assume that the government knows what it is talking about with regard to Australian wildlife. These 'authorities' need to be questioned constantly and those who question them should not be easily dismissed.

In 1980 Azaria Chamberlain disappeared at Ayers Rock/Uluru. She was 9 weeks old. Her mother said that she had seen a dingo leaving the tent. The implication was that a dingo had taken the baby. Mrs Chamberlain however, was accused and convicted of murder.

1988 Appeal overturned convictions based on Brunner dingo hair identification

In 1988, the Northern Territory Court of Criminal Appeal overturned all convictions against the Chamberlains. The evidence of Hans Brunner, a forensic hair expert,[1] was crucial for the overturning of the conviction, since he was able to identify dingo hairs.
Although the convictions against Mr and Mrs Chamberlain were overturned, a coronial inquest in 1995 delivered an open verdict.

June 12, 2012 Second Inquest: Brunner comments

On June 12, 2012 a second coroner delivered a verdict that a dingo did take Azaria.

I asked Hans Brunner what he thought of this and published his response as a comment, on June 13, 2012. He wrote to me,

"Why did it take so long to finally admit that a dingo took the baby Azaria? This result was obvious to me right from the start. Mrs. Chamberlain would have had to be twice as clever as Houdini to accomplish what she was accused of. I thought that it was over and done with after I identified Dog (Dingo) hairs found on the jump suit and singlet. But no, the 'powers that be' did not like to admit that Dingoes can be a danger to children as this could have badly affected tourism. A lot of the scientific evidence given was scandalous and perverted and left the door wide open for a conviction. We can't blame the judges when they were fed with lies.

But now I am elated that the truth has finally been accepted."

Doubt in public mind, re jumpsuit

This statement about the role of dingoes in the fate of Azaria Chamberlain elicited some doubtful comments.

One comment was, "Its not so much that I don't believe it. It's that I don't believe there was no human involvement at all... Someone took her from that tent and the dingos may have ended up with her. It just doesn't sit right ; I'm not saying that Lindy did or didn't have anything to do with it, but I'm just not convinced."

Another comment was, "The biggest question in my mind is how did the blood-stained jumpsuit get off the baby in one piece and undamaged?? Why did no one see anything? Evidence was removed beforehand. There are just too many unanswered questions surrounding the whole situation."

Brunner today on jumpsuit, officials' attitudes, dingoes and injustice

I asked Hans these questions and he wrote the following explanation based on his observations of material for the Appeal. It contains information about police attitudes of the time, which is shocking. One can only feel the greatest dismay at the way Lindy Chamberlain was treated by our police, court and media.

Hans wrote to me on 16 June 2012:

"I have seen and carefully inspected the jumpsuit and singlet as well as many other items in Canberra.

The jumpsuit was soaked with blood and badly damaged in front. I have taken special notice of the ends of the fibers in the damaged area and found them with torn ends and not cut. I was well trained for this as I had to examine lots of sheep wool found in wild dog droppings. When the wool had natural tips it was from a lamb that has not yet been sheared. The others had clearly cut ends.

As to human intervention, I have no doubt that this happened, but only AFTER the dingo took Azaria. I belief that the baby was taken from the dingo, disposed of, and the clothes placed where they were found.

At an earlier stage, just when the clothes were found, I rang the police and offered to examine dingo droppings collected in the surroundings to see whether I could find remains of Azaria in them. I was bluntly refused and told that, "She did it anyhow," and the phone went silent. I was only asked very much later by the Defence to examine hairs mounted on two microscope slides. This was very easy for me since I used dingo hairs as reference sample in my book, The Identification of Mammalian Hair.

As for the skeptics, they probably took only notice of what was fed to them by journalists and crook scientists, while the real information remained hidden from them.

I love dingoes very much. I worked with them while two were in captivity for two years at the Keith Turnbull Research Institute in Frankston.

I am still extremely angry that a women on Frazer Island, who fed a hungry, sick looking dingo, was fined $ 40,000 for giving it some food.

When does injustice stop?"

Notes

[1] Mr Brunner was then a Senior Technical Officer for the Department of Conservation, Forest and Land. He developed the technique for identifying mammalian hair which was published in 1974 and is used around the world. In Australia users include the CSIRO, Government agencies and universities.

"Every time I hear or read the word 'sustainable', for instance, in 'sustainable growth', 'sustainable living' and 'sustainable economy', I feel that we are being cheated and lured into false security."

Article by Hans Brunner

"Sustainability," a word much used and abused

Every time I hear or read the word 'sustainable', for instance, in 'sustainable growth', 'sustainable living' and 'sustainable economy', I feel that we are being cheated and lured into false security. These expressions permeate our cultural communication and continuously mislead. It is therefore time to alert people to the uncomfortable, or ‘inconvenient’ truth about to what is urgently needed in order to obtain realistic sustainability. The fundamental problem that causes all our present and future unsustainable existence is that there are far too many of us on this planet of finite resources.

Ehrlich and Flannery

Professor Paul Ehrlich (ehrlich in German means ‘honest’), in his report “People and the Planet” to the Royal Society said

“ The optimum population of the earth was 1.5 to 2 billion people, much less than the seven billion alive today. So we have to humanly and as rapidly as possible move to population shrinkage.”

A similar statement was also made by Professor Tim Flannery in The Future Eaters as early as 1995:

“Because of the structure of our economy, a population of 6-12 million (people) would give Australians enormous flexibility in dealing with environmental and other problems.”

Both professors are surely acutely aware that they have to protect their reputation when making these statements. Obviously, their conclusions must have been based on lots of accurate and unbiased information, while realizing that their research results could upset a lot of people. Both also insist that their estimates are made under the condition that the living standard per person must not increase.

Increasing number of concerned people as people numbers increase

There is now a rapidly increasing number of other people who also express their concern about over-population, many of them well informed scientists.

Based on my own experience, I am personally convinced that their statements are realistic as well as accurate. We all can ill-afford to live any longer in a fools' paradise and naively belief that the little bandage work we are doing will save the world. The truth about over-population has to come out and be shouted from every rooftop. It is sad that, in spite of this, our politicians on both sides still push for population and economic growth as if there was no tomorrow. By this, they blindly speed up the certain and disastrous consequences that will inevitably doom our future.

Easy way to inform yourself: Check out Sustainable Population Australia (SPA)

I ask the skeptics to do their own, honest research or to contact Sustainable Population Australia for information before they refuse this important warning. Acting now, even if it seems harsh and difficult, is much better than to wait for the much more brutal and out of control responses, such as inevitable wars, famine and natural disasters, to do it for us.

Since there is abundant information and many detailed studies available on the above subject, it was not my purpose to go into all the details of what has happened and why it has gone so wrong, as it would take pages to cover it all. Greed would probably be one of the most fatal factors.

So, in future, when you use the word ‘sustainable’ think at least twice and more seriously about it and then you will most likely not use it.

Victorian government plans to drop 1080 poison bait from an aircraft into forests could result in the extinction of the already critically endangered Spot-tailed quoll. The purpose of this antiquated and vandalistic method is to poison wild dogs.

Article by Hans Brunner, Wildlife ecologist and biologist

Why is the Victorian Government using old, dangerous methods?

The Victorian government plans to drop 1080 poison bait from an aircraft into forests which could result in the extinction of the already critically endangered Spot-tail quoll. The purpose of this hazardous, antiquated and vandalistic method is to poison wild dogs. This is like re-introducing the use of DDT. It is now a double disaster: all Ted Baillieu has to do now is to aerial bait to kill wild dogs in order to protect the cattle he allowed to go back into the mountains.! An estimated success rate for aerial poisoning of wild dogs is one tonne of poison bait per one dog! Spot-tailed quolls and other Dasyurids are meat eaters as well as some species of possums, reptiles, bandicoots, bush rats and birds. It was estimated that 90% of baits were either not eaten or taken by other animals. Raptor and scavenger birds may collect poison bait and take them to feed their young. McIlroy (CSIRO) reported that in one campaign birds took over 40% of the bait. These other animals would all be at serious risk of being poisoned. Further more, most of this bait would be wasted because of the dogs not being able to find them and this is where non-target animals will rather find and eat them. Baits have therefore to be placed only in places which dogs frequently use, along forest tracks.

More effective method known

There is a well researched and efficient method for the poisoning of wild dogs and foxes. It is a target specific bait station system which is successfully used throughout Victoria. Bait stations are placed along forest tracks where activities of dogs are observed.
A bait station consists of a mound of soil about 20 cm high and one meter in diameter. An un poisoned bait (free feed) is buried in the center of the mound about 10cm deep with some SFE lure placed on top. When the bait has been dug up and eaten, a check is made, with some experience, to assess whether a dog or fox took the bait. If satisfied that a target species took the bait it can be replaced with a poison bait. If it appears that a quoll or an other non-target animal may have taken the free feed bait, continue free feeding that station to keep the quoll and others away from a poison station (about 2 km away) or eliminate that station.
This is the only responsible way to poison dogs and foxes. Even better, it will be of great benefit to not only the quolls by removing the competition by dogs and foxes of their natural prey species, but also for the survival of Kangaroos, wallabies, bandicoots, possums, echidnas etc.

Biologist's experience of alternatives

I have researched and tested this system in 700 square km of forest between Gembrook and Neerim and found it most effective and efficient. I have also introduced it in NSW National Parks where it was recognized as “The dog baiting stations proposed by Hans are the best practical suggestion to date. With the implementation of the bait stations, properly maintained and serviced at the appropriate times, there would appear to be NO reason to allow the continued use of aerial baiting” and, “Poisoning using the buried bait technique is still proving extremely target specific, with dogs and foxes being the only species killed”.

Do it the right way and wildlife return

Barbara Triggs, an eminent naturalist stated after poisoning wild dogs and foxes and using the bait station system on her property in Croajingolong Nat. Park:

“At no time has there been any evidence that a bait has been taken by a non-target animal. In the past year the numbers of native animals seen on the property have increased startlingly. The Red-necked Wallabies, who’s group was here in low numbers, have increased markedly from five individuals to now at least fourteen. The most surprising increase has been in the population of Long-nosed Bandicoots. The Dusky Antechinus, Swamp Rats, Water Rats, Sugar Gliders and several species of ground-nesting birds and also species of owls are much more in evidence than ever before."

With all this evidence, this non specific and irresponsible aerial baiting must be immediately stopped.

Hans Brunner
Wildlife biologist
Sept 2011

Through incompetence and neglect 110 ha which was recently added to the Pines Flora and Fauna reserve was mismanaged by Parks Victoria and Department of Sustainability Victoria to the point where nearly all the species it contained have become extinct. Now this land is due to be separated by a huge tollway from the rest of the reserve, despite many bitter protests and submissions from residents and other concerned people, whose hearts are nearly broken. See also related articles

The death of the DARA land.

110 ha of land once belonging to the Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, known now as 'the DARA land" was recently added to the Pines Flora and Fauna reserve. Through incompetence and neglect it has been mismanaged by Parks Victoria and Department of Sustainability Victoria to the point where nearly all the species it contained have become extinct. Now, in a crowning act of environmental vandalism,[1] this land is due to be separated by a huge tollway from the rest of the reserve. This is to go ahead, despite many bitter protests and submissions from residents and other concerned people who do not want it.

Here Hans Brunner describes the process by which the species became extinct and pleads for the area to be rehabilitated. It is the least that the State government and SEITA (now renamed the Linking Melbourne Authority) can do. This time there should be transparent aims to increase the fauna species representation to its optimum and reproducible methods to test the success of the operation, so that the public may monitor the effectiveness of it.

Hans Brunner sends a plea to Department of Sustainability and Environment and to Parks Victoria to bring the Dara land back to life again. It can and must be done.

The future of the DARA land can be so much brighter than its past

The Dara land is the 110 ha that has been added to the Pines Flora and Fauna Reserve. It borders on Ballarto Rd and McClelland Drive and joins on to the golf course, North-East of the original Pines. The proposed Bypass will separate the two parcels of land.

Some twenty years ago the Dara land, then occupied by the Dept. of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, was teaming with wildlife. There were large colonies of Swamp Rats, lots of Bandicoot diggings everywhere, there were Wallabies, Ringtail- and Brush-tail Possums, Echidnas, an occasional Koala and Sugar Glider and only a very small number of Rabbits. This was the result of regular poisoning of foxes and rabbits and the total absence of dogs. Boundary fences were inspected weekly and repaired immediately.

After a large wildfire, it took about two to three years for these animals to recover to their original numbers, but they did so with the help of ongoing fox and rabbit control and the absence of dogs.

After Dept of Agriculture left, Parks Vic and DSE allowed ferals to run amuck

After the Dept, of Agriculture vacated the Dara land Parks Victoria was appointed to manage this land. Immediately fox and rabbit poisoning stopped, a number of gates were erected to allow people with their dogs to enter as well as foxes and cats. The bandicoots were the first to suffer. It took only about twelve months for them to totally disappear from the whole of the Dara land. Where there were once large colonies of Swamp Rats one could find only the mounds of soil where they used to be. Rabbit numbers increased and fox and dog foot prints became prevalent not only along the walking tracks but also throughout the bush land off the tracks.

20 yrs ago foxes' and domestic dogs' scats revealed diet of endangered fauna

During my many visits, I collected scats of foxes, cats and dogs containing hairs and identified them in order to determine the prey species.

Since we know already too well what foxes prey on I concentrated on dog scats with hairs of prey species. It is well known that some people encourage their dogs to hunt for rabbits in the Reserve and the dogs will than go for anything that moves including native animals. Bandicoots are especially vulnerable to predation as they have to dig deep holes to get to their food and then can easy be ambushed while doing so. They also have not got large ears like the rabbits have to hear predators approaching. Subsequently I established what the contents were of twenty four dog scats. Of these, 8 had Rabbit, 4 had Wallaby, 4 had Bandicoot, 3 had Brush-tail Possum, 3 had Ring-tail Possum and 2 had Swamp Rat. Fox scats had a higher proportion of Rabbits but preyed on all the other animals as well and included some Sugar Gliders and lots of lizards.

Now the same scats show diet of mostly rabbits

Fox and dog scats now contain manly rabbit and a few ring-tail possums as all the other small native animals have almost totally disappeared.

This was not helped when Parks Victoria control burnt a large area of prime bandicoot habitat and before this area could recover an adjacent area was also burnt. This resulted in the absence of all the animals that used to live there and consisted of about fifty percent of the whole Dara bush land.

Active fox dens are now distributed throughout the whole area and there is no hope for the native animals to become re-established again.

The ultimate blame lies with DSE and PV

The ultimate blame lies with DSE (Department of Sustainability and Environment)[2] and PV (Parks Victoria)[3]. They both were unwilling to protect the nationally endangered bandicoots and with it all the other native mammals, birds, lizards and frogs. How can they completely neglect and mismanage this prime habitat for not only this rare bandicoot but also for Koalas, Sugar Gliders, Swamp Rats, Echidnas, Brush- and Ring-tail Possums and all the other native wildlife! We have to urgently go back to the way the Dara land was managed by the Agriculture Dept.

In the absence of dogs, the control of foxes, cats and rabbits could than be carried out completely un-restricted and efficiently.

I plead with the DSE and PV to bring the Dara land back to life again. It can and must be done. If I had time, exactly the same story could be told about the Western half of the Pines where beside the predators and rabbits motorbike riders cause havoc to Wallabies, birds and other wildlife.

Hans Brunner

[1] Works undertaken by the Linking Melbourne Authority (once called SEITA) with the support of the Brumby government and your taxes.

[2] The Department of Sustainability and Environment has almost no staff devoted to actively protecting and sustaining healthy biodiverse fauna populations. DSE seems to be far more interested in pushing human population growth by stimulating high immigration, providing land to developers and pushing through infrastructure programs to the detriment of our indigenous fauna and the loss of green spaces. DSE is dominated by agriculturalists and property development oriented planners and technicians.

[3] Parks Victoria is a public authority (akin to a government department), funded from three major sources; payments from the State Government Budget (your taxes), an annual charge based on a property rate levied on all metropolitan properties, and user fees.
It is managed by a board with the following members:
Rob Gerrand, BA, FAMI, FAICD
Lois Appleby
Clarice Ballenden, BA (Hons) M.Ed.
Damien Bell
Rod Gowans, PSM.
Ken King, Dip. For., B.Sc (Hons)
Noel Harvey, OAM, MAICD
Jennifer Labourne, B.Bus, FCPA
Jan Mahoney BA, PhD, FAICD

What are these people doing with our money?

In 1845 the Mornington Peninsula was thick with wildlife: herds of kangaroos, wombats, wallabies, many echidnas and koalas and glorious birds, all unused to man and quite tame and inquisitive. ...wonderful trees, abundance of silver wattles, when in blossom, gilded the country and filled the air deliciously with their sweetness. Now population growth is turning the Peninsula into a desert. Research and graphs by Malcolm Legg and Hans Brunner.

Original fauna

Howitt in 1845 wrote:

“ The Peninsula was thick with wildlife, with herds of kangaroos, wombats, wallabies, many echidnas and koalas and glorious birds, all unused to man and quite tame and inquisitive. He described the wonderful trees and abundance of silver wattles which, when in blossom, made the whole country golden and the whole atmosphere filled deliciously with their sweetness.”

Henry Tuck and others also stated that Kangaroos were like herds of sheep and could never be shot out, and bandicoots and possums were in hundreds and that the native cat was one of the commonest animals.

Ms. Cavill, who lives next to the Moorooduc Quarry Reserve commented in her Masters Thesis:

“In the 1930’s we found bush around us, a whole wonderland of animals, wild flowers, birds, hollow trees, gullies and ground water ways.

Koalas grunted all night, wombats, kangaroos, wallabies, possums, echidnas, bush- and water rats, flying foxes and bandicoots were abundant and tame. At night the frogs roared in the darkness . In the evening, swarms of birds arrived in v-shaped formations and landed on the swamp. Black – and tiger snakes were common around the huge Moorooduc swamp that lay below our property and brown snakes and copperhead were a nuisance around the house.
Our delight in exploring the swamp with its sheets of water, covered with swans and ducks, and its spongy islands of moss and tee-tree was always tempered by fear of these snakes.
On our horse rides their was a never failing source of interest in the discovering new wild flowers, gullies of maiden ferns, orchids, minute wild strawberries, egg and bacon bushes and swathes pink and white heath.

There were several other similar reports made by Wheelwright, Kenyon and Hobson, mentioning also many other species and all describing the Mornington Peninsula as teeming with wild life.

Based on historical and recent records there were at least 37 species of mammals on the Peninsula in those early days.

Much the same could have also been said about the many species of birds, reptiles and amphibians. Hobson in 1837 observed the gigantic crane or brolga and the native turkey ( Australian Bustard ). They are now listed as threatened fauna in Victoria.

The loss of native fauna

With the arrival of pioneers and settlers, timber cutters removed nearly all the mature trees on the Peninsula and shipped them to Melbourne or used them to build railway lines or as fuel to drive stone crushers etc. or to clear land for grazing.

Kangaroos were slaughtered in their thousands on single drives and some of the meat, together with koalas and possums was sent to Melbourne for food. Animals were also destroyed because of competition with sheep and cattle grazing.

Much of the land was then used for farming and for fruit orchards. The clearing of land caused subsequently massive soil erosion and mega-tons of good soil was washed into the sea especially along Balcomb Creek.

With the ever increasing number of people arriving on the Peninsula, the remaining natural bush was gradually destroyed and fragmented.

Chris Tzaros recently worked out that for every 100 hectares of woodland cleared, between 1000-2000 woodland dependent birds are lost. These figures could be even higher for mammals, reptiles and amphibians.

With this drastic decrease of suitable habitat for most native birds and mammals, many species have now become locally extinct. (See graph below).

Doug Robinson has estimated that about 50% of birds which originally existed on the Peninsula are now either locally extinct or are threatened. Ground nesting birds have suffered most, especially because of predation by foxes and cats.

A Mr. Woolley and others also used to shoot ducks in the 1880’s for a living until they were almost shot out.

Later, larrikins delighted in the shooting of wild life when the pubs were closed after 6 O’clock.
In the quarry area bandicoots and kangaroos lasted till about 1940 and wombats and the eastern quoll till about 1960. By 1970 koalas, sugar gliders and antechinuses were still present but have since declined drastically and have become extremely rare and the antechinuses are now extinct in the Frankston area.

There is also a growing concern over a serious decline of invertebrates. Subsequently, there are concerns for the future of many species of bird, mammals and amphibians that feed on them. Habitat loss and habitat fragmentation as well as the over use of pesticides has to be the main reason.

In summary, we have taken over all the prime land on the Mornington Peninsula . The rest of nature is forced to make do with what is left which amounts to less than 5 % of a much- reduced quality of habitat. Plainly, this is the major factor resulting in the ongoing, local species extinction and in an increase in ecosystem stress.

Loss of mammalian species on the Peninsula:

From 37 original species = locally extinct and endangered 25 species = 66%

Loss of mammalian species in the Frankston area:

From 37 original species = locally extinct and endangered 28 species = 76 %

To cap it all, we now have, in a large number of reserves, more introduced mammalian species such as the fox, cat, dog, rabbit, black rat, brown rat and house mouse, than native species. (This does not include all the farm animals such as horses, cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, and deer etc. that take up land originally used by native animals.)

The graph (data from Malcolm Legg ) shows the loss of mammals on the Mornington Peninsula. Since then, two more species had to be shifted to the “extinct” section, namely, the Wombat and the Southern Brown Bandicoot.

The recent, local loss of the Southern Brown Bandicoot is one of the latest examples. In spite of all the lobbying and by-partisan political support, no sufficient efforts have been made to safe this species. This Bandicoot has been in great numbers all over the Peninsula and its disappearance during the last thirty years has been well recognised and documented. This is yet another frustrating, shameful, local extinction story of an iconic Australian species.

Hans Brunner

(Hans Brunner is a Peninsula Wildife Biologist and internationally recognised as a Forensic hair identification expert, through his work identifying dingo hairs in the Azaria Chamberlain appeal and later in identifying a possible new hominid species in Indonesia.)