You are here

Greens Party hypocrisy

ACT Greens Minister Shane Rattenbury approved the massacre of 1455 kangaroos, thereby proving Greens' policy to 'protect native wildlife' a sham! The usual spiel 'The Minister does not take the decision lightly' is a pathetic excuse for not trialling non-lethal methods!

In June 2013, Greens Minister Rattenbury approved the massacre of 1,455 adult kangaroos (excluding pouch young) in Canberra's so-called Nature Reserves. However since then two protest groups - Animal Liberation ACT and the Australian Society for Kangaroos - launched urgent legal action to stay the seven cull licenses in the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal. They wanted the culls delayed by the tribunal until a full review of the government's decision occurred, and said they would be at a significant disadvantage if a stay was not granted. Unfortunately, the protest groups lost and a total of 1244 kangaroos were approved to be massacred in seven Nature Reserve Parks.

Greens Hypocritical

What kind of political party would have a policy to 'protect native wildlife' and 'ensure that animals' rights and welfare are respected' then go ahead and authorise a bloody massacre of native animals?

Cruelty in Kangaroo 'Culls'

And it gets worse. For every adult female there is one in-pouch joey and one at foot joey, both dependent on her for 18 months. When she is shot, the pouch young is yanked from her pouch and bashed to death while fully conscious without anesthesia. The at-foot joey will hop away only to die of hunger, predation, hypothermia and a broken heart. In view of how pouch young are despatched, how can the Greens justify this when their policy clearly says 'humans have a duty of care to minimise physical and psychological suffering of animals resulting from human activity'? Where are the strong animal welfare standards when it comes to kangaroo killing? Non-existent obviously.

(photo: Braidwood Wildlife Hospital)

Daniel Iglesius claims that the two professional shooters doing the 'culling'
had an exceptional strike rate of more than 99 per cent for hitting their target the first time. It's extremely unlikely that these shooters would get such a high rate of head shots considering they are shooting at night at moving targets. In fact the RSPCA claims that at least 40% only are not head shots, meaning their face gets blown off and they are still alive or they are body shot and still hop away.

If anyone killed a puppy or kitten like this it would be an offence. Our kangaroo killing is every bit as bad as Canada’s seal hunt. Shame on Australia!

Pseudo-science used to justify brutality

There is currently no evidence of overgrazing, soil loss or threats to other species, but ACT bureaucrats want to spend taxpayers’ money to ‘cull’ in case next year kangaroos breed up.

Where’s the science backing up their claims that:

  • kangaroos overgraze
  • cause soil loss
  • threaten other species
  • populations have exploded?

There isn’t any! It all looks very clinical, official and correct. We need to see through this veneer of ‘correctness’ to the cold-hearted brutality masked by pseudo-science.

Non-lethal Solutions

If you believe the 'science' that kangaroos are overpopulated in these reserves (unproved) and if you believe their population estimates (always hyper-inflated) and if you believe kangaroos are impacting other species (also unproved) in spite of millions of years of living in harmony with other species, then where are the wildlife corridors for them to move on? Why have the Greens not even considered the need for these in view of their policy to protect native wildlife?

Relocation is a viable option that is actually cheaper than shooting and many local and experienced wildlife carers would happily assist, however, the Greens appear to not even consider such an option. When I called Rattenbury's office last month I was told that relocation was not an option because of the high number of deaths. Even if that were true, why do they prefer 100% deaths to a lesser number of deaths? As it turns out Professor Steve Garlick and his wife Rosemary Garlick presented a paper in Adelaide showing 0% deaths in their relocation of 700 kangaroos over the years. Why aren't they being consulted by the Greens?

Letter by Macropod Author and Lecturer to Minister Rattenbury dated 9th June 2013

ACT Minister Environment- Simon Corbell MLA
ACT Chief Minister- Katy Gallagher
ACT Legislative Assembly- Shane Rattenbury

I am appalled at the recent announcement (at the last hour) from the Government to kill healthy Eastern grey kangaroos in Canberra national parks. This is NOT a cull, since these are healthy animals!

This is the most underhanded and disgustingly corrupt display of authoritarianism, which seems typical of the way in which this Government works, without any consideration or input from the people who elected them. If this planned slaughter of healthy animals was based on scientific evidence, why isn't this evidence published for public comment?

How is it that healthy, native animals can be slaughtered without any statistics of the numbers of kangaroos present in the Canberra Parks which covers approximately 50 square kilometres?

WHO has carried out a count of these animals? Why hasn't the numbers of kangaroos been published for the public to see?

Last year Mr. Iglesias stated that that, "kangaroos have evolved the ability to quickly take advantage of good conditions"? Kangaroos cannot change their breeding cycle, which remains the same whether conditions are good or bad. Eastern greys have a gestat