Fraser Island

While expressing sympathy for the child injured by a dingo on Fraser Island around midnight on April 18, and for the child’s parents, the National Dingo Preservation and Recovery Program (NDPRP) wishes to draw attention to the long-term mismanagement of the high conservation value dingo population on the island by the Queensland authorities. The NDPRP considers that the continued mismanagement of tourism to Fraser Island by the Queensland government and of the dingo population by the Queensland environmental authorities have been major contributing factors in such incidents.

(Posted on behalf of the National Dingo Preservation and Recovery Program Inc.)
Tourism numbers to Fraser Island have grown over the past decade to mass proportions which are not consistent with the preservation of the environmental and wildlife values which are the basis of the Island’s World Heritage Listing status. This is particularly the case at peak visitation periods like Easter.

What should be managed as a high conservation, ecotourism location of world significance is being marketed as a cash cow for mass tourism. Much of this mass tourism impacts on dingo breeding locations and the dingoes simply cannot avoid the human traffic. Instead of tourist visitation to the island being managed as a privilege, and visitor numbers restricted accordingly, Fraser Island is being managed as a Disney style theme park.

Camping on Fraser Island should be strictly limited to designated camping areas, which exclude dingoes. Poorly regulated, free range camping on a mass scale should not be permitted. An alternative management approach of this kind would respect the high environmental values of the island, protect campers and limit visitation numbers to manageable levels. Wilson's Promontory in Victoria is an example of this superior management approach.

Serious questions remain about whether tourists to Fraser Island are properly informed by the authorities about dealing with dingoes and how to avoid negative contacts with them. Current visitation numbers are so great that this cannot be done properly. Questions also remain as to whether the ranger presence is great enough in popular camping locations on the island, like the one where this incident occurred. Was the family involved in this incident approached and informed by rangers about safe behaviour? The announcement by island authorities that the ranger presence will be stepped up in the wake of this incident is too little too late.

The simplistic and environmentally irresponsible approach of killing dingoes involved in such incidents cannot continue. Evidence shows that the genetic diversity of the island’s dingo population may already have been damaged by routine killing. The problem is not with the dingoes, which are part of Fraser Island unique ecosystem. It rests with the commercial mind set of the Queensland government, which looks upon the World Heritage Listing status of Fraser Island as an opportunity for maximising the tourist dollar at all costs.

Dr Ernest Healy

Secretary,

National Dingo Preservation and Recovery Program Inc. A0051763G

I was inspired to write this short article after reading evolutionary sociologist Sheila Newman's multi-species population work on cooperative breeding and incest avoidance in Demography, Territory, Law: The Rules of Animal and Human Population, Countershock Press, 2013, chapters 3 and 4. Newman gives theory plus examples of self-controlled populations in variety of species. My primary observation of dingo breeding habits in their native habitat supports this theory and is supported by it.

Dingoes have the ability to self-regulate their population, and avoid breeding when times are lean, by suppressing their own estrus (female) and testrus (male) cycles. In normal circumstances, the alpha male and female are able to suppress breeding in subordinate pack (family) members, so that only one pair out of each pack reproduces. A stable dingo pack includes the alpha male and female, and surviving pups from the previous year’s litter. These pups have a vital role as beta pack members, who perform the task of ‘alloparental helper’, to wet-nurse, regurgitate food and deliver food (carcasses) for the pups and to provision the mother.

I have personally witnessed a beta female wet nurse pups of an alpha female (therefore the large litter of 8 pups was well provisioned), and have also seen an alpha female assist a young Mother from a different pack by nursing her pups as well as her own. There was also a case of an alpha female who provisioned her own pups by nursing, and then provisioned another (deceased) female’s litter on the other side of the Island, thus altruistically self-sacrificing for the sake of survival of another dingo’s litter.

Dingoes therefore have an innate ability to help each other survive, indeed, help the species survive, by cooperatively nurturing their young. I have also seen adoption of pups between packs, if numbers in the packs are low and beta members required.

When this role is successfully completed, in most cases, the beta pack members disperse to find new territories and make new alliances, bonding with dingoes from outside their own territory and staring their own packs.

Despite circumstances of provisioning each-other’s packs beyond their own territorial boundaries, in stable dingo packs, incest is non-existent. There is a complete avoidance of inbreeding, producing successful population control (to either raise or lower the population as required), promotion of genetic diversity, maintenance of social hierarchies, with territorial boundaries fixed and serving an important role.

However when pack social structure is disrupted, or entire packs are destroyed, this all changes.

I have seen one circumstance of near-incest and one of incest in unstable dingo packs.

In the first instance, the alpha female’s brother, whose own pack was completely wiped out, and who had no other females within his territory, followed his sister around desperately when she was in ovulation and ready to mate. I watched as the sister and her mate attempted copulation, but were constantly interrupted by the brother. The most fascinating observation of their behaviour was that although they were firm with the brother, insisting that he couldn’t mate, they were kind and gentle while pushing him away. The desire for him to mate was so strong that he had little choice but to continue to try and mate his sister, but there is no doubt that if his pack had survived, and he was able to find an appropriate female, he would not have been in a position to attempt to mate his sister.

In another circumstance, an entire pack was wiped out, except for a male and a female pup. The pair mated when they were 10 months old. Dingoes don’t usually have their first estrus until they are 2 years old, and it was a clear indication that there was something very wrong. Surprisingly, the female produced a very healthy litter of 8 pups. I believe she had a large litter to compensate for the fact that the rest of the pack was gone and the population needed boosting. I am convinced this was a form of preservation of the species, allowing for the fact that the carrying capacity of her territory was large enough for 8 new pack members.

These incestuous occurrences only took place because of loss of stable pack social structure, and bespoke of a species in crisis.

See also: Help Save Koalas From Extinction! (9/1/2014) on the Australian Wildlife Protection web site.

With the destruction of yet another juvenile dingo on Fraser Island, the Australian Wildlife Protection Council (AWPC) and the National Dingo Preservation and Recovery Program (NDPRP) today issued a joint criticism of the Queensland Government for its continuing mismanagement of the Fraser Island dingo population.

The juvenile male dingo was destroyed by Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service staff this week after it allegedly stalked tourists near Eli Creek on the Island and nipped an 11 year old child.

Spokespersons for the Australian Wildlife Protection Council Inc. (AWPC) and the National Dingo Preservation and Recovery Program Inc. (NDPRP), Ms Jennifer Parkhurst and Dr Ernest Healy, respectively, stressed that:

‘Such allegations of aggression by dingoes on Fraser Island are frequently subjective, often being misinterpretations of innocent dingo behaviour, and have characterised the mismanagement of dingoes on the Island for a long time. The Queensland authorities have a long track record of manufacturing perceptions of dingo ‘aggression’ on Fraser Island, at times even encouraging a fear mentality against dingoes amongst tourists’.

Ms Parkhurst, a wildlife photographer who studied dingoes on the Island at close hand for many years, stated that, this most recent destruction of a juvenile dingo on Fraser Island, after contact with tourists, highlights an even deeper mismanagement issue.

‘The underlying problem with the Queensland government’s approach to managing the Island, which is World Heritage listed, is the sheer volume of tourists that it allows onto Fraser Island, currently running at well over 400,000 per year. The dingoes are literally over run by tourists, including beach areas which are traditionally places where dingoes forage for food. Efforts by the authorities to virtually confine dingoes to the central areas of the Island, where they can be ‘wild’, without contact with people, are ill-conceived and unachievable. While this prioritisation of commercial values over biodiversity values continues, more dingoes will die and their ability to survive on Fraser Island in the medium to longer-term will be in doubt.’

Ms Parkhurst said hopes that the Newman government would mean a fresh approach to dingo management on Fraser Island have now proven unfounded.

‘Despite a review of the Fraser Island dingo management policy on coming to government in 2012, the current Queensland government has fallen into the same old mismanagement practices. Part of the problem is that there has not been a sufficient turnover of Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service staff to ensure departmental cultural renewal in relation to dingo management on the Island.’

Dr Healy emphasised that the ongoing culling of Fraser Island dingoes is being permitted by the Queensland authorities without sufficient base-line dingo population data to know whether the authorised killing of dingoes is undermining the viability of the Island’s population:

‘Convincing answers are yet to be provided by the Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service as to the total dingo population of Fraser Island, the population age structure, including the number of breeding pairs, and the genetic health of the dingo population. This is essential knowledge for any responsible dingo management policy. It has been lacking.

At present the authorities simply keep citing a figure of between 100 and 200 animals, a figure that has been blindly thrown around by the authorities for years without adequate research to substantiate it. The fact that the Queensland authorities have only recently put forward a detailed research agenda to address these dingo population questions bears out the inadequacy and potential risk of dingo management practices up to this point.’

The AWPC and the NDPRP are concerned that the majority of animals killed on Fraser Island have been juveniles. Without accurate population data on the Island’s breeding population, the impact of culling juveniles upon the overall dingo population’s survival prospects is not known. Destruction of juveniles impacts negatively upon future generations because they perform an important role as parental helpers in raising subsequent litters and they disperse to form new packs.

January 8, 2015

Independence of Queensland Liberal National Party Government Fraser Is. Dingo management policy review has been questioned by the SFID. Why is previous management involved in review of its own record? SFID believes there are a number of high-profile and more suitable ecologists in Australia with experience more directly relevant to dingo conservation who could and should have been recruited to the policy review. The history of dingo management on Fraser Island has been disgraceful.

Queensland Environment Minister Andrew Powell naive choice of Dingo review team

The Save the Fraser Island Dingo Incorporation (SFID) today expressed bewilderment and concern in its strong belief that the recently elected Queensland LNP government’s initiative to conduct a genuinely independent review of the failed Fraser Island Dingo Management Strategy already seems to have been compromised.

SFID has lobbied for years for an independent review of the current dingo management policy, which has been an ongoing disgrace and international embarrassment under the previous Bligh Labor government.

SFID’s concern relates to the engagement of two expert advisors to the dingo policy review process, who SFID strongly believes cannot be reasonably considered to be at ‘arms length’ in evaluating the current policy.

Contrary to the public commitment of the Queensland Minister for the Environment, the Hon. Andrew Powell, that the policy review would be rigorous and independent, the consultancy firm, EcoSure, hired by the Queensland government to conduct the review, engaged Dr Lee Allen as a keynote speaker for a public workshop, held at Maryborough on Friday 5 October as part of the review process.

Why is previous management leading review of its own record?

By no reasonable, commonly-accepted standard could Dr Allen be considered an independent participant. He has been acknowledged and thanked on several occasions during the term of the Beattie/Bligh Labor governments for his contribution to the Fraser Island Dingo Management Strategy or for input into research conducted as part of that strategy.

While not questioning Dr Allen’s expertise, his engagement as a keynote speaker at the public workshop, SFID believes, is a contradiction of the Minister’s commitment to a thoroughly independent review process. This belief is underscored by the fact that Dr Allen’s comments to the public workshop could be easily interpreted as an endorsement of the current policy, and thereby potentially influencing attendees whose opinions the workshop was designed to take into account.

Father-son team structure seems too subjective

It is also of concern that Dr Lee Allen’s son, Ben Allen, an expert in dingo ecology, has been engaged by EcoSure, to participate in the Fraser Island Dingo Management review. Again, there is no question concerning Ben Allen’s professional competency. The objection, rather, is that he would be in a potentially conflictual position in evaluating material gathered at the October 5th review workshop, and written submissions to the review, if involved in drafting EcoSure’s report to the Minister. If Ben Allen were to be involved in this part of the policy review, he would be charged with evaluating submission material critical of the current policy, and research conducted under the auspices of the current policy, that his own father has been associated with. Regardless of qualifications and experience, anyone in such circumstances could be placed in a position of conflict of interest. EcoSure should simply not have engaged someone with the possibility of being placed in a position of conflict of interest.

The consultancy firm, EcoSure, ought also be aware that Dr Lee Allen and Ben Allen have recently jointly published contentious material in a professional journal on the state dingo conservation research in Australia, which makes it clear that their views are substantially similar. It is of significant concern that the careers of Dr Lee Allen and Ben Allen have, we believe, been more focused upon dingo control than dingo conservation. This issue is central to the integrity of the review because one major criticism of the current Fraser Island dingo management policy is that it is being implemented as a de facto dingo control policy, rather than a conservation policy.

Review lacks diverse scientific representation

SFID believes there are a number of high-profile and more suitable ecologists in Australia with experience more directly relevant to dingo conservation who could and should have been recruited to the policy review, with experience more directly relevant to dingo conservation. If a more diverse range of expert opinion had been brought to bear upon the review process, the outcome could have been enriched. The current review process potentially represents a missed opportunity.

SFID calls upon the Minister and the Chair of the Fraser Island Dingo Management Strategy Review Steering Committee, Professor Possingham, to intervene to ensure that review submission material is evaluated objectively and that the Minister’s public commitment to a genuinely independent policy review process is upheld.

Source: Media release from Save the Fraser Island Dingo (Inc.), October 25, 2012

Sad story of 3 brothers, 2 killed, one is running for his life

.

A dingo From the K'Gari Butchulla camp called "Inky "is running for his life. QPWS targets three dingo brothers for ‘crimes’ they ‘supposedly’ committed and they have been coded for destruction. Visit Youtube news story on this dingo for a news report:- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypA2oeiO8Rs&list=UUdyUpJ3MnEdPLQnOuxMfAsg&index=6&feature=plcp

(Pic from Ch 7 Sunshine Coast QLD News)

Two have already been destroyed, one at the K'Gari camp site shot, where Inky was shot along with his brother who died. “Inky" survived but ran off with a bullet wound in his neck, developed an infected ear, is still running/ hiding terrified of the rangers. Another dingo Inky’s brother, ‘Byron’ known to be harmless, from Cathedral Beach was darted and given a lethal injection. This dingo was destroyed by QPWS on 4th Oct. 2012 before a public forum with the newly appointed FIDMS Ecosure on 5th Oct. This leaves "Inky” who, after his brother was shot at the K'Gari camp, ran off to join his other brother Byron at Cathedral beach. He is now being hunted by a trapper brought in by QPWS to trap and kill this terrified dingo.

An online vote poll asks ‘Should dingoes that attack tourists on Fraser Island be destroyed?’ It stands at 91% No and only 8% Yes- nearly 100% angry NO’s of community response. QPWS, Regional Manager Fraser Island, Ross Belcher admitted on ABC radio that this dingo and his brother, who were both killed, did not bite anyone. Why were these dingoes deemed dangerous and aggressive? They were future breeding dingoes, important to sustain another generation, but were given a death sentence based on an obscure report, and coded.

Those issuing death sentences do not understand dingo play behaviour; they behave like human male teenagers- boisterous. No more dingoes should die; there must be a complete moratorium on killing dingoes until Ecosure publish their peer reviewed FDIMS management strategy, which won't be until Feb next year. For decades, the fight to protect the F.I. Dingoes, has done little to improve the chances of these dingoes surviving for future generations. "Inky" and his brothers committed the crime of a code C..." a dingo was lying down 20 metres from a fisherman!! Other "crimes" the dingo commits, assume the dingo ‘knows the rules’: ‘loitering’ at visitor sites, stealing or ‘soliciting’ food, following people closely, generally associating with human presence’.

The QPWS term of ‘habituating’ is a ‘dingo committed crime’ Marie-Louise Sarjeant. P.A. Jennifer Parkhurst.

Notes leading up to the hunt for Inky

‘Our Fraser Island Dingoes need protection and honesty from Government which is not being provided’ AWPC Australian Wildlife Protection, President.

Hon. Steve Dickson. M.P. National Parks, Recreation, Sport & Racing…have under a current policy, the decision to authorise a “humane “destruction of a dingo that hasn’t bitten anyone. They state that ‘Issues for dingo’ destruction are because QPWS deemed it has committed a “code crime” of “habituation”. Specific details have not been given as to why Inky has to be destroyed.
(Ross Belcher from the QPWS: people were not harmed, but r it is extremely concerning dingo has not been caught)

QPWS have enlisted a paid shooter /trapper to the Island, setting a terrible precedence to bring in a person, who is effectively a pest control officer and a dingo exterminator. This is not acceptable in a Heritage Listed National Park, where fauna is supposedly protected. Dingoes on Fraser Island have learnt Rangers mean death or pain and avoid them, recognise their vehicles. Previous contentious FIDMS even states in the old management strategy, that a history of incidents and photos required and only as a last resort is the animal to be destroyed"

ABC Net news;” Trapper hunts rogue Fraser is dingo”: By Frances Adcock. 11th Oct 2012, saying that, “Up to 40 rangers are still looking for a dingo.” There are only 49 rangers there, so why waste time and money to chase down a dingo that is not a threat to anyone?

Indigenous people have signed Statutory Declarations to declare that Inky is not dangerous.

A comment written to Ross Belcher, Regional Manager Fraser Island on the Fraser Coast Chronicle:

“The dingo is allegedly a "natural feature" of the Island, interference with which is punishable by very serious fines and even, in some circumstances, imprisonment. So how then, Mr Belcher, can you justify either Rangers or a paid Shooters coming on to the Island and taking such action? Will the shooter be the subject of legal proceedings for “interference”? Will you be the subject of conspiracy to commit such a crime given your enlistment of the paid shooter?" (Marilyn Nuske Lawyer).

WHAT YOU CAN DO

Contacts to write to protest about the destruction of Inky:
[email protected] or [email protected] Ph 07 32248113
DERM dingo ranger. [email protected]
Ross Belcher Regional Manager FI: ph: 4121 1800. E:[email protected]
UNESCO: [email protected]
Mr. Young Hun JUNG UNESCO: [email protected] Please write or call to save Inky

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

Media Release... Exactly as I or anyone would have thought. A hungry dog is more likely to approach people and try and get food, and then they have to be "managed" to prevent attacks. It's all a self-fulfilling prophesy to keep their numbers down for tourism. The fine was more about upsetting the status quo and about having their little scheme exposed for what it is. People living on islands don't usually survive without importing food. Why should these animals have to? "Sustainable" numbers for dingoes is one thing, but "sustainable" human numbers - and their overshoot - gets ignored.

Save Fraser Island Dingoes Inc.

13 Sept. 2011

Dingo Strategy has no bite...

Recent reports obtained through freedom of information suggest that the government has been misleading the public regarding the cause of aggression by the Fraser Island Dingo.

These reports, dating back to 1994 and Commissioned by the Government, clearly demonstrate that feeding is not the main cause of aggressive behaviour. In fact the reports state that loss of fear when combined with hunger, is the actual cause of problem behaviour (Price 1994) and the incidence of stalking is most likely attributed to lack of foods available.

This study confirms what scientists and researchers have been saying for years, lack of food is a major factor in causing unnatural and inappropriate behaviour. A hungry animal can become volatile and unpredictable. Constant trapping, ear-tagging, hazing and destroying of animals disrupts the pack structure which, in turn, leads to anti-social behaviour, but this is not recognised in the Dept. Of Environment and Resource Management's Dingo Strategy.

DERM was aware that limiting food sources, such as closing the dumps, would have consequences. The dump closure...is blamed for starvation (Price 1994), but did not consider it of importance.

The study also discusses the fact that nipping and biting is usually provoked by visitors and that a juvenile dingo's natural curiosity and play-behaviour can be misinterpreted as aggression. Price states, nuisance behaviour is usually associated with a juvenile animals playful character". But again DERM has ignored its own findings and the majority of animals destroyed today are juveniles.

Jennifer Parkhurst, Wildlife Photographer, was fined a sum of $40,000 including a 3 year suspended sentence for feeding starving animals and allegedly causing them to become dangerous. At the time this was considered excessive, as the maximum fine for feeding a dingo is $4000; now it seems ridiculous.

DERM's management strategy is apparently based on the observations of rangers and students during the course of their field work. Jennifer Parkhurst spent 7 years of observations but her findings were dismissed.

In light of this study questions need to be asked:

Why did DERM spend so much time and effort pursuing Ms. Parkhurst in an attempt to denounce her research when her findings were similar to those of their own department?

Why did DERM subsequently use a photograph from Ms. Parkhurst's study on its website if her findings were discredited?

Why does DERM continue to deny that its management was not responsible for starvation of the dingoes when clearly this document shows that the strategy had a huge impact on the dingoes behaviour?

Why is the public only fined for feeding, but allowed to torment and tease the dingoes?

Why is the signage on the Island only warning tourists not to feed dingoes, but no signage warning tourists not to abuse the animals?

Why are members of the public not held accountable for their actions, such as not supervising children?

Why are juvenile dingoes still being targeted for destruction when exhibiting natural behaviours?

Save Fraser Island Dingoes Inc. will be taking these questions, and many more, to the government...

Sincerely,

Save Fraser Island Dingoes Inc. Committee

President Malcom Kilpatrick

50 Old Maryborough Rd.

Pialba Qld. 4655

Ph: 07 4124 1979 Email: [email protected]