feral management

Park Rangers in NSW Public Service Association will take industrial action to show their lack of confidence in NSW Premier's backroom deal with shooters party to give them hunting access in our National Parks. This seems the right thing to do. The current government attitude to New South Wales's beautiful parks and indigenous animals seems unAustralian and somehow blasphemous, for these are our icons and Mother Nature's home. This foreshadowed desecration of our national parks is linked to deals to privatise NSW electricity. See also "Barry O'Farrell, NSW electricity privatisation and shooting in National Parks Australia"

Reluctant industrial action to protect wildlife and the public from unwise government policy

The NSW Public Service Association, which represents park rangers, has directed its members not to assist with any activity involved with establishing recreational hunting in national parks in NSW.

Members will also be asked to withhold information and their expert advice from Minister for the Environment Robyn Parker and other members of the NSW Coalition Government.

General Secretary John Cahill said the good work and safety of NSW National Parks staff would be placed at risk by the State Government’s backroom deal for hunting in parks

Serious risk to public safety

“Recreational shooting of pest animals in National Parks is an unproven, untested, expensive and unsafe activity, Mr Cahill said today.

“Opening the gate for recreational hunting in 79 national parks and other conservation areas in NSW poses a serious risk to the safety of park rangers, visitors, wildlife and the environment.

“Our park rangers should not have to work in fear for their own safety. Our members have expressed serious concerns about the danger to themselves and the community when shooting is allowed in bushland popular with walkers and picnickers.

Vested interests compromise Scientific programs, valuable data at risk

“Our members have been working very hard to control and manage feral animals in parks. Recreational shooting will compromise the professional and scientifically proven feral animal control programs run by national parks staff, placing native plants and animals at risk.

“This move is another shot across the bow of our national parks, with the Shooters and other vested interest groups clamouring for greater access at the expense of the environment and the people who look after them.

“Industrial action like this is not a decision we take lightly but we simply cannot let the State Government’s compromise of our National Parks to go ahead,” Mr Cahill said.

For decades now state governments have been withdrawing support from Australia's national and regional parks. These rangers' numbers have been whittled down. They have been forced to submit to arcane bean-counting exercises and to focus on attracting tourists rather than protecting and studying the wildlife and vegetation in these wild spaces. They risk their livelihoods by expressing these educated views in a system that simply does not play fair with rank and file workers, especially when they are isolated from each other. Natural science has so much to enrich our society but it is a victim of corrupt political processes in our society where land-use is increasingly dominated by a growth lobby that knows the price of everything but the value of nothing, and has no respect for democracy.

Contact: John Cahill 0419 413 577 / Jane Garcia 0434 489 533

Source: Media Release,
Friday, 1 June 2012

See also: Not in Our Parks of 5 June in the Glen Innes Examiner, Riled rangers target national park hunts of 5 June in the Western Advocate, Hunters and objectors of 5 June in the Central Western Daily.

Electricity privatisation continues to cause bizarre consequences as yet another State Premier will apparently do anything to push it through, despite almost total lack of electoral support. See our history of attempts to privatise electricity in NSW. It reads like a war on democracy. Now that war is against the State's wildlife. During his first week in government, the NSW Premier, Barry O`Farrell, made a strong promise to environment groups and the people of NSW that he would not allow shooting in National Parks. Now he has done a deal with the Shooters and Fishers Party so that they will support his electricity privatisation bill. Shame on Barry, Shame on the Shooters and Fishers who many see as just another front for the Libs in NSW, posing as another party.

Barry O'Farrell gunning down democracy

The Premier of NSW has today broken a pre-election promise to keep recreational shooting out of our National Parks. He has announced that the government will be opening up 34 National Parks, 31 Nature Reserves and 14 State Conservation Areas across the state to recreational hunters.

During his first week in government, the Premier made a strong promise to environment groups and the people of NSW that he would not allow shooting in National Parks. Now he has done a deal with the Shooters and Fishers Party so that they will support his electricity privatisation bill.

National Parks are for the protection of nature and for the enjoyment of the NSW public, not for blood sport. This decision by the government shows complete disregard for public safety and for the purpose of our National Park system.

The government is ‘greenwashing’ this deal as a way of managing feral animals, but control of feral animals is best achieved by professionals, not by sporting hunters.

If you are as horrified about this as we are, please take a few quick actions:

1) Give your local member a call today and tell them how you feel about this appalling decision. You can follow this link to look up your local MP's contact details.

2) Visit the SMH website and vote in their poll against shooting in national parks. (Poll closes at midnight 31 May.)

3) If you have time, please write a letter to editor (either of your local paper or one of the State-wide papers), and/or make a call to talkback radio about this issue.

4) Comment below this article.

The National Parks Association of New South Wales (NPA) has a number of key concerns about this decision:

1) The purpose of National Parks is to protect the environment and allow the quiet enjoyment of nature, not for blood sports.

2) This decision poses a huge risk to the safety of the public, who just want to bushwalk, have a picnic or enjoy nature with their families.

3) Control of feral animals should be left to the professionals. Recreational hunting is not an efficient or cost-effective tool for feral animal control in National Parks, and may have serious impacts on our native wildlife.

4) This is a major betrayal of the public by the Premier, who has consistently promised that there will be no recreational hunting in National Parks. It is completely unacceptable for our protected areas to be used as a pawn in a political trade-off.

See below for a list of parks that the government proposes to open up for shooting.

The website of the Invasive Species Council has more information about why so called 'conservation hunting' by amateur hunters is not an effective means of controlling feral animals.

"The NSW and Victorian governments have been funding recreational hunting and opening access to public lands on the basis that hunters can control feral animals.

But evidence (including the failure of numerous bounties) shows that, at best, hunters can supplement more effective methods of feral animal control or provide control in small, accessible areas.

Funding recreational hunting as a primary method of control is a waste of taxpayers’ money. There is also the risk that opening up public lands to hunting creates an incentive for maverick hunters to shift feral animals into new areas – as has occurred particularly with pigs and deer.

The Invasive Species Council has been working with other environment groups to oppose the NSW Shooters Party legislation to expand hunting into national parks, allow private hunting reserves, and permit the release of exotic birds rated as a serious or extreme pest threat by Australian governments."

More information at National Parks Association of New South Wales.

Affected National Parks, Nature Reserves and State Conservation Areas

The government is proposing to immediately consider opening the following National Parks, Nature Reserves and State Conservation Areas up for shooting.

National Parks 

Nature Reserves

State Conservation Areas

Source: Kirstin Proft
Biodiversity Conservation Officer
National Parks Association of NSW
PO Box 337 | Newtown 2042 | New South Wales
T 02 9299 0000 |
W http://www.npansw.org.au | E [email protected]
Watch us on youtub!

Human exposure to 1080 is very severely restricted by law, for obvious reasons. The same does not apply to other species in baited areas. The major animal welfare concern over the use of 1080 relates to its extreme cruelty and its lack of an antidote. The major environmental concern relates to its effects on non target animals, either through ingestion of baits or by secondary poisoning.

Article by Sheila Newman with Maryland Wilson, President, Australian Wildlife Protection Council (AWPC)

1080, sodium fluoracetate, is all bad news

1080, sodium fluoracetate- for which there is no antidote, is cheap and easy to use, but a cruel solution.

(Photo of Eastern Grey joey, "Acacia," by Brett Clifton.The late Dr Peter Rawlinson La Trobe University zoologist stated in 1987 (as an Australian Conservation Foundation Councillor):

“The wallaby does not know the carrots will poison and kill her...they are laced with 1080; she will die and her joey will starve! There is no antidote to the progressively slow and agonising death...as her functions fail...” Photo: Brett Clifton “When ingested, wallabies, possums, wedge-tailed eagles that feed on smaller prey are progressively debilitated and die a slow, agonizing death as its systems fail. Death may ultimately result from a variety of causes ranging from heart failure to suffocation. There is no antidote to 1080 poisoning”.

For these reasons, human exposure to 1080 is very severely restricted by law. The same does not apply to other species in baited areas. The major animal welfare concern over the use of 1080 relates to its extreme cruelty and its lack of an antidote. The major environmental concern relates to its effects on non target animals, either through ingestion of baits or by secondary poisoning... the toxic chemical that slowly kills.

Secondary poisoning

Secondary poisoning occurs when animals, such as birds of prey, eat poisoned mammals. Falcons and eagles are a case in point. Many of these animals are increasingly rare:

"Australia and its territories host 35 species of birds of prey: 24 diurnal raptors and 11 owls, many of which are endemic. Nine species and as many subspecies are listed as threatened nationally and/or regionally....

As predators at the top of food chains they are vulnerable to secondary poisoning and the accumulation of persistent pesticides, and subject to persecution." Source: http://www.birdlife.org.au/documents/OTHPUB-Raptors.pdf

Pets and domestic animals victims of 1080

Dogs and even horses are at serious risk. Here is a case in New Zealand:

"The land treated could easily have been treated for possum control by safer alternative methods, ie. trapping and ferratox in bait stations, as it is NOT REMOTE, NOT INNACCESSIBLE, and NOT RUGGED TERRAIN.

It is obvious from the position of the animal, the damage to its leg, the vomited lungs and the distended veins, that this animal died a horrible and cruel death. Deer have been observed to have tried to rip open their own bellies in their agony, and have inflicted similar and worse damage to their bodies while under the effects of 1080. Dogs are driven insane by the excruciating pain inflicted upon them before succombing to a cruel death. Poisoned possums can travel several kms and may take up to 18 hours to die." Source: http://emigratetonewzealand.wordpress.com/2008/09/05/1080-3/

Dingos are a better idea than 1080

The alternative idea of supporting the return of terrestrial predators adapted to Australian conditions has recently been the subject of serious discussion, most recently and fascinatingly in this article by scientists, Corey Bradshaw and Euan Ritchie: "Can Australia afford the dingo fence?" The authors write:

"...Why do we invest billions of dollars in feral animal control and the subsequent recovery plans for endangered wildlife using the same techniques for decades, when a more proactive and natural alternative exists? It’s a solution mired in controversy because it involves yet another “introduced” predator – the dingo.

...And poisoning is not the answer either. In addition to killing non-target native species, baiting dingoes might in fact result in increased dingo densities due to social breakdown of the pack, resulting in increasing attacks on stock, not to mention a higher likelihood of hybridisation with feral dogs. Baiting also leads to more juvenile dingoes."

Article by Sheila Newman with Maryland Wilson, President, Australian Wildlife Protection Council (AWPC)