 |
Legislative
Council |
|
 |
||
| Mike Elliott Leader Australian Democrats Member of the Legislative Council |
Parliament Index |
|
|
Legislative
Council |
|
|
||
| Mike Elliott Leader Australian Democrats Member of the Legislative Council |
Parliament Index |
|
The Hon. M.J. ELLIOTT: I move:
That this Council calls on the committee to examine and report on the interaction of native animals with agricultural activities and, in particular, current proposals and/or approvals to shoot native bird species. I have been approached by several groups concerned about the removal of certain protections for native species, particularly as they relate to birds near commercial horticultural concerns. I am not an opponent to responsible controls and, in the past, I have supported the rights of farmers to protect their interests. I have in this place and on the record supported the kangaroo cull in the north of the State. I have also supported the culling of koalas on Kangaroo Island, where they are not a native species and in fact were causing enormous ecological damage. In one case for environmental reasons and in another case recognising the legitimate concerns of farmers I have supported culling. It is with some concern that I noted the Minister's moves to remove the need for destruction permits for killing protected species. In the absence of a detailed examination which demonstrates any inefficiency in the current licence system, I am concerned that the Minister's move will create an unnecessary and potentially costly imbalance of interests; thus I will move the interaction of native animals with agricultural activities to be examined by the Environment, Resources and Development Committee. I have made contact with several groups to seek their opinions and concerns on the issue. I have spoken with both conservation interests and farmers' interests and I will briefly present a couple of views they have put. I do genuinely want the committee to look at all sides of the argument and to come to a resolution—and hopefully a resolution that can work for all parties. Dr Tim Doyle, President of the Conservation Council, was interested to know the extent of the baseline surveys on the species where the permits were no longer being allowed. He expressed concern that the Government is not following the precautionary principle and is concerned that the trial area is too extensive. Also from the Conservation Council, Vice-President Dr David Close argued that it was naive to expect non-specialists to differentiate between targeted and non-targeted species. I suspect that an awful lot of orchardists would not know one rosella species from another, and indeed would not differentiate necessarily between several parrot species, just as an example. It is probable that the result will be an open season on all rosellas, including some that are in quite low numbers. Dr Close also expressed concern that there are no safeguards to ensure that the birds were killed in a humane way. Sharon Blair of the Bird Care and Conservation Society feels that horticultural interests are already met under the permit system, and that one important aspect is the designation of how many birds are to be destroyed.She was concerned that with unlimited culling rare subspecies of rosella (platycercus elegans adelaideae and platycercus elegans flaveous) may be threatened. She noted that some of the targeted species are responsible for pollinating native trees and the control of pests and also noted the significant impact of land clearance on native bird species. Martin Reeve, of the Nature Conservation Society, noted that there cannot be a broad statement on the culling of native species and that we need to take things on a case by case basis. They have concerns that without proper research and monitoring one can only pay lip service to ecological sustainability. In principle the Nature Conservation Society does not oppose culling but supports the precautionary principle. There needs to be careful and flexible management plans. There we have a cross section of interests of conservation groups and among them there is not outright opposition to culling but there is concern about what appears to be almost open slather at this stage.
I also contacted the Farmers Federation, and Mike Gaden, the Chair of the Natural Resources Committee, noted that SAFF is committed to ecologically sustainable agricultural practices and regional development; that SAFF seeks stronger action on the development of management plans for pest native species (I do not think that anyone has problems with that); and calls for affordable, practical and sustainable responses to koalas that do not just transfer the problem elsewhere; the export of pest cockatoo species as part of a management plan; changes to regional restrictions to prevent the commercial use of kangaroos when pests to agricultural areas; changes to responses to Cape Barren geese to allow shooting and trapping when threatening farmers' livelihoods; and consideration of the cull of excess wallabies on Kangaroo Island and their commercial use.There have been, just in the past 12 months, a number of quite high profile cases of culls and calls for culls. It is not that long ago that we saw the culling of galahs in Port Lincoln; they were being shot with shotguns and many were falling wounded to the ground and being clubbed to death. We also saw on Eyre Peninsula Cape Barren geese problems. On 25 May the Minister announced the Eyre Peninsula Cape Barren Geese Committee to oversee a management plan for birds. Reportedly these birds are causing problems for local farmers by feeding on pastures. The southern coast of mainland Australia and Tasmania are the only places where these geese exist. This highlights again the need to balance the needs of producers and biological conservation. I look forward to this action committee with representatives of farming groups and Government agencies providing the kind of balanced approach required.
An Adelaide Hills Bird Management Task Group was formed to offer advice to the Wildlife Authority on areas where there have been problems with native bird management. I note the involvement of a wide range of commercial Government and interest group representation. However, I have been informed by a constituent that there are no representatives on the Conservation Council or other conservation groups. The Adelaide Hills Bird Management Task Group is quite a large one, and the fact that there has not been any official representation of conservation groups, although there may be one or two conservationists in the group, is unfortunate. It was also only in recent times—I think a couple of days ago—that there was an article about the Tamar wallabies, which have been introduced onto Boston Island and which are now overpopulating. It is not surprising: if you introduce an animal and do not introduce a predator at the same time there are any number of cases of an explosion in numbers, and that is precisely what happened with the koalas when put onto Kangaroo Island. Clearly a problem has emerged there.
There are also claims of problems of wallabies on Kangaroo Island. We quite regularly hear complaints about corellas and damage they do to crops and sometimes to electrical equipment and other things. I am not seeking to debate whether or not native animals have the capacity to cause significant harm as that is beyond question. However, I would like to see the ERD Committee, which has managed throughout its existence to be non-Party political, to look at the issue of the interactions of native animals and agriculture in particular and to make recommendations in terms of directions to take.There is no doubt that there has been a rapid move towards almost the deregulation of controls in the last 12 months—and there is pressure for more. That is causing a deal of unease. For those reasons, I hope that all members in this place will be prepared to support a motion which does not state an opinion about whether or not culling should occur but simply says that the interaction between native animals and farmers and proposals for culls should be examined by the ERD Committee.
See also Mike Elliott's News Release on this topic: 26 July 1999
This motion was passed by the Legislative Council: 5 August 1999
