Ptaylor wrote: What kind of state are the native wildlife in then? Not endangered but not managed. Seems like if they were out of control (either ecologically or socially) then folks would call for management. But they don’t, maybe cause they don’t know, never go in the bush? Or the animals are doing fine without being managed?
So property owners are allowed to shoot or pay someone to shoot roos and wallabies if they’re competing with stock for graze – but only firearms. In my state there is no public land hunting at all (only 2 of our states have it). So management is more or less up to station owners. In public land, they seem to go in cycles of boom or bust, probably pretty closely related to rainfall and droughts. When the boom gets too big, the state government pays professional shooters an absolute fortune to cull the population. For some reason that’s more acceptable to the urban voting base.
We do have state and federal agencies and people dedicated to wildlife management, but pretty much all their time is tied up in keeping the endangered animals of Australia alive and kicking. Unfortunately hunting is not seen as real value adder to the issue.
Steve Irwin was actually leading the way in conservation in my state, using the income from his shows and park to buy up stations and properties through north Queensland, setting them aside as uninterfered with wildlife habitat. He was a loud mouth and not everyone’s cup of tea, but he put his money where his mouth is.
edit: I should point out that there are plenty of endangered wallaby species, but the fella above is not one of them 😉
