Tickets for the Ark by Rebecca Nesbit

Author:Rebecca Nesbit
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Profile
Published: 2021-02-15T00:00:00+00:00

At the other end of the spectrum, animal populations that are very high or rising rapidly raise dilemmas related to welfare. The issues become particularly thorny when the animals concerned are killed, and disagreements can come from both the manner of killing and its motivation. The debates are made more complex by the fact that a single animal may be killed for multiple reasons – a sport hunter can kill a ‘pest’ animal, then sell the meat, for example. Each animal’s death can therefore be embroiled in multiple debates. Is pleasure a legitimate excuse for killing? What counts as a pest? Does wild meat have a higher welfare standard than meat from livestock? Is it more sustainable?

All these issues can become entwined, and nowhere more so than in Australia’s culling of kangaroos. The killing of Australia’s national animal emblem divides the nation. Vocal opponents denounce the culls as an inhumane massacre, while supporters see them as a traditional aspect of rural life. After all, Aboriginal Australians have been hunting kangaroos for thousands of years, often making full use of the carcass: meat is eaten, teeth are used as needles and sinews from the tail are used as thread. Hunting, however, changed and intensified with the arrival of European settlers, who were quick to define kangaroos as pests that damaged gardens and competed with livestock for grazing. Between 1877 and 1907, around 8 million kangaroos and wallabies were presented to the Queensland Government alone for bounty money, pushing some species to the brink of extinction. Times have changed since then and kangaroos can now only be shot under license, ensuring that the harvest is sustainable.

Kangaroos are killed in different situations, ranging from farmers shooting ‘pest’ kangaroos on their land to professional marksmen taking part in commercial hunts for meat and leather. The line is blurred, though: some farmers allow licensed shooters on their land and view the commercial kangaroo industry as self-funding pest control. The definition of ‘pest’ is decidedly subjective in both farming and conservation, and opinion is divided on whether kangaroo culls benefit or harm the wider environment. One controversy is that farmers control dingoes to protect livestock, and this can allow kangaroo populations to grow. In high densities, kangaroos can reduce the diversity of plants, affecting habitat quality as well as the populations of other animals. They’re also a problem for people, competing with livestock for food, damaging fences and causing car accidents.

However, at lower population densities, kangaroos play an important role as ecosystem engineers. Some conservationists argue that a commercial kangaroo industry could be the motivation we need to manage land to suit the kangaroo. Australia has been degraded by livestock ever since Europeans arrived, and replacing livestock with sustainable harvest of wild kangaroo meat could be a way to restore the rangelands. However, more evidence is needed to answer the question of whether this is a viable solution for habitat protection. In fact, we’re short on data about the ecological impact of kangaroo culls in general, and that’s before we’ve thrown welfare debates into the mix.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.