http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-23/dingoes-set-to-become-pelorus-island-environmental-saviour/7652424 Apparently there is an island overpopulated by goats, so they plan to control it by releasing dingoes into the area. The dingoes all have capsules inside them that will release poison into their systems and kill them in two years, provided they aren't shot first, as their reward for a job well done.
Wait...what?!
That is seriously bizarre and yes...it's cruel as hell.
Gee, that should work just as well as when Europeans brought mongooses to Hawaii to control rats, or Californians imported Australian eucalyptus trees to grow for lumber, or....
Satanically hideous. Who thought of that Sara Palin or Donald Trump?
I mean they get to blame Obama for their disgruntlements, so I am turning the tables. It does sound like an idea they would get behind.
Mongeese. ?
I don't like it one bit.
In the beginning, the dingoes will simply maul and maim every animal they can catch. Many will suffer horribly for a long time due to the injuries and infection.
As the dingoes get hungrier, they will kill for the meat, quickly and efficiently.
I don't know what kind of poison is used, but my guess is one that is slow acting and mild, on the grounds that birds that feed on the carcasses will not also be poisoned. Rat baits over here have that characteristic so that wildlife won't die from scavenging on the bodies.
It is essential to deal with feral animals because they do devastating damage to the natural environment. I favour the idea of introducing STD's that cause sterility.
Put another check in the "Australia is a messed up place" column.
It's acceptable.
I'm more concerned by an article I saw today about abuse in juvenile detention center(s) there.
I thought this was to kill the goats.
Of course it's cruel. Why can't they export the excess goats to somewhere where there is a shortage of goats? That would also save the dingoes.
Why is it acceptable, Thriftymaid? How is it acceptable?
Good for the dingo. I thought Australia was a more civilised nation than that.
I used to think it should be "mongeese" myself until I was about 8, then I learned it was "mongooses". My sister had the opposite idea, she used to think the plural of "goose" was "gooses" when she was a child. Lol:)
Absolutely.
The Internet says "mongooses" is the most common plural form of mongoose, although "mongeese" is acceptable.
Mongooses were imported here in the 19th century to try to cut down on the rat population (also imported by European/American trading ships). However, the mongooses also found native birds (esp. eggs and hatchlings) easy prey, and the bird population was devastated.
It's not the same situation. This would be much more controlled. The dingoes are sterilized and can't reproduce. There are a limited number they plan to use. They will be destroyed within two years. So it doesn't appear to meet the requirements for an out of control, runaway disaster. In fact, according to the article, it was tried before in 1993, and was successful, although there were 4 times as many dingoes, and it took longer to destroy them all. The technology in use for this case (the time release poison) would seem to make the dingo cleanup much simpler.
My main objection to this, at first glance, is that the use of the time-released poison seems unfair, "unsportsmanlike". But when you consider that the main objective is to clear the overpopulation of goats, and that the end goal is to destroy the dingoes anyway, their being simply a means to an end, it doesn't appear to be a very logical objection.
As to whether it's cruel to the goats, I think Nature is far more cruel. With no natural predators on the island, I'd say they've had a good run already. The use and regulation of predator species to control prey populations is well-precedented, and is used throughout the world by local wildlife authorities.
As to whether it's cruel to the dingoes, as long as the poison itself is reasonably humane in its effects, it's hard to object to its use. The fact is that wild dingoes are shot all the time if they become a nuisance to humans. In this case, they will have a good two years to follow their natural instincts without interference, and feast on as much goat as they can eat. Seems like a decent enough deal for a predator species.
Overall, it seems like a smart plan. It's not without precedent, having been successfully tried in 1993. While the time-release poison may seem unfair, the fact is that there was never any fairness to begin with, since humans could theoretically destroy them any time they like anyway. The poison just makes it more convenient, and reduces the risk of the animals getting out of control in the long term.
Any serious ethical objections would have to fall under the wider umbrella of whether humans have any right at all to kill and control animals at will. If one were to object on that basis, I could understand the dilemma. However, there are a couple of things to consider on that basis. One, the goats were brought there by humans in the first place, causing great damage to the island's ecology due to the lack of foresight. The problem has gotten beyond the ability for humans to control by normal methods of culling, such as aerial shooting. So it's reasonable that a human-led solution is needed for a human-caused problem. Two, if animal welfare is the objection, overpopulation is certainly not doing the goats any favours. If they have defoliated the area as badly as the article suggests, then they must be at the limits of their food supply. If nothing is done, they will starve to death or die of disease.
If it were that easy to round up the goats to transport them, then they could just be culled instead. Clearly, taking out the goats by this method is not a viable option, or it would have been tried already.
They have tried that, and it's too difficult, time consuming, and expensive, apparently. They have tried aerial shooting, and it wasn't effective enough to make a significant difference.
I'm playing against the rules probably by just commenting.
The issues and views brought forth from the answers and threads here reminded me of many issues brought forth in a book I just finished reading, "The Plague Dogs" by Richard Adams (of "Watership Down" fame).
The book centers on two dogs who escape from an animal research center where both of them had had "experiments" put upon them. Adams tells the story, in part, from the dogs' talking. I highly recommend the powerful book. (And the animated film "The Plague Dogs," based upon the book, is phenomenal. It ain't no "kiddie kartoon!!")
:)
Be Well, All
WelbyQ
quick, cheap & efficient....smart aussies
@RPF -- I hope it works, but so many times plans like this have somehow gone awry and produced unexpected problems. For example, the goats are there in the first place because European immigrants thought, "Gee, wouldn't it be nice to have goats to eat here?" and imported them.
It seems the program managers are doing their best to cover contingencies, but I remain wary.
If there is such an abundance of goats there, why not take them somewhere and feed them to hungry people?
I don't think I would like to eat got fed dingoes.
Sailors let goats loose on the island over 150 years ago in order to provide fresh meat on long voyages.
There is no shortage of goats anywhere in Australia.
Shooting feral animals from the air tends not to work well - it is hard to hit a moving target from a platform that shakes like an earthquake. The wounded animals take a long time to die and many survive.
Capture is difficult due to the rocky terrain.
They are not a popular meat at butchers due to the slight aniseed flavour of the flesh.
The goats decimated the natural ecology on the island, which is in the middle of a World Heritage listed national park, the Great Barrier Reef.
They found an efficient balance between the growth of plants and their population, but other native animals have become extinct there along with some of the plant species. Especially important is nesting sites for birds.
Dingos are also an introduced species, the Asiatic Wolf, introduced by Malaccan trepang traders between 10,000 and 3,000 years ago. They quickly naturalised in the wild, without decimating Australian wildlife. They also became the hunting companions of Aborigines.
Where they come close to farming communities, dingoes create problems by wounding and killing scores of livestock without eating them, and interbreeding with domestic dogs. The hybrid tends to be healthier, much smarter and less trainable than dogs, and frequently goes wild and becomes a "pest."
I am not excusing or trying to justify the cruelty. It is barbarous and unnecessary.
Introducing a few billy goats infected with gonorrhea would solve the problem within 13 years by making all the goats sterile.
