Pestsmart have recently published what seems to be a weak and lame attempt to undermine the recent letter sent by 26 of Australian's leading environmental scientists to oppose the renewal of 1080 aerial baiting in Victoria. The 26 scientists are very clear, they stridently oppose the renewal of aerial baiting and have let the Victorian Government know why.
"As prominent researchers in predator ecology, biology, archaeology, cultural heritage, social science, humanities, animal behaviour and genetics, we wish to emphasise the importance of dingoes in Australian, and particularly Victorian ecosystems. Dingoes are the sole non-human land-based top predator on the Australian mainland. Their
importance to the ecological health and resilience of Australian ecosystems cannot be overstated, from regulating wild herbivore abundance (e.g. various kangaroo species), to reducing the impacts of feral mesopredators (cats, foxes) on native marsupials ((Johnson & VanDerWal 2009; Wallach et al. 2010; Letnic et al. 2012; Letnic et al.
2013; Newsome et al. 2015; Morris & Letnic 2017). Their iconic status is of significant importance to First Nations people and to the cultural heritage of all Australians. ......
On the balance of scientific evidence, ethical reasoning and society-wide expectations, protection of dingoes should be enhanced rather than diminished. Aerial baiting programs are not compatible with the continued persistence of dingoes or spot-tailed quolls, native threatened species, in Victoria.
Here is a Link to what Pestsmart say
In response, Dingo Genetics Research' Dr Kylie Cairns today gave a response to the incorrect information published by Pestsmart in their lame attempt : Here is what Dr Cairns said:
"Fact checking #PestSmart's "The facts about Victoria's aerial baiting program" https://tinyurl.com/rg3a6bd This opinion statement seems to be a response to a submission by 26 independent scientists to the Victorian Government about the renewal of aerial baiting and the risks this poses to dingoes and potentially quolls. Read here - https://conservationbytes.com/…/victoria-please-dont-aeria…/
1. DNA testing shows that these animals are dingoes (some with some dog ancestry) not feral domestic dogs. The most appropriate term for these animals is #dingo not wild dog.
2. #PestSmart say "4.375 million ha for native wildlife and dingoes to persist undisturbed". This is wrong. There are widespread ground baiting (1080) programs across VIC. Aerial baiting combined with ground baiting poses a serious risk to the persistence of dingoes in VIC.
3. #PestSmart say that there is plenty of space (4.375 million ha) for dingoes to persist undisturbed. Victoria also has a "wild dog" bounty that pays $120 per scalp. This directly impacts dingoes. We don't know how many threatened #dingoes are killed.
4. #PestSmart says "Victoria’s Wild Dog Program has been a stand-out performer nationally in terms of reducing wild dog attacks on livestock" - but there is no data to support this statement. Actual data on livestock loss before and after aerial baiting needs to be provided. #PestSmart claims that aerial baiting is needed for "the protection of livestock". Annually 288 sheep are killed/maimed in Victoria by dingoes, out of a total sheep population of 15.3 million sheep (ABS data). How many dingoes are killed by "wild dog" control programs? #PestSmart should be advocating for non-lethal livestock protection measures like guardian animals, electric fencing and animal husbandry management. Followed by targeted trapping/shooting of problem animals. Aerial baiting is not a #bestpractice solution.
5. #PestSmart says "Aerial and ground baiting only occurs on private land and within the 3km Livestock Protection Buffer zones" - please explain the baiting inside public lands that is beyond the buffer zone. Just one example. #Fox baits kill #dingoes too.
6. #PestSmart says "This zone may also be assisting with dingo conservation by preventing domestic dogs from wandering into national parks and cross breeding". No, lethal control ⬆️ the risk of hybridisation in wolf, coyote and dingo populations by fracturing social structures. Aerial baiting poses such a risk to dingoes because it increases the risk of hybridisation and drastically reduces the population (by +70%) and encourages the spread of dog genes into the dingo population. Management needs to balance stock protection with conservation.
7. #PestSmart says "scientific literature is still out on ... the ability of wild dogs to supress foxes or cats". Incorrect, there is solid scientific evidence that dingoes, like other apex predators, suppress mesopredators. In some regions this suppression may be less effective. There is more variability in the response of cats to dingoes, perhaps because cats are more effective at evading dingoes in forested regions. Still lots of work to be done in this field.
8. #PestSmart say "Queensland study (Fancourt et al 2019) showed feral cat numbers were actually higher where they co-existed with dingoes". No. Their study site had a high density of cats, but this wasn't because they were co-existing with dingoes. Maybe due to lack of foxes?
9. #PestSmart claims "As a native species Spotted Tailed Quoll, Dasyurus maculatus, is highly tolerant of 1080". They are more tolerant than dingoes (LD50 0.11 mg/kg) with an LD50 of 1.85 mg/kg - ie takes more baits to kill them. Studies show quolls will eat multiple baits. There is little data about the sub-lethal impacts of 1080 on quolls or other natives. Do 1080 baits affect reproduction, fertility, life history in quolls? Not dying is a low bar, Quoll populations have declined drastically in the last 50 years. Is it worth the risk?
The Victorian government needs to be mindful that they have listed the #dingo as a threatened species, continued active lethal control of dingoes (labelled “wild dogs”) is incompatible with this listing. There needs to be more detailed research on the impacts of lethal control on dingo populations and a onus on appropriate justification for lethal control prior to carrying out any aerial baiting or ground baiting (particularly on public lands) that might potentially impact on the persistence of dingoes. The "wild dog" bounty should also be stopped. There needs to be a balance between conserving dingoes (and their ecological role) whilst managing their impacts on livestock/farmers.