Both humans and wildlife deserve a standard of crocodile management that prioritises human safety, promotes co-existence and cultural sensitivity, and respects the vital roles of our native fauna. Current practices fail to adequately meet this standard. Sign this petition to add your voice and call for the Queensland’s Department of Environment and Science to introduce penalties for those who put themselves and their community at increased risk of a crocodile attack.

For many years, the approach to resolving human-crocodile conflict in Australia has been a simple one: remove the ‘problem’ crocodile. A problem crocodile is defined as one which “has attacked, is about to attack, or is behaving aggressively towards, a person” or if “the nature of the crocodile’s location or behaviour makes the crocodile a threat, or a potential threat, to the safety or wellbeing of humans”. These parameters could apply to any crocodile; this species is inherently dangerous to humans due to being an apex predator. This criterion unfairly labels crocodiles as culpable for simply existing and exhibiting natural behaviours.

This management approach is inadequate in preventing crocodile attacks and reducing the risk of human-crocodile conflict. Removing a crocodile does not make an area safe as it does not guarantee the absence of other crocodiles, which are just as likely to attack should anyone provide them with the opportunity. To promote crocodile removal as a method for ensuring human safety is misleading and generates a false sense of security among the public. Additionally, the lack of legal consequence for knowingly putting oneself and the community at risk of a crocodile attack is a matter of great concern. Crocodile attacks are avoidable and human safety is entirely dependent on the actions of people. Unfortunately, current practice grants too much power over the fate of our wildlife to the foolish few who deliberately ignore the warnings about crocodile risk. This is harmful to local communities who have strong ties with their wildlife and a desire to protect and preserve their environment. A stronger focus on the management of human behaviour would be more effective in reducing the rate of crocodile attacks and removals.

Penalties apply in Queensland for feeding dingoes on K’gari, swimming in restricted areas of Babinda Boulders, boating too close to marine mammals, and enticing cassowaries with fruit. The purpose of these fines is to place responsibility on the individual who is performing these acts, who are then labelled as accountable and must deal with the consequences of their behaviour. This deters them and others from repeating the problematic behaviour and protects both human safety and the integrity of the environment and its ecosystems. This petition calls for a similar approach towards the management of crocodiles in Queensland.

Those who sign this petition call for the following changes to Queensland’s Crocodile Management Plan:

Introduce and strictly enforce penalties for people whose actions increase the risk of crocodile attack:

• Leaving fish scraps at boat ramps and jetties.
• Directly providing food to crocodiles.
• Approaching/entering the water in areas where signs warn of crocodile presence.
• Teasing or enticing crocodiles to approach people and other animals.

Abandon the practice of removing ‘problem crocodiles’ in cases where humans are identified as at-fault (as listed above) for the increased risk of crocodile attack:

• If an isolated incident occurs due to human fault or error, no action should be taken against the crocodile.
• Adopt behaviour correction strategies to deter crocodiles from areas frequented by people (i.e. boat ramps) in cases where animals have had repeated access to food provided by humans.
• When a human is taken by a crocodile, the animal should still be removed to recover the person’s body.

The above changes can be achieved by installing surveillance cameras in targeted areas to catch and prosecute those who leave food for crocodiles, providing infrastructure to allow safe operations in crocodile habitat, establishing a 5 meter 'no-go-zone' along the water’s edge in signed crocodile habitat, and deploying wildlife officials to create repeated negative experiences for crocodiles which show signs of habituation to human presence. The latter practice should be viewed as a form of wildlife rehabilitation, returning crocodiles to natural behaviours that have been altered due to human interference (this practice is employed in other countries dealing with ‘problem crocs’). Ultimately, when someone performs an action which alters a crocodile’s behaviour, the issue should be approached as a matter of public endangerment and the individual held accountable for their actions.

Senseless behaviour that endangers the lives of the community and protected wildlife should no longer persist without legal consequence. Our native animals should not have to bear the penalty for human ignorance. It is time to restore a sense of personal responsibility.