DOCSLIB.ORG

The Changing Face of Hunting in Australia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

AUSTRALIAN SHOOTERS JOURNAL TheASJ political voice of the SSAA Heart of the hunter Facts about crippling and wounding rates in waterfowl The changing face of hunting in Australia 2011 Vol. 12 Issue 1 www.ssaa.org.au Members-only insert to the Australian Shooter In this issue ASJThe political voice of the SSAA Staff Managing Editor Tim Bannister, Associate Editor Kaye Jenkins, Art Director Mike Barr, Production Coordinator Judy Ward, Graphic Designer Natalie Hill, Media Officer Rachael Andrews, Advertising Representative Karoline Minicozzi, Administration Debbie Wing and Alison Slodki. Contributors SSAA National Research Team, John Elder, Craig Sillitoe, Tony Sharley, Paul Wainwright. 3 The changing face of hunting in Australia Cover photo by Craig Sillitoe. PO Box 2520, Unley, SA 5061 3 Hunting in Australia Phone: 08 8272 7100 Fax: 08 8272 2945 Internet: www.ssaa.org.au 5 State-by-state perspective Email: [email protected] 6 Hunter involvement in wildlife management Distributed to 134,000 members Australia-wide. 8 Expert Advisory Group The ASJ is owned and published by the Sporting Shooters’ Association of Australia Inc. Opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and 8 Be Part of the Solution campaign do not necessarily reflect the policy of this Association. 10 Red Deer Research Project Contributions: Freelance contributions are welcome. We do, however, recommend that 11 Conclusion potential authors contact the office prior to story drafting. Color slides and manuscripts may be sent to the address shown above. 12 Heart of the hunter No responsibility can be accepted for errors and/or omissions. No text or photographs within the ASJ may be The facts about crippling and wounding republished, either electronically or in print, without the express written permission of the 14 rates in waterfowl in Australia SSAA. Copyright 2011. The Australian Shooters Journal is published 14 Background information periodically and is printed by Genii, Brookvale, NSW. 14 Australian research The Sporting Shooters’ Association of Australia 15 Relevance of earlier research Inc (SSAA Inc) is subject to the provisions of the National Privacy Act. We collect personal information from members of the Sporting 16 Summary Shooters’ Association of Australia in the various states and territories. Should you want a copy of 16 The constructive way forward the SSAA Inc Privacy Statement or seek further information please write to PO Box 2520, Unley, SA 5061. See back issues of ASJ online at www.ssaa.org.au/asj The changing face of hunting in Australia by the SSAA National Research Team Red Deer Research Project members provide much- needed volunteer labour and field assistance. ecreational hunting in Australia is a legitimate pastime legitimate and positive activity, the same as fishing.2 In late 2009, involving people of all ages on both private property the SSAA began a national campaign3 promoting this message and on government land as permitted. These hunters and encouraging people to recognise that hunting can be part provide direct and indirect social, economic and environ- of the solution to managing problems where wildlife and the R 1 mental benefit to communities across the country. surrounding environment may be at odds. Australian hunters are perhaps in a unique position of being This chapter will examine hunting in Australia. It will look at unable to hunt any of their native animals; instead, only those that the current situation for hunters across all states and territo- were introduced with European settlement are permitted. Hunting ries and the SSAA’s initiatives to gain acceptance of hunting as regulations vary between all Australian states and territories a recreational pastime and useful tool in maintaining a balanced and focuses on different pest animal problems and game animals, ecosystem. depending on population numbers and the climate. Rabbits, foxes, cats and pigs are among the species generally classified as a ‘feral’ or ‘pest’ and can be hunted at any time, while species such as deer, Hunting in Australia duck, quail and pheasant are often the subject of a specified open Hunting in Australia is as diverse as its unique landscapes. season with limits applied to individual hunters. Australian hunters have many species available to hunt, ranging Hunting is often a controversial issue in Australia, especially from small-game birds such as stubble quail to large-bodied in the political arena, with anti-hunting groups and political exotic species such as water-buffalo. The status, perception parties often fuelling the debate. However, the Sporting Shooters’ and management of these species differ immensely across the Association of Australia (SSAA) is working to spread a more country. Some species are viewed by government authorities, educated and balanced message about the value of hunting as wildlife professionals, hunters and the general public as simply a conservation tool, as well as hunting for the table as being a pests, while other species are valuable game resources. > www.ssaa.org.au/asj 3 The changing face of hunting in Australia The difference in which a species status is viewed is one of the valued resources to be managed and treated as pests instead of main reasons Australia is seen as having a dysfunctional game a sustainable recreational food and economic resource. Although and wildlife management regime. The way in which the status most animal rights groups would disagree, one of the best ways of many native and introduced species is perceived creates divi- to preserve and maintain a population of any species is to put an sion within the ranks of hunters, wildlife professionals and the economic value on it. An animal with no value to the local commu- community at large. This is most evident when individual views nity is one that is not looked after and is often viewed negatively if and acceptance of a particular species clash and cause conflict it impacts the local community in some way. In countries such as between individuals and groups. Namibia, for instance, sustainable wildlife use through the develop- All Australian states and territories manage their native and intro- ment of community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) duced wildlife differently. In South Australia, Victoria and Tasmania programs provide many economic and social benefits to the local for example, government wildlife authorities continue to proclaim community, ensuring they are valued.5 and manage sustainable recreational harvests of game birds such as The lessons learned from African countries, where countless duck and quail through managed and regulated hunting seasons. The populations of endangered species have been brought back from other states and territories may no longer proclaim an official hunting the brink of extinction, are invaluable. On many occasions, the season, but they do still permit the culling of ducks under ‘pest survival of the population simply came down to how the local mitigation’ permits and programs. This is a clear example of the one communities viewed the species. Once the community began to state managing the species as a resource and the other as a pest. value the animal as an economic and social resource, they no longer This differential management regime on the national scale often viewed it as a crop-eating or livestock-killing pest. Sustainable leads to political debate. Many anti-hunting groups commonly utilisation was a new paradigm that produced benefits beyond the declare that the hunting or shooting of ducks is banned in the protectionist regimes of the past. The thought of big-game hunting states without a managed and regulated recreational harvest.4 may be unpalatable to some, but the fact remains that it was very The shooting of ducks is indeed continuing but under a different successful in achieving what protectionist regimes could not and name - pest mitigation. Anti-hunting groups constantly make an this continues today. oversight of this fact while trying to influence public opinion by Slowly, this new management paradigm has made its way to the using the states that are, unfortunately, without a managed and shores of Australia. Unfortunately, there’s a long way to go and it regulated recreational harvest as a reason to ban duck hunting in is far from being fully recognised and accepted by wildlife manage- their particular state or territory. ment authorities that are still tied to protectionism policymaking. Australia’s dysfunctional approach to hunting, duck manage- Sustainable utilisation in Australia is limited to only a few species, ment and other game species across the country has allowed but there are some species that can provide economic and social SSAA SA Hunting & Conservation groups have been controlling goat numbers in the Flinders Ranges for many years now. This has resulted in an increase in yellow-footed rock wallaby populations too. 4 www.ssaa.org.au/asj The changing face of hunting in Australia benefits to local indigenous communities, such as has occurred in rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus), feral cat (Felis catus), feral goat African countries. Crocodile safari hunting is just one example that (Capra hircus) and feral pig (Sus scrofa) have all been held respon- could provide benefits to the local Aboriginal people in communi- sible for negative social, economic and environmental impacts. ties within the Northern Territory. Animal rights groups continue The overall economic cost of a collection of pest animals has been to lobby against and provide resistance to any moves to relax reported to be in excess of $743 million per year in Australia14. protectionist policy to allow sustainable utilisation of animals. A This takes into account the direct economic costs associated with clear example of this was the decision by the previous Australian impacts relating to foxes, rabbits, wild dogs, feral pigs, mice and Minister for Environment Peter Garrett to refuse approval for birds, as well as estimated costs of pest management, administra- the Northern Territory Government to undertake a limited safari tion and research.
Recommended publications
  • Sterilization, Hunting and Culling : Combining Management Approaches for Mitigating Suburban Deer Impacts

    Sterilization, Hunting and Culling : Combining Management Approaches for Mitigating Suburban Deer Impacts

    Poster Presentation Sterilization, Hunting and Culling: Combining Management Approaches for Mitigating Suburban Deer Impacts J.R. Boulanger University of North Dakota P.D. Curtis and M.L. Ashdown Cornell University ABSTRACT: Based on decades of growing deer impacts on local biodiversity, agricultural damage, and deer-vehicle collisions, in 2007 we implemented an increasingly aggressive suburban deer research and management program on Cornell University lands in Tompkins County, New York. We initially divided Cornell lands into a suburban core campus area (1,100 acres [4.5 km2]) and adjacent outlying areas that contain lands where deer hunting was permitted (~4,000 acres [16.2 km2]). We attempted to reduce deer numbers by surgically sterilizing deer in the core campus zone and increasing harvest of female deer in the hunting zone through an Earn-a-Buck program. During the first 6 years of this study, project staff spayed 96 female deer (>90% of all deer on campus); 69 adult does were marked with radio transmitters to monitor movements and survival. From 2008 to 2013, hunters harvested >600 deer (69–165 each hunting season). By winter 2013, we stabilized the campus deer herd to approximately 100 animals (57 deer/mi2 [22 deer/km2]), a density much higher than project goals (14 deer/mi2). Although we reduced doe and fawn numbers by approximately 38% and 79%, respectfully, this decrease was offset by an increase in bucks that appeared on camera during our population study. In 2014, we supplemented efforts using deer damage permits (DDP) with archery sharpshooting over bait, and collapsible Clover traps with euthanasia by penetrating captive bolt.
  • Attitudes to Recreational Use of Rural Properties

    Attitudes to Recreational Use of Rural Properties

    Attitudes to recreational use of rural properties A Report for the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation by Elaine Barclay October 2004 RIRDC Publication No 04/123 RIRDC Project No UNE-84A INCORPORATING THE FORMER RURAL DEVELOPMENT CENTRE University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351 © 2004 Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation. All rights reserved. ISBN 1 74151 031 7 ISSN 1440-6845 Attitudes to recreational use of rural properties Publication No. 04/123 Project No. UNE-84A The views expressed and the conclusions reached in this publication are those of the author and not necessarily those of persons consulted. RIRDC shall not be responsible in any way whatsoever to any person who relies in whole or in part on the contents of this report. This publication is copyright. However, RIRDC encourages wide dissemination of its research, providing the Corporation is clearly acknowledged. For any other enquiries concerning reproduction, contact the Publications Manager on phone 02 6272 3186. Researcher Contact Details Elaine Barclay The Institute for Rural Futures, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351 Phone: (02) 67735141 Fax: (02) 67733245 Email: [email protected] In submitting this report, the researcher has agreed to RIRDC publishing this material in its edited form. RIRDC Contact Details Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation Level 1, AMA House 42 Macquarie Street BARTON ACT 2600 PO Box 4776 KINGSTON ACT 2604 Phone: 02 6272 4539 Fax: 02 6272 5877 Email: [email protected] Website: http://www.rirdc.gov.au Published in October 2004 Printed on environmentally friendly paper by Canprint ii Foreword Attitudes of landholders are of fundamental importance in determining the area available to the general public for outdoor recreation.
  • Megafauna in a Continent of Small Game: Archaeological Implications of Martu Camel Hunting in Australia’S Western Desert

    Megafauna in a Continent of Small Game: Archaeological Implications of Martu Camel Hunting in Australia’S Western Desert

    Quaternary International 297 (2013) 155e166 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Quaternary International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/quaint Megafauna in a continent of small game: Archaeological implications of Martu Camel hunting in Australia’s Western Desert Douglas W. Bird a,*, Brian F. Codding b, Rebecca Bliege Bird a, David W. Zeanah c, Curtis J. Taylor d a Department of Anthropology, Stanford University, Bldg. 50, 450 Serra Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA b Department of Anthropology, University of Utah, 270 S. 1400 E., Rm. 102, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA c Department of Anthropology, California State University, Sacramento, 6000 J Street, Sacramento, CA 95819, USA d Parnngurr Aboriginal Community, LMB 598, Newman, WA 6753, Australia article info abstract Article history: Archaeologists often assume that large ungulates are inherently highly ranked prey because of their size, Available online 14 January 2013 especially attractive to hunters using sophisticated capture technologies common after the late Pleis- tocene. Between 1840 and 1907, over 10,000 dromedary camels were imported to Australia, and today feral populations number well over a million. Although contemporary Aboriginal hunters in Australia’‘s Western and Central Deserts regularly encounter camels, they rarely pursue them. We present data on camel encounter and pursuit rates, with comparisons of energetic search and handling efficiency relative to other foraging options among Martu, the Traditional Owners of a large region of the Western Desert. We then explore some hypotheses concerning the determinants of prey rank and the technological and social contexts that influence resource value. In some respects the case runs counter to common ex- pectations about hunting large ungulates, and highlights the special kinds of opportunity costs that large game acquisition might entail in many contexts.
  • Fast Facts on Canada's Commercial Seal Hunt

    Fast Facts on Canada's Commercial Seal Hunt

    Fast Facts on Canada's Commercial Seal Hunt About the Hunt: Canada's commercial seal hunt is the largest slaughter of marine mammals on Earth. In just 10 years, over two million seals have been killed for their fur. This does not include the tens of thousands of injured seals who have died below the ice. 97 percent of the seals killed in the past 10 years have been less than three months of age. Many of these defenseless seals did not yet know how to swim. In 2001, an independent veterinary panel concluded that the seal hunt results in considerable and unacceptable suffering. They noted that in 42 percent of the seals examined there was not enough evidence of cranial injury to even guarantee unconsciousness at the time of skinning. Harp seals rely on sea ice to give birth to and nurse their pups and they need the ice to remain intact until the pups are strong enough to survive in open water. Climate change has caused sea ice to diminish at an alarming rate off Canada’s east coast in the harp seal birthing grounds. Sea ice formation has been well below average for each of the past 15 years, with 2010 having the lowest sea ice formation on record. The Canadian government has estimated up to 100% mortality in harp seal birthing areas when the sea ice did not form or melted too early in the season. Despite this, the Canadian government continues to authorize massive harp seal quotas each year. The Humane Society of the United States takes no issue with subsistence seal hunting by aboriginal people.
  • New Animal Products

    New Animal Products

    RIRDC Completed Projects in 2002 - 2003 and Research in Progress as at June 2003 Sub Program 1.2 NEW ANIMAL PRODUCTS July 2003 RIRDC Publication No 03/59 © 2003 Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation. All rights reserved. ISBN 0 642 5862 8 ISSN 1440 6845 "RIRDC Completed Projects in 2002 - 2003 and Research in Progress as at June 2003 - 1.2 New Animal Products" Publication No 03/059 The views expressed and the conclusions reached in this publication are those of the author and not necessarily those of persons consulted. RIRDC shall not be responsible in any way whatsoever to any person who relies in whole or in part on the contents of this report. This publication is copyright. However, RIRDC encourages wide dissemination of its research, providing the Corporation is clearly acknowledged. For any other enquires concerning reproduction, contact the Publications Manager on phone 02 6272 3186. RIRDC New Animal Products Research Manager Dr Peter McInnes RIRDC Level 1, AMA House 42 Macquarie Street BARTON ACT 2600 PO Box 4776 KINGSTON ACT 2604 Phone: 08 8556 7331 Fax: 08 8556 7289 Email: [email protected] RIRDC Publications Manager Cecile Ferguson Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation Level 1, AMA House 42 Macquarie Street BARTON ACT 2600 PO Box 4776 KINGSTON ACT 2604 Phone: 02 6272 3186 Fax: 02 6272 5877 Email: [email protected] Website: http://www.rirdc.gov.au Published in July 2003 Printed on environmentally friendly paper by Canprint Foreword The following report contains all entries from continuing and completed New Animal Products research projects funded by RIRDC.
  • Coexisting with Deer an Advocate’S Guide for Preventing Deer Culls in Your Community

    Coexisting with Deer an Advocate’S Guide for Preventing Deer Culls in Your Community

    Coexisting with Deer An advocate’s guide for preventing deer culls in your community How to use this toolkit We fight the big fight for all animals, but we can’t do it without your help. This toolkit is designed to add power to your passion; to enable you to be the most effective advocate for the deer in your community. Suburban development has created an environment in which deer thrive; our backyards provide the “edge” habitat (where forest meets field) they prefer, offering ample supply of food and water. Access to abundant resources leads to healthy deer and higher reproductive rates, and as deer populations increase, so too do deer-human conflicts. The result too often is an assumption that there are “too many deer” and a call for lethal control. This toolkit is designed to empower advocates like you to take action, be it against planned lethal measures, or proactively encouraging the adoption of a humane deer management plan. It’s often thought that the voice of a large, national organization is enough, but the voice of a constituent – yours! – is actually the most powerful tool in the fight for the welfare of deer in your community. Local decision-makers want to hear from you, not an outsider. A groundswell of local opposition to a deer cull, or in support of a humane deer management plan, has the greatest impact. This toolkit will provide guidance on how best to voice your opinion, and how to inspire others to do the same. The toolkit is organized as follows: o Learn the issue: Knowing more about the types of conflicts your community may be having with deer can help you better understand how to address them humanely.
  • The Use of Animals in Sports

    The Use of Animals in Sports

    Existence, Breeding, a,nd Rights: The Use of Animals in Sports Donald Scherer Bowling Green State University Against these lines of argument one frequently encounters a certain objection. It is argued that since the animals for fighting, hunting and racing exist only because they have been bred for such human uses, human beings are justified in so treating them. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate this line ofobjection, or to speak more precisely, to evaluate the two distinct objections implicit in this line. For the objection may be either that (l) the present uses of the animals are justified because they are better for the animals than the Standardly, philosophical arguments about the alternative, namely non-existence, or that quality of treatment human beings owe nonhuman animals! rest on two bases. Peter Singer is famous (2) breeding an animal for a purpose gives the for arguing from the capacity of animals to feel pain breeders (transferable) rights over what they to the conclusion that since almost none of the pain have bred. human beings cause animals is necessary, almost none of it is morally justifiable (Singer, 1989, pp. 78-79). I shall pursue these alternatives sequentially. Singer rests his case on the premise that who suffers pain does not affect the badness of the suffering, so The Value of Existence that, without strong justification, the infliction of pain is universally wrong (Ibid., pp. 77-78). Tom Regan is The strength ofthe first form ofthe objection rests on equally famous for his argument that the beliefs and a common intuition comparing the values of existence desires which normal one year-old mammals clearly and non-existence.
  • Safari Hunting of Australian Wild Exotic Game—Extension Establishment of a Peak Body for the Industry

    Safari Hunting of Australian Wild Exotic Game—Extension Establishment of a Peak Body for the Industry

    Safari Hunting of Australian Wild Exotic Game—Extension Establishment of a peak body for the industry by G.McL. Dryden, S.G. Craig-Smith and C. Arcodia October 2007 RIRDC Publication No 07/161 RIRDC Project No UQ-116A © 2007 Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation. All rights reserved. ISBN 1 74151 556 4 ISSN 1440-6845 Safari Hunting of Australian Wild Exotic Game—Extension: Establishment of a peak body for the industry Publication No. 07/161 Project No. UQ-116A The information contained in this publication is intended for general use to assist public knowledge and discussion and to help improve the development of sustainable regions. You must not rely on any information contained in this publication without taking specialist advice relevant to your particular circumstances. While reasonable care has been taken in preparing this publication to ensure that information is true and correct, the Commonwealth of Australia gives no assurance as to the accuracy of any information in this publication. The Commonwealth of Australia, the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation (RIRDC), the authors or contributors expressly disclaim, to the maximum extent permitted by law, all responsibility and liability to any person, arising directly or indirectly from any act or omission, or for any consequences of any such act or omission, made in reliance on the contents of this publication, whether or not caused by any negligence on the part of the Commonwealth of Australia, RIRDC, the authors or contributors. The Commonwealth of Australia does not necessarily endorse the views in this publication. This publication is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, all other rights are reserved.
  • Veganism and Mi'kmaq Legends: Feminist Natives Do Eat Tofu

    Veganism and Mi'kmaq Legends: Feminist Natives Do Eat Tofu

    Veganism And Mi'kmaq Legends: Feminist Natives Do Eat Tofu This paper proposes a postcolonial ecofeminist reading of Mi’kmaq legends as the basis for a vegan diet rooted in indigenous culture.1 Such a project faces two significant barriers. The first is the association of veganism with whiteness. Drew Hayden Taylor has portrayed abstaining from meat as a white practice (Taylor 2000a, 2000b). In a joke at the beginning of his documentary, Redskins, Tricksters and Puppy Stew he asks, “What do you call a Native vegetarian? A very bad hunter.” Ecologist Robert Hunter (1999) depicts vegans as “eco-Jesuits” and “veggie fundamentalists,” who “force Natives to do things the white man’s way” (p. 100-113). By projecting white imperialism onto vegans Hunter enables white omnivores to bond with Natives over meat-eating. In Stuff White People Like, satirical author Christian Lander (2008) portrays veganism as a tactic for maintaining white supremacy. He writes, “As with many white-people activities, being vegan/vegetarian enables them to feel as though they are helping the environment and it gives them a sweet way to feel superior to others” (p. 38). When veganism is constructed as white, First Nations people who choose a meatless diet are portrayed as sacrificing cultural authenticity. This presents a challenge for those of us who see our vegan diets as ethically, spiritually and culturally compatible with our indigenous traditions. A second barrier to Native veganism is its portrayal as the product of class privilege. Opponents claim that a vegan diet is an indulgence since the poor must eat whatever is available, and cannot afford to be so picky.
  • The Abandonment and Neglect of Hunting Dogs Jamie B

    The Abandonment and Neglect of Hunting Dogs Jamie B

    Exigence Volume 2 | Issue 1 Article 5 2018 Hunting a Home: The Abandonment and Neglect of Hunting Dogs Jamie B. Walker Germanna Community College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.vccs.edu/exigence Part of the Animal Studies Commons, Natural Resources Law Commons, and the Other Animal Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Walker, J. B. (2018). Hunting a Home: The Abandonment and Neglect of Hunting Dogs. Exigence, 2 (1). Retrieved from https://commons.vccs.edu/exigence/vol2/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ VCCS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Exigence by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ VCCS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Walker: Hunting a Home Introduction Hailed as an Old Dominion tradition reaching back to the English roots of the Virginia Colony, hunting with dogs seems to be as popular today as it was when George Washington participated in the 18th Century. Rabbit, fox, racoon and pheasant, to name a few, are easiest to catch or kill with the assistance of man’s best friend and her magnificent nose, and over the years deer hunting with dogs climbed to the top of the popularity list for canine sportsmen. While many lament the fate of the quarry, there exists a victim nearer to the hunter than even the deer: his dogs. Mistreatment of these working animals has been widely reported in the media (Telvock, 2013), but rarely studied in academic circles. What can be done to improve the lot of the Virginia hunting hound without squeezing the rights of the humane hunters which traditionally reach all the way back to England? Ironically, England may hold the key.
  • A Genetic Assessment of the Human-Facilitated Colonization History of Black Swans in Australia and New Zealand

    A Genetic Assessment of the Human-Facilitated Colonization History of Black Swans in Australia and New Zealand

    A genetic assessment of the human-facilitated colonization history of black swans in Australia and New Zealand Citation: Montano, Valeria, Van Dongen, Wouter F. D., Weston, Michael A., Mulder, Raoul A., Robinson, Randall W., Cowling, Mary and Guay, Patrick-Jean 2018, A genetic assessment of the human-facilitated colonization history of black swans in Australia and New Zealand, Evolutionary applications: evolutionary approaches to environmental, biomedical and socio- economic issues, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 364-375. DOI: http://www.dx.doi.org/10.1111/eva.12535 © 2017, The Authors Reproduced by Deakin University under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence Downloaded from DRO: http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30106123 DRO Deakin Research Online, Deakin University’s Research Repository Deakin University CRICOS Provider Code: 00113B Received: 15 March 2017 | Accepted: 15 August 2017 DOI: 10.1111/eva.12535 ORIGINAL ARTICLE A genetic assessment of the human- facilitated colonization history of black swans in Australia and New Zealand Valeria Montano1* | Wouter F.D. van Dongen2,3,4* | Michael A. Weston2,3 | Raoul A. Mulder5 | Randall W. Robinson4 | Mary Cowling4 | Patrick-Jean Guay4 1School of Biology, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK Abstract 2Deakin University, Geelong, Vic, Australia Movement of species beyond their indigenous distribution can fundamentally alter the 3School of Life and Environmental Sciences, conservation status of the populations involved. If introductions are human- facilitated, Centre for Integrative Ecology, Faculty introduced species could be considered pests. Characterizing the colonization history of Science, Engineering and the Built Environment, Burwood, Vic, Australia of introduced species can therefore be critical to formulating the objectives and na- 4Institute for Sustainability and ture of wildlife management strategies.
  • Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Annual Symposium on Sea Turtle Biology and Conservation

    Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Annual Symposium on Sea Turtle Biology and Conservation

    NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-630 PROCEEDINGS OF THE TWENTY-NINTH ANNUAL SYMPOSIUM ON SEA TURTLE BIOLOGY AND CONSERVATION 17 to 19 February 2009 Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Compiled by: Lisa Belskis, Mike Frick, Aliki Panagopoulou, ALan Rees, & Kris Williams U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOAA Fisheries Service Southeast Fisheries Science Center 75 Virginia Beach Drive Miami, Florida 33149 May 2012 NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-630 PROCEEDINGS OF THE TWENTY-NINTH ANNUAL SYMPOSIUM ON SEA TURTLE BIOLOGY AND CONSERVATION 17 to 19 February 2009 Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Compiled by: Lisa Belskis, Mike Frick, Aliki Panagopoulou, ALan Rees, Kris Williams U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE John Bryson, Secretary NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION Dr. Jane Lubchenco, Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE Samuel Rauch III, Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries May 2012 This Technical Memorandum is used for documentation and timely communication of preliminary results, interim reports, or similar special-purpose information. Although the memoranda are not subject to complete formal review, editorial control or detailed editing, they are expected to reflect sound professional work. NOTICE The NOAA Fisheries Service (NMFS) does not approve, recommend or endorse any proprietary product or material mentioned in this publication. No references shall be made to NMFS, or to this publication furnished by NMFS, in any advertising or sales promotion which would indicate or imply that NMFS approves, recommends or endorses any proprietary product or material herein or which has as its purpose any intent to cause directly or indirectly the advertised product to be use or purchased because of NMFS promotion.