Here Frankie describes a bad plan and the silly ideas that underpin the killing.

In 2010, the ACT government published its Kangaroo Management Plan 2010 (KMP 2010). Although the government sought public comment on this plan, and several submissions were made by welfare experts, Kangaroo experts and independent ecologists, virtually nothing of the draft plan was changed in the final plan to reflect any of those submissions.

The ACT government’s KMP 2010 purported to provide a scientific explanation for the government’s commitment to slaughtering Kangaroos. The KMP seems to assume from its first chapter that ‘managing’ Kangaroos means killing them, and that killing them is necessary because Kangaroos eat grass; and that more grass (herbage, biomass) means more biodiversity. Therefore, it argues, slaughtering hundreds or thousands of Kangaroos is good for any endangered species living in the Kangaroos’ habitat. This erroneous belief seemed to underpin the entire document.

‍

There is also an attempt to convince readers that the crashing of Eastern Grey Kangaroo populations in times of extended drought is due to starvation, rather than the cessation of breeding combined with normal attrition. This implies that killing Kangaroos is an act of mercy. If this were the genuine belief behind the slaughter, one would expect the government to conduct an actual cull - a careful and humane singling out and euthanasia of individual Kangaroos who are suffering and have no chance of surviving.

This would be a policy no animal advocate has ever opposed, assuming it were conducted without causing any greater pain or stress to the target animal or any other animal. What one would not expect is the mass slaughter that has occurred over the last eleven years: the random massacre of a pre-set target number of Kangaroos in a healthy population.

Further, even if there were a basis in fact for a "cull" of sick or starving Kangaroos during a time of extended drought, what possible justification could there be for the continuing slaughter through the years of plenty that always follow (or, at least, always have - all bets are off with anthropogenic climate change of course). When there is far more herbage in the reserves than even a fully intact population of Kangaroos could possibly consume, there is a clear and present danger of bushfires.

‍

The ACT government has been unable to cite any source, other than the KMP, to justify its Kangaroo killing policy. The KMP itself, fails to cite any authority or data to justify its recommendation of an ideal Kangaroo density of 0.6 to 1.5 Kangaroos per hectare, or an annual slaughter of 40% of Kangaroos. This kill rate is three to four times the highest possible population growth rate for Eastern Grey Kangaroos, given their slow breeding, late breeding, gender distribution, gestation and lactation period, average natural lifespan, cessation of breeding when food is scarce, and normal infant mortality rate.

The KMP is certainly full of citations of earlier, more scholarly works, but examination of those works rarely supports the KMP’s underlying assertions: that more biomass is better for the environment than diverse biomass; that an ideal density of Kangaroos is 0.6-1.5 per hectare; that managing Kangaroos is in any way necessary; and that managing mean skilling. Essentially, the government contends that the KMP is good science because the KMP says so.

‍