O
ver the past few years I have been looking at
natural systems, virgin land and the animals, plants
and functional ecosystems they comprise. I am particu-
larly interested in the level of protection they are
afforded, and in who is responsible for providing this.
What does ‘protected’ mean, and how is the appetite for
growth and destruction separated from the need to
conserve? All I keep finding is the same, simple
response; there is no protection, except in some perfunc-
tory, ‘lip service’ manner, and those that rape and pillage
these natural systems do so with impunity (this power
often being equated with heaps of $s).
The above dramatized, fictional episode involving the
Brolgas pertains to a recent case in the Northern
Territory, in which the ‘biggest protected wildlife seizure
anywhere in Australia’ was uncovered during a raid on a
property in Howard Springs. The haul comprised more
than 1,300 animal parts from 400 individual animals and
91 different species, with an estimated value on the black
market of more than $500,000. Tracey Duldig, from
Parks and Wildlife NT, said that officers had ‘uncovered
a large-scale wildlife poaching and trafficking’ network
with links interstate and internationally.
“The prize of a lot of these animals is the skull,” said Ms
Duldig. “The skull is easy to get out of the country as
well.”
The owner of the property was indicted on more than 370
charges relating to protected wildlife, in addition to fire-
arms offences. Describing himself as ‘a genuine environ-
mental enthusiast’ he was found guilty, but handed a
mere 10-month suspended sentence.
If you are reading this, then you must also be an animal
lover, and will no doubt be disgusted and annoyed that
the killing of so many native animals resulted in a
suspended sentence. In my opinion, the penalty makes a
mockery of the resources dedicated to bringing this
person to justice.
So, where to from here, and what message does this
send? Well, in my mind the obvious conclusion is that
wildlife laws are ineffective and that, if you want to go
and get a critter from the wild, the consequences are
likely to be negligible! I am not advocating this course of
action and have been very proactive in making sure we
do have wildlife laws, but in many instances they are
archaic or obsolete. Hopefully, something like this recent
case will elicit a change.
Of course the big question is what should be changed,
and how can this be implemented effectively? There are
so many laws that currently cover native animals in
Australia but, as the above story shows, we don’t really
value the wildlife we have. It may seem incongruous that
every Green Tree Frog, blue-tongue and bearded dragon
has the same level of protection as a Pig-nosed Turtle,