The Most Unwanted: Pest, Feral, Invasive Alien, Biosecurity Risk

Riley, S

The Most Unwanted: Pest, Feral, Invasive Alien, Biosecurity Risk

Riley, S

Permalink

Publisher:: LexisNexis
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Australian Environment Review, 2023, 37, (10), pp. 194-199
Issue Date:: 2023-11-09

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Accepted versionAdobe PDF (288.43 kB)

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Riley, S https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8079-7069
dc.date.accessioned	2023-11-29T01:28:06Z
dc.date.available	2023-09-25
dc.date.available	2023-11-29T01:28:06Z
dc.date.issued	2023-11-09
dc.identifier.citation	Australian Environment Review, 2023, 37, (10), pp. 194-199
dc.identifier.issn	1035-137X
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/173611
dc.description.abstract	The phrase, “the most unwanted” comes from a website hosted by the New South Wales (NSW) Department of Primary Industries (DPI), that deals with “non-native pest animals”. In Australia, managing unwanted species traditionally relies on the use of lethal methods, an approach that from at least the 19th century, has polarised public opinion. Recent media reports reveal increasing disagreement among conservationists, farmers and animal advocates, with the latter arguing that killing, particularly aerial shooting is inherently cruel, while conservationists and farmers consider that environmental and economic benefits outweigh any perceived cruelty. This article provides an introduction to the debate, commencing with an overview of the regulatory regime. While unwanted species need to be managed, the issue is whether wholesale killing (killing to waste) is appropriate. Current processes certainly make it easier to kill unwanted animals, but do so by glossing over animal welfare concerns and do not necessarily improve long term environmental management.
dc.language	en
dc.publisher	LexisNexis
dc.relation.ispartof	Australian Environment Review
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.title	The Most Unwanted: Pest, Feral, Invasive Alien, Biosecurity Risk
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	37
utslib.location.activity	Australia
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Law
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/e-Press
utslib.copyright.status	open_access	*
pubs.consider-herdc	true
dc.date.updated	2023-11-29T01:28:05Z
pubs.issue	10
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	37
utslib.citation.issue	10

Abstract:

The phrase, “the most unwanted” comes from a website hosted by the New South Wales (NSW) Department of Primary Industries (DPI), that deals with “non-native pest animals”. In Australia, managing unwanted species traditionally relies on the use of lethal methods, an approach that from at least the 19th century, has polarised public opinion. Recent media reports reveal increasing disagreement among conservationists, farmers and animal advocates, with the latter arguing that killing, particularly aerial shooting is inherently cruel, while conservationists and farmers consider that environmental and economic benefits outweigh any perceived cruelty. This article provides an introduction to the debate, commencing with an overview of the regulatory regime. While unwanted species need to be managed, the issue is whether wholesale killing (killing to waste) is appropriate. Current processes certainly make it easier to kill unwanted animals, but do so by glossing over animal welfare concerns and do not necessarily improve long term environmental management.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/173611