ETHICAL AND WELFARE CONSIDERATIONS
Anthropogenic intervention and management of overabundant wildlife population remains controversial. There is a broad range of often conflicting views regarding acceptable levels and methods of intervention.
In some instances these views reflect individual or group philosophies or beliefs that are not supported by appropriate scientific data. For example, contraception and translocation are frequently seen as more humane options than lethal control options. However, investigation of contraceptive options for native mammals has been largely focused on efficacy, with little consideration given to welfare outcomes. Studies specifically and systematically addressing potential welfare compromise associated with contraception are limited (Gray and Cameron 2010). Poor welfare outcomes have been demonstrated for kangaroo harvesting programs (RSPCA Australia 2002) and are frequently cited as reasons to avoid shooting for population control. Yet recent reviews of several kangaroo shooting programs for population control have demonstrated appropriate animal welfare outcomes (ACT Government 2013; Hampton and Forsyth 2016; Mawson et al. 2016).Choosing an appropriate methodology for controlling overabundant Australian mammal populations requires a structured and holistic approach supported by sound scientific data. Recently, international consensus principles for the ethical control of wildlife have been proposed (Dubois et al. 2017). Developed by an international group of experts, the following points were recommended for consideration before embarking upon management of a given wildlife population:
• there should be evidence-based justification for the proposed control action
• the outcome of the proposed control action should be clear, achievable and monitored within an adaptive management framework
• where possible human-wildlife conflict should be managed by mitigating and altering human activities
• the proposed control action should cause the least animal welfare harm to the least number of animals
• community values should be considered alongside scientific, technical, and practical information (i.e. the proposed control action should be socially acceptable)
• the proposed control action should be part of a systematic long-term management strategy
• implementation of control of a wildlife population should be based on the specific circumstances of the given situation.
These principles give consideration to the broader context of wildlife population management, prioritise welfare outcomes and propose integration of both sound scientific data and community values. As such, these principles provide a sound basis for the development of management programs for overabundant free-ranging Australian mammals.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I thank Lyn Hinds, Melissa Snape and Claire Wimpenny for providing information on the use of GonaCon™ in macropods and for reviewing an early draft of the manuscript.