With all this talk of getting things moving on a sounder basis here while the carnage continues quietly in the background, one might think we had forgotten about Dingo welfare issues lately. Nothing could be further from the truth.
While there have been improvements in the public's perception of Dingoes, it seems that where the Dingoes are, frontier mentality yet reins supreme.
We've heard reports of Dingoes in Victoria being trapped in lieu of problem dogs in domestic livestock areas because of restrictions on travelling, presumably in the name of "increased productivity".
At the same time, Susan Hayes rebuts in this issue of Merigal the tired old arguments served up time and time again by some authorities responsible for vertebrate pest control who have only recently realised that programs of wholesale destruction pursued so vigorously in the past have not only been cruel and unethical, but also an unmitigated waste of taxpayers' and livestock producers' money.
Yes, we're aware of the welfare implications of uncontrolled dogs, wild or domestic, attacking stock, and I've seen some of the results first hand. I must say that it irritates me that those who are so quick to say, "Ever seen what a Dingo does to a sheep?" never seem to consider what the public might think of their lamb chops if someone filmed a stickhole for primetime TV. Two could play this game.
In the long run, it is absurd to expect Dingoes, or any other creature to take responsibility for lack of resources, gates which aren't kept shut, or merely doing what they've come to do through natural selection. Yet, one often hears justification essentially based on a tit for tat mentality, as though predation on one's livestock was a premeditated, personal attack.
Essentially, this is ascribing to the animals involved the power of human thought.
Yes, agriculture has been and is still a vital part of our country's economy and way of life, but Australia is a big island, and it should be shared. The "city greenie" stereotypes so often scorned for being out of touch with the realities of life on the land are also part of the agricultural producer's market, and it's no longer economically viable for producers to ignore legitimate concerns about what's going on in what they consider their "neck of the woods". It may be more than just a few suburban "greenie" stereotypes who need to join the "real world"