Transparency and communication can improve wildlife welfare outcomes: A case of kangaroos

Abstract

Abstract. All countries manage human and wildlife coexistence. Where traditionally humans may have killed animals perceived to be a problem, this is often no longer legal or socially acceptable. Decision-makers tend to feel less strongly about coexistence issues than the people who attempt to influence them on behalf of human or wildlife interests. It has been argued that links between human interests and decisions affecting wildlife should be transparent, and that open decision making processes involving a range of local stakeholders will improve outcomes for humans and wildlife. This paper examines one case incident in an ongoing conflict between an international car racing track and kangaroos that have occasionally been found on the track during a race, causing danger to themselves and race participants. A secret local government report and plan to cull kangaroos was obtained using Freedom of Information legislation. When released to the media the subsequent public discussion showed a much greater concern for kangaroo stress, harm and right to live than the official report, and called for consideration of a range of alternatives to culling. This led to postponement of culling plans, and commitment to a more open community discussion of options. The case clearly supports claims that greater transparency and local stakeholder participation in management decision processes can improve welfare outcomes for non-human animals.

Access to Public Information as a Political Sciences Technique: What and How Should Be Studied, and What for?

“…The technique is not extensively used to collect source data by political scholars . It is surprising that the technique of access to public information has not been consciously implemented in political research, even though access to public information has helped, for example, to stop the shooting of kangaroos (Simmons, 2017) and contributed to other achievements of watchdog organizations that control the transparency of public life . This "open governance" tool has great cognitive potential as well as potential to trigger social changes .…”

Cullers and Guardians: Subcultures, Attitudes and Culling Kangaroos

“…When communicating about culling the kangaroo industry tend to emphasise the 'harvest' of an abundant resource, the control of pests, and shooter adherence to a strict concerning the requirement to kill instantly with a single shot to the head (Kelly, 2013). Some recent research has called for greater scrutiny of many aspects of the processes that lead to granting licences to cull kangaroos (Boom et al, 2013;Simmons, 2016). Kangaroos are not farmed and killed in sterile farm sheds or conditions, they are shot in the open and wild.…”