Abstract

Simple SummaryKangaroos likely prospered for most of the last 65,000 years under the landscape management of Australia’s first people. From the arrival of British colonists in 1788, European agricultural practices, crops and livestock transformed the landscape to one less favourable to indigenous flora and fauna. However, the six species of large kangaroos persisted and came into conflict with cropping and pastoral enterprises, leading to controls on their abundance. After mass killing for bounties, a commercial industry emerged in the 1970s to sell meat and hides into domestic and international markets. The further intention was to constrain kangaroo abundance while sustaining kangaroos in the landscape. Human–human conflict has emerged about the necessity and means of this lethal control. Further control of the abundance of four of the six species is promoted. Their abundance is considered by some as a threat to biodiversity in conservation reserves, removing these as a haven. We therefore propose returning the kangaroos’ stewardship to the current and future generations of Aboriginal Australians. We envisage that a marriage of localised consumptive (bush tucker) and non-consumptive (wildlife tourism) uses in the indigenous-protected-area estate can better sustain abundant kangaroo populations into the future.Australia’s first people managed landscapes for kangaroo species as important elements of their diet, accoutrements and ceremony. This developed and persisted for about 65,000 years. The second wave of colonists from the United Kingdom, Ireland and many subsequent countries introduced familiar domesticated livestock and they have imposed their agricultural practices on the same landscapes since 1788. This heralded an ongoing era of management of kangaroos that are perceived as competitors to livestock and unwanted consumers of crops. Even so, a kangaroo image remains the iconic identifier of Australia. Kangaroo management is shrouded in dogma and propaganda and creates a tension along a loose rural–city divide. This divide is further dissected by the promotion of the consumption of kangaroo products as an ecological good marred by valid concerns about hygiene and animal welfare. In the last decade, the fervour to suppress and micro-manage populations of some kangaroo species has mounted. This includes suppression within protected areas that have generally been considered as safe havens. This review explores these tensions between the conservation of iconic and yet abundant wildlife, and conflict with people and the various interfaces at which they meet kangaroos.

Highlights

  • The most diverse family of marsupials (Marsupialia) is the Macropodidae (~67 species with four recent extinctions), which includes small to medium-sized browsing and grazing herbivores, such as the pademelons (Thylogale), hare-wallabies (Lagorchestes, Lagostrophus), nailtail wallabies (Onychogalea), rock-wallabies (Petrogale), brush wallabies (Setonix, Wallabia, Notamacropus), kangaroos (Macropus, Osphranter) and tree-kangaroos (Dendrolagus).Most are found only in Australia, but New Guinea contributes a higher diversity of tree-kangaroos (~12 species) than Australia (2 species) and two endemic genera of forest wallabies (Dorcopsis and Dorcopsulus) [1]

  • The extant kangaroo species have an evolutionary history that pre-dates the arrival of humans on the Australian continent by a million (Osphranter spp.) to two million years (Macropus spp.)

  • In Australia, the stocking rate for a pastoral property is estimated as dry sheep equivalents (DSE), i.e., a non-lactating ewe of average size

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The most diverse family of marsupials (Marsupialia) is the Macropodidae (~67 species with four recent extinctions), which includes small to medium-sized browsing and grazing herbivores, such as the pademelons (Thylogale), hare-wallabies (Lagorchestes, Lagostrophus), nailtail wallabies (Onychogalea), rock-wallabies (Petrogale), brush wallabies (Setonix, Wallabia, Notamacropus), kangaroos (Macropus, Osphranter) and tree-kangaroos (Dendrolagus). Further conflict arises where a kangaroo species may diminish the prospects of one or more other species of higher conservation significance (e.g., in a threatened species category) [14] These conflicts lead to the implementation of measures to control abundance. The final aim is to explore the generality of this contention and the interplay between studies showing benefits or benign effects of kangaroo populations, and those promoting a contrary result. To fulfil these aims and give it currency, the review mainly explores peer-reviewed scientific literature from the last two decades in the disciplines of conservation biology, ecology and behavioural ecology. We apply academic rigor here and temper our own hyperbole

Abundance
Aboriginal Australians
Present-Day Australia
Human Predation Decline
Dingo Predation Decline
Watering Point Expansion and Stability
Conservation—Six Species of Least Concern
What Do the People Think through Attitudinal Surveys?
Findings
Resolving the Conflict—Conclusions
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.