Kangaroo Industry Research Articles

Making kangaroos grievable; making grievability non-human

When Australian economist Ross Garnaut proposed to increase the commercial kangaroo industry in 2008, it started a national debate on the supposed edibility of kangaroos. Campaigns against the commercial kangaroo industry and hesitance amongst many consumers to eat kangaroo reflect concerns about viewing kangaroos as food. This article explores the reactions and challenges that originate from the kangaroo’s changing role in society by using Judith Butler’s concept of grievable lives. Using this framework shows that what animals we eat goes beyond nutritional value; it symbolizes deeper values regarding human–animal relations and illustrates why and how not all animals are seen and treated as the same.

Options and rationale for regional property‐based kangaroo production

SummaryThe larger kangaroos (Macropus giganteus, M. fuliginosus and Osphranter rufus) are widely distributed and have a national population which fluctuates in response to changes in grass growth and trends to 40 million. Most are outside parks and reserves and, on pastoral properties, particularly on the rangelands of southern Australia. High numbers compromise regenerative agriculture, pasture conservation, revegetation and stewardship programmes, and can have significant financial impacts on landholders by lowering livestock production and damaging sustainability. Some smaller macropods, wallabies and pademelons, also have a similar effect, especially in Tasmania and on other smaller Australian Islands where foxes are absent. Paradoxically, kangaroos have a wide range of potentially valuable production attributes and are unique, which should be a global comparative advantage. The kangaroo industry is established with a small domestic and international market, although demand has been falling in recent years. Non‐commercial culling is rising, which results in millions of carcasses being wasted and left to decompose in the field. Indigenous communities abhor such waste and its cultural implications. A stronger kangaroo industry would be a better solution to managing overabundant kangaroos than pest culling and exclusion fences. Because kangaroos move from property to property, populations need to be managed on a regional basis through ‘regional property‐based kangaroo production’. A form of proprietorship over this mobile resource would encourage landholders to play a role in creating greater demand for kangaroo products. They would have an incentive to raise the value of kangaroos. Through innovative harvesting, they could deliver high‐quality, environmentally branded, accurately described, gourmet, differentiated products integrated with other livestock industries. They could establish cooperatives and embark on promoting regional kangaroo products. Policy improvements are needed to achieve these production systems. Doing so would diversify their enterprises, convert a liability already on their properties into an asset, create employment, enhance rural economic resilience, and improve animal welfare and conservation outcomes while earning them carbon credits. These opportunities become even more profound as climate change progresses.

Introduction to the special edition on overabundant macropods

Introduction to the special edition on overabundant macropods

Balancing stakeholder interests in kangaroo management – historical perspectives and future prospects

Kangaroos are commercially harvested in five mainland states of Australia, with the harvest regulated by state government wildlife management agencies and overseen by the Commonwealth government. Non-commercial culling is permitted, and although most kangaroos have traditionally been taken by the commercial kangaroo harvesting industry, the proportion taken non-commercially has increased in recent years. Management plans that guide the regulation of the harvest support the management objectives of wildlife management agencies and the kangaroo industry, but the plans do not successfully address the objectives of other stakeholders including pastoralists and animal protection groups, which focus on minimising the grazing impacts of kangaroos and animal welfare issues respectively. We reviewed the objectives outlined in the management plans for kangaroos in the Australian rangelands and examined alternative systems for managing natural resources to identify if improvements to management could be made. Current management plans for kangaroos principally use fixed harvest rates that are responsive only to the state of the kangaroo population and not to changes in the environments in which kangaroos live. This type of management is reactive, and opportunities for improving management of the environment are limited. A viable alternative is active adaptive management which focuses on explicit measurement of the response of the natural system to management actions and use of this information to modify interventions to better meet management objectives. Active adaptive management is appropriate when management actions can strongly influence system state but the impacts of management are uncertain. We argue that the management of kangaroos and the environments in which they live would benefit from the adoption of an active adaptive management approach by wildlife management agencies.

The welfare ethics of the commercial killing of free-ranging kangaroos: an evaluation of the benefits and costs of the industry

AbstractThe commercial killing of kangaroos provides multiple benefits to society, but also causes both deliberate and unintended harms to kangaroos. The ethics of the kangaroo industry is assessed in terms of whether the assumed benefits justify the welfare costs. An analysis of the stated benefits indicates that killing for damage mitigation is beneficial mainly during drought and not at current levels; that there is a commercial value, although considerably lower than previously estimated, and that demonstrable environmental benefits from commercial killing of kangaroos are lacking; and that the commercial kill may ameliorate the suffering of kangaroos during drought. Welfare practices are very difficult to assess and regulate due to the size and remote nature of the industry. A combination of empirical data on welfare outcomes and inferences drawn from behavioural and reproductive knowledge of the commercially killed species are utilised to assess harm. The welfare costs include deliberate and indirect harm to dependent young (a by-product of the commercial kill), and a number of unintended harms to adult kangaroos, including increased mortality during drought, inhumane killing of a portion of adult kangaroos, and a disruption of social stability and the evolutionary potential of individuals. Furthermore, a substantial gap exists between the intended welfare standards of the code of practice governing the kangaroo industry and the welfare outcomes for both dependent young and adult kangaroos. We found that, on balance, the benefits are lower than expected and the welfare costs are likely to be considerably higher than acceptable. More research, particularly at the point of kill, is necessary to verify and assess the extent of harms. A number of improvements are suggested to the code of practice to improve welfare outcomes.

The role of inspections in the commercial kangaroo industry

This article provides an assessment of the enforcement of the law governing commercial kangaroo killing, focusing particularly upon inspectorial practices. Australia’s kangaroo industry is the largest commercial kill of land-based wildlife in the world. Professional shooters hunt kangaroos in rural and remote locations at night. Due to the remote and decentralised nature of the killing, the industry presents unique challenges to law enforcement agencies that are responsible for the enforcement of animal welfare standards. This article focuses upon the role that inspections have in detecting offences within the commercial kangaroo industry. It provides a comparative analysis across the states, highlighting key differences in terms of inspectorial practices and the resulting outcomes. A common theme across all of the jurisdictions is that none of the agencies responsible for enforcement regularly conduct inspections of shooters, making it impossible to ensure that these parties are complying with the National Code of Practice for the Humane Shooting of Kangaroos and Wallabies. Recommendations for reform are offered, including stronger compliance policy, higher rates of inspection, increased resourcing and the introduction of alternative methods of inspection.

Kangaroos in the rangelands: opportunities for landholder collaboration

For 3 years, the Future of Australia’s Threatened Ecosystems (FATE) Program has been working towards achieving multiple benefits for rangelands by applying conservation through sustainable use (CSU) approaches to the kangaroo industry. A critical component of this work is landholder involvement in kangaroo management that results in commercial gain. We are developing strategies for landholders to add value to the harvest at the same time as achieving better control over the impact that kangaroos can have on their land. This paper outlines FATE’s experiences with two related initiatives exploring landholder involvement in kangaroo harvest in the rangelands. First, a trial in the Barrier Ranges of north-western New South Wales demonstrates the potential benefits of collaboration for landholders in reducing their exposure to kangaroo harvest variability and the associated business risks. Second, an analysis of the various enterprise models which landholders could employ to enter the kangaroo industry identifies opportunities for landholders and kangaroo harvesters to collaborate for mutual benefit. Several challenges exist in bringing these potential benefits to fruition. The paper includes: (1) analysis of harvest data across collaborating properties; (2) progress towards allocation of harvest tags on a group rather than an individual property basis; (3) results of discussions between key stakeholders; and (4) a description of models for landholder involvement and analysis of the extent to which they can achieve multiple benefits.

Comment on Wilson and Edwards' proposal for low‐emission meat

George Wilson and Melanie Edwards are to be commended for raising the issue of livestock methane in their recent paper “Native wildlife on rangelands to minimize methane and produce lower-emission meat: kangaroos versus livestock” (Edwards & Wilson 2008). However, the paper contains inconsistencies and the proposed massive increase in kangaroo meat production is implausible. First the inconsistencies. Table 2 claims that 34 million kangaroos with a kill rate of 15% will produce 170,000 tonnes of carcase. That is about 33 kg per animal. But the table implies a carcase weight of 12 kg which is consistent with other studies (Hardman 1996; Hacker et al. 2004). The 33 kg carcase weight is also evident throughout figure 3. The overestimate of carcase weight yields an almost three-fold underestimate of the animals required to produce the desired amount of carcase. We all make numerical mistakes, but a more serious issue is that a beef carcase is different from a kangaroo carcase. A beef carcase can yield 60% to 70% of its carcase weight as cuts or mince (Yeates & Gaden 1998). The Kangaroo Industry Strategic plan 2005–2010 (Kelly 2005) uses a figure of just 1.5 kg (12%) per kangaroo as cuts with the rest of the carcase being only suitable for processed meat. Thus, it will take 120 kangaroo carcases with a combined weight of 1.4 tonnes to provide the same quantity of meat cuts as a single 260 kg cattle carcase. This brings the accumulated underestimate of the kangaroo population required to over 15-fold. The authors claim that reductions in sheep numbers will allow a kangaroo population increase but present a graph (figure 1) showing that the 2006 kangaroo population has had a net decline of 15 million since 1990 despite a reduction in the sheep population 170 million to 88 million during the same period (Pink 2008). In summary, Wilson and Edwards seriously underestimate the kangaroo population required to replace the suggested reduction in sheep and cattle and fail to identify an adequate mechanism to drive kangaroo population growth. Editor : Corey Bradshaw

Rules, norms and strategies of kangaroo harvest

Kangaroos are a common pool resource harvested for commercial markets that utilise meat and skins. Harvest is regulated by legislation that establishes the formal rules of the kangaroo industry. Our recent research, conducted in South Australia, examined the formal rules of commercial harvest and has also uncovered informal institutions in operation. By analysing data from interviews with landholders (pastoral lease holders), kangaroo harvesters and kangaroo meat processors we found that the formal rules imposed by government regulators are not always congruent with efficient and effective harvest regimes. We have used Crawford and Ostrom's (2005) syntax for classifying rules in our examination of the informal institutions fashioned by industry actors. Resource users may not always follow the formal rules of use imposed by government, but when personal livelihoods are at stake they do act to conserve their resource base.

Rules, norms and strategies of kangaroo harvest

Kangaroos are a common pool resource harvested for commercial markets that utilise meat and skins. Harvest is regulated by legislation that establishes the formal rules of the kangaroo industry. Our recent research, conducted in South Australia, examined the formal rules of commercial harvest and has also uncovered informal institutions in operation. By analysing data from interviews with landholders (pastoral lease holders), kangaroo harvesters and kangaroo meat processors we found that the formal rules imposed by government regulators are not always congruent with efficient and effective harvest regimes. We have used Crawford and Ostrom's (2005) syntax for classifying rules in our examination of the informal institutions fashioned by industry actors. Resource users may not always follow the formal rules of use imposed by government, but when personal livelihoods are at stake they do act to conserve their resource base.

Building connections between kangaroos, commerce and conservation in the rangelands

The role of landholders in kangaroo harvesting is an issue that has been revisited often over time as circumstances continue to change within the kangaroo industry, within rural communities and within national and international conservation frameworks. It is again time to assess the state of play. The kangaroo industry has, after more than 30 years of operation, a legitimate claim to being sustainable. But where does it stand in relation to current international thinking on sustainable use and in relation to the broader conservation goals for Australia's rangeland environments?This paper presents strategies for linking the kangaroo harvest with conservation in the sheep rangelands through models that can provide economic returns and a greater management role for landholders in the kangaroo industry. According to the principles of conservation through sustainable use (CSU), when local people receive direct economic returns from the sustainable use of wildlife, they can gain incentives to undertake species ...

Aboriginal perspectives on kangaroo management in South Australia

Kangaroos are culturally significant to Aboriginal people but Aboriginal people are generally not involved in kangaroo management or in the kangaroo industry. Our research has provided the first opportunity for Aboriginal people in South Australia to present their perspectives on the commercial harvest of kangaroos. Research methods were qualitative, involving consultations with authoritative Aboriginal people about their perspectives, aspirations, and how they see their rights and interests in relation to the commercial harvest of kangaroos. We found diverse views on this topic from Aboriginal research participants. For some Aboriginal people, strict cultural protocols preclude any involvement in the commercial harvest, but for people from other regions where the cultural laws concerning kangaroos are quite different, there is interest in developing enterprises based on kangaroo harvest. Despite the diversity of views about commercial kangaroo harvest, Aboriginal people across South Australia highly value kangaroos, and want to be included in decision-making processes for kangaroo management. There is potential for appropriate engagement of Aboriginal people in kangaroo management through improved communication, greater understanding and respect for the diversity of Aboriginal perspectives and protocols regarding native wildlife.

Social and cultural dimensions of commercial kangaroo harvest in South Australia

Kangaroo management is important to the sustainability of Australia’s rangeland landscapes. The commercial harvest of kangaroos assists in reduction of total grazing pressure in the rangelands and provides the potential for supplementary income to pastoralists. Indeed, the commercial kangaroo industry is considered by natural resource scientists as one of the few rural industry development options with potential to provide economic return with minimal environmental impact. While the biology and population ecology of harvested kangaroo species in Australia is the subject of past and present research, the social, institutional and economic issues pertinent to the commercial kangaroo industry are not well understood. Our research is addressing the lack of understanding of social issues around kangaroo management, which are emerging as constraints on industry development. The non-indigenous stakeholders in kangaroo harvest are landholders, regional management authorities, government conservation and primary production agencies, meat processors, marketers and field processors (shooters) and these industry players generally have little understanding of what issues the commercial harvest of kangaroos presents to Aboriginal people. Consequently, the perspectives and aspirations of Aboriginal people regarding the commercial harvest of kangaroos are not well considered in management, industry development and planning. For Aboriginal people, kangaroos have subsistence, economic and cultural values and while these values and perspectives vary between language groups and individuals, there is potential to address indigenous issues by including Aboriginal people in various aspects of kangaroo management. This research also examines the Aboriginal interface with commercial kangaroo harvest, and by working with Aboriginal people and groups is exploring several options for greater industry involvement. The promotion of better understandings between indigenous and non-indigenous people with interests in kangaroo management could promote industry development through the marketing of kangaroo as not only clean and green, but also as a socially just product.

From the Rangelands to the Ritz: Geographies of Kangaroo Management and Trade

ABSTRACT The Australian kangaroo products industry has become a global export industry that is rapidly being seen as a model in economic and ecological sustainability. Local geography and ecology contribute to the industry's ecological sustainability, while the international geographies of trade influence economic sustainability. The global trade in wild products and the purchase of kangaroo products outside Australia is shown to create opportunities to improve the conseroation of local land resources and kangaroos. However, kangaroo products are not yet socially and culturally acceptable to many people. The authors argue that the positive global influences on the kangaroo industry could be enhanced through increasing government involvement in promoting kangaroo as a resource, which would also promote the industry and elevate the status of a significant local resource.

From the Rangelands to the Ritz: Geographies of Kangaroo Management and Trade

ABSTRACTThe Australian kangaroo products industry has become a global export industry that is rapidly being seen as a model in economic and ecological sustainability. Local geography and ecology contribute to the industry's ecological sustainability, while the international geographies of trade influence economic sustainability. The global trade in wild products and the purchase of kangaroo products outside Australia is shown to create opportunities to improve the conservation of local land resources and kangaroos. However, kangaroo products are not yet socially and culturally acceptable to many people. The authors argue that the positive global influences on the kangaroo industry could be enhanced through increasing government involvement in promoting kangaroo as a resource, which would also promote the industry and elevate the status of a significant local resource.

The Wild Kangaroo Industry: Developing the Potential for Sustainability

Wildlife resources the world over have long been subject to harvest and management. As wildlife uses have grown, so too have the need and desire to ensure their sustainability.

Managing the commercial harvest of kangaroos in the Murray-Darling Basin.

In this study a new, physiologically structured model of kangaroo population dynamics is described. The model has been used to examine a wide range of harvest rate � sex ratio combinations, following a simple harvest strategy where the quota was proportional to population size. The combinations of harvest rate and sex ratio in the harvest that best suited the objectives of the stakeholder groups (non-Government conservationists, wildlife management agencies, the kangaroo industry and pastoralists) were identified using multicriteria decision analysis. The best combinations for the stakeholder groups non-Government conservationists, wildlife management agencies and the kangaroo industry were characterised by a strong male bias (90 ? 100% male) and low to moderate harvest rates (10 ? 40% per annum). The best solutions for pastoralists were female biased (at least 70% females) with high harvest rates (90% per annum).

Kangaroo harvesters: fertilising the rangelands

Offcuts from harvested red kangaroo (Macropus rufus), comprising the head, stomach, entrails, legs and joey (females only) and sometimes the tail remain near the point of harvest. Offcut weights of males averaged 11.46 kg and comprised 26% of the total body mass, whilst average female offcuts weighed 6.69 kg and comprised 31% of total body mass. There was a strong correlation between carcass and offcut mass for both sexes. Offcuts from 27 kangaroos were randomly exposed to three different assemblages of vertebrate scavengers. Soil nitrogen and organic carbon concentrations increased significantly following the addition of offcuts but there was no significant change in soil potassium concentrations or pH. Decomposition and dispersal of offcuts was enhanced by accessibility to different scavenging guilds. The contribution of the kangaroo industry to soil nutrient retention and cycling contrasts with the depletion of nutrients through the export of domestic livestock from the Australian rangelands.

Sustainable use of wildlife in western New South Wales: Possibilities and problems.

Sustainable use of wildlife has become equated with exploitation of animal products (meat, skin or feathers) and/or removal of wild progenitors into the pet trade. This consumption of the wildlife is therefore largely ex situ and so removes nutrients and energy from the rangelands. Demand for lethal or a removal action is often driven by the severity of the perceived conflict between the wildlife and other enterprises, especially agriculture, rather than for the resulting products. Such uses also raise community concerns about humane treatment of animals and a valuing of the natural heritage. Wildlife-based tourism, as part of the valuable and growing nature-based or ecotourism industry in Australia, is an in situ use that may be a more ecologically sustainable and economically twble option for use of rangeland wildlife. This paper examines these possibilities and their problems with a focus on the commercial kangaroo industry and the use of arid-zone mammals, birds and reptiles for pets. It provides new evidence that wildlife-tourism based on free-living kangaroos in the rangelands is both feasible and in demand. This industry should be given advocacy in the on-going debate on the management and future of the rangelands. Key words: kangaroos, wildlife management, wildlife tourism, game harvesting

An Economic Perspective to the Population Management of Commercially Harvested Kangaroos.

Both overseas and within Australia, the need for a commercial kangaroo industry is being questioned. Some groups believe that the larger kangaroo species presently being culled are under threat of extinction and that the pest status of kangaroos to agriculture is largely a myth. As the commercial kangaroo industry is export oriented, the imposition of import bans by overseas governments would significantly affect the viability of the industry. Also, agricultural producers who believe they bear the costs of maintaining kangaroo population are concerned that damage by kangaroos would become unacceptably high if their numbers were to go unchecked. The aim of this article is to put an economic perspective on the population management of commercially harvested kangaroos. The major groups in conflict are identified, along with their respective preferences regarding the appropriate level of the kangaroo population. The underlying reason for conflict, the common property characteristic of kangaroos, is examined, and an economic framework for reconciling these conflicts through population management presented. The lack of data on kangaroo numbers and the benefits and costs which various population levels have for the various interest groups remain a major impediment to quantifying an economic model for determining optimal population levels. An examination is made of relevant data and a national appraisal of the order of magnitude of kangaroo damages to agriculture is presented.