• Home
• Cruelty
• Animals on Farms
• Experimentation
• Wildlife
• Sport and Entertainment
• Nutrition
• Recipes
• Animal Law
• Eating Wildlife
• Meat and the Environment
• Cruelty Free Products
• Free Range Eggs
• Vegetarian Restaurants

• Things to do
• School activities
• About us
• Contacts us
• Membership
• Mail us
• Links
• Credits

Web

animalliberation.org.au

• Cattle methane
• The real cost of chicken
• CSIRO's Cancer Diet
• Eating Water
• Eating Plants
• Milking the Murray

• Greenhouse Gases
• Water Usage Quiz
• Bush Tucker
• Climate Change

• New South Wales
• Queensland
• Victoria
• Tasmania
• Animals Australia

Kangaroo slaughter

Kangaroos and wallabies are protected wildlife. In spite of this, all a shooter needs to legally shoot these animals is a permit from the state or federal government. There are 3 ways in which they are killed:

Commercial shooting . The Federal government each year sets quotas for how many kangaroos can be sold for meat and skins, both within Australia and overseas.

Non-commercial shooting . State governments issue destruction permits to farmers who claim kangaroos or wallabies are causing agricultural damage. The animals may be shot, or poisoned with chemicals such as 1080.

Illegal killing . Weekend shooters go spotlighting for fun, farmers shoot kangaroos for dog food or set snares around holes in fences, and some shooters illegally kill kangaroos to sell their corpses to processors.

Cruelty in kangaroo killing

In 1985, the RSPCA issued a report called Incidence of Cruelty to Kangaroos (1). They estimated how many kangaroos were killed instantly in the commercial kangaroo killing industry by examining corpses in chillers. The RSPCA calculated what percentage of kangaroos were shot through the head, because only a head shot causes so much damage that it almost guarantees an instant death. The effect of shooting an animal just below the ear is described as follows:

" Wound damage is horrific, the cranium containing the brain is literally completely destroyed. Generally the projectile exists through the side of the head resulting in a cavity of about 8cm in diameter. In some cases the eyes are pushed out of the eye socket as a result of internal pressures, but they are not damaged by bullet fragments ."

When kangaroos are shot in the chest or the hip, an instant death is not guaranteed. They may suffer for some time before being shot a second time or being clubbed to death. They may even escape wounded into the bush.

From its observations, the RSPCA estimated that 15% of kangaroos sold in the legal commercial industry were not killed humanely. On this basis, 850,000 animals from the kill quota of over 5.6 million in 1999 would have suffered pain and stress before they died.

Supporters of the industry have claimed that cruelty has decreased since 1985: (2)
" ...there have been improvements made since the RSPCA report in 1985, New South Wales having taken legislative steps to require only head-shot carcases or skins to be allowed to enter the trade, and the culture of head shooting is now much better developed throughout the industry than it was when the study was done. Indeed, so many changes have occurred in that time that its validity can no longer be certain. "

However, these writers have not substantiated their claims by going into chillers and examining large numbers of kangaroo carcases in the way that the RSPCA did.

The kangaroo industry claims to have a 98% clean kill rate, but even if this claim were true, there would still be 113,368 animals not killed cleanly in the 1999 kill quota. However, the comment from the Australian and New Zealand Federation of Animal Societies must be kept in mind (3):
" In 1985, the industry said its clean kill rate was 96%. The RSPCA found it to be 85%. We don't think their claims are credible; there is no reason to think things have changed. "

Even in the commercial industry, only about 10% of shooters are full-time (2). The rate of wounding is likely to be higher the less experience the shooter has.

There is a Code of Practice for the Humane Shooting of Kangaroos (1990, 2nd ed.). It contains points such as the following:

• A centrefire rifle must be used for kangaroos, and the shooter must aim for the head.

• A shotgun may be used for wallabies driven from bush cover during the day, who will probably not be stationary while the shooter takes aim. The shooter can aim for the head, throat or chest, at a maximum range of 30 metres.

• Shooting may not take place from any moving vehicle. When using a rifle (rather than a shotgun) the animal also must be stationary.

• The Code admits: "No matter how carefully the shooter aims, some kangaroos will not be killed outright."

• Wounded kangaroos should be shot through the head or heart, or if close enough to the shooter, by a heavy blow to the skull.

• Shooters should search pouches of dead females and kill furless joeys by decapitation with a sharp knife, furred joeys with a blow to the head. Joeys at foot should be killed by a shot to the brain.

• When a kangaroo is wounded, the shooter should not shoot any further animals until all reasonable efforts have been made to kill the wounded one.

However, this code is not legally enforceable. Since most shooting takes place in remote areas at night, there is limited monitoring of shooters, and any breaches of the Code remain undetected.

The level of cruelty is likely to be higher still in non-commercial and illegal killing. NSW National Parks officials have stated: " Landholders are concerned with the elimination of a pest; niceties of species identification and humane killing do not enter into the equation " (1).

Careless shooting with low power rifles, poisons and illegal kangaroo drives cause great suffering. A drive involves rounding up kangaroos on motorbike or horseback and driving them into a confined area. The animals panic, joeys are abandoned, some kangaroos collapse from exhaustion and some are injured. Drives are obviously very cruel (1).

Snares are sometimes set around holes in fences. The kangaroo or wallaby is supposed to be caught around the neck and strangled. Often they are caught around the chest or leg, and they die of thirst or starvation, a cruel way to die (1).

Weekend shooting for fun is often associated with alcohol (1). A drunken shooter is unlikely to be concerned about cruelty, and is unlikely to be able to shoot accurately anyway, so the chances of wounding kangaroos is high.

While these forms of cruelty are illegal, they are difficult to detect because they take place in isolated areas at night.

Shooting may also affect kangaroos by altering their social structure and gene pool. Commercial shooters kill the biggest animals to get the most skin or meat. This means they shoot more males than females. For example, in the years 1978-1983 in Queensland, between 70% and 95% of 3 kangaroo species shot were males. A disproportionately large number were 4-9 years old, just before the age where they could challenge for the alpha male position at around 10 years. Thus, the strongest males which would sire the next generation are being removed. The largest females also are shot, and these are the oldest and most experienced mothers, leaving less experienced, less strong animals to breed. A biologist has commented on the unnatural selective force exerted on the population by shooting (4):
" There is strong selection for small body size. We lose genotypes that have been strongly tested by the environment because survival to an old age is a matter of good foraging skills, disease resistance, competitive abilities, and of course, chance. "

The commercial killing industry

The quotas for kangaroo killing set by the Federal government have increased steadily over the years as markets for kangaroo products have increased. A quota of 885,000 was set in 1975, but has steadily increased to reach 5,668,416 in 1999. The following are the quotas for the last 12 years:

1988	2,804,400
1989	2,969,800
1990	3,712,900
1991	4,208,800
1992	5,207,700
1993	4,804,100
1994	4,170,000
1995	3,636,556
1996	3,723,000
1997	4,353,800
1998	4,090,140
1999	5,668,416

The main species killed are:

• Red kangaroo (just under 50% of total)

• Eastern grey kangaroo (around one third of total)

• Western grey kangaroo (around 10% of total)

• Wallaroo (or euro) (around 10% of total)

In addition, smaller numbers of whiptail wallabies are killed in Queensland, and Bennett's wallabies and pademelons are killed in Tasmania. The vast majority of kangaroos for the commercial industry are shot in Queensland and NSW. The quota is intended to represent 15-20% of the estimated population of a species in a given year (2).

The quotas refer to the commercial industry only. The figures don't include pouch joeys, non-commercial killing by farmers, or illegal killing. In evidence presented to a Senate Select Enquiry, it was estimated that 1 million kangaroos and wallabies were killed illegally each year (5). In Tamania alone, 500,000 wallabies a year are killed for sport, meat and petfood. This is in addition to those wallabies shot or poisoned with 1080 on destruction permits. On Kangaroo Island in South Australia 10,000 Tammar wallabies a year are killed on destruction permits (6).

Of the kangaroos shot for the commercial industry in Queensland in 1997, 75% were used for skins only, the remaining 25% for meat and skins (6). In 1998, over 2 million skins were exported (7). Some skins are also used in Australia, for example to make souvenirs such as toy koalas.

Some kangaroo meat is sold for human consumption in Australia, and just under 6000 tonnes was exported in 1998 (7). Kangaroo meat was being sold in supermarket chains in the UK. However, Tesco removed the meat from its 350 stores, and Somerfield decided not to sell it in its chain after graphic video footage of cruelty in the industry was shown (8).

Of the meat taken from corpses (in skin-only shooting the corpse is left to rot), most is still used for pet food or crayfish bait. For example, of meat recovered in South Australia in 1997, 75% was used as pet food (6).

Some supporters of the kangaroo industry suggest that kangaroo meat could replace beef and lamb, with the advantage that kangaroos cause less environmental damage that hard-hooved introduced grazing animals. However, given how little meat kangaroos produce, and how relatively small their population is, this suggestion is quite impractical (2):
" ...approximately 55,000 tonnes of kangaroo meat (excluding wallaby) would have been available if the 1993 quota had been taken fully. In the same year, about 2.8 million tonnes of beef, veal, mutton, lamb and pork were used in Australia. Similar results would be obtained for comparisons made in years since then. That is to say, even if all of the kangaroos shot under the commercial quotas each year were used for human consumption, this would be an almost insignificant fraction of Australia's annual red meat production, less that 2%. "

For more information on the impracticality of eating native animals, go to Eating wildlife .

Reasons for killing kangaroos

Kangaroos and wallabies are supposedly killed as agricultural pests. Once dead, so the official line goes, shooters may as well make use of the bodies. However, the Queensland government has admitted that the industry now exists for its own sake, to make money, rather than to remove animals causing damage (9). The kangaroo has become a "resource" rather than protected wildlife.

Shooting of the main commercial species takes place mainly in inland areas, especially in the arid and semi-arid extensive sheep grazing zones. Negligible crops and only 15% of Australia's sheep and cattle come from these areas (9). Thus, kangaroos are not shot for the commercial industry in areas of high agricultural production.

Estimates of lost production due to kangaroos are more guess work that fact, as one group of researchers stated: (10)
" Kangaroo management authorities justify commercial harvesting and the issue of permits to shoot kangaroos largely in terms of their pest status, but limited data exist on the topic. "

The same researchers found that young winter wheat crops in southern Queensland were visited by very few kangaroos in 2 wet years, but more in a year of average rainfall. Mature wheat was not visited in any year (10).

In a 4 year study in Western Australia, it was found that 95% of wheat fields were never visited by kangaroos, and that kangaroos rarely moved more than 100 metres from their home range in the bush (11). Crop losses bordering this bush were only 1-2% of the total yield. Strong fences with 2 barb wires could keep out all but the most determined kangaroos. The researcher concluded that kangaroos did not cause major damage in the wheat lands of WA, and pleaded with landholders to preserve the remaining bush so that native species, including macropods, did not decline even further.

Studies on grazing competition between livestock and kangaroos have produced varying results, although they do agree that such competition occurs only under some circumstances.

• In southern Queensland, kangaroos were found to eat 73% grasses and 27% forbs, while sheep ate 33% grasses and 67% forbs. The researchers concluded: (12)
  " The results of this study confirm those of the previous one (Griffiths and Barker 1966); grey kangaroos and sheep in mulga-box country in south western Queensland have specific food preferences at any one time, and even in severe drought the two species continue to eat very different plants in spite of the marked reduction in the number of plant species to choose from. The grey kangaroos continued to be predominantly grass-eaters and the sheep largely forb-eaters. "

• Researchers observing cattle and red kangaroos in central Australia concluded that the two species could co-exist: (13)
  " ...there is little concurrent competition occurring in general use of the [plant] communities by cattle and kangaroos. Some cattle leave the open communities after forage has dried off and been eater and move to the hills and mulga-perennial grass communities during drought. Kangaroos, on the other hand, mostly move out of the mulga-perennial community, used in good forage conditions, and transfer to the open communities during drought periods. "

• A review of early studies concluded: "In periods of adequate forage simultaneous overlap in plant community utilisation and the diets of kangaroos and livestock may be minimal. It is likely that competition increases during drought." (14)

• Consistent with this conclusion, there was very little overlap in the diets of sheep and kangaroos at Fowlers Gap in western New South Wales during two years with above average rainfall: (15) " Thus, in winter 1972, when red kangaroos had 87% identifiable grass particles and sheep in the same land system has only 7% grass, at least 80% of the diet was not common to both. "

• However, dietary overlap at Fowlers Gap was higher during drought (16). Other studies found overlaps of 53%-73%, depending on the rainfall and forage available. In spite of the overlap, sheep live weight decreased only in the driest period, and wool production was not affected. Thus, competition with kangaroos only had an effect on production during drought (17-18).

• Other studies at Cobar in western New South Wales claimed a greater effect due to competition with kangaroos. (19-20) They claimed that kangaroos reduced the forage availability for sheep and decreased their live weight and production. However in these studies stocking rates were higher (0.3-0.8 sheep/ha without kangaroos, 0.2-0.53 sheep/ha with kangaroos) than in the Fowlers Gap studies (0.2 sheep/ha). Not surprisingly, forage yield decreased significantly only at the high stocking densities (0.5-0.8 sheep equivalents/ha). However, sheep production was not reduced, even at these high stocking densities, in a year of high rainfall.

• A 6.5 year study at Fowlers Gap found that there was negligible competition between sheep and red kangaroos when the plant biomass was high, in other words, after good rain. With a medium plant biomass sheep and kangaroos could co-exist unless stocking densities were too high. Competition would only exist when the plant biomass was less than 300kg/ha. This researcher concluded: (21)
  " The current justification for culling red kangaroos in the rangelands is to minimise the effect of competition between domestic stock and kangaroos for native pasture. The present study indicates that under most conditions, red kangaroos have a negligible effect on the productivity of sheep and that culling at these times is unjustified. During times of drought culling is justified but significant increases in sheep productivity should not be expected. "

The fact is that "pest management" has become secondary to commercial exploitation. Other reasons why the kangaroo killing industry is not a management tool include:

• Most kangaroos shot are males because they are larger and therefore more profitable. One male mates with many females, so enough males will be left to enable females to continue breeding and to maintain the population that is supposedly an agricultural pest.

• Queensland, the state where the most kangaroos are killed, has an open season for kangaroo killing. Kangaroos can be killed anywhere, regardless of whether or not they are causing damage. This is hardly a management tool!

Non-lethal protection

If kangaroos or wallabies are shown to be a problem in a certain area, there are a number of non-lethal and effective ways of protecting crops.

• Electrified fencing can be used to exclude animals from crops or improved pasture. For example, this approach has been used very effectively to prevent kangaroos from the Grampians National Park moving into nearby improved pasture (9). A trial over 3 years in Tasmania showed that a 10 wire fence with 4 wires electrified could keep out Bennett's wallabies and pademelons. The trial paddock had only 1% of the Bennett's wallabies and 20% of the padmelons found in a conventionally fenced paddock (22).

• Roo-Guard is a deterrent device that emits a high frequency sound the animals find very unpleasant. It has been promoted by the Queensland Grain Growers Association to protect crops (9).

• Tree guards can be used to protect tree seedlings against wallabies. A new approach is a deterrent called WR-1, developed by the Victorian Institute of Animal Science (23). Seedlings are sprayed with WR-1, followed by a sprinkling of hard grit. Animals find this grit very unpleasant, and learn not to feed on treated plants. Deterrents are obviously preferable to poisoning wallabies with 1080, as is still being done by some government departments.

For more information on the recently published book The Kangaroo Betrayed: World's Largest Wildlife Slaughter, contact the publisher.

Hill of Content Publishing 86 Bourke St Melbourne 3000 ph (03) 9662-2282 fax (03) 9662-2527 email hocpub@collinsbooks.com.au

Scientists and wildlife activists discuss many different aspects of the kangaroo slaughter in this informative book.

References