Journal articles on the topic 'Wildlife pests – Control – Namibia'

Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) are organic (carbon-based) compounds that include synthesized substances (pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls [PCBs]) and other by-product substances generated as a result of human and natural activity (dioxins and furans). Extensive scientific studies have shown that POPs are some of the most dangerous pollutants released into the environment by humans. Great efforts have been made since the early 1960s to enhance chemical management and safety issues. Various conventions have been adopted for this purpose: the Stockholm Convention (SC) is one of the well-known meetings in this context. The SC on POPs (May 2001) focuses on reducing and eliminating releases of 12 POPs coined the ‘Dirty Dozen’ by the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). Persistence of such chemicals in soils, air, and water, together with natural processes such as evaporation to the atmosphere and washout by rain and flood, give rise to their ubiquitous distribution in the environment and eventual penetration into food chains and bio-accumulation in humans. Public concern about contamination by POPs increased recently because several of these compounds are identified as hormone disruptors, which can alter normal function of endocrine and reproductive systems in humans and wildlife. African countries are using pesticides, such as dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT), lindane, toxaphene, endrin, dieldrin, heptachlor, since more than 50 years for combating agricultural pests and controlling disease vectors, especially malaria. The way in which pesticides are used in Africa caused serious environmental and health problems much more than elsewhere. These problems are represented by accumulation of organochlorine pesticide (OCP) residues in different environmental samples and hosting of at least 50,000 tons of obsolete pesticides, as well as tens of thousands of tons of contaminated soil. Within the framework of the Africa Stockpiles Program (ASP), huge quantities of pesticidal POPs have been completely or partially destroyed in a number of African countries (e.g. Egypt, Namibia, Niger, Senegal, Seychelles, South Africa, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia). At regional level (i.e. African Countries), a strategic plan for monitoring and getting rid of POPs in the continent should be set up and implemented through coordination between all governments. Among issues of top priorities are to find alternative non-combustion technologies for disposing obsolete pesticides, and to use alternative control measures for mosquitoes’ management and other vector-borne diseases.

More than twenty exotic vertebrate species are now listed as pests in Australia. Collectively, these pests have a huge economic and environmental impact and pose a major threat to Australia’s ecosystems and unique biodiversity. Management of such pests on a continental scale is a major challenge. Recent advances in biotechnology suggest alternatives to the lethal diseases normally sought for use as biological control agents. One proposal, being investigated in the Pest Animal Control Cooperative Research Centre, Canberra, is the use of biotechnology to develop a new generation of agents that act through controlling reproduction to prevent the build up of pest populations. The core concept is fertility control through immunocontraceptive vaccines delivered by viruses that specifically infect the target pest population. Proof of this exciting concept has been obtained for the mouse and, very recently, the rabbit, and a candidate vaccine vector identified for the fox, portending better control of a trio of Australia’s most pervasive pests. Other advances in biotechnology suggest ways to negate the build up of both innate and acquired immune resistance in target pest populations that normally act to limit the efficacy and effective life of biocontrol agents in the field. Prospects for extending the use of virally vectored vaccines to the field management of wildlife diseases are also identified. Targets for such vaccines include a growing suite of emerging diseases, hosted by Australia’s wildlife, which pose a threat to human and livestock health. Numerous technical challenges remain to be addressed before any of these new agents are ready for use in the field. However, the major risk to their development is now no longer viewed as being technical, but the failure to gain public acceptance for their use in the field. This already significant risk is exasperated by the present heightened level of public concern about all introductions of genetically modified organisms.

The world population continues to grow rapidly while also demanding a safe, secure food supply. This supply is produced on a limited soil and water base which needs to be protected today and for future generations. By adapting to the control methods that are being used, current and new pests are changing and thriving under the conditions we provide while we produce food. A resource efficient and sustainable food production chain requires that producers of crops and livestock have a selection of safe, effective tools to manage pests to acceptable levels, and to minimize their ability to adapt. At present, the problem exists that those with responsibility for pest management like government policy makers, government regulators, the pest control industry, research and expert committees, food producers and consumers, lack a long-term strategic plan on how to manage pests safely and effectively. Such a strategic plan would clearly identify effective pest management as a major key, one that would give food producers the means of providing for food security while maintaining soil quality and wildlife habitat. Because of the speed at which pest resistance or adaptation is occurring, the process of developing the long-term strategy must be put in place quickly.

Common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) production and storage are limited by numerous constraints. Insect pests are often the most destructive. However, resource-constrained smallholders in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) often do little to manage pests. Where farmers do use a control strategy, it typically relies on chemical pesticides, which have adverse effects on the wildlife, crop pollinators, natural enemies, mammals, and the development of resistance by pests. Nature-based solutions —in particular, using biological control agents with sustainable approaches that include biopesticides, resistant varieties, and cultural tools—are alternatives to chemical control. However, significant barriers to their adoption in SSA include a lack of field data and knowledge on the natural enemies of pests, safety, efficacy, the spectrum of activities, the availability and costs of biopesticides, the lack of sources of resistance for different cultivars, and spatial and temporal inconsistencies for cultural methods. Here, we critically review the control options for bean pests, particularly the black bean aphid (Aphis fabae) and pod borers (Maruca vitrata). We identified natural pest regulation as the option with the greatest potential for this farming system. We recommend that farmers adapt to using biological control due to its compatibility with other sustainable approaches, such as cultural tools, resistant varieties, and biopesticides for effective management, especially in SSA.

Invasive vertebrate pests together with overabundant native species cause significant economic and environmental damage in the Australian rangelands. Access to artificial watering points, created for the pastoral industry, has been a major factor in the spread and survival of these pests. Existing methods of controlling watering points are mechanical and cannot discriminate between target species. This paper describes an intelligent system of controlling watering points based on machine vision technology. Initial test results clearly demonstrate proof of concept for machine vision in this application. These initial experiments were carried out as part of a 3-year project using machine vision software to manage all large vertebrates in the Australian rangelands. Concurrent work is testing the use of automated gates and innovative laneway and enclosure design. The system will have application in any habitat throughout the world where a resource is limited and can be enclosed for the management of livestock or wildlife.

AbstractThis paper considers the effects of blood sports on the landscape, wildlife and farming, and assesses the implications of the topic for some matters of historical interpretation. Histories of individual sports written by practitioners are rarely candid about the environmental costs and even descriptions by professional historians tend to neglect the dynamic ecological consequences. Ritualised foxhunting supplanted more effective control and encouraged pests. Any benign consequences were incidental. Thanks to commercial money, shooting intensities held up well even during agricultural depressions. Game preservation, notably of pheasants, meant heavy pressure on birds of prey and other wild species; planting woodland was the main benign effect, although this simultaneously fostered so-called pests. Killing species that competed with game eliminated some wildlife but often proved self-defeating in the long term. Angling had mixed implications for waterside wildlife, although riverine habitats were lastingly modified when sport-fishing replaced fishing for food. Hunting and shooting meant some withdrawal of land from farming and interference with rotations: these activities reduced productivity. That the national economy could ‘afford’ to divert so many resources to elite sports contradicts the dominant view that England came up against a resources barrier.

The establishment of enclosed conservation areas are claimed to be the driving force for the long-term survival of wildlife populations. Whilst fencing provides an important tool in conservation, it simultaneously represents a controversial matter as it stops natural migration processes, which could ultimately lead to inbreeding, a decline in genetic diversity and local extinction if not managed correctly. Thus, wildlife residing in enclosed reserves requires effective conservation and management strategies, which are strongly reliant on robust population estimates. Here, we used camera traps combined with the relatively new class of spatially explicit capture-recaptured models (SECR) to produce the first reliable leopard population estimate for an enclosed reserve in Namibia. Leopard density was estimated at 14.51 leopards/100 km2, the highest recorded density in Namibia to date. A combination of high prey abundance, the absence of human persecution and a lack of top-down control are believed to be the main drivers of the recorded high leopard population. Our results add to the growing body of literature which suggests enclosed reserves have the potential to harbour high densities and highlight the importance of such reserves for the survival of threatened species in the future.

A wide variety of vertebrates have been introduced into Australia during the 200 years of European settlement. Many have become pests causing significant environmental damage and having the potential to act as reservoirs of infectious diseases. Control of vertebrate pest species by fertility control is attractive on animal welfare grounds. Should exotic animal diseases become established in any of these feral animal populations vaccination would be an essential element in the control or eradication of disease. The only experience to date with vaccination of wildlife or feral animals has been the successful control of rabies in foxes in Europe by means of a live, attenuated rabies vaccine and a vaccinia-rabies recombinant vaccine. The feasibility of vaccination for disease control or fertility control in other vertebrate pests will depend on the development and evaluation of several vaccine vector strategies. The choice of vector, based on live viruses or bacteria, naked DNA coding for vaccine antigen or virus-like particles encapsidating genetic material coding for vaccine antigen, will depend on optimization of vector delivery strategies and immunogenicity of the vaccine antigen. Past experience from the vaccination of foxes against rabies suggests that rates of uptake of the vaccine bait and immunogenicity of the vaccine will be crucial factors in determining the success of other vaccines controlling disease or fertility.

Proposals to manipulate the fertility of wild, free-living animals extend the domination humans already exercise over domesticated animals. Current lethal methods for population control include poisoning, trapping, hunting, dogging, shooting, explosives, fumigants, and deliberately introduced disease. Animal welfare interests are based on individual animal suffering, but those interests are often overshadowed by labelling of groups of animals as pests, resource species, national emblem or endangered species. Public concern for animal welfare and acceptance of new population control methods will be influenced by such labels. The animal welfare implications of new population control technology must be balanced against the existing inhumane lethal methods used. It will be difficult to resolve the dilemma of a mechanism for disseminating a fertility control agent that will cause some animal suffering (e.g. a genetically-manipulated myxoma virus for European rabbits), yet may reduce future rabbit populations and therefore the number suffering from lethal methods. An Animal Impact Statement is proposed as a tool to assist debate during development of fertility control methods and for decision making prior to their use. A comprehensive and objective Animal Impact Statement may introduce an ethic that moves the pendulum from attitudes that allow sentient animals to be destroyed by any and all available means, towards a more objective selection of the most effective and humane methods.

THERE is no doubt that fluoroacetate-bearing vegetation (also known as poison peas) has had a profound effect on the evolution and persistence of Western Australian biota. Most of these plants belong to the genus Gastrolobium, and most are found in the south-west corner of Western Australia (Gardner and Bennetts 1956; Aplin 1971; Twigg and King 1991). The toxic principle of these plants, fluoroacetate, is also manufactured synthetically as 1080 (sodium fluoroacetate) for Australiawide control of vertebrate pests, such as rabbits Oryctolagus cuniculus, foxes Vulpes vulpes, wild dogs Canis lupus familiaris and feral Pigs Sus scrofa (Twigg and King 1991). Because of their co-evolution with fluoroacetate-bearing vegetation, many native animals in Western Australia have developed varying levels of tolerance to this highly toxic compound. In contrast, introduced mammals are generally highly sensitive to fluoroacetate. Although it is not a prerequisite for safe and effective pest control programmes with 1080, the toxicity differential between native and introduced animals provides an additional “safety net” when using 1080 products in Western Australia.

Numerous pesticides are used in agriculture, gardening, and wildlife-control. Despite their intended toxicity to pests, these compounds can also cause harm to wildlife and humans due to their ability to potentially bioaccumulate, leach into soils, and persist in the environment. Humans and animals are commonly exposed to these compounds through agricultural practices and consumption of contaminated foods and water. Pesticides can cause a range of adverse effects in humans ranging from minor irritation, to endocrine or nervous system disruption, cancer, or even death. A convenient and cost-effective method to reduce unavoidable pesticide absorption in humans and wildlife could be the use of probiotic lactobacilli. Lactobacillus is a genus of Gram-positive gut commensal bacteria used in the production of functional foods, such as yoghurt, cheese, sauerkraut and pickles, as well as silage for animal feed. Preliminary in vitro experiments suggested that lactobacilli are able to degrade some pesticides. Probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus GR-1-supplemented yoghurt reduced the bioaccumulation of mercury and arsenic in pregnant women and children. A similar study is warranted to test if this approach can reduce pesticide absorption in vivo, given that the lactobacilli can also attenuate reactive oxygen production, enhance gastrointestinal barrier function, reduce inflammation, and modulate host xenobiotic metabolism.

Spiders represent one of the most abundant components of the predatory arthropods in terrestrial ecosystem. Their effectiveness at restricting pest populations, both alone and as part of natural enemy complex has well demonstrated in many countries. The web, web-site attributes and predatory efficiency of Dark Tetragnathid Spider Tetragnatha mandibulata were assessed in Point Calimere Wildlife and Bird Sanctuary between August 2015 and March 2016. In the present study, the spiders used limited number of plants species. The relationship between web architecture and web-site attributes was estimated using Pearson’s correlation. Number of spiders recorded in the web showed the positive correlation with web horizontal and vertical length of the capture areas (p<0.05). Similarly, the web circumference showed the positive interaction with plant height and canopy width (p<0.05), which clearly indicated the importance of vegetations across the webs of Dark Tetragnathid Spider. Further, the microhabitat selection and utilization could also be impacted by non-trophic factors like structural features of plants that provide architectural supports to spiders. A total of 4620 insect pests comprising seven orders were entangled by the webs of dark tetragnathid spiders. Number of spiders in the web were positively correlated with number of insect pests (p<0.05), which clearly explained that the Dark Tetragnathid spiders restricting pest populations and therefore they are considered as useful organism in biological control.

Increasing demand for wood is putting pressure on forest resources that are equally under threat from insect pests and diseases. Reported average annual forest loss stands at 0.2% globally, 0.8% in Africa, and 1.6% in Kenya. To meet the increasing demand for forest products in Kenya, the government and private sector have established plantations of non-native tree species dominated by Eucalyptus species, Cupressus lusitanica, and Pinus patula. To ensure successful forest plantation establishment and management schemes, there is a need for sufficient knowledge and understanding of tree growth conditions and threats including pests and diseases. This study aimed at determining the incidence of plantation and tree nurseries in Kimondi Forest, Kenya. Tree plantations were mapped into 2.5 Ha rectangular portion transects parallel to the forest roads. In randomly selected portions, observations were carried out for disease and pest signs and symptoms on various tree parts (leaves, stem, roots, fruits, and twigs). In the tree nurseries, 3 m × 1 m rectangular quadrants were placed on seedling beds and similar observations were made. Collected data indicated a high incidence of nursery seedling pests (5.3 % leaves and 5.1% stems) on Eucalyptus species and least on P. patula (2.4% leaves and 3% stems). Higher incidence of plantation pests (35.0% leaves of Eucalyptus sps.) and least on P. patula stems (1.2%) were recorded. On the other hand, twelve (12.0%) of C. lusitanica and (1.8%) Eucalyptus species plantation twigs were infested by pests. A high incidence of nursery seedling disease (9.8%) was observed on C. lusitanica leaves and least on P. patula stems (3.6%). Higher incidence of plantation diseases (32 %) on leaves of Eucalyptus sps. and least on C. lusitanica stem (1.4%) was recorded. In both tree nurseries and plantations, roots and fruits remained free from pests and disease. Major tree pests and diseases identified in Kimondi forests include (Human, wildlife, livestock, Cinara cupressi, Gonipterus scutellatus, Pinus pini, and Leptocybe invasa) and (damping-off, Fusarium wilt, Botryosphaeria canker, cypress canker, and Mycosphaerella spp.) respectively. These results suggest a need for regular monitoring and intervention measures to control pest and disease infestation in the Kimondi forest.

As the world’s human population continues grow in number and mobility, and the impacts of climate change take effect, the opportunities for problematic relationships with non-human animals multiply. There are escalating threats to health from wild vectors of zoonotic disease, and so-called “invasive” species have been identified as a significant direct driver of an unprecedented period of global biodiversity loss. This brings a sense of genuine urgency to control problematic wild populations; in the UK alone, it is estimated that 38 million wild mammals and birds are killed as pests. However, the impact of these animals is not always objectively appraised. Control interventions are often ineffective, may be counterproductive and can cause severe suffering. Decisions about when, where and how to control animal populations can be affected by attitudes and philosophical perspectives, influenced by how language is used. A systematic review of wildlife population control studies was carried out to determine whether negative linguistic framing of animals was associated with poor welfare outcomes. Framework analysis of titles, abstracts and keywords was used, and assessments made of the welfare impacts of control methods. This analysis revealed language that framed target populations in terms of War, Threat, Place, Victim, Value, Sentience and Naturalness with a range of associated themes. There was a relationship between negative framing and methods with the most adverse welfare outcomes, but the effect was not consistent. It was clear that there are cultural conventions within the science that were reinforced or challenged depending on many factors including the status of the species and the context of the intervention. More work to explore and challenge cultural conventions in describing targeted animals, and robust reporting of the welfare impacts of control methods are needed to tackle this, often disregarded, animal welfare emergency.

Worldwide, introduced vertebrate pests impact primary production, native biodiversity, and human health. In New Zealand, extensive pest control (~10 million ha) is undertaken to protect native biota and to prevent losses to the primary sector from wildlife vectors of bovine tuberculosis (TB), primarily possums (Trichosurus vulpecula). Control is conducted by TBfree New Zealand and by conservation agencies. Remote, forested terrain is treated using the toxin 1080 via aerial delivery in bait with a return time of ~5 years. Ground-based control is conducted annually using traps and/or poison bait. Possums are controlled to very low abundance by these operations. Aerial 1080 is effective against another forest-dwelling vertebrate pest, the ship rat (Rattus rattus). Possum control has reduced TB rates, but collateral benefits for native biodiversity have not been quantified, making it difficult to demonstrate a return on investment. We review information from 47 accounts of responses of native biota to possum control. Of these, 60% quantified responses to aerial 1080; the remainder were ground-based. Possum control benefited vegetation by increasing foliage and fruit production, and by reducing tree mortality. Controlling ship rats and possums together improved bird populations, but rats recovered rapidly and long-term outcomes for rat-vulnerable birds are unknown.Large-bodied invertebrates also benefited from extensive pest control. We conducted a meta-analysis of 84 response measures from 35 of these 47 studies in order to provide a quantitative assessment of these findings. The analysis demonstrated that both ground and aerial control of this invasive pest in New Zealand has provided substantial collateral benefits for native biota. Few studies have taken advantage of decades of extensive pest control in New Zealand to monitor ecosystem-level outcomes, which have received only short-term attention thus far. Non-treatment experimental controls and replicate sites that enable validated assessments of outcomes for native biota are vital. Future studies would benefit from a standardised set of biodiversity indicators from a range of taxonomic and functional groupings, and from standardising experimental designs so individual studies can contribute to future meta-analyses, to strengthen the evidence base for the impacts of invasive pests on native biota in New Zealand and worldwide.

Context. As evidence accumulates implicating domestic cats as significant predators of urban wildlife, the need for effective mitigation of potentially negative impacts becomes more pressing. Belled collars are probably one of the cheapest and least intrusive methods, although the opinion of a proportion of members of the public in New Zealand is that they are not effective. Aims. We aimed to determine whether belled collars reduced prey catch. Methods. Prey caught and brought back home by cats that were regular hunters during 6 weeks when they wore a belled collar was compared with prey caught during 6 weeks when they did not wear a collar. Key results. Predation of birds and rodents was reduced by 50% and 61%, respectively. The number of rats, lizards and insects was not significantly reduced; however, these constituted a small proportion of the total catch. Sex and age of cats, as well as time did not affect catch rates, with the exception that older cats were more likely to catch rats (Rattus spp.) than were younger cats. Most of the cats in the study were young, reflecting our selection criteria that cats be regular and frequent hunters. Conclusions. The degree to which catch of birds and rodents was reduced is similar to that reported in two experimental studies in the UK, and confirms that belled collars are effective in the New Zealand environment. Implications. In New Zealand, small mammals are introduced pests and hunters of native wildlife; predation by cats may regulate their populations in urban areas and so care should be taken when instituting cat-control measures. It is also possible that a 50% reduction in predation may be insufficient to ensure viability for some urban wildlife populations.

Abstract. Savanna ecosystems are subject to desertification and bush encroachment, which reduce the carrying capacity for wildlife and livestock. Bush thinning is a management approach that can, at least temporarily, restore grasslands and raise the grazing value of the land. In this study we examined the soil microbial communities under bush and grass in Namibia. We analyzed the soil through a chronosequence where bush was thinned at 9, 5, or 3 years before sampling. Soil microbial biomass, the biomass of specific taxonomic groups, and overall microbial community structure was determined by phospholipid fatty acid analysis, while the community structure of Bacteria, Archaea, and fungi was determined by multiplex terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis. Soil under bush had higher pH, C, N, and microbial biomass than under grass, and the microbial community structure was also altered under bush compared to grass. A major disturbance to the ecosystem, bush thinning, resulted in an altered microbial community structure compared to control plots, but the magnitude of this perturbation gradually declined with time. Community structure was primarily driven by pH, C, and N, while vegetation type, bush thinning, and time since bush thinning were of secondary importance.

Abstract. Savanna ecosystems are subject to desertification and bush encroachment, which reduce the carrying capacity for wildlife and livestock. Bush thinning is a management approach that can, at least temporarily, restore grasslands and raise the grazing value of the land. In this study we examined the soil microbial communities under bush and grass in Namibia. We analyzed the soil through a chronosequence where bush was thinned at 9, 5, or 3 years before sampling. Soil microbial biomass, the biomass of specific taxonomic groups, and overall microbial community structure was determined by phospholipid fatty acid analysis, while the community structure of Bacteria, Archaea, and fungi was determined by multiplex terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis. Soil under bush had higher pH, C, N, and microbial biomass than under grass, and the microbial community structure was also altered under bush compared to grass. A major disturbance to the ecosystem, bush thinning, resulted in an altered microbial community structure compared to control plots, but the magnitude of this perturbation gradually declined with time. Community structure was primarily driven by pH, C, and N, while vegetation type, bush thinning, and time since bush thinning were of secondary importance.

The recently introduced spotted wing drosophila is one of the most serious pests in small fruit production in the United States and Europe. Most control relies upon multiple applications of synthetic insecticides. In an effort to find less-toxic insecticides to consumers, farm workers, and wildlife, we conducted two laboratory trials and a semi-field trial in order to assess the potential for disodium octaborate tetrahydrateformulated and sold as Octabor®(U.S. Borax, Inc.) as a control for spotted wing drosophila in wild blueberry. We found that Octabor at 0.6 and 1.0% (w/v) applied to wild blueberry fruit resulted in higher mortality of flies than non-treated control fruit. Addition of sugar to Octabor enhanced mortality in one of the two trials, with an interaction between sugar addition and Octabor rate suggesting that the addition of sugar provided the greatest enhancement at the low rate. Our semi-field study showed that an apparent repellency effect of Octabor provided protection of fruit from infestation for up to 3 days. Also in the semi-field study, we observed a delayed effect on fly mortality. Increased fly mortality occurred over time, relative to the non-treated control fruit. The greatest fly mortality, relative to the non-treated control, resulted from flies being exposed to fruit treated 3 and 7 days prior to fly exposure, but not immediately after the treatment of Octabor. We speculate on why this type of delay in mortality might have occurred.

‘Bait-resistance’ is defined as progressive decreases in bait efficacy in controlled pest species populations. Understanding the mechanisms by which bait-resistance can develop is important for the sustainable control of pests worldwide, for both wildlife conservation programs and agricultural production. Bait-resistance is influenced by both behavioural (innate and learned bait-avoidance behaviour) and physiological aspects of the target pest species (its natural diet, its body mass, the mode of action of the toxin, and the animal’s ability to biochemically break down the toxin). In this review, we summarise the scientific literature, discuss factors that can lead to innate and learned aversion to baits, as well as physiological tolerance. We address the question of whether bait avoidance or tolerance to 1080 could develop in the red fox (Vulpes vulpes), an introduced predator of significant economic and environmental importance in Australia. Sublethal poisoning has been identified as the primary cause of both bait avoidance and increased toxin-tolerance, and so, finally, we provide examples of how management actions can minimise the risk of sublethal baits in pest species populations.

Context Rodent pests severely affect crop production, particularly in monocultures where one or two rodent pest species dominate. We predict higher species richness of native small mammal species in more heterogeneous mosaic (crop–fallow–bush) subsistence agro-ecosystems in Africa. Conservation and agro-ecological imperatives require that such diverse natural communities should be maintained and may benefit crop protection through limiting domination of pest species. Ecologically based rodent-management alternatives to rodenticides are urgently required and one such method (community trapping) is herein advocated. Aims To provide baseline information on rodent and shrew communities in agro-ecosystems in three African countries and to demonstrate efficacy of ecologically based rodent management (EBRM) in Africa (e.g. community household trapping). Methods Removal-trapping in a variety of agro-ecological habitats provided accurate small-mammal species lists. Intensive kill-trapping by rural agricultural communities was carried out experimentally where the efforts of communities were scientifically monitored by kill-trapping to measure impact on rodent numbers and the levels of post-harvest damage to stored grains. Key results Our study revealed a high diversity of endemic species in agricultural habitats in Tanzania and Namibia (but not Swaziland) and the existence of undescribed and possibly rare species, some of which may be at risk of extinction from unchecked habitat transformation for agriculture. Treatment-control studies showed that communities in three African countries could effectively reduce pest rodent populations and rodent damage by intensive trapping on a daily basis in and around the community. Conclusions Community trapping reduced pest rodent populations and damage to stored grains. Unlike the use of indiscriminate rodenticide, this practice is expected to have a negligible effect on beneficial non-target rodent and shrew species. Implications Ecologically based rodent management approaches such as community trapping will conserve beneficial non-pest rodent communities and ultimately improve crop protection.

Context Understanding the ecological impacts of the palm-oil industry on native fauna requires information on anthropogenic threats that may cause species decline or local extinction. Aim The main aim of the study was to assess wildlife deaths caused by illegal hunting, road accidents and introduced predators in established oil-palm landscapes in Peninsular Malaysia. Methods Between April and October 2009, we interviewed 362 oil-palm workers at 36 sites, including large industrial estates and semi-traditional smallholdings. Key results Our results showed that (1) illegal hunting by oil-palm workers in different oil-palm management systems was not statistically significant (P = 0.097), (2) native fauna were more often destroyed as pests in smallholdings than in conventional and eco-friendly plantation estates (P = 0.005), (3) non-local poachers conducted illegal activity more often in smallholdings than in conventional and eco-friendly plantation estates (P = 0.011), (4) road accidents were reported to kill more native fauna in conventional plantation estates than in smallholdings and eco-friendly plantation estates (P < 0.001) and (5) feral dogs were reported as killing more native fauna in eco-friendly plantation estates than in conventional plantation estates and smallholdings (P = 0.034). Conclusion In addition to the conversion of native forest to oil-palm monocultures, various other anthropogenic threats can have a substantial effect on wildlife in oil-palm landscapes. Implications To improve the conservation value of oil-palm landscapes, we recommend that palm-oil stakeholders should implement anti-poaching patrols, organise conservation programs to educate workers, reduce vehicle speeds on roads within oil-palm landscapes, and control local populations of feral dogs.

Brodifacoum is a highly toxic, second-generation anticoagulant developed for the control of rodent pests. However, information regarding the impacts of brodifacoum on non-target wildlife has been largely collected opportunistically and is generally avian biased. Reviews of non-target impacts of brodifacoum routinely regard reptiles and amphibians as low risk, despite there being no formal evidence supporting this assumption. Recent evidence suggests that some native lizard species will consume cereal baits in addition to toxin-loaded invertebrates. As part of a wider study, we quantified visitation rates to brodifacoum bait stations by Shore Skinks Oligosoma smithi, and recorded the first observation of this species consuming toxic bait. Bait stations (n = 56) recorded up to 81.5% tracking incidence by Shore Skinks across one of two pest-controlled grids. Skinks were occasionally observed inside bait stations feeding on invertebrates. Of the 805 skinks caught in pitfall traps over the 6 month period, none showed clinical or behavioural signs of anticoagulant toxicosis. Further research into the acute toxicity and chronic sub-lethal impacts of pesticides on herpetofauna is required before potential impacts on these fauna can be dismissed.

Bird damage to sunflowers (Helianthus annuus) degrades the profitability of this crop and calls into question its place in rotations. Our international literature review shows that sunflower is one of the crops most vulnerable to bird attacks. However, these predatory pests are not specialized: if the sunflower is affected in one region, then the other crops sharing the same cycle could also be affected to varying degrees. All production areas are affected by flowerhead damage at maturity. Damage at emergence has recently become more visible in France, Italy and Switzerland, probably as a result of global changes and evolving farming practices. Birds are highly mobile pests with complex behaviour. The problem needs to be tackled in a hierarchical framework that takes into account field, landscape, and regional scales, along with processes at different timescales from rapid field selection to long term demographic trends. Moreover, the distribution of damage is asymmetrical: few fields are affected, but with a high severity. At this time, there is no single effective method for preventing damage, and coordination at the landscape scale should be initiated to find potential solutions. Finally, there is a gap between theoretical and applied knowledge, even though initiatives in North America have helped to move research forward. These difficulties imply an integrated approach combining partially effective methods, the association of several stakeholders, and the coordination of several policies (agricultural, environmental, and recreational hunting or wildlife management). Additionally, data collection appears essential to acquire knowledge about economic damage and efficacy of control programmes. Digital technology can be useful for such purposes. Finally, this review advocates international networking to consolidate a research community on this topic and on the wider issue of bird damage to crops.

AbstractTraditional farming, where livestock is seasonally managed as free ranging and the use of drugs is reduced or absent, may prove beneficial to biodiversity by fostering the occurrence of spatial heterogeneity, and increasing the availability of trophic resources to wildlife. Previous work indicates that the presence of cattle in lowlands leads to an increase in bat foraging activity, yet no study has addressed this topic in mountainous regions, where free-ranging livestock is still common. Here we explore the relationships between landscape structure, farming and bat activity in a mountainous agricultural area, hypothesizing that bat activity will increase in response to the presence of livestock and landscape structure and heterogeneity. We found that traditional cattle farming may have a role in influencing bat activity in mountainous agroecosystems, yet its effects are evident for a limited number of species. Three pipistrelle species favoured foraging in areas subjected to cattle farming by hunting more often over cattle or fresh dung than at control sites. Free-ranging cattle thus provide profitable foraging opportunities for bats in mountainous landscapes, which remarks the importance of traditional farming activities in sustaining biodiversity. Cattle might also benefit from bat foraging activity if this leads to suppression of blood-sucking pests.

Southwest Ohio Fruit and Vegetable School is a regional training program for both commercial growers and amateur gardeners. The program has been sponsored by four county Extension offices in Southwest Ohio and has attracted a total attendance of 571 since 1995. We have offered two concurrent sessions, one for commercial fruit and vegetable growers, and one for amateur gardeners. This combination has proven to be the key factor in the success of the program. Attendees are allowed to move between the commercial and amateur sessions. Many commercial growers brought their spouses along since there were good topics for both of them. Backyard gardeners benefitted from the commercial session since the information was very applicable to their situation. Commercial growers also receive their pesticide recertification credits. Some of the popular topics for the commercial session included: management of diseases, insects, and weeds of fruits and vegetables; production of fresh market tomatoes, green beans, peppers, sweet corn, and pumpkins; production of herbs and specialty crops; production of apples, raspberries, strawberries, and blueberries. Popular topics for the non-commercial session included: growing tree fruits and small fruits in home gardens; raised bed gardening; growing giant pumpkins; nuisance wildlife damage control; growing and using culinary herbs; beneficial insects; and managing garden pests without using conventional insecticides. The Southwest Ohio Fruit and Vegetable School has been a very successful training program and could serve as a good model for other county Extension educators.

According to projections by the United Nations, 60% of the world’s population will reside in urban areas by 2030. Studies of the ecology of cities and ecology in cities will therefore assume increasing relevance as urban communities seek to protect and/or enhance their ecological resources. Presently, the most serious threats to wildlife include the degradation and/or loss of habitats, the introduction and spread of problem species, water pollution, unsympathetic management, and the encroachment of inappropriate development. Climate change could add to these problems through competition from exotic species, the spread of disease and pests, increased summer drought stress for wetlands and woodland, and sea-level rise threatening rare coastal habitats. Earlier springs, longer frost-free seasons, and reduced snowfall could further affect the dates of egg-laying, as well as the emergence, first flowering and health of leafing or flowering plants. Small birds and naturalized species could thrive in the warmer winters associated with the combined effect of regional climate change and enhanced urban heat island. This article reviews the range of climate-related threats to biodiversity in the aquatic, intertidal and terrestrial habitats of urban areas. London is used as a case study to illustrate potential impacts, and to contend that ‘green spaces’ in cities could be used by planners to counter climate-related threats to biodiversity, as well as to improve flood control and air quality, and reduce urban heat island effects.

Humans are altering biodiversity globally and infectious diseases are on the rise; thus, there is interest in understanding how changes to biodiversity affect disease. Here, we explore how predator diversity shapes parasite transmission. In a mesocosm experiment that manipulated predator (larval dragonflies and damselflies) density and diversity, non-intraguild (non-IG) predators that only consume free-living cercariae (parasitic trematodes) reduced metacercarial infections in tadpoles, whereas intraguild (IG) predators that consume both parasites and tadpole hosts did not. This likely occurred because IG predators reduced tadpole densities and anticercarial behaviors, increasing per capita exposure rates of the surviving tadpoles (i.e., via density- and trait-mediated effects) despite the consumption of parasites. A mathematical model demonstrated that non-IG predators reduce macroparasite infections, but IG predation weakens this “dilution effect” and can even amplify parasite burdens. Consistent with the experiment and model, a wetland survey revealed that the diversity of IG predators was unrelated to metacercarial burdens in amphibians, but the diversity of non-IG predators was negatively correlated with infections. These results are strikingly similar to generalities that have emerged from the predator diversity–pest biocontrol literature, suggesting that there may be general mechanisms for pest control and that biocontrol research might inform disease management and vice versa. In summary, we identified a general trait of predators—where they fall on an IG predation continuum—that predicts their ability to reduce infections and possibly pests in general. Consequently, managing assemblages of predators represents an underused tool for the management of human and wildlife diseases and pest populations.

Context European rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) are serious economic and environmental pests in Australia and New Zealand. Since the illegal introduction of rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus (RHDV) in New Zealand in 1997, the disease has persisted in most rabbit populations, with major epizootics occurring usually each autumn. Aims We evaluated the efficacy of the virus as a biological control agent in the southern South Island. Methods We used an index of rabbit abundance (kills per hunter) based on a region-wide annual rabbit-hunting competition to evaluate rabbit population trends 7 years before and 16 years after the first outbreak of RHD. We also evaluated the influence of rainfall and temperature in the preceding year on post-RHD trends in the index. Key results Kill rates declined by 60% following the initial epizootic. They remained low for the following 3 years and then increased steadily to intermediate levels punctuated by occasional declines. The instantaneous rate of increase in kill rates during the increase phase was low, but above zero (0.04 per year). No relationship between kill rates and rainfall was apparent, but there was a negative relationship between kill rates and winter temperature in the preceding season. Conclusions The kill-rate data obtained from this hunting competition suggest that RHD still appears to be killing rabbits. Every 2–3 years over the past decade, kill rates have been as low as they were when government rabbit-control programs were in place before RHD arrived, but the efficacy of RHD as a biological control agent is waning compared with the first outbreaks of the disease. This concurs with findings based on spotlight counts. Implications The data collected from this hunting competition are a good example of how ‘citizen science’ can be used to capture large volumes of pest-monitoring data from a wide geographic region for very little cost. The information is a valuable addition to understanding the effects of a major wildlife disease.

Whereas the biology, physiology and systematics of mistletoes have been explored in considerable detail, their ecology has received less attention and our understanding is highly fragmentary. A conspicuous exception is the dwarf mistletoes (Arceuthobium spp.)—a genus that exclusively parasitises coniferous trees, including many commercially valuable species in the forests of the western United States. Accordingly, these plants have been the subjects of intensive cross-disciplinary research for the past five decades, initially from a control and management perspective but extending into most aspects of their ecology and life history. This review summarises our understanding of dwarf mistletoes, focusing on recent developments in the areas of mistletoe–wildlife interactions, fire, ecosystem ecology and conservation biology. We also compare dwarf mistletoes with Australian mistletoes in the genus Amyema, a diverse suite of species found throughout the continent. Despite fundamental differences in their evolutionary origin and most aspects of their autecology and life history, the genera exhibit many similarities in terms of their ecological role in forests and woodlands, and their influence on stand- and forest-scale dynamics. In particular, both groups provide nesting resources for a range of birds and mammals, and nutritional resources for a diverse assemblage of species. Both also interact with fire, potentially leading to changes in successional dynamics at the stand scale. At an applied level, both groups are widely considered as pests but, as our understanding of these keystone species improves, they have the potential to serve as sensitive ecological indicators for their respective ecosystems. Key research priorities are identified for further research on both groups of mistletoes and more explicit comparative research, with Arceuthobium serving as a valuable template for future work on Amyema and Australian mistletoes in general.

Abstract There is growing concern globally about the inhumane treatment of ‘pest’ animals, including rodents, and about the ecological consequences of rodenticides, notably the poisoning of non-target wildlife like raptors and scavengers. Recent contestation between Environmental Health (EH) officials in Khayelitsha, Cape Town’s largest African township, and the National Council for Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (NSPCA) illustrates the tension that can arise between innovative ecologically-focused strategies and existing legislation and animal protection practices. In 2013/14 EH officials introduced a job-creation project to trap and drown rats, describing it as ‘humane’ because it avoided poison thereby posing no danger to wildlife such as owls. The NSPCA, however, halted the project, arguing that drowning was both inhumane and illegal. Death by poison is also inhumane but the South Africa’s Animals Protection Act (1962) allows it (and trapping and hunting) to be used against ‘pests’/‘vermin’. The NSPCA, which has never challenged the Act for allowing the inhumane treatment of these animals, used it to trump local preferences. A representative survey from Khayelitsha showed that there was some support for an NSPCA-like position (14% thought that drowning was cruel and that workers should not be allowed to trap and drown rats) but that the majority (70%) indicated that they were both concerned about the poisoning of non-target animals and supported the continuation of the trapping and drowning project. This was not a contestation over whether animals should be protected, but over how to do this, and which animals to include.

The establishment of native wildflower plantings in Florida can benefit agricultural producers as well as native pollinators and other beneficial insects (predators and parasitoids). The plantings do this by: 
 
 providing forage and nesting sites for bees, butterflies, and other pollinators,
 increasing wild bee numbers possibly across the farm, and
 increasing natural enemies of insect pests (that also depend on forage and nesting sites).
 
 This document discusses choosing the right mix of native plant species to benefit many pollinator species, as well as proper site selection, planting practices, and weed control techniques. Wildflower plots should be practical to manage, maximize benefits to wildlife, and fit into the overall management practices of the property.

The arthropod salmon louse (Lepeophtheirus salmonis) is a major threat to Atlantic salmon aquaculture and wild salmonids. Essentially like in monoculture, very high concentrations of susceptible hosts may result in high reproduction and severe production of waves of pests. Pest management is crucial both for fish health and protection of wild fish populations from aquaculture influence. Various methods have been utilized to control salmon lice infestations, such as pesticide use, physical treatments, construction modifications, fallowing, breeding, vaccination, and biological control. Most of the methods are partially successful, but none completely fulfills the necessary pest control strategy. Like in agriculture, lice/pest management is an arms race, but the marine environment makes it even more difficult to precisely hit the target pest and avoid unintended negative effects on general wildlife. In this study, we provide an overview of the methods and principles of salmon lice management and address current possibilities and limitations. We also highlight the potential of emerging strategies and enabling technologies, like genome editing, RNA interference, and machine learning, in arthropod management in aquaculture.

A confirmed case of human brucellosis motivated an investigation into the potential source of infection in Namibia. Since domestic animals are principal sources of Brucella infection in humans, 1692 serum samples were screened from sheep, goats and cattle from 4 presumably at-risk farms and 900 springbok (Antidorcas marsupialis) serum samples from 29 mixed farming units for Brucella antibodies by the Rose-Bengal test (RBT) and positive cases confirmed by complement fixation test (CFT). To assess the prevalence of human brucellosis, 137 abattoir employees were tested for Brucella antibodies using the standard tube agglutination test (STAT) and by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Cattle and sheep from all 4 farms were negative by RBT and CFT but 2 of the 4 farms (Ba and C) had 26/42 and 12/285 seropositive goats, respectively. Post mortem examination of seropositive goats revealed no gross pathological lesions typical of brucellosis except enlarged mesenteric and iliac lymph nodes seen in a single buck. Culture for brucellae from organs of seropositive animals was negative. None of the wildlife sera tested positive by either RBT or CFT. Interviews revealed that besides the case that prompted the investigation, a family and another person from other farms with confirmed brucellosis shared a common history of consumption of unpasteurised goat milk, home-made goat cheese and coffee with raw milk and prior contact with goats, suggesting goats as the likely source of infection. All 137 abattoir employees tested negative by STAT, but 3 were positive by ELISA. The 3 abattoir workers were clinically normal and lacked historical connections with clinical cases. Although goats are often associated with B. melitensis, these studies could not explicitly implicate this species owing to cross-reactivity with B. abortus, which can also infect goats. Nevertheless, these data reinforce the need for a better National Control Programme for brucellosis in Namibia.

Abstract California’s central coast differs from many agricultural areas in the U.S., which feature large tracts of monoculture production fields and relatively simple landscapes. Known as the nations salad bowl, and producing up to 90% of U.S. production of lettuces, broccoli and Brussels sprouts, this region is a mosaic of fresh vegetable fields, coastal meadow, chaparral shrubs, riparian and woodland habitat. We tested for relationships between the percent cover of crops, riparian and other natural landscape vegetation and the species richness of parasitic wasps and flies foraging in crops, such as broccoli, kale and cauliflower, and interpreted our results with respect to the decrease in natural habitat and increase in cropland cover prompted by a local microbial contamination event in 2006. Our key results are that: (1) as cropland cover in the landscape increased, fewer species of parasitoids were captured in the crop field, (2) parasitoid richness overall was positively associated with the amount of riparian and other natural vegetation in the surrounding 500m, (3) different groups of parasitoids were associated with unique types of natural vegetation, and (4) parasitism rates of sentinel cabbage aphid and cabbage looper pests were correlated with landscape vegetation features according to which parasitoids caused the mortality. Although individual species of parasitoids may thrive in landscapes that are predominantly short season crops, the robust associations found in this study across specialist and generalist parasitoids and different taxa (tachinid flies, ichneumon wasps, braconid wasps) shows that recent food safety practices targeting removal of natural vegetation around vegetable fields in an attempt to eliminate wildlife may harm natural enemy communities and reduce ecosystem services. We argue that enhancing biological diversity is a key goal for transforming agroecosystems for future productivity, sustainability and public health.

The widespread use of pesticides to control agricultural pests is a hot topic on the public scene of environmental health. Selective pest control for minimum environmental impact is a major goal of the environmental toxicology field, notably to avoid unintended poisoning in different organisms. Anticoagulant rodenticides cause abnormal blood coagulation process; they have been widely used to control rodents, allowing inadvertent primary and secondary exposure in domestic animals and non-target predatory wildlife species through direct ingestion of rodenticide-containing bait or by consumption of poisoned prey. To report toxic effect, the most common approach is the measurement of liver or plasma residues of anticoagulant rodenticides in dead or intoxicated animals showing clinical symptoms. However, one major challenge is that literature currently lacks a hepatic or plasma concentration threshold value for the differentiation of exposure from toxicity. Regarding the variation in pharmacology properties of anticoagulant rodenticides inter- and intra-species, the dose-response relationship must be defined for each species to prejudge the relative risk of poisoning. Beyond that, biomarkers are a key solution widely used for ecological risk assessment of contaminants. Since anticoagulant rodenticides (AR) have toxic effects at the biochemical level, biomarkers can serve as indicators of toxic exposure. In this sense, toxicological knowledge of anticoagulant rodenticides within organisms is an important tool for defining sensitive, specific, and suitable biomarkers. In this review, we provide an overview of the toxicodynamic and toxicokinetic parameters of anticoagulant rodenticides in different animal species. We examine different types of biomarkers used to characterize and differentiate the exposure and toxic effects of anticoagulant rodenticide, showing the strengths and weaknesses of the assays. Finally, we describe possible new biomarkers and highlight their capabilities.

Pesticides are a hidden threat to humans, animals, insects, as well as to all ecosystems. They control pests and play an important role in crop productivity and prevent vector borne-diseases in humans, but they also extremely pollute our surroundings. These toxic substances are found in soil, water, air, plants, food and feed. Their residues enter plants and animal products and accumulate in humans and animals by the food chain. They endanger our lives and put down our health, as well as demolish beneficial organisms in the environment. This paper expresses a piece of information that has been obtained from reviewing academic papers, books and other sources. People take these toxic chemicals from water, air, and agricultural products, as well as their surroundings. They are stored in humans and animals’ tissues or excreted by different routes, but their adverse effects have no end. Brain, kidneys, skin, gastrointestinal, liver, lungs, spleen and every organ of humans are suppressed by them. They cause various diseases, cancers, mutations, as well as lead to death. These chemicals destroy honeybees’ colonies and decrease pollinator’s populations. Additionally, birds, wildlife and soil organisms are extremely suppressed by the heavy application of pesticides. They damage human beings, animals, pollinators, honeybees, and soil microorganisms. Increasing the application of pesticides decreases the population of pollinators, honeybees, and other beneficial organisms, as well as impacts human health. If these living organisms are diminished, our lives are threatened by food shortage, a collapsed economy, and increased food and feed demand, therefore new crises including famine and diseases put down our prosperity. All pesticides should be used cautiously and need to develop a new type of pesticides that do not harm seriously our environment.

In 1987 the Forestry Research Advisory Council of Canada (FRACC) proposed an annual Canada-wide survey of research priorities and emerging issues to be presented to the Canadian Council of Forest Ministers (CCFM). This was accepted as a way to improve research dialogue, coordination and application. The provincial and territorial forestry research advisory committees contributed to the first overview presented to CCFM in October 1989 and published in the December 1989 Forestry Chronicle. This second report is based on material provided by the provincial and territorial advisory groups in early 1990.Forestry research is often long term but priorities do evolve. Twenty three research topics are new in this report. Several were identified as emerging concerns last year. Many of the new items fall under a new heading "FOREST POLICY AND ECONOMICS" or under "ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS" and highlight the need for socioeconomic studies, predictive models, resource and land use decision methods and concern about climate change. This evolving emphasis reflects the increasing attention forest managers in industry and government are giving to public attitudes on resource and environmental matters. These attitudes are being more forcefully articulated as the sustainable development ethic gains wider acceptance. At the same time, the more traditional concerns of forest managers about protecting, harvesting and regenerating the forest are still prominent in research priorities.Policy and economics matters needing research attention are:• Predictive supply/demand models for timber & non timber values;• Broad socio-economic studies on the implications of new policies;• Economics of private woodlands;• Methods for land use decisions;• Novel tenure and timber sales arrangements.Integrated forest resource management requires research on:• Managing for all values, wildlife, recreation, timber etc.;• Ecosystem functioning;• Decision criteria and information systems.Environmental research priorities include:• The effects of forest management and harvesting on the forest ecosystem;• The forest effects of atmospheric pollution and climate change;• The fate of pesticides applied to the forest;• The reforestation of contaminated sites;• The implications of pesticide residues on planting stock.Forest pest priorities for research are:• Alternatives to chemical control methods;• Improved risk assessment and management methods;• Work on specific pests such as the spruce budworm;• Pests of nurseries and young stands;• Damage appraisal methods;• Spray technology and drift prevention.The many forest fires of 1989 give priority to research on:• Wildfire prediction, detection and control;• Improving and applying integrated fire management systems;• Fire ecology.In silviculture, forest regeneration and tending are high priority with research particularly needed on:• Improving planting stock quality;• Control of competing vegetation;• Tree improvement;• Seed and seed orchard management;• Regenerating hybrid poplars and aspens;• Cost reduction and increased effectiveness;• Improved growth and yield information and site data;• The culture of high quality hardwoods in eastern Canada.Forest products research needs include:• Underutilized hardwoods;• The quality of wood harvested from second growth forests;• Improving the manufacture of pulp, paper and solid wood products;• Devising new higher value products.The major emerging issues likely to affect future priorities centre around:• The increasing public involvement in resource management;• The growing prominence of the sustainable development ethic;• Canada's weak commitment to research and development;• Recycling and its impact on both forest management and products;• The growing commitment to integrated forest resource management.There is also concern that popular environmental matters may skew research priorities away from less glamorous but important topics.The importance of Forest Resource Development Agreements in furthering forestry research is universally recognized as is the importance of their continuation.Research advisory structures are in place in most jurisdictions although in one or two locations progress has not been rapid. Present research programs are considered scientifically and technically sound for the most part. Lack of funding continues to be a matter of serious concern.

Wandering the aisles of my local Woolworths in April this year, I noticed a large number of chocolate bilbies replacing chocolate rabbits. In these harsh economic times it seems that even the Easter bunny is in danger of losing his Easter job. While the changing shape of Easter chocolate may seem to be a harmless affair, the expulsion of the rabbit from Easter celebrations has a darker side. In this paper I look at the campaign to replace the Easter bunny with the Easter bilby, and the implications this mediated conservation move has for living rabbits in the Australian ecosystem. Essential to this discussion is the premise that studies of ecology must take into account the impact of media and culture on environmental issues. Of particular interest is the role of narrative, and the way the stories we tell about rabbits determine how they are treated in real life. While I recognise that the Australian bilby’s struggle for survival is a tale which should be told, I also argue that the vilification of the European-Australian rabbit is part of the native/invasive dualism which has ceased to be helpful, and has instead become a motivator of unproductive violence. In place of this simplified dichotomous narrative, I propose an ethic of "ecological remembrance" to combat the totalising eradication of the European rabbit from the Australian environment and culture. The Bilby vs the Bunny: A Case Study in "Media Selection" Easter Bunny says, ‘Bilby, I want you to have my job.You know about sharing and taking care.I think Australia should have an Easter Bilby.We rabbits have become too greedy and careless.Rabbits must learn from bilbies and other bush creatures’. The lines above are taken from Ali Garnett and Kaye Kessing’s children’s story, Easter Bilby, co-published by the Australian Anti-Rabbit Research Foundation as part of the campaign to replace the Easter bunny with the eco-politically correct Easter bilby. The first chocolate bilbies were made in 1982, but the concept really took off when major chocolate retailer Darrell Lea became involved in 2002. Since this time Haigh’s chocolate, Cadbury, and Pink Lady have also released delicious cocoa natives for consumption, and both Darrell Lea and Haigh’s use their profits to support bilby assistance programs, creating the “pleasant Easter sensation” that “eating a chocolate bilby is helping save the real thing” (Phillips). The Easter bilby campaign is a highly mediated approach to conservation which demonstrates the new biological principle Phil Bagust has recognised as “media selection.” Bagust observes that in our “hybridised global society” it is impossible to separate “the world of genetic selection from the world of human symbolic and material diversity as if they exist in different universes” (8). The Australian rabbit thrives in “natural selection,” having adapted to the Australian environment so successfully it threatens native species and the economic productivity of farmers. But the rabbit loses out in “cultural selection” where it is vilified in the media for its role in environmental degradation. The campaign to conserve the bilby depends, in a large part, on the rabbit’s failures in “media selection”. On Good Friday 2012 Sky News Australia quoted Mike Drinkwater of Wild Life Sydney’s support of the Easter bilby campaign: Look, the reason that we want to highlight the bilby as an iconic Easter animal is, number one, rabbits are a pest in Australia. Secondly, the bilby has these lovely endearing rabbit-like qualities. And thirdly, the bilby is a beautiful, iconic, native animal that is struggling. It is endangered so it’s important that we do all we can to support that. Drinkwater’s appeal to the bilby’s “endearing rabbit-like qualities” demonstrates that it is not the Australian rabbit’s individual embodiment which detracts from its charisma in Australian society. In this paper I will argue that the stories we tell about the European-Australian rabbit’s alienation from Indigenous country diminish the species cultural appeal. These stories are told with passionate conviction to save and protect native flora and fauna, but, too often, this promotion of the native relies on the devaluation of non-native life, to the point where individual rabbits are no longer morally considerable. Such a hierarchical approach to conservation is not only ethically problematic, but can also be ineffective because the native/invasive approach to ecology is overly simplistic. A History of Rabbit Stories In the Easter Bilby children’s book the illustrated rabbit offers to make itself disappear from the “Easter job.” The reason for this act of self-destruction is a despairing recognition of its “greedy and careless” nature, and at the same time, its selfless offer to be replaced by the ecologically conscious Bilby. In this sacrificial gesture is the implicit offering of all rabbit life for the salvation of native ecosystems and animal life. This plot line slots into a much larger series of stories we have been telling about the Australian environment. Libby Robin has observed that settler Australians have always had a love-hate relationship with the native flora and fauna of the continent (6), either devaluing native plants, animals, and ecosystems, or launching into an “overcompensating patriotic strut about the Australian biota” (Robin 9). The colonising dynamic of early Australian society was built on the devaluation of animals such as the bilby. This was reflected in the introduction of feral animals by “acclimatisation societies” and the privileging of “pets” such as cats and dogs over native animals (Plumwood). Alfred Crosby has made the persuasive argument that the invasion of Australia, and other “neo-European” countries, was, necessarily, more-than-human. In his work, Ecological Imperialism, Crosby charts the historical partnership between human European colonisers in Indigenous lands and the “grunting, lowing, neighing, crowing, chirping, snarling, buzzing, self-replicating and world-altering avalanche” (194) of introduced life that they brought with them. In response to this “guilt by association” Australians have reversed the values in the dichotomous colonial dynamic to devalue the introduced and so “empower” the colonised native. In this new “anti-colonial” story, rabbits signify a wound of colonisation which has spread across and infected indigenous country. J. M. Arthur’s (130) analysis of language in relation to colonisation highlights some of the important lexical characteristics in the rabbit stories we now tell. He observes that the rabbits’ impact on the county is described using a vocabulary of contamination: “It is a ‘menace’, a ‘problem’, an ‘infestation’, a ‘nuisance’, a ‘plague’” (170). This narrative of disease encourages a redemptive violence against living rabbits to “cure” the rabbit problem in order to atone for human mistakes in a colonial past. Redemptive Violence in Action Rabbits in Australia have been subject to a wide range of eradication measures over the past century including shooting, the destruction of burrows, poisoning, ferreting, trapping, and the well-known rabbit proof fence in Western Australia. Particularly noteworthy in this slaughter has been the introduction of biological control measures with the release of the savage and painful disease Myxomatosis in late December 1950, followed by the release of the Calicivirus (Rabbit Haemorrhage Disease, or RHD) in 1996. As recently as March 2012 the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries announced a 1.5 million dollar program called “RHD Boost” which is attempting to develop a more effective biological control agent for rabbits who have become immune to the Calicivirus. In this perverse narrative, disease becomes a cure for the rabbit’s contamination of Australian environments. Calicivirus is highly infectious, spreads rapidly, and kills rabbits en masse. Following the release of Calicivirus in 1995 it killed 10 million rabbits in eight weeks (Ponsonby Veterinary Centre). While Calicivirus appears to be more humane than the earlier biological control, Myxomatosis, there are indications that it causes rabbits pain and stress. Victims are described as becoming very quiet, refusing to eat, straining for breath, losing coordination, becoming feverish, and excreting bloody nasal discharge (Heishman, 2011). Post-mortem dissection generally reveals a “pale and mottled liver, many small streaks or blotches on the lungs and an enlarged spleen... small thrombi or blood clots” (Coman 173). Public criticism of the cruel methods involved in killing rabbits is often assuaged with appeals to the greater good of the ecosystem. The Anti-Rabbit research foundation state on their Website, Rabbit-Free Australia, that: though killing rabbits may sound inhumane, wild rabbits are affecting the survival of native Australian plants and animals. It is our responsibility to control them. We brought the European rabbit here in the first place — they are an invasive pest. This assumption of personal and communal responsibility for the rabbit “problem” has a fundamental blind-spot. Arthur (130) observes that the progress of rabbits across the continent is often described as though they form a coordinated army: The rabbit extends its ‘dominion’, ‘dispossesses’ the indigenous bilby, causes sheep runs to be ‘abandoned’ and country ‘forfeited’, leaving the land in ‘ecological tatters’. While this language of battle pervades rabbit stories, humans rarely refer to themselves as invaders into Aboriginal lands. Arthur notes that, by taking responsibility for the rabbit’s introduction and eradication, the coloniser assumes an indigenous status as they defend the country against the exotic invader (134). The apprehension of moral responsibility can, in this sense, be understood as the assumption of settler indigeneity. This does not negate the fact that assuming human responsibility for the native environment can be an act of genuine care. In a country scarred by a history of ecocide, movements like the Easter Bilby campaign seek to rectify the negligent mistakes of the past. The problem is that reactive responses to the colonial devaluation of native life can be unproductive because they preserve the basic structure of the native/invasive dichotomy by simplistically reversing its values, and fail to respond to more complex ecological contexts and requirements (Plumwood). This is also socially problematic because the native/invasive divide of nonhuman life overlays more complex human politics of colonisation in Australia. The Native/Invasive Dualism The bilby is currently listed as an “endangered” species in Queensland and as “vulnerable” nationally. Bilbies once inhabited 70% of the Australian landscape, but now inhabit less than 15% of the country (Save the Bilby Fund). This dramatic reduction in bilby numbers has multiple causes, but the European rabbit has played a significant role in threatening the bilby species by competing for burrows and food. Other threats come from the predation of introduced species, such as feral cats and foxes, and the impact of farmed introduced species, such as sheep and cattle, which also destroy bilby habitats. Because the rabbit directly competes with the bilby for food and shelter in the Australian environment, the bilby can be classed as the underdog native, appealing to that larger Australian story about “the fair go”. It seems that the Easter bilby campaign is intended to level out the threat posed by the highly successful and adaptive rabbit through promoting the bilby in the “cultural selection” stakes. This involves encouraging bilby-love, while actively discouraging love and care for the introduced rabbits which threaten the bilby’s survival. On the Rabbit Free Australia Website, the campaign rationale to replace the Easter bunny with the Easter bilby claims that: Very young children are indoctrinated with the concept that bunnies are nice soft fluffy creatures whereas in reality they are Australia’s greatest environmental feral pest and cause enormous damage to the arid zone. In this statement the lived corporeal presence of individual rabbits is denied as the “soft, fluffy” body disappears behind the environmentally problematic species’ behaviour. The assertion that children are “indoctrinated” to find rabbits love-able, and that this conflicts with the “reality” of the rabbit as environmentally destructive, denies the complexity of the living animal and the multiple possible responses to it. That children find rabbits “fluffy” is not the result of pro-rabbit propaganda, but because rabbits are fluffy! That Rabbit Free Australia could construe this to be some kind of elaborate falsehood demonstrates the disappearance of the individual rabbit in the native/invasive tale of colonisation. Rabbit-Free Australia seeks to eradicate the animal not only from Australian ecosystems, but from the hearts and minds of children who are told to replace the rabbit with the more fitting native bilby. There is no acceptance here of the rabbit as a complex animal that evokes ambivalent responses, being both worthy of moral consideration, care and love, and also an introduced and environmentally destructive species. The native/invasive dualism is a subject of sustained critique in environmental philosophy because it depends on a disjunctive temporal division drawn at the point of European settlement—1788. Environmental philosopher Thom van Dooren points out that the divide between animals who belong and animals who should be eradicated is “fundamentally premised on the reification of a specific historical moment that ignores the changing and dynamic nature of ecologies” (11). Mark Davis et al. explain that the practical value of the native/invasive dichotomy in conservation programs is seriously diminished and in some cases is becoming counterproductive (153). They note that “classifying biota according to their adherence to cultural standards of belonging, citizenship, fair play and morality does not advance our understanding of ecology” (153). Instead, they promote a more inclusive approach to conservation which accepts non-native species as part of Australia’s “new nature” (Low). Recent research into wildlife conservation indicates a striking lack of evidence for the case that pest control protects native diversity (see Bergstromn et al., Davis et al., Ewel & Putz, Reddiex & Forsyth). The problematic justification of “killing for conservation” becomes untenable when conservation outcomes are fundamentally uncertain. The mass slaughter which rabbits have been subjected to in Australia has been enacted with the goal of fostering life. This pursuit of creation through destruction, of re-birth through violent death, enacts a disturbing twist where death comes to signal the presence of life. This means, perversely, that a rabbit’s dead body becomes a valuable sign of environmental health. Conservation researchers Ben Reddiex and David M. Forsyth observe that this leads to a situation where environmental managers are “more interested in estimating how many pests they killed rather than the status of biodiversity they claimed to be able to protect” (715). What Other Stories Can We Tell about the Rabbit? With an ecological narrative that is failing, producing damage and death instead of fostering love and life, we are left with the question—what other stories can we tell about the place of the European rabbit in the Australian environment? How can the meaning ecologies of media and culture work in harmony with an ecological consciousness that promotes compassion for nonhuman life? Ignoring the native/invasive distinction entirely is deeply problematic because it registers the ecological history of Australia as continuity, and fails to acknowledge the colonising impact of European settlement on the environment. At the same time, continually reinforcing that divide through pro-invasive or pro-native stories drastically simplifies complex and interconnected ecological systems. Instead of the unproductive native/invasive dualism, ecologists and philosophers alike are suggesting “reconciliatory” approaches to the inhabitants of our shared environments which emphasise ecology as relational rather than classificatory. Evolutionary ecologist Scott P. Carroll uses the term “conciliation biology” as an alternative to invasion biology which focuses on the eradication of invasive species. “Conciliation biology recognises that many non-native species are permanent, that outcomes of native-nonnative interactions will vary depending on the scale of assessment and the values assigned to the biotic system, and that many non-native species will perform positive functions in one or more contexts” (186). This hospitable approach aligns with what Michael Rosensweig has termed “reconciliation ecology”—the modification and diversification of anthropogenic habitats to harbour a wider variety of species (201). Professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Mark Bekoff encourages a “compassionate conservation” which avoids the “numbers game” of species thinking where certain taxonomies are valued above others and promotes approaches which “respect all life; treat individuals with respect and dignity; and tread lightly when stepping into the lives of animals”(24). In a similar vein environmental philosopher Deborah Bird Rose offers the term “Eco-reconciliation”, to describe a mode of “living generously with others, singing up relationships so that we all flourish” (Wild Dog 59). It may be that the rabbit cannot live in harmony with the bilby, and in this situation I am unsure of what a conciliation approach to ecology might look like in terms of managing both of these competing species. But I am sure what it should not look like if we are to promote approaches to ecology and conservation which avoid the simplistic dualism of native/invasive. The devaluation of rabbit life to the point of moral inconsiderability is fundamentally unethical. By classifying certain lives as “inappropriate,” and therefore expendable, the process of rabbit slaughter is simply too easy. The idea that the rabbit should disappear is disturbing in its abstract approach to these living, sentient creatures who share with us both place and history. A dynamic understanding of ecology dissipates the notion of a whole or static “nature.” This means that there can be no simple or comprehensive directives for how humans should interact with their environments. One of the most insidious aspects of the native/invasive divide is the way it makes violent death appear inevitable, as though rabbits must be culled. This obscures the many complex and contingent choices which determine the fate of nonhuman life. Understanding the dynamism of ecology requires an acceptance that nature does not provide simple prescriptive responses to problems, and instead “people are forced to choose the kind of environment they want” (189) and then take actions to engender it. This involves difficult decisions, one of which is culling to maintain rabbit numbers and facilitate environmental resilience. Living within a world of “discordant harmonies”, as Daniel Botkin evocatively describes it, environmental decisions are necessarily complex. The entanglement of ecological systems demands that we reject simplistic dualisms which offer illusory absolution from the consequences of the difficult choices humans make about life, ecologies, and how to manage them. Ecological Remembrance The vision of a rabbit-free Australia is unrealistic. As organisation like the Anti-Rabbit Research Foundation pursue this future ideal, they eradicate rabbits from the present, and seek to remove them from the past by replacing them culturally with the more suitable bilby. Culled rabbits lie rotting en masse in fields, food for no one, and even their cultural impact in human society is sought to be annihilated and replaced with more appropriate native creatures. The rabbits’ deaths do not turn back to life in transformative and regenerative processes that are ecological and cultural, but rather that death becomes “an event with no future” (Rose, Wild Dog 25). This is true oblivion, as the rabbit is entirely removed from the world. In this paper I have made a case for the importance of stories in ecology. I have argued that the kinds of stories we tell about rabbits determines how we treat them, and so have positioned stories as an essential part of an ecological system which takes “cultural selection” seriously. In keeping with this emphasis on story I offer to the conciliation push in ecological thinking the term “ecological remembrance” to capture an ethic of sharing time while sharing space. This spatio-temporal hospitality is focused on maintaining heterogeneous memories and histories of all beings who have impacted on the environment. In Deborah Bird Rose’s terms this is a “recuperative work” which commits to direct dialogical engagement with the past that is embedded in the present (Wild Country 23). In this sense it is a form of recuperation that promotes temporal and ecological continuity. Eco-remembrance aligns with dynamic understandings of ecology because it is counter-linear. Instead of approaching the past as a static idyll, preserved and archived, ecological remembrance celebrates the past as an ongoing, affective presence which is lived and performed. Ecological remembrance, applied to the European rabbit in Australia, would involve rejecting attempts to extricate the rabbit from Australian environments and cultures. It would seek acceptance of the rabbit as part of Australia’s “new nature” (Low), and aim for recognition of the rabbit’s impact on human society as part of dynamic multi-species ecologies. In this sense ecological remembrance of the rabbit directly opposes the goal of the Foundation for Rabbit Free Australia to eradicate the European rabbit from Australian environment and culture. On the Rabbit Free Australia website, the section on biological controls states that “the point is not how many rabbits are killed, but how many are left behind”. The implication is that the millions upon millions of rabbit lives extinguished have vanished from the earth, and need not be remembered or considered. However, as Deborah Rose argues, “all deaths matter” (Wild Dog 21) and “no death is a mere death” (Wild Dog 22). Every single rabbit is an individual being with its own unique life. To deny this is tantamount to claiming that each rabbit that dies from shooting or poisoning is the same rabbit dying again and again. Rose has written that “death makes claims upon all of us” (Wild Dog 19). These are claims of ethics and compassion, a claim that “we look into the eyes of the dying and not flinch, that we reach out to hold and to help” (Wild Dog 20). This claim is a duty of remembrance, a duty to “bear witness” (Wiesel 160) to life and death. The Nobel Peace Prize winning author, Elie Wiesel, argued that memory is a reconciliatory force that creates bonds as mass annihilation seeks to destroy them. Memory ensures that no life becomes truly life-less as it wrests the victims of mass slaughter from “oblivion” and allows the dead to “vanquish death” (21). In a continent inhabited by dead rabbits—a community of the dead—remembering these lost individuals and their lost lives is an important task for making sure that no death is a mere death. An ethic of ecological remembrance follows this recuperative aim. References Arthur, Jay M. The Default Country: A Lexical Cartography of Twentieth-Century Australia. Sydney: UNSW Press, 2003. Bagust, Phil. “Cuddly Koalas, Beautiful Brumbies, Exotic Olives: Fighting for Media Selection in the Attention Economy.” “Imaging Natures”: University of Tasmania Conference Proceedings (2004). 25 April 2012 ‹www.utas.edu.au/arts/imaging/bagust.pdf› Bekoff, Marc. “First Do No Harm.” New Scientist (28 August 2010): 24 – 25. Bergstrom, Dana M., Arko Lucieer, Kate Kiefer, Jane Wasley, Lee Belbin, Tore K. Pederson, and Steven L. Chown. “Indirect Effects of Invasive Species Removal Devastate World Heritage Island.” Journal of Applied Ecology 46 (2009): 73– 81. Botkin, Daniel. B. Discordant Harmonies: A New Ecology for the Twenty-first Century. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990. Carroll, Scott. P. “Conciliation Biology: The Eco-Evolutionary Management of Permanently Invaded Biotic Systems.” Evolutionary Applications 4.2 (2011): 184 – 99. Coman, Brian. Tooth and Nail: The Story of the Rabbit in Australia. Melbourne: The Text Publishing Company, 1999. Crosby, Alfred W. Ecological Imperialism: The Biological Expansion of Europe, 900 – 1900. Second Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Davis, Mark., Matthew Chew, Richard Hobbs, Ariel Lugo, John Ewel, Geerat Vermeij, James Brown, Michael Rosenzweig, Mark Gardener, Scott Carroll, Ken Thompson, Steward Pickett, Juliet Stromberg, Peter Del Tredici, Katharine Suding, Joan Ehrenfield, J. Philip Grime, Joseph Mascaro and John Briggs. “Don’t Judge Species on their Origins.” Nature 474 (2011): 152 – 54. Ewel, John J. and Francis E. Putz. “A Place for Alien Species in Ecosystem Restoration.” Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2.7 (2004): 354-60. Forsyth, David M. and Ben Reddiex. “Control of Pest Mammals for Biodiversity Protection in Australia.” Wildlife Research 33 (2006): 711–17. Garnett, Ali, and Kaye Kessing. Easter Bilby. Department of Environment and Heritage: Kaye Kessing Productions, 2006. Heishman, Darice. “VHD Factsheet.” House Rabbit Network (2011). 15 June 2012 ‹http://www.rabbitnetwork.org/articles/vhd.shtml› Low, Tim. New Nature: Winners and Losers in Wild Australia. Melbourne: Penguin, 2002. Phillips, Sara. “How Eating Easter Chocolate Can Save Endangered Animals.” ABC Environment (1 April 2010). 15 June 2011 ‹http://www.abc.net.au/environment/articles/2010/04/01/2862039.htm› Plumwood, Val. “Decolonising Australian Gardens: Gardening and the Ethics of Place.” Australian Humanities Review 36 (2005). 15 June 2012 ‹http://www.australianhumanitiesreview.org/archive/Issue-July-2005/09Plumwood.html› Ponsonby Veterinary Centre. “Rabbit Viral Hemorrhagic Disease (VHD).” Small Pets. 26 May 2012 ‹http://www.petvet.co.nz/small_pets.cfm?content_id=85› Robin, Libby. How a Continent Created a Nation. Sydney: UNSW Press, 2007. Rose, Deborah Bird. Reports From a Wild Country: Ethics for Decolonisation. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press, 2004. ——-. Wild Dog Dreaming: Love and Extinction. Charlottesville and London: University of Virginia Press, 2011. Rosenzweig, Michael. L. “Reconciliation Ecology and the Future of Species Diversity.” Oryx 37.2 (2003): 194 – 205. Save the Bilby Fund. “Bilby Fact Sheet.” Easterbilby.com.au (2003). 26 May 2012 ‹http://www.easterbilby.com.au/Project_material/factsheet.asp› Van Dooren, Thom. “Invasive Species in Penguin Worlds: An Ethical Taxonomy of Killing for Conservation.” Conservation and Society 9.4 (2011): 286 – 98. Wiesel, Elie. From the Kingdom of Memory. New York: Summit Books, 1990.

Kangatarianism is the rather inelegant word coined in the first decade of the twenty-first century to describe an omnivorous diet in which the only meat consumed is that of the kangaroo. First published in the media in 2010 (Barone; Zukerman), the term circulated in Australian environmental and academic circles including the Global Animal conference at the University of Wollongong in July 2011 where I first heard it from members of the Think Tank for Kangaroos (THINKK) group. By June 2017, it had gained enough attention to be named the Oxford English Dictionary’s Australian word of the month (following on from May’s “smashed avo,” another Australian food innovation), but it took the Nine Network reality television series Love Island Australia to raise kangatarian to trending status on social media (Oxford UP). During the first episode, aired in late May 2018, Justin, a concreter and fashion model from Melbourne, declared himself to have previously been a kangatarian as he chatted with fellow contestant, Millie. Vet nurse and animal lover Millie appeared to be shocked by his revelation but was tentatively accepting when Justin explained what kangatarian meant, and justified his choice on the grounds that kangaroo are not farmed. In the social media response, it was clear that eating only the meat of kangaroos as an ethical choice was an entirely new concept to many viewers, with one tweet stating “Kangatarian isn’t a thing”, while others variously labelled the diet brutal, intriguing, or quintessentially Australian (see #kangatarian on Twitter).There is a well developed literature around the arguments for and against eating kangaroo, and why settler Australians tend to be so reluctant to do so (see for example, Probyn; Cawthorn and Hoffman). Here, I will concentrate on the role that ethics play in this food choice by examining how the adoption of kangatarianism can be understood as a bargain struck to help to manage grief in the Anthropocene, and the limitations of that bargain. As Lesley Head has argued, we are living in a time of loss and of grieving, when much that has been taken for granted is becoming unstable, and “we must imagine that drastic changes to everyday life are in the offing” (313). Applying the classic (and contested) model of five stages of grief, first proposed by Elisabeth Kübler-Ross in her book On Death and Dying in 1969, much of the population of the western world seems to be now experiencing denial, her first stage of loss, while those in the most vulnerable environments have moved on to anger with developed countries for destructive actions in the past and inaction in the present. The next stages (or states) of grieving—bargaining, depression, and acceptance—are likely to be manifested, although not in any predictable sequence, as the grief over current and future losses continues (Haslam).The great expansion of food restrictive diets in the Anthropocene can be interpreted as part of this bargaining state of grieving as individuals attempt to respond to the imperative to reduce their environmental impact but also to limit the degree of change to their own diet required to do so. Meat has long been identified as a key component of an individual’s environmental footprint. From Frances Moore Lappé’s 1971 Diet for a Small Planet through the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organisation’s 2006 report Livestock’s Long Shadow to the 2019 report of the EAT–Lancet Commission on Healthy Diets from Sustainable Food Systems, the advice has been consistent: meat consumption should be minimised in, if not eradicated from, the human diet. The EAT–Lancet Commission Report quantified this to less than 28 grams (just under one ounce) of beef, lamb or pork per day (12, 25). For many this would be keenly felt, in terms of how meals are constructed, the sensory experiences associated with eating meat and perceptions of well-being but meat is offered up as a sacrifice to bring about the return of the beloved healthy planet.Rather than accept the advice to cut out meat entirely, those seeking to bargain with the Anthropocene also find other options. This has given rise to a suite of foodways based around restricting meat intake in volume or type. Reducing the amount of commercially produced beef, lamb and pork eaten is one approach, while substituting a meat the production of which has a smaller environmental footprint, most commonly chicken or fish, is another. For those willing to make deeper changes, the meat of free living animals, especially those which are killed accidentally on the roads or for deliberately for environmental management purposes, is another option. Further along this spectrum are the novel protein sources suggested in the Lancet report, including insects, blue-green algae and laboratory-cultured meats.Kangatarianism is another form of this bargain, and is backed by at least half a century of advocacy. The Australian Conservation Foundation made calls to reduce the numbers of other livestock and begin a sustainable harvest of kangaroo for food in 1970 when the sale of kangaroo meat for human consumption was still illegal across the country (Conservation of Kangaroos). The idea was repeated by biologist Gordon Grigg in the late 1980s (Jackson and Vernes 173), and again in the Garnaut Climate Change Review in 2008 (547–48). Kangaroo meat is high in protein and iron, low in fat, and high in healthy polyunsaturated fatty acids and conjugated linoleic acid, and, as these authors showed, has a smaller environmental footprint than beef, lamb, or pork. Kangaroo require less water than cattle, sheep or pigs, and no land is cleared to grow feed for them or give them space to graze. Their paws cause less erosion and compaction of soil than do the hooves of common livestock. They eat less fodder than ruminants and their digestive processes result in lower emissions of the powerful greenhouse gas methane and less solid waste.As Justin of Love Island was aware, kangaroo are not farmed in the sense of being deliberately bred, fed, confined, or treated with hormones, drugs or chemicals, which also adds to their lighter impact on the environment. However, some pastoralists argue that because they cannot prevent kangaroos from accessing the food, water, shelter, and protection from predators they provide for their livestock, they do effectively farm them, although they receive no income from sales of kangaroo meat. This type of light touch farming of kangaroos has a very long history in Australia going back to the continent’s first peopling some 60,000 years ago. Kangaroos were so important to Aboriginal people that a wide range of environments were manipulated to produce their favoured habitats of open grasslands edged by sheltering trees. As Bill Gammage demonstrated, fire was used as a tool to preserve and extend grassy areas, to encourage regrowth which would attract kangaroos and to drive the animals from one patch to another or towards hunters waiting with spears (passim, for example, 58, 72, 76, 93). Gammage and Bruce Pascoe agree that this was a form of animal husbandry in which the kangaroos were drawn to the areas prepared for them for the young grass or, more forcefully, physically directed using nets, brush fences or stone walls. Burnt ground served to contain the animals in place of fencing, and regular harvesting kept numbers from rising to levels which would place pressure on other species (Gammage 79, 281–86; Pascoe 42–43). Contemporary advocates of eating kangaroo have promoted the idea that they should be deliberately co-produced with other livestock instead of being killed to preserve feed and water for sheep and cattle (Ellicott; Wilson 39). Substituting kangaroo for the meat of more environmentally damaging animals would facilitate a reduction in the numbers of cattle and sheep, lessening the harm they do.Most proponents have assumed that their audience is current meat eaters who would substitute kangaroo for the meat of other more environmentally costly animals, but kangatarianism can also emerge from vegetarianism. Wendy Zukerman, who wrote about kangaroo hunting for New Scientist in 2010, was motivated to conduct the research because she was considering becoming an early adopter of kangatarianism as the least environmentally taxing way to counter the longterm anaemia she had developed as a vegetarian. In 2018, George Wilson, honorary professor in the Australian National University’s Fenner School of Environment and Society called for vegetarians to become kangatarians as a means of boosting overall consumption of kangaroo for environmental and economic benefits to rural Australia (39).Given these persuasive environmental arguments, it might be expected that many people would have perceived eating kangaroo instead of other meat as a favourable bargain and taken up the call to become kangatarian. Certainly, there has been widespread interest in trying kangaroo meat. In 1997, only five years after the sale of kangaroo meat for human consumption had been legalised in most states (South Australia did so in 1980), 51% of 500 people surveyed in five capital cities said they had tried kangaroo. However, it had not become a meat of choice with very few found to eat it more than three times a year (Des Purtell and Associates iv). Just over a decade later, a study by Ampt and Owen found an increase to 58% of 1599 Australians surveyed across the country who had tried kangaroo but just 4.7% eating it at least monthly (14). Bryce Appleby, in his study of kangaroo consumption in the home based on interviews with 28 residents of Wollongong in 2010, specifically noted the absence of kangatarians—then a very new concept. A study of 261 Sydney university students in 2014 found that half had tried kangaroo meat and 10% continued to eat it with any regularity. Only two respondents identified themselves as kangatarian (Grant 14–15). Kangaroo meat advocate Michael Archer declared in 2017 that “there’s an awful lot of very, very smart vegetarians [who] have opted for semi vegetarianism and they’re calling themselves ‘kangatarians’, as they’re quite happy to eat kangaroo meat”, but unless there had been a significant change in a few years, the surveys did not bear out his assertion (154).The ethical calculations around eating kangaroo are complicated by factors beyond the strictly environmental. One Tweeter advised Justin: “‘I’m a kangatarian’ isn’t a pickup line, mate”, and certainly the reception of his declaration could have been very cool, especially as it was delivered to a self declared animal warrior (N’Tash Aha). All of the studies of beliefs and practices around the eating of kangaroo have noted a significant minority of Australians who would not consider eating kangaroo based on issues of animal welfare and animal rights. The 1997 study found that 11% were opposed to the idea of eating kangaroo, while in Grant’s 2014 study, 15% were ethically opposed to eating kangaroo meat (Des Purtell and Associates iv; Grant 14–15). Animal ethics complicate the bargains calculated principally on environmental grounds.These ethical concerns work across several registers. One is around the flesh and blood kangaroo as a charismatic native animal unique to Australia and which Australians have an obligation to respect and nurture. Sheep, cattle and pigs have been subject to longterm propaganda campaigns which entrench the idea that they are unattractive and unintelligent, and veil their transition to meat behind euphemistic language and abattoir walls, making it easier to eat them. Kangaroos are still seen as resourceful and graceful animals, and no linguistic tricks shield consumers from the knowledge that it is a roo on their plate. A proposal in 2009 to market a “coat of arms” emu and kangaroo-flavoured potato chip brought complaints to the Advertising Standards Bureau that this was disrespectful to these native animals, although the flavours were to be simulated and the product vegetarian (Black). Coexisting with this high regard to kangaroos is its antithesis. That is, a valuation of them informed by their designation as a pest in the pastoral industry, and the use of the carcasses of those killed to feed dogs and other companion animals. Appleby identified a visceral, disgust response to the idea of eating kangaroo in many of his informants, including both vegetarians who would not consider eating kangaroo because of their commitment to a plant-based diet, and at least one omnivore who would prefer to give up all meat rather than eat kangaroo. While diametrically opposed, the end point of both positions is that kangaroo meat should not be eaten.A second animal ethics stance relates to the imagined kangaroo, a cultural construct which for most urban Australians is much more present in their lives and likely to shape their actions than the living animals. It is behind the rejection of eating an animal which holds such an iconic place in Australian culture: to the dexter on the 1912 national coat of arms; hopping through the Hundred Acre Wood as Kanga and Roo in A.A. Milne’s Winnie-the-Pooh children’s books from the 1920s and the Disney movies later made from them; as a boy’s best friend as Skippy the Bush Kangaroo in a fondly remembered 1970s television series; and high in the sky on QANTAS planes. The anthropomorphising of kangaroos permitted the spectacle of the boxing kangaroo from the late nineteenth century. By framing natural kangaroo behaviours as boxing, these exhibitions encouraged an ambiguous understanding of kangaroos as human-like, moving them further from the category of food (Golder and Kirkby). Australian government bodies used this idea of the kangaroo to support food exports to Britain, with kangaroos as cooks or diners rather than ingredients. The Kangaroo Kookery Book of 1932 (see fig. 1 below) portrayed kangaroos as a nuclear family in a suburban kitchen and another official campaign supporting sales of Australian produce in Britain in the 1950s featured a Disney-inspired kangaroo eating apples and chops washed down with wine (“Kangaroo to Be ‘Food Salesman’”). This imagining of kangaroos as human-like has persisted, leading to the opinion expressed in a 2008 focus group, that consuming kangaroo amounted to “‘eating an icon’ … Although they are pests they are still human nature … these are native animals, people and I believe that is a form of cannibalism!” (Ampt and Owen 26). Figure 1: Rather than promoting the eating of kangaroos, the portrayal of kangaroos as a modern suburban family in the Kangaroo Kookery Book (1932) made it unthinkable. (Source: Kangaroo Kookery Book, Director of Australian Trade Publicity, Australia House, London, 1932.)The third layer of ethical objection on the ground of animal welfare is more specific, being directed to the method of killing the kangaroos which become food. Kangaroos are perhaps the only native animals for which state governments set quotas for commercial harvest, on the grounds that they compete with livestock for pasturage and water. In most jurisdictions, commercially harvested kangaroo carcasses can be processed for human consumption, and they are the ones which ultimately appear in supermarket display cases.Kangaroos are killed by professional shooters at night using swivelling spotlights mounted on their vehicles to locate and daze the animals. While clean head shots are the ideal and regulations state that animals should be killed when at rest and without causing “undue agonal struggle”, this is not always achieved and some animals do suffer prolonged deaths (NSW Code of Practice for Kangaroo Meat for Human Consumption). By regulation, the young of any female kangaroo must be killed along with her. While averting a slow death by neglect, this is considered cruel and wasteful. The hunt has drawn international criticism, including from Greenpeace which organised campaigns against the sale of kangaroo meat in Europe in the 1980s, and Viva! which was successful in securing the withdrawal of kangaroo from sale in British supermarkets (“Kangaroo Meat Sales Criticised”). These arguments circulate and influence opinion within Australia.A final animal ethics issue is that what is actually behind the push for greater use of kangaroo meat is not concern for the environment or animal welfare but the quest to turn a profit from these animals. The Kangaroo Industries Association of Australia, formed in 1970 to represent those who dealt in the marsupials’ meat, fur and skins, has been a vocal advocate of eating kangaroo and a sponsor of market research into how it can be made more appealing to the market. The Association argued in 1971 that commercial harvest was part of the intelligent conservation of the kangaroo. They sought minimum size regulations to prevent overharvesting and protect their livelihoods (“Assn. Backs Kangaroo Conservation”). The Association’s current website makes the claim that wild harvested “Australian kangaroo meat is among the healthiest, tastiest and most sustainable red meats in the world” (Kangaroo Industries Association of Australia). That this is intended to initiate a new and less controlled branch of the meat industry for the benefit of hunters and processors, rather than foster a shift from sheep or cattle to kangaroos which might serve farmers and the environment, is the opinion of Dr. Louise Boronyak, of the Centre for Compassionate Conservation at the University of Technology Sydney (Boyle 19).Concerns such as these have meant that kangaroo is most consumed where it is least familiar, with most of the meat for human consumption recovered from culled animals being exported to Europe and Asia. Russia has been the largest export market. There, kangaroo meat is made less strange by blending it with other meats and traditional spices to make processed meats, avoiding objections to its appearance and uncertainty around preparation. With only a low profile as a novelty animal in Russia, there are fewer sentimental concerns about consuming kangaroo, although the additional food miles undermine its environmental credentials. The variable acceptability of kangaroo in more distant markets speaks to the role of culture in determining how patterns of eating are formed and can be shifted, or, as Elspeth Probyn phrased it “how natural entities are transformed into commodities within a context of globalisation and local communities”, underlining the impossibility of any straightforward ethics of eating kangaroo (33, 35).Kangatarianism is a neologism which makes the eating of kangaroo meat something it has not been in the past, a voluntary restriction based on environmental ethics. These environmental benefits are well founded and eating kangaroo can be understood as an Anthropocenic bargain struck to allow the continuation of the consumption of red meat while reducing one’s environmental footprint. Although superficially attractive, the numbers entering into this bargain remain small because environmental ethics cannot be disentangled from animal ethics. The anthropomorphising of the kangaroo and its use as a national symbol coexist with its categorisation as a pest and use of its meat as food for companion animals. Both understandings of kangaroos made their meat uneatable for many Australians. Paired with concerns over how kangaroos are killed and the commercialisation of a native species, kangaroo meat has a very mixed reception despite decades of advocacy for eating its meat in favour of that of more harmed and more harmful introduced species. Given these constraints, kangatarianism is unlikely to become widespread and indeed it should be viewed as at best a temporary exigency. As the climate warms and rainfall becomes more erratic, even animals which have evolved to suit Australian conditions will come under increasing pressure, and humans will need to reach Kübler-Ross’ final state of grief: acceptance. In this case, this would mean acceptance that our needs cannot be placed ahead of those of other animals.ReferencesAmpt, Peter, and Kate Owen. Consumer Attitudes to Kangaroo Meat Products. Canberra: Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, 2008.Appleby, Bryce. “Skippy the ‘Green’ Kangaroo: Identifying Resistances to Eating Kangaroo in the Home in a Context of Climate Change.” BSc Hons, U of Wollongong, 2010 <http://ro.uow.edu.au/thsci/103>.Archer, Michael. “Zoology on the Table: Plenary Session 4.” Australian Zoologist 39, 1 (2017): 154–60.“Assn. Backs Kangaroo Conservation.” The Beverley Times 26 Feb. 1971: 3. 22 Feb. 2019 <http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article202738733>.Barone, Tayissa. “Kangatarians Jump the Divide.” Sydney Morning Herald 9 Feb. 2010. 13 Apr. 2019 <https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/kangatarians-jump-the-divide-20100209-gdtvd8.html>.Black, Rosemary. “Some Australians Angry over Idea for Kangaroo and Emu-Flavored Potato Chips.” New York Daily News 4 Dec. 2009. 5 Feb. 2019 <https://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/eats/australians-angry-idea-kangaroo-emu-flavored-potato-chips-article-1.431865>.Boyle, Rhianna. “Eating Skippy.” Big Issue Australia 578 11-24 Jan. 2019: 16–19.Cawthorn, Donna-Mareè, and Louwrens C. Hoffman. “Controversial Cuisine: A Global Account of the Demand, Supply and Acceptance of ‘Unconventional’ and ‘Exotic’ Meats.” Meat Science 120 (2016): 26–7.Conservation of Kangaroos. Melbourne: Australian Conservation Foundation, 1970.Des Purtell and Associates. Improving Consumer Perceptions of Kangaroo Products: A Survey and Report. Canberra: Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, 1997.Ellicott, John. “Little Pay Incentive for Shooters to Join Kangaroo Meat Industry.” The Land 15 Mar. 2018. 28 Mar. 2019 <https://www.theland.com.au/story/5285265/top-roo-shooter-says-harvesting-is-a-low-paid-job/>.Garnaut, Ross. Garnaut Climate Change Review. 2008. 26 Feb. 2019 <http://www.garnautreview.org.au/index.htm>.Gammage, Bill. The Biggest Estate on Earth: How Aborigines Made Australia. Sydney: Allen and Unwin, 2012.Golder, Hilary, and Diane Kirkby. “Mrs. Mayne and Her Boxing Kangaroo: A Married Woman Tests Her Property Rights in Colonial New South Wales.” Law and History Review 21.3 (2003): 585–605.Grant, Elisabeth. “Sustainable Kangaroo Harvesting: Perceptions and Consumption of Kangaroo Meat among University Students in New South Wales.” Independent Study Project (ISP). U of NSW, 2014. <https://digitalcollections.sit.edu/isp_collection/1755>.Haslam, Nick. “The Five Stages of Grief Don’t Come in Fixed Steps – Everyone Feels Differently.” The Conversation 22 Oct. 2018. 28 Mar. 2019 <https://theconversation.com/the-five-stages-of-grief-dont-come-in-fixed-steps-everyone-feels-differently-96111>.Head, Lesley. “The Anthropoceans.” Geographical Research 53.3 (2015): 313–20.Kangaroo Industries Association of Australia. Kangaroo Meat. 26 Feb. 2019 <http://www.kangarooindustry.com/products/meat/>.“Kangaroo Meat Sales Criticised.” The Canberra Times 13 Sep. 1984: 14. 22 Feb 2019 <http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article136915919>.“Kangaroo to Be Food ‘Salesman.’” Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, 2 Dec. 1954. 22 Feb 2019 <http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article134089767>.Kübler-Ross, Elisabeth. On Death and Dying: What the Dying Have to Teach Doctors, Nurses, Clergy, and their own Families. New York: Touchstone, 1997.Jackson, Stephen, and Karl Vernes. Kangaroo: Portrait of an Extraordinary Marsupial. Sydney: Allen and Unwin, 2010.Lappé, Frances Moore. Diet for a Small Planet. New York: Ballantine Books, 1971.N’Tash Aha (@Nsvasey). “‘I’m a Kangatarian’ isn’t a Pickup Line, Mate. #LoveIslandAU.” Twitter post. 27 May 2018. 5 Apr. 2019 <https://twitter.com/Nsvasey/status/1000697124122644480>.“NSW Code of Practice for Kangaroo Meat for Human Consumption.” Government Gazette of the State of New South Wales 24 Mar. 1993. 22 Feb. 2019 <http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-page14638033>.Oxford University Press, Australia and New Zealand. Word of the Month. June 2017. <https://www.oup.com.au/dictionaries/word-of-the-month>.Pascoe, Bruce. Dark Emu, Black Seeds: Agriculture or Accident? Broome: Magabala Books, 2014.Probyn, Elspeth. “Eating Roo: Of Things That Become Food.” New Formations 74.1 (2011): 33–45.Steinfeld, Henning, Pierre Gerber, Tom Wassenaar, Vicent Castel, Mauricio Rosales, and Cees d Haan. Livestock’s Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, 2006.Trust Nature. Essence of Kangaroo Capsules. 26 Feb. 2019 <http://ncpro.com.au/products/all-products/item/88139-essence-of-kangaroo-35000>.Victoria Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning. Kangaroo Pet Food Trial. 28 Mar. 2019 <https://www.wildlife.vic.gov.au/managing-wildlife/wildlife-management-and-control-authorisations/kangaroo-pet-food-trial>.Willett, Walter, et al. “Food in the Anthropocene: The EAT–Lancet Commission on Healthy Diets from Sustainable Food Systems.” The Lancet 16 Jan. 2019. 26 Feb. 2019 <https://www.thelancet.com/commissions/EAT>.Wilson, George. “Kangaroos Can Be an Asset Rather than a Pest.” Australasian Science 39.1 (2018): 39.Zukerman, Wendy. “Eating Skippy: The Future of Kangaroo Meat.” New Scientist 208.2781 (2010): 42–5.