A strategic approach to mitigating the impacts of wild canids: proposed activities of the Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre

Wild canids (wild dogs and European red foxes) cause substantial losses to Australian livestock industries and environmental values. Both species are actively managed as pests to livestock production. Contemporaneously, the dingo proportion of the wild dog population, being considered native, is protected in areas designated for wildlife conservation. Wild dogs particularly affect sheep and goat production because of the behavioural responses of domestic sheep and goats to attack, and the flexible hunting tactics of wild dogs. Predation of calves, although less common, is now more economically important because of recent changes in commodity prices. Although sometimes affecting lambing and kidding rates, foxes cause fewer problems to livestock producers but have substantial impacts on environmental values, affecting the survival of small to medium-sized native fauna and affecting plant biodiversity by spreading weeds. Canid management in Australia relies heavily on the use of compound 1080-poisoned baits that can be applied aerially or by ground. Exclusion fencing, trapping, shooting, livestock-guarding animals and predator calling with shooting are also used. The new Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre has 40 partners representing private and public land managers, universities, and training, research and development organisations. One of the major objectives of the new IACRC is to apply a strategic approach in order to reduce the impacts of wild canids on agricultural and environmental values in Australia by 10%. In this paper, the impacts, ecology and management of wild canids in Australia are briefly reviewed and the first cooperative projects that will address IACRC objectives for improving wild dog management are outlined.

The Ethics of a Co-regulatory Model for Farm Animal Welfare Research

Standards for farm animal welfare are variously managed at a national level by government-led regulatory control, by consumer-led welfare economics and co-regulated control in a partnership between industry and government. In the latter case the control of research to support animal welfare standards by the relevant industry body may lead to a conflict of interest on the part of researchers, who are dependent on industry for continued research funding. We examine this dilemma by reviewing two case studies of research published under an Australian co-regulated control system. Evidence of unsupported conclusions that are favourable to industry is provided, suggesting that researchers do experience a conflict of interest that may influence the integrity of the research. Alternative models for the management of research are discussed, including the establishment of an independent research management body for animal welfare because of its public good status and the use of public money derived from taxation, with representation from government, industry, consumers, and advocacy groups.