Damned Both Ways In The Koala Collar Controversy
Sydney Morning Herald
Tuesday January 17, 1995
I write concerning the article by James Woodford, "Koala collars may be kiss of death" (Herald, January 12). Despite my many arguments with State Forests of NSW and their methodology, I cannot help but feel great sympathy for the research staff and the professional foresters working out in the field day after day at the criticisms made by Dr Tony Norton and implicitly by the National Parks and Wildlife Service.
If there was ever a case of damned if you do and damned if you don't, then this koala management program must surely be it. For years State Forests (formerly the Forestry Commission) was criticised for its lack of wildlife data. Now, five years and $10 million on, it is being criticised again. For some commentators, no matter what they do they can't win any brownie points.
The public may also be surprised to learn that the accumulated knowledge acquired by State Forests about wildlife, and especially endangered species, exceeds anything held by the National Parks and Wildlife Service.
Many times have I read positive media stories about the use of radio collars to track and research wildlife. Could it be that this current criticism is more directed against the forest management agency and logging generally rather than a truly legitimate research management concern? As for the unsubstantiated claim that koalas might be shot when found in or near logging areas, I can only say not a shred of evidence exists to support such a claim and nothing in the story suggests the reporter has any such evidence. I, for one, simply do not believe such an unfounded comment could have appeared in this story for any other reason than to prejudice the reader.
Col Dorber, Executive director, NSW Forest Products, Surry Hills.
January 12 Your article entitled "Koala collars may be kiss of death" (Herald, January 12) is alarmist. While State Forests may have been negligent in the handling of its koala research, your article is already having a panic effect that all radio tracking is harmful. At this stage, the collars provide our only way of finding out more about koala behaviour patterns, their social structure and habitat needs.
The Koala Preservation Society of NSW is assisting NSW NPWS with a koala study in the Port Macquarie area following bushfires in the region in September. On January 11, a collared koala was brought back to the koala hospital because she was on the ground. Had she not been collared and monitored on her return to the wild, this animal would not have been noticed and would probably have died or been attacked by predators.
The Port Macquarie Koala Study, while still in its infancy and stalling for lack of funding, is already providing valuable scientific data which will enable the authorities concerned to protect what habitat remains in these fast developing coastal regions and so ensure the continued survival of wild and free roaming koala populations.
While tracking should only be done by experienced and committed trackers, it appears that all too often a lack of funding means that studies are done on a shoestring, and as a result koalas are lost. More funds and commitment, please; not a ban on radio-tracking. The information which is being obtained is far too valuable and provides the only real way of ensuring the koala's survival.
Emilie Cooper, Vice-president, Koala Preservation Society NSW Inc, Port Macquarie.
January 12 Australians are entitled to know that if the US Government does decide to list the koala as endangered under the provisions of its Endangered Species Act, it was the result of an Australian effort.
The detailed scientific petition which was submitted in Washington DC last May by Australians for Animals is more than 120,000 words and fulfils four of the five criteria available under the US act.
Five Australian scientists with expertise on native forests and the koala reviewed the petition. One of the reviewing scientists, Dr Frank Carrick of the University of Queensland, described it as "the most comprehensive synthesis of scientific information available today on the koala".
Australians for Animals spent more than two years compiling the research, undertaking extensive field studies and identifying the legal deficiencies of environmental protection in NSW, Queensland and Victoria.
The petition itself cost well in excess of $100,000.
An examination of the loss of koala habitat in the three "koala" States shows irrefutably the causes and extent of destruction, in particular woodchipping of native forests and uncontrolled coastal development.
The appalling lack of any proper funding for basic scientific research, habitat protection and proper management of koalas is going to push these already highly vulnerable creatures to extinction. Affidavits by scientists supporting this statement accompanied the petition.
Australians for Animals was the first Australian conservation group to use the provisions of the US Endangered Species Act to protect an indigenous species.
If the Australian State and Federal Government authorities acted in a responsible way to protect the unique and irreplaceable koala, this action would never have been necessary.
The problem lies with the politicians, not the people.
Sue Arnold, Co-ordinator, Australians for Animals, Byron Bay.
January 13
© 1995 Sydney Morning Herald