Ducking progress: Victoria’s duck hunting season

My article about Victoria's 2011 duck hunting season, published on The Scavenger: "Ducking progress: Victoria's duck hunting season".

------------

Ducking progress: Victoria's duck hunting season

13 March 2011

A three month duck hunting season, authorised by the Baillieu Liberal Government, is due to commence in Victoria. But declining public support and shrinking waterbird numbers illustrate that duck hunting is on increasingly tenuous ground, writes Susannah Waters.

Although dependent on water for their very existence, recent rainfall in a state long plagued by drought will see Victoria’s waterbirds caught in a dangerous quagmire. A 2011 duck hunting season has been sanctioned by the newly installed Baillieu Liberal Government, on the rationale of the recent rains to hit the state.

In January, Victoria’s Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) announced a season to commence on March 19. Spanning 12 weeks - the longest season since 2006 - hunters will be permitted to bag up to 10 ducks a day.

Flagging public support, child shooters, low waterbird numbers and cruelty concerns are the central points of controversy surrounding the hunt.

Executive Director of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services at the DSE, Kylie White, has defended this year’s season. White said that substantial rainfall has “increased habitat for waterfowl including game bird populations. This in turn has triggered extensive breeding and wide dispersal of waterfowl across Eastern Australia’s wetlands. As a result, Victoria can sustain a return to normal seasonal arrangements in 2011”.

However, research indicates that waterbird numbers are far from healthy. Aerial waterbird surveys led by Professor Richard Kingsford of the University of New South Wales have revealed that waterbird numbers have long been in significant decline. The surveys, conducted across eastern Australia, show a decrease in bird numbers of up to 82% since the early 1980s.

Dwindling wild populations are due to a combination of factors such as long drought periods, water being diverted from rivers for irrigation, and climate change. Consequently, many waterbird species have been thrust into threatened status. 

Laurie Levy, Campaign Director of the Coalition Against Duck Shooting (CADS), was not surprised by this year’s announcement of a season. “We expected it”, he said.  Levy believes that duck hunting serves to compound the threat to bird numbers. He argues that the decision for a 2011 season was not based on scientific data, but was instead politically motivated.

“This season is a political season. DSE hasn’t done the studies – they haven’t carried out the scientific research”, Levy told The Scavenger. “Their reasons are based on the fact there is more water due to rainfall, therefore they just assume there are more birds”. He suggests that in good climatic conditions, recovery for waterbird populations could take many years.

With potentially thousands of shooters joining this year’s three month hunt, and considering the large daily kill limit, the impact on the recovering native waterbird population has the potential to be devastating.

Amongst those shooters will be children. Victorian law stipulates that juniors - those from 12 to 17 years - can legally hunt ducks if they hold a Game Licence.

A spokesman from the Victorian Sporting Shooters’ Association of Australia (SSAA) believes that it is “not particularly untoward” for 12-year-old children to participate in the hunt. He told The Scavenger last year that there are roughly 500 shooters of that age. If young people have a firearms permit, have completed the relevant training and are under adult supervision, then the SSAA believe that children’s participation does not pose any special safety issues. 

Many disagree. Levy believes that the wetlands during duck season are “a dangerous place to be”. Having campaigned against the recreational shooting of waterbirds since 1986, he has often witnessed children on the wetlands accompanying their parents.

“What skills do 12-year-olds have when shooting birds? None. That's another reason why many birds are wounded”, Levy said.

Clementine Round is the 16-year-old founder of the Duck Army, a group she says is “filled with the young and young at heart who care about our declining waterbird populations”. Standing onshore as part of the duck rescue, Round has also seen children present on the wetlands.

“Allowing children on to the water to witness this slaughter, not to mention encouraging them to hurt and kill small animals, is disgusting and detrimental to their learning and empathetic development”, Round told The Scavenger.

Evidence shows that ignoring animal cruelty inflicted by children is at our own peril. A wealth of research reveals a strong correlation between violence perpetrated by children against animals and the likelihood of them committing violent acts against people in later life.

The tide of public opinion has been steadily turning against the hunt. A Roy Morgan poll conducted three years ago determined that 87% of Victorians desire an end to duck shooting. However recreational duck shooters are a loud minority backed by powerful interests and vindicated by successive Victorian governments.  

Levy argues that there are very strong connections between politicians and shooters. “The only reason that it’s continuing is that it is seen as a political issue. Many politicians say behind the scenes that it isn’t about native waterbirds - it’s about them trading off their interests”.

Recreational duck shooting has long enjoyed support from the Labor, Liberal and National parties in Victoria. However it was banned in NSW in 1995, WA in 1990, and QLD in 2005. The practice has never been legal in the ACT.

During last year’s duck hunting season, Round said that despite public opposition she could not “foresee a ban on duck shooting in Victoria happening in the near future. Our government is too busy pandering to the wishes of shooter lobby groups rather than listening to the 87% of Victorians who want duck shooting to stop”.

Round was referring to the then Brumby Labor government. A year on, she describes the Baillieu Liberal government’s endorsement of a 2011 duck season as “short-sighted” and “infuriatingly disappointing”.  

Under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act - which is enshrined in Federal Government legislation - the DSE is required to undertake scientific studies before the Victorian government can approve a duck season. CADS don’t believe this has ever been done.

In fact, Levy claims that the DSE is tasked with providing justifications for government-sanctioned duck seasons. “DSE staff have often said in private that if the government allows a duck shooting season, then it's DSE's job to supply arguments to justify the season. If, for example, the government doesn't want a season to go ahead then DSE would give you arguments supporting a moratorium or a ban”, Levy said.

Moratoriums were in fact called in 2007 and 2008, with the DSE pinpointing the enduring drought.

Interestingly, duck shooters have often claimed to be environmental conservationists. This argument is prominent on hunting websites and other online forums, and the SSAA spokesman asserts that his organisation “actively campaigns” for wetland protection. According to him, SSAA are among the “only ones lobbying and applying pressure” to the government over wetland and water management issues.   

But do these claims of environmental credentials have any merit?

Duck rescuers have long complained about rubbish, including empty shotgun cartridges, being left behind on the wetlands by shooters. It is also apparent that the loud presence of large numbers of people and so-called “hunting dogs” is disruptive to the wetland surrounds and ecology.

A build-up of lead shot – the use of which is now forbidden – remains in many wetlands from past use, threatening waterbirds and other species. The DSE concedes that waterbirds may be poisoned by an accumulation of lead in many wetlands. Despite being banned in Victoria for 10 years, there is evidence that lead shot is still sometimes used by shooters. On last year’s duck hunting opening weekend, eleven shooters were fined for using this toxic shot.

Levy strongly rejects the suggestion that duck shooters promote wetland conservation. “Duck shooters have always lobbied governments to have wetlands filled to attract birds as targets. The artificial filling killed off many of Victoria's wetlands due to the salt rising to the surface and many Red Gums and Black Box Gums died from drowning. Wetlands need a cycle of wet and dry years to remain healthy”.

It is also worth noting that charges were brought against Gary Howard, a spokesman for hunting organisation Field and Game Australia (FGA), for his actions in the lead up to the 2009 season. An investigation found that he had illegally released water from the Latrobe River into a FGA owned wetland area in the week before that season commenced. The diversion attracted up to 1000 more birds to the wetland, which was to be used for private shooting.

In NSW and QLD the recreational shooting of native waterbirds was banned after recommendations by their governments’ respective Animal Welfare Advisory Committees (AWAC), combined with public pressure. The Victorian AWAC has consistently made the same recommendations to the Victorian Government, citing cruelty concerns.

The RSPCA opposes duck hunting due to what it deems “high level” and “senseless” cruelty. The organisation refers to a study which indicates that up to 6.6 ducks are crippled per 10 killed outright and bagged.

Particularly problematic is the use of shotguns, which spray pellets in an often irregular fashion. The imprecision of this weapon often results in high wounding rates, and consequently many ducks suffer long and painful deaths.

Many threatened species are also at risk of being killed by hunters. During last year’s season duck rescue teams discovered four dead Grey-headed Flying Foxes. They are not only a threatened species, but were found to have been killed with the prohibited lead shot.

Levy claims that in the past, hunters have illegally shot threatened and protected species such as Swans, Pelicans, Ibis, Freckled Ducks and Blue-billed Ducks.

With shooters required to sit a waterfowl identification test just once, and only a handful of wildlife officers for the entire state of Victoria, the risk to threatened wildlife during duck hunting season is immense.

But are duck shooters themselves an imperilled species? In a sign that duck hunting is becoming increasingly unpopular, FGA are attempting to entice prospective hunters to join in this year by offering over $25,000 worth of prizes. Their 2011 slogan, “Reignite the Passion”, is also being utilised in an effort to whip up participant turnout.

This throws into question claims by FGA that “interest from new duck hunters is already building strongly and license numbers are expected to increase by up to 15%”. While there are presently around 20,000 licensed waterfowl hunters in Victoria, duck season participant numbers have been steadily declining for years.

According to the SSAA’s spokesman, a strong “camaraderie” between hunters is the drawcard for many to take part. But what they may not have counted on is the solidarity between duck advocates and their unwavering determination to see duck shooting end.

Despite the obstacles, Round firmly believes that the day will come when duck hunting will be outlawed in Victoria. While acknowledging that it won’t be this season, she believes it is not unachievable in the long term. “We will continue to inform the general public of this ‘fowl’ practice and have vowed to lobby as hard as ever”, Round said. “The general public is on our side”.

Round will be onshore assisting the duck rescue this year, her third in a row. “I am only 16 and have to wait until I am 18 to enter the water myself, but if duck shooting isn’t banned before then, I am looking forward to that day”.

According to Levy, many new people are joining the duck rescue this year. Although he has campaigned on this issue for a quarter of a century, the prospect of facing another season has not demoralised him and his group. Rather, “it strengthens our resolve”.  

He says that rescuers will be back on the wetlands this year, “doing what we usually do”, and when the hunters arrive, “we’ll be there waiting for them”.

Visit the Coalition Against Duck Shooting (CADS) website for more information and to find out how you can support the campaign to stop duck hunting.

Susannah Waters holds a Master’s degree in journalism and communication from the University of New South Wales. She is a former veterinary nurse who has worked with both domestic animals and wildlife. She has a strong interest in wildlife conservation.

Images: Opening morning of the 2005 duck shooting season at McDonald Swamp in north western Victoria. A quick thinking rescuer took a photo of a shooter illegally pointing his weapon at him. The protected swan had been illegally shot. The grey teal shot through the bill (top) highlights some of the horrific injuries the birds endure.

Photos courtesy of Coalition Against Duck Shooting.

On Your Soapbox - Vegan Voice

My “On Your Soapbox” piece in the current issue (No.45 Mar-May 2011) of Vegan Voice magazine.

How did you get into this vegan thing?

The thing that genuinely perplexes me is how I didn’t get into it earlier. As a child, I adored animals and wanted to protect them. If I saw a bullfight on TV, it would render me hysterical for hours. Teachers at school often deferred to me when there was an injured or trapped animal on the grounds, and I set up an environment club in primary school to help promote a respect for nature and animals amongst the kids. But I never made that connection between the meat I ate and this concern I had for animals. It surprises me, as I was an inquisitive child – I constantly drove my parents mad with questions!

My older sister Alison became a vegetarian in 1995 when I was 15, and when she embarks on something there are no half measures – she thoroughly researches it. She started reading anything she could get her hands on about vegetarianism and factory farming. I remember she had a copy of Peter Singer’s Animal Liberation. I was curious and also had a look. I couldn’t believe what I was reading, and as someone who grew up with a strong sense of justice and who professed to care about animals, the decision to become a vegetarian was completely logical to me. As soon as I made that decision, my commitment was solid and I never even questioned it. Giving up meat made sense to me on every level, and I wasn’t tempted to eat it ever again.

Several months later Alison announced she was going to become vegan. When she explained why – the cruelty and suffering central to milk and egg production – right away I knew I could not justify eating animal products any longer. I started transitioning to veganism shortly after that.

Back then, I was - and still am - obsessed with a vegan band called Propagandhi. Their song Nailing Descartes to the Wall/ (Liquid) Meat is Still Murder has the lyrics: “I have recognised one form of oppression, now I recognise the rest”. As someone concerned about injustice, that completely resonated with me. It was around then that my understanding evolved and I began to see the bigger picture - how all oppression is connected. It doesn’t make sense to vigorously reject one form but not another. I could see the hypocrisy in my past actions. I connected the dots, so to speak.

Talk to us about food.

I’m lucky - my partner is an amazing cook. He makes the kind of food that shocks the pants off non-vegans. I thrive on vegetables so I eat lots of raw vegetables every day. I am obsessed with avocado and tahini and eat both daily. There is an Indonesian potato and tempeh dish that is my favourite dish ever. I also love anything with pastry, like pies or spinach and tofu “ricotta” scrolls – we make those at home. We also make Mexican food a lot.

We went to Vietnam a year ago and the vegan food there is spectacular – we had no problem at all finding stuff to eat. We also discovered a vegan restaurant where the food is so ridiculously good we are considering going back for an extended trip just to eat there again!

What pisses you off?

Ignorance. And people who choose to live in ignorance because they are scared of the truth. I wish people questioned things more – I’m surprised that so many people just accept things at face value.

I think it’s true that our natural curiousity is somewhat stifled from the day we are born through socialisation and society. However, I don’t think it’s adequate to attribute people’s ignorance – for example, not knowing about how meat is produced – solely to societal influence. People have the ability to look around, learn, and challenge what they see. What a world we’d live in if people did that more!

I have spent a lot of time doing conservation and rehabilitation work with wildlife in Asia. Tourists go on holidays and many don’t question what they see. Many pay to have their photo taken with a tiger or a baby animal such as a gibbon, or they ride an elephant. How do they not notice that the tiger is living in squalid conditions and that he has been drugged in order to provide them with entertainment? Why don’t they wonder why that baby is on the streets and not in her natural habitat with her family? How can people view it acceptable that an elephant is reduced to a vehicle for their misguided pleasure? Why don’t people reject this? Their actions are contributing to species depletion while inflicting extreme cruelty. It absolutely incenses me.

And of course the fact that people don’t question – or refuse to think about – the way that animals are used, abused and destroyed just so that they can eat their body parts. Humans profess to value life so dearly, and many have a great fear of pain and death. Yet, they are so willing to impose pain and death on others without even a second thought.

Consumerism, and how the planet is being treated as if it’s dispensable, drives me mad. The planet is being destroyed for trivia – just look at all the pointless products in shops which are a waste of resources and will likely never biodegrade.

Nutritionists who dish out the same tired old advice to eat three serves of dairy a day infuriate me. How on earth could it be possible that human health depends on the milk meant for the growing baby of a different species? I mean, come on! Are they joking? The absolute stupidity would be funny if the consequences of their advice weren’t so cruel. The fact that most nutritionists don’t actually research nutrition, and merely regurgitate what they read in a textbook, is astounding.

The worst thing that we could ever commit against a human being, and this is pretty much universal, is murder. It is never considered humane. However, the word “humane” has become closely associated with the marketing of animal products. It is used constantly to hoodwink people into thinking the products are ethically acceptable. It is a dangerous precedent to set, when people come to believe some of these products are produced in an ethical fashion. It seems that giving an animal two more centimetres of cage to languish in is “humane”. This is a complete corruption of the meaning of the word, and something we have to fight against. In reality, there’s no ambiguity - to consume animal products is to endorse the view that the exploitation and domination of others for profit is acceptable.

What’s hard about being vegan?

The only thing that is hard about it is the negative reaction of many non-vegans, such as their willingness to deride vegans for their beliefs. Veganism is a part of me; it’s part of my life philosophy, my value system. So it insults me to my core.

I get frustrated when non-vegans squirm and say “that’s awful”, and shield their ears when they hear about the cruelty inflicted on food animals. They have the power to change that awful reality, yet most don’t.

Also, when people find out I’m vegan and say, “wow, you must have a lot of willpower”. It has absolutely nothing to do with willpower. It’s the expression of my central values – compassion, justice and equality. I dislike it when people frame it like that, as I believe it’s a distortion of veganism. It also makes it seem completely unattainable, which it most certainly isn’t.

What's the most rewarding thing about being vegan?

Not being a part of the horrid system that systematically kills sentient beings and treats them as mere consumer products is very important to me.

I was a very shy child, and I actually credit veganism with giving me more confidence in myself as it triggered a lot of self-reflection. And the opposition to my decision from others inadvertently made me stronger, as I refined my ability to be able to defend myself well in an argument!

Being a vegan is easy – striving to live a compassionate life is simply the best thing you can do. It’s liberating. Knowing that I am living my values means everything.

Why is it so difficult to get people to do it then?

Many are too lazy. They think the status quo is easier. And people have been told from a young age that eating animal products is normal, and most don’t challenge it unfortunately.

The meat, dairy and egg industries are underpinned and sanctioned by the government. This gives them a legitimacy which makes it easy to convince people that their products are necessary. Their relentless marketing also reinforces this message.

Many people think veganism is all about sacrifice; consequently they fear depriving themselves of anything. I honestly think that is one of the main factors. We live in a society which prizes individualism, where people compete and aspire to have more all the time. It’s become such an “on-demand” culture, and people feel they should be allowed to have access to whatever they want, whenever they want it. That is most definitely born of the consumerist mindset imposed on us by the capitalist system.

On top of that, many are disconnected from and are actually frightened of nature and the other creatures sharing this planet. That terrifies me.

What would you like to say to every single non-vegan on the planet (if you had an enormous megaphone)?

Do you really think that your taste buds are more important than our environment, the lives of all the animals you eat, and your own health? Read some books, learn the issues, and watch some videos of what actually happens to the animals you consume. There was no divine plan – humans aren’t superior to anyone or anything. We are simply one element of a massive planet; we place too much importance on ourselves as being number one. We aren’t.

Where do you hope the world will be in five years?

Awake. Concerned about the future. Ready to tackle the pervasive greed and destruction which is threatening to swallow the planet whole. Attuned to the needs of the environment and all the creatures, human and non-human, that populate it.

Read any good books lately?

I have been studying journalism full time this last year so I’ve had much less time to read books than I would have liked. However my sister recently gave me a book called Making a Killing: The Political Economy of Animal Rights by Bob Torres. He co-authored Vegan Freak: Being Vegan in a Non-Vegan World which is a brilliant book. I’m a few chapters in and am finding it very compelling. The book examines the link between the exploitative treatment of humans and the domination of animals under capitalism.

Give us a miscellaneous rant.

The idea that vegans don’t eat animal products simply because they “love” animals is a flawed, but popular, perception. You know, that view that we’re just an overly sentimental bunch. It is a very simplistic way of analysing the motivations behind veganism.

Saying that veganism is merely driven by a love for animals undermines the notion of rights. It frames veganism within the needs and emotions of humans, rather than the intrinsic right of all creatures to freedom and self-determination. It detracts from a deeper analysis of the issues.

I strenuously believe in animal rights; “love” is a misleading term. I love the concept of respect and rights for all species.