Kangaroo Culls are a Necessary Evil

June 3, 2021

Dear Editor,

Emotive (in fact: indirectly, cruel) media campaigns are being waged against absolutely necessary kangaroo culls, including fallacious claims of gene-pool dilutions (which testosterone-loaded roaming junior Old Man buck kangaroos soon put paid to)!

Is my contention that there are even more kangaroos in Australia today than before European settlement wrong? Am I wrong to contend that the proliferation of water bores, dams, irrigation channels, and irrigated pastures now far, far out in the outer reaches of Australia have brought – all seasons available – water, and food for the kangaroo, where there never was any of either before?

And, so much land and forest (where kangaroos are not disturbed/hunted by aborigines) has been set aside; am I wrong?

The kangaroo is not hunted (even with high-powered rifles) by the Aborigines to the same extent today because European settlement has brought Aborigines readily available food and clothing (with no need for ‘roo skin garments); am I wrong?

Finally, European settlement also means that the great bushfires (started by the aborigines and Mother Nature) no longer sweep from one side of Australia to the other, virtually wiping out all wildlife in their paths; am I wrong?

Having seen ‘roos in plague proportions a number of times, I say farmers, housing estate developers, sporting clubs, municipalities, etc. are merely ensuring very healthy numbers of very healthy kangaroos within their own boundaries (as is their right)!

Yours,

Howard Hutchins
Victoria, Australia