Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removal of Three
Kangaroos From the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
[Federal Register: March 9, 1995]
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018-AB88
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removal of Three
Kangaroos From the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
[[Page 12888]] ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has determined
that three common species of kangaroos, the red kangaroo, the western
gray kangaroo, and populations of the eastern gray kangaroo in mainland
Australia, should be removed from the list of threatened species under
the Endangered Species Act (Act or ESA). The Service also announces
that it is denying a December 20, 1989, petition to reimpose a ban on
the commercial importation of products from these three species of
kangaroos from mainland Australia on procedural grounds. The Service,
with this rule, also rescinds the existing special rule applicable to
threatened kangaroo populations.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 10, 1995.
ADDRESSES: The complete file for the rule is available for public
inspection by appointment, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., in Room 750, 4401
North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia 22203.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Charles W. Dane, Office of
Scientific Authority, at the above address, or by phone (703-358-1708)
or by fax (703-358-2276).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The term ``kangaroo'' in this rule refers to all populations of the
red kangaroo (Macropus rufus), the western gray kangaroo (M.
fuliginosus), and the eastern gray kangaroo (M. giganteus) in mainland
Australia, which are being removed from the list of endangered and
threatened wildlife (50 CFR 17.11) under Act (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544). The
subspecies of the eastern gray kangaroo (M. g. tasmaniensis), which
occurs solely in Tasmania retains its endangered classification under
the Act. The red kangaroo, western gray kangaroo, and the eastern gray
kangaroo in mainland Australia were listed on December 30, 1974 (39 FR
44990), as threatened species pursuant to the Act and the commercial
importation of kangaroos, their parts, and products was banned. A
special rule to allow such importations into the United States after
development of adequate State management plans accompanied the listing.
The Service accepted the management programs for four Australian States
and lifted the importation ban on April 29, 1981 (46 FR 23929), after
kangaroo management plans and population survey techniques had been
strengthened. The Service, in two Federal Register notices of April 8,
1983, proposed to delist the three species of kangaroos (48 FR 15428)
and to continue the commercial importation of kangaroos (48 FR 15434).
The final rule allowing the continuation of the importation of
kangaroos was published on August 1, 1983 (48 FR 34757). The Service
withdrew the proposed rule to delist the three kangaroo species on
April 24, 1984 (49 FR 17555), after receiving new data from the
Australian Government that the severe drought in the summer of 1982-3
had caused significant reductions in kangaroo populations. It was noted
that the drought was broken in winter 1983, that kangaroos were again
beginning to breed, but the ability of kangaroo populations to recover
from the major 1982-3 population fluctuation was unknown. It was
further noted that the delisting action could be reconsidered after the
Service had a better understanding of how kangaroo populations recover
from drought events.
The Service was petitioned on December 20, 1989, by Greenpeace USA,
with subsequent support from other groups, ``to reinstate the ban on
commercial importation of kangaroos and of kangaroo products.'' The
petitioners contended that Australia's management of kangaroos was
inherently flawed and that Australian States did not have adequate and
effective conservation programs that ensured the protection of the
threatened species. The Service, in order to respond to the December
20, 1989, petition in a meaningful manner, sent three representatives
to Australia in March 1990 to investigate the population status of the
three kangaroo species (survey methods, numbers, and trends) and the
implementation of management programs. In addition, the team received
comments about the conservation benefit of management plans that
allowed the harvest of kangaroos. The Service team spent 12 days
meeting with selected members of Parliament, representatives of various
nongovernmental organizations, scientists, State and federal natural
resource managers, enforcement personnel, grain growers, and ranchers.
The team also visited parks, open range, chillers, faunal dealers,
ports and exporters. The team presented their findings in a June 5,
1990, report (Nichols et al. 1990). The Service, in a Federal Register
notice of August 8, 1990 (55 FR 32276), announced the receipt of the
Greenpeace petition and the availability of the June 5, 1990, Service
report and requested comments on the status of the three species of
kangaroos in Australia. The comment period on the status review for the
December 20, 1989, petition was extended to November 6, 1990.
The Wildlife Legislative Fund of America submitted a petition dated
November 6, 1990, which was received by the Service on the following
day. That petition requested that all populations of the red kangaroo
(Macropus rufus), the western gray kangaroo (M. fuliginosus), and the
eastern gray kangaroo (M. giganteus), except the subspecies M. g.
tasmaniensis, be removed from the list of threatened species under the
Endangered Species Act (Act).
The Wildlife Legislative Fund petition presented the June 5, 1990,
report prepared by Service personnel as the principal basis for the
petition. Among other things, the petitioners cited the conservative
estimates of the 1987 kangaroo populations (red kangaroos--7.5 million,
western gray kangaroos--1.7 million, and eastern gray kangaroos--4.7
million) and the fact that kangaroo conservation programs exist within
individual range states as reasons for delisting the species.
The Service, in a Federal Register notice of June 12, 1991 (56 FR
26971), found that the action requested in the November 6, 1990,
petition may be warranted and requested additional comments as part of
a continuing status review of kangaroos and kangaroo management in
Australia. The comment period was reopened until September 10, 1991.
That comment period was later extended to September 24, 1991, in a
Federal Register notice dated September 17, 1991 (56 FR 47060).
The Service published a proposed rule in the Federal Register on
January 21, 1993 (58 FR 5341) proposing to remove the three species of
kangaroos in mainland Australia from the list of threatened species
under the Act. The Service had found that the four States that
commercially harvest kangaroos (New South Wales, Queensland, South
Australia, and Western Australia) had developed and implemented
adequate and effective conservation programs that ensured the
protection of these species. The Service additionally found that
kangaroo populations were high and that the three species were
protected by appropriate legislation, had their populations regularly
monitored by direct and indirect procedures, and were managed by a
complex licensing system which regulated the extent of the legal
harvest. The Service in that Federal Register document also announced
that it was deferring a decision on the December 20, 1989, petition by
Greenpeace USA to reimpose the ban on the importation of kangaroo
products until the final [[Page 12889]] decision on the proposed action
was made. The Service also indicated that if the final decision was to
delist the three species that it would then act to rescind the special
rule allowing imports of kangaroo products from threatened populations
into the United States.
The Service notes that a nonlisted status for these three species
under the Act is wholly consistent with listing decisions made by other
organizations. The three species of kangaroos are described as abundant
by the Australian Conservation Foundation. The species are not on lists
published by the Council of Nature Conservation Ministers, World Wide
Fund for Nature Australia (WWF), or Fund for Animals Ltd., that
variously identify species of Australian fauna they find to be
endangered, threatened, or vulnerable. The status of the three species
in mainland Australia is described as stable by the Species Survival
Commission of the World Conservation Union's (IUCN/SSC) Australasian
Marsupial and Monotreme Specialist Group in its 1992 publication
(Kennedy 1992). That publication also indicates that the western gray
kangaroo has declined less than 10 percent in geographic range since
European settlement and that the eastern gray kangaroo and the red
kangaroo may actually have increased their geographic range since
European settlement. The IUCN/SSC publication also listed the three
kangaroos as among those taxa for which there is no genetic concern--
either because they are common in captivity, or readily available from
the wild, requiring monitoring only by annual census.
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
The Service received about 740 comments in response to the January
21, 1993, request for comments published in the Federal Register (58 FR
5341). Virtually all correspondents supported the request to ban the
importation of kangaroo products into the United States and/or
advocated the retention of threatened status for the species. Most
comments provided no substantive information on these issues.
The harvest of kangaroo products provides raw materials for a
primary industry in Australia. Many individuals and organizations
expressed dissatisfaction or distaste for this fact. For example, about
700 comments were in response to an Action Alert published by the
Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) which stated that the
Australian Government sanctioned the slaughter of 5.2 million kangaroos
in 1992 to supply the domestic and international market for kangaroo
skins. This was from a combined kangaroo population which the HSUS
claimed only totaled 13.9 million. Respondents especially advocated the
retention of threatened status (374 replies), or the retention of
threatened status and the reimposition of the importation ban (260
replies).
The underlying concern expressed by the HSUS respondents as well as
many other commentators regarded the commercial harvest and trade in
these kangaroo species, which are protected species under Australian
domestic legislation. Commenters frequently expressed (1) an outrage
that a commercial harvest was allowed to occur by an industry that many
persons characterized as illegitimate; (2) a view that market forces,
if not at present, might in the future overwhelm conservation practices
to the detriment of the species; and (3) a view that the threat of
trade restrictions was necessary to ensure that Australian governments
continue to manage kangaroos in a responsible manner.
The Service response to this recurring and significant concern is
as follows. The determination to utilize, in commercial trade, kangaroo
products from well-managed populations is a domestic issue that will
ultimately be determined at the ballot box, in the legislatures, and in
the courts of Australia. The Service has the responsibility to
determine whether the species are threatened or endangered under the
Endangered Species Act and to promulgate certain special rules if
required. A finding of threatened or endangered is made after five
specific listing criteria have been evaluated. The second of these
criteria questions whether overutilization occurs, for among other
reasons, commercial purposes. The Service has found, as indicated
below, that the commercial quotas are related to kangaroo populations
occurring within the commercial utilization area (CUA). The CUA is that
portion of the range of the individual species where the commercial
harvest is allowed to occur.
Kangaroo populations are known to cycle in abundance within the
CUAs because much of inland Australia is an arid and drought-prone
landscape where unregulated kangaroo numbers increase when water is
plentiful and diminish in times of drought. Extensive annual surveys
occur in South Australia, New South Wales and Queensland to estimate
kangaroo populations in order to set harvest quotas for the subsequent
calendar year. Those surveys using fixed-wing aircraft seem to reliably
index kangaroo populations in open and arid landscapes but to
significantly underestimate populations in woodlands, such as the mulga
woodlands of southern Queensland. Aerial surveys conducted from
helicopters seem to more reliably indicate kangaroo populations in the
woodland habitats. The kangaroo populations in vast and thinly
inhabited Western Australia are estimated every third year from aerial
surveys and inferred in intermediate years from a variety of data.
Harvest quotas are usually established as a percentage of the
estimated kangaroo population after considering potential range
conditions as predicted from current rainfall data. Frequently, the
harvest quota has totaled about 15-20 percent of the estimated kangaroo
population and about 70 percent of the commercial harvest quota has
been annually harvested. Kangaroo shooters are licensed, and can only
kill kangaroos for commercial purposes on private properties after
shooters have obtained permission from landowners. Commercial shooters
can only sell their kangaroo hides and meat to licensed dealers.
Products only from these commercially killed kangaroos can enter
international commerce. The Service believes that the Commonwealth and
State governments in Australia have a sincere interest in the
preservation of their native wildlife species and act in a professional
manner to manage these kangaroo species so they will occur in abundance
into perpetuity. The Service has no reason to believe that market
pressures will one day insidiously drive conservation activities in
Australia, and notes that the United States and the international
community could act to limit the trade in kangaroo products, should the
status of these three kangaroo species be significantly reduced in the
future.
The Service disagrees that threatened status should be retained for
these abundant and sufficiently managed species, at this time, to
ensure that a primary industry behaves or because one day the
threatened status may somehow be useful in the management of kangaroos.
The Service believes the lists of endangered and threatened species
should only include those animals and plants whose current status fit
the definitions of the Act. The Service has found that these three
species of kangaroos are not threatened species (i.e., species in
danger of extinction, within the foreseeable future, throughout all or
a significant portion of their range).
Several comments stated that the threatened status should be
retained for the three species of kangaroos because [[Page 12890]] of
the current quality of kangaroo management in Australia. These comments
(A-M) are treated together in this assessment because they are closely
related and actually pertain to a larger issue, which is ``How much
management is sufficient?'' The comments and Service responses are
listed below for comments A-M and this is followed by a discussion of
the ``sufficiency of management'' question.
A. Comment: Survey methods, especially in Queensland, are
unreliable. Response: Nichols et al. (1990) stated that ``Australian
biologists have been leaders in the development of aerial survey ethods
for estimating animal population size. Current surveys are very
extensive, properly standardized and well thought out. Some additional
work needs to be done on the estimation of visibility correction
factors, but such work is well underway. Current research indicates
that previously-used correction factors may be too small. Published
estimates of kangaroo population size thus are based on sound
methodology but are probably too small.'' Additional studies have been
conducted since 1990. Queensland is especially concerned about methods
to more reliably estimate animal numbers in woodland habitats.
Queensland has annually accomplished fixed-wing aerial surveys from
1984 to 1992, and helicopter surveys since 1991. Queensland plans to
further review the results of population surveys using fixed-wing
aircraft and helicopters to establish revised correction factors for
use in surveys of woodland habitats.
B. Comment: The Commonwealth and State governments have failed to
implement measures to make kangaroo plans adequate to protect
kangaroos. Response: It is unclear whether this comment pertains to the
apparent contradiction wherein different domestic statutes provide both
protective status to the species and allow a commercial harvest of the
species or to some perceived inadequacy in the kangaroo management
plans. Any conflict in domestic legislation is an Australian domestic
matter. The Service has found that the kangaroo management plans
developed by the States and agreed to by the Commonwealth are
sufficient to allow the species to be delisted.
C. Comment: The commercial slaughter of kangaroos constitutes a
very real threat to the survival of the species. Response: For the
reasons stated above, and later in this final rule, the Service has
found that the current commercial harvest of these managed kangaroo
species does not threaten the survival of these species in mainland
Australia at present nor is it likely to in the foreseeable future.
D. Comment: The kangaroo slaughter is unnecessary. Response: The
necessity and desirability of commercially harvesting kangaroos is an
Australian domestic matter. The Service's assessment is only that the
present managed harvest does not cause the Service to conclude that the
kangaroo populations should be listed as threatened.
E. Comment: The development of a meat market will increase demands
on kangaroo populations. Response: The decision to seek domestic and
international markets for kangaroo meat is an Australian domestic
issue. The Service believes that the present management is sufficient
and notes that extensive non-use of kangaroo protein accompanies a
skins-only harvest, and that a well run meat industry can more fully
and more efficiently use the current harvest.
F. Comment: The adoption of a sustained use management principle
for a protected species was accomplished without a public debate.
Response: The Service considers this to be an Australian domestic
matter and not a factor in making a listing decision under the Act.
G. Comment: The ``threatened'' listing was valuable because it
allowed the Service to act as an international watchdog on the kangaroo
industry. Response: The Service promotes the international conservation
of species and the international enhancement of biodiversity. The
Service is obligated to properly classify these species based on the
criteria stipulated in the Act.
H. Comment: Kangaroos routinely carry such a high parasite load
that they are unfit for human consumption. Response: It is the
responsibility of the Commonwealth government to assure the citizens of
Australia and the world, if such exports are allowed, about the quality
of any kangaroo meat product. The Service notes this is clearly not an
issue to consider when making an evaluation under the Act.
I. Comment: Tags placed on carcasses and skins are not species
specific. Response: The Service agrees that species specific kangaroo
tags would likely allow the States to have a better control over the
kangaroo harvest and over the marketing of kangaroo products. The
Service notes that the kangaroo harvest is sufficiently monitored in
other ways such as the assessment of shooter's records, dealer's
records, sex-age composition of the kill and descriptors of other
biological attributes. These records help ensure that the kangaroo
harvest is adequately managed.
J. Comment: Customs officers do not inspect all consignments of
kangaroo products prior to their export. Response: The kangaroo harvest
and exports are thoroughly reported and State and Federal enforcement
personnel have authority for search and seizures that the Service
believes will adequately control any significant illegal activities.
K. Comment: Harvest quotas do not include animals killed for the
domestic market or for nuisance purposes. Response: The Service agrees
that it would be beneficial to management if all kangaroos killed were
tagged and reported. This effort would benefit the estimate of total
harvest and would help curtail any movement of untagged animals into
commerce. The Service notes that harvest quotas are based on estimates
of the living population so that the establishment of a harvest quota
is a function of all sources of mortality that have impacted kangaroo
populations up to the time of quota determination. The Service further
notes that kangaroos killed for the domestic market are part of the
kill regulated by the harvest quotas but that kangaroos killed for pest
control are outside the harvest quota. The kill for pest control,
however, is limited. For example, the number of kangaroos killed for
damage mitigation purposes is believed to be less than 1 percent of the
population.
L. Comment: There is inadequate enforcement of animal welfare
requirements. Response: The Service agrees that any wildlife harvest
should be conducted in as humane a manner as is possible, but this is
not a criterion to be considered in making listing determinations under
the Act.
M. Comment: The State and Commonwealth governments have inadequate
resources for kangaroo management. Response: The Service finds that
resources available to conservation agencies in Australia are
sufficient so these three species of kangaroos are adequately protected
under present management.
A decision to list or delist species under the Act often requires a
decision about the ``sufficiency of management.'' No government or
agency provides perfect management but many governments and agencies
provide sufficient management so individual wildlife species can be
used in a sustainable manner. A reasonable standard for the Service to
use to determine sufficiency of management in any country is to compare
the management of the foreign species with the management of a
comparable species within the United States. The [[Page 12891]] whitetailed
deer in the United States is, in some ways, comparable to the
kangaroo in Australia. The white-tailed deer analogy is utilized herein
to provide a measure of scale. Scale is important for understanding the
size of ranges, the size of populations, the size of the harvest, and
the magnitude of management and law enforcement problems. It is fully
understood that harvest mechanisms differ between deer (sport-hunting)
and kangaroos (commercial harvest). That significant difference,
however, is not directly relevant to the present discussion.
The white-tailed deer may be about as numerous in the United States
as are the three kangaroos in Australia, and the white-tailed deer is
sufficiently managed at about the same intensity as are the kangaroos.
State and the Commonwealth governments in Australia accomplish a
variety of aerial and ground censuses and computer simulations to
estimate kangaroo populations, and these estimates become the basis for
the establishment of harvest quotas. State governments in the United
States use a variety of ground surveys and computer simulation models
to estimate white-tailed deer populations, and these estimates become
the basis for establishing desired levels of harvest. Some level of
public comment is sought in establishing harvest levels in both
countries. Some level of appraisal of habitat carrying capacity
frequently occurs for both deer and the kangaroo species. The actual
harvests of kangaroos in Australia and deer in the United States are
regulated by complex licensing systems. Landholders seek harvest
permits from State governments in Australia and professional hunters
seek licenses from those State governments and hunt permission from
individual landholders in order to legally kill kangaroos. The
professional hunter then sells kangaroo hides and/or carcasses to
licensed dealers. State governments in the United States establish
hunting seasons and bag limits and sell licenses to individual hunters
who must seek permission to hunt on private lands but who may also hunt
on certain public lands. Deer hunters vary considerably in their
hunting skills and deer products are for personal rather than
commercial use. Some level of illegal kill occurs in each country
because there are insufficient resources to police all levels of the
kangaroo industry and all deer hunting events.
One major difference between deer and kangaroo management is that
kangaroos in arid habitats seem more likely to experience large
population fluctuations. A second difference between deer and kangaroo
management is that in the United States 12 million licensed hunters
annually kill 3 million deer for personal consumption, whereas in
Australia 3 million kangaroos may be killed by about 1700 licensed
professional hunters who each kill an average of 1800 kangaroos for
commercial purposes. Neither species is threatened by its respective
management regime, as both deer and kangaroos are managed in a way that
is adequate to maintain harvestable populations over time.
The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) provided
three comments that are answered individually, below. The first comment
from CIEL stated that the proposal to delist the three species is a
political action and is not a justified biological decision. CIEL
maintained that Australia had put political pressure on the Bush
administration, and that this delisting action was the last act of the
Service during that Administration. CIEL also held that a brief 60-day
comment period underscores the attempt to sneak a final rule past a new
Administration.
The Service response is that the proposal to delist these species,
published in the Federal Register on January 21, 1993, evolved from a
request in a December 20, 1989, petition filed by Greenpeace USA, ``to
reinstate the ban on commercial importation of kangaroos and kangaroo
products''. That petition generated a review that was subsequently
cited in a petition to delist the species filed on November 6, 1990, by
the Wildlife Legislative Fund of America. The Service notes
correspondence from the Center for International Environmental Law,
dated April 9, 1992, requesting that the Service make a final decision
on both petitions by the end of the summer of 1992. Consequently, the
Service made every effort to arrive at a decision regarding the two
petitions and to publish the required proposal in as timely a manner as
possible. A Service biologist returned from a fact-finding trip to
Australia on August 1, 1992, and prepared the proposed rule by midNovember.
The intervening 2-month period from mid-November until
publication in mid-January reflects normal Service review time and
delays associated with the holiday season. The 60-day comment period on
the proposed rule is not at all unusual. It is the same comment period
specified in some other recent proposed rules involving foreign species
such as the Queen Alexandra's Birdwing Butterfly in the March 1, 1989,
Federal Register (54 FR 8574) and the Nile Crocodile in the August 3,
1992, Federal Register (57 FR 34095).
The second comment from CIEL declared that the proposal to delist
the three species of kangaroos continues a pattern seen over the past
few years during which time the Service has failed to add protection
to, or has reduced protection for, several species of commercial
interest.
The Service response is that it has not abrogated its
responsibilities to world conservation and arbitrarily reduced
protection to species because of their commercial value. The Service
supports the sustainable use of wildlife if that use can be shown not
to threaten the survival of the species. The Service, since 1989, has
added foreign species to the list of endangered species under the
United States Endangered Species Act (e.g., the chimpanzee, several
snub-nosed monkeys, and a variety of birds, including psittacines, and
turtles). The Service periodically reevaluates the status of species as
new information becomes available and occasionally transfers species
between lists or removes species from the lists of endangered and
threatened species when justified. The Service supported the listing of
the African elephant and six species of fruit bats to Appendix I at the
Seventh Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
(CITES) in 1989 and successfully proposed the addition of the Goffin's
cockatoo and the bog turtle to Appendix I at the Eighth Meeting of the
CITES Conference of the Parties in 1992. The Service also successfully
proposed five other additions to Appendix II at the 1992 meeting and
offered proposals to amend Appendices, in accordance with the 10-year
review process of CITES. Some of those proposals required the transfer
of species between Appendices. The Service sought to suspend commercial
trade in certain wild bird species of concern that are listed in
Appendix II of CITES at the 1992 CITES Convention and supported the
passage of domestic legislation in 1992 (The Wild Bird Conservation Act
of 1992) to ensure that U.S. bird imports do not jeopardize wild bird
populations.
The third comment from CIEL states that the Service must retain the
kangaroos on the list of threatened species and reinstate the import
ban because the long and continuing drought constitutes an important
natural factor affecting the existence of these species of kangaroos.
The Service notes that enclosures submitted by CIEL on March 22,
1993, clearly indicate extensive areas in New [[Page 12892]] South
Wales (NSW) and Queensland that retain a drought-declared designation
as of March 1, 1993. These enclosures are presented as evidence that
drought continues to devastate Australia and kangaroo populations. A
February 5, 1993, letter from John Eveleigh, Assistant Regional
Manager, Western Region, New South Wales, to the Director, Australian
National Parks and Wildlife Service (ANPWS), clearly indicates that
economic factors as well as rainfall totals determine the declaration
of drought status by the Department of Agriculture.
An El Nino-related drought occurred in parts of Australia during
1991-2 and affected some populations of the three kangaroo species.
Rainfall deficiencies from March through October 1991 occurred
throughout nearly all of Queensland, in northcentral and northeastern
New South Wales, some portions of the Northern Territory and in extreme
northeastern Western Australia. Rains during November 1991 through
January 1992 essentially reduced the rainfall-deficient area to the
eastern two-thirds of Queensland, the northern portion of the Northern
Territory and northern Western Australia. Additional rains during
February 1992 further reduced the rainfall-deficient areas to
southcentral Queensland and the northeastern coastal areas of
Queensland, the northern portion of the Northern Territory and northern
Western Australia. The rainfall-deficient area, by May 1992, was
further reduced to southcentral Queensland, northcentral New South
Wales, and the central and northern coasts of Queensland. The rainfalldeficient
area for the 17-month period from March 1, 1991 to July 31,
1992, occurred in southcentral Queensland and extreme northcentral New
South Wales. Much of this southcentral Queensland and northcentral New
South Wales area experienced severe rainfall deficiencies and two small
localized portions of this area recorded record rainfall deficiencies
during this 17-month period. These portions of Queensland and New South
Wales constitute important kangaroo habitat.
The 1991-1992 drought event ended in these kangaroo habitats
because rainfall totals listed as highest on record were recorded
throughout the southern portion of South Australia, southwestern New
South Wales and much of Victoria from November 1, 1992 to January 31,
1993. Rainfall totals recorded as very much above average were recorded
for much of the remainder of South Australia and western and central
New South Wales during this same three month period. At least average
rainfall fell over most of Queensland, including the most important
kangaroo habitats, in the November 1, 1992 to January 31, 1993 period.
Drought areas in New South Wales received reasonable rains in the first
half of 1993 and even better rains in the second half of the year.
Drought declarations in Queensland, by early 1994, occurred in about 46
percent of the State's land area. No rangelands are drought declared in
Western Australia in early 1994, and South Australia has experienced
good rainfall years from 1989-1993 in most parts of the State. The
1991-2 drought, at one time or another, affected northern New South
Wales, most of Queensland, eastern and northern portions of the
Northern Territory and northern Western Australia. The 1991-2 drought
was not experienced in the other 60 percent of the continent.
About 70 percent of Australia is classified as arid or semi-arid
and is characterized by high variability in rainfall. Drought
periodically occurs to these landscapes, and its severity and duration
can clearly affect pasture quality and kangaroo well-being and numbers.
At least 47 major drought events have been recorded somewhere on the
continent during the 100 year period from 1888 to 1988 (data provided
by ANPWS and excerpted from ``Water 2000: Consultants Report No 13--
Water Resources Aspects of Drought in Australia'' Dept. Resources and
Energy (1983) and Bureau of Meteorology). Areas of deficient rainfall
are to be expected on the Australian continent. Wildlife management
specialists accept drought as a ``normal'' event and manage their
resources accordingly by reducing kill during years when kangaroo
populations are diminished and increasing harvest when populations are
increased (see below). The 1991-1992 drought impacted kangaroos,
especially in northern New South Wales and southern Queensland, but did
not and does not threaten the continental population of these three
species.
Drought areas were declared in most of New South Wales and some
southern and eastern areas of Queensland in Australia's winter of 1994.
The effect of this drought on kangaroo populations is not yet known,
but as noted earlier, kangaroo populations have recovered from the
previous severe drought of 1982-83 (longer in some areas). Furthermore,
while 1995 kangaroo harvest quotas are not yet known, the Service has
reviewed and discussed the State and Commonwealth management program
and believes that appropriate quotas will be established to maintain
kangaroo populations.
An additional comment expressed by several persons concerned the
capability and willingness of wildlife managers to reduce the kangaroo
kill when populations are diminished. They claimed that Australia's
management plans do not reduce the kill quotas during droughts and the
present drought has sharply reduced kangaroo populations and clearly
placed the species in jeopardy.
The Service responds with a summary description of the management
actions that one state, New South Wales (NSW), has undertaken to manage
kangaroos during drought declared conditions in the 1980s and 1990s.
NSW has about a third of the continent's population of red and gray
kangaroos. This summary is excerpted from a letter from John Eveleigh,
Assistant Regional Manager, Western Region, New South Wales National
Parks and Wildlife Service, to the Director, Australian National Parks
and Wildlife Service, dated February 5, 1993. A significant area of NSW
was declared to be within a drought declared zone in 1982. A total
harvest quota of 843,000 animals had previously been established for
1982, which was 12 percent of the 1981 estimated NSW population of 7
million kangaroos. A fixed quota was allocated for the first six months
of 1982 and a notional quota was allocated for the second half of the
year to be modified if climatic conditions dictated. The 1982 midwinter
(June-August) population survey estimated a total NSW kangaroo
population of about 9.4 million animals with the population of red
kangaroos still increasing but that of gray kangaroos being diminished
by about 29 percent.
Because of the drought conditions the harvest quota for calendar
year 1983 was maintained at 843,000, about 9 percent of the 1982
estimated population. Drought conditions prevailed throughout far
western and eastern portions of NSW during 1983, but relieving rains
fell throughout the central portion of the state. Quotas were allocated
as in 1982. The mid-winter 1983 population estimate indicated a total
NSW kangaroo population of 5.5 million, with some decline in red
kangaroos and a significant decline in the number of gray kangaroos. A
total harvest quota of 500,000 was established for 1984, which
represented about 9 percent of the total 1983 population. The harvest
quota for red kangaroos was set at 12 percent, but no culling was
authorized in selected one-degree blocks within management zones.
Culling of gray kangaroos was [[Page 12893]] allowed in three
management zones and was disallowed in seven other zones. In addition,
properties of applicants for non-commercial culling of red or gray
kangaroos within the closed areas were subject to physical inspection
by NSW Rangers prior to license grant considerations.
Drought conditions continued to widen across NSW in 1984. The midwinter
1984 population estimate indicated a total NSW kangaroo
population of about 2.8 million with an increasing red kangaroo
population, a static gray kangaroo population in the eastern management
zones, and a decline in both red and gray populations in western
management zones. A harvest quota of 300,000 (11 percent of the 1984
population) was established for 1985, but no harvest was allowed in
areas containing estimated population densities of one or fewer red or
gray kangaroos per sq km. Drought conditions still extended across NSW
in early 1985, except for the extreme southwestern portion of the
state. Drought-breaking rains fell in late 1985, and early 1986 and the
state was declared drought-free in 1986. The mid-winter 1985 population
estimate indicated a total kangaroo population of about 4.15 million
with a recovery of both red and gray kangaroo populations. Some pockets
with low populations remained, and no harvest was allowed during 1986
in areas with a kangaroo density less than or equal to one per sq km. A
1986 harvest quota of 577,000 was established (14 percent of the
population) but 15 percent of the quota was withheld and not allocated.
Drought conditions did not occur in NSW from 1987-1991, and
populations of both red and gray kangaroos and harvest quotas
progressively increased each year. The total harvest also usually
increased each year. The mid-winter 1990 population estimate indicated
a total kangaroo population in NSW of 8.55 million with increases in
both red and gray kangaroos. A 1991 harvest quota of 1.5 million was
established which was 18 percent of the population estimate. Thirteen
percent of the quota was held back and not allocated. Drought
conditions began to extend southward from Queensland into the northern
management zones of NSW. The mid-winter 1991 population estimate
indicated a total kangaroo population in NSW of 9.1 million. A harvest
quota of 2.1 million was established which was about 23 percent of the
1991 population estimate. Fifteen percent of the harvest quota was held
back and not allocated. By January 1992, the 1991-2 drought had
extended further into NSW and was declared to cover the northern and
eastern portions of the state. Kangaroos reportedly moved to the south
as the drought progressed and some quota allocations were transferred
from northern management zones to more southern zones. The notional
quotas for July-December 1992 were reviewed in July 1992. Preliminary
1992 survey figures indicated that central and southern populations
were barely impacted by the drought and kangaroo populations were
increasing in the most southern management zones.
By December 1992 the drought declarations indicated that the
drought had retreated to the most northern management zones of NSW. The
mid-winter 1992 population estimate indicated a total NSW kangaroo
population of 8.04 million. A harvest quota of 1.66 million was
established which was about 21 percent of the 1992 population estimate.
The 1992 survey indicated declines of the red kangaroo throughout
the northern management zones, stability in the central management
zones and increases in the southern management zones. Populations of
the gray kangaroo were somewhat diminished in some management zones.
Harvest quotas for 1993 were diminished for populations in those
management zones where kangaroo populations were found to be reduced.
Fourteen percent of the potential harvest quota was held back and not
allocated.
The notional quota for the second half of 1993 was reviewed when
preliminary mid-winter 1993 population estimates were available.
February 1993 reports indicated that drought-breaking rains were
widespread in NSW and that drought conditions were retracting to the
north.
This synopsis indicates how New South Wales strives to manage
kangaroos on ranges periodically impacted by droughts. It is not
possible to attain and maintain a specific kangaroo population on such
landscapes, and such populations are expected to cycle as periodic
droughts overtake portions of the continent. Management strives to
follow the cycle. This requires frequent monitoring of kangaroo
populations and the setting of low harvest quotas when populations are
low but allows for the setting of higher quotas when kangaroo
populations are expanding. This is exhibited by the NSW data where a
harvest quota of 300,000 was established for 1985 when the mid-winter
1984 NSW population was estimated at 2.7 million and a harvest quota of
2.07 million was established for 1992 when the 1991 mid-winter NSW
kangaroo population was estimated at 9.11 million.
Harvest quotas represent the maximum number of kangaroos that can
enter domestic or international commerce in a given year after having
been taken in accordance with state-approved plans. About 70 percent of
the quota has been harvested during recent calendar years. The maximum
allowable kill is regulated as is the relative location of that kill.
New South Wales has closed management zones to harvest, has closed
degree blocks within management zones to harvest, has reallocated
harvest quotas between management zones as a result of new population
survey information, routinely issues the second half of the harvest
quota in the second half of the calendar year, and routinely holds back
some percentage of the commercial quota as a safety precaution. In
addition, the legal harvesting of kangaroos is a licensed operation and
all aspects of licensing can be suspended at any time during the
calendar year if such actions are necessary. Other harvesting States
also have regulatory measures that allow the reduction of take if
environmental or other factors adversely impact kangaroo populations.
A comment supporting the Service's proposed rule was provided by
The Wildlife Legislative Fund of America (WLFA) which had filed the
November 6, 1990, petition to delist the three kangaroo species. WLFA
stated it is a strong supporter of the Endangered Species Act when it
is applied to species that truly require protection from overexploitation
or critical habitat destruction. WLFA also stated that
listing species like these three species overburdens the system and
detracts from the ultimate goal of protecting truly endangered species.
WLFA stated that recovered species should be delisted as quickly as
possible to encourage recovery efforts for other listed species and to
focus the limited efforts of the Service on species and populations in
greater need of scientific and public attention. WLFA stated that
keeping these species on the threatened list could only be interpreted
as bureaucratic red tape designed to stifle the legitimate trade in a
closely controlled and monitored renewable resource. WLFA further
stated that delisting does not foreclose continued efforts by the
Service to selectively monitor the kangaroo management programs of
Australia. The Service concurs.
The Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service, now known as
the Australian Nature Conservation Agency (ANCA), also submitted
comments [[Page 12894]] about the extent and duration of the 1991-2
drought, the sensitivity of the kangaroo management plans of New South
Wales to drought and environmental stress during the 1980s and 1990s,
and the 1992 population estimates and the kangaroo harvest quotas
determined for 1993.
The notice containing the proposed rule, published on January 21,
1993 (58 FR 5341), described a series of monitoring reports to be
submitted annually from the Commonwealth to the Service. The Service,
on January 27, 1994, received a report of the 1993 population surveys.
The Service, because the additional information was received before the
final rule was finalized, announced the new information and extended
the comment period in a Federal Register notice on February 18, 1994
(59 FR 8163).
After the close of the 1993 comment period on the proposed rule,
additional letters were received before the comment period was
reopened. These were tallied with those received when the comment
period was reopened in 1994, and all of these comments were considered
in the preparation of this rule. Comments received during this combined
period included 883 letters and 14 ``petitions'' containing an
additional 310 signatures. Most of these letters received during the
interim period continued to raise concerns about the inhumane aspects
of the harvest, the effects of drought, the adequacy of management
plans, high harvest quotas, and high unregulated or illegal killings.
The Service's responses to these issues were addressed above in the
responses to earlier comments. One commenter supported the delisting
because of its perception that this would enable the species to be used
in ranching. This is not relevant to our decision.
Several new comments were received in response to the February 18,
1994, Federal Register notice. CIEL submitted several comments that
seem based on inadequate or incomplete information. In addressing
those, the Service notes (1) that the information submitted by ANCA was
in voluntary compliance with monitoring provisions listed in the
January 21, 1993, Federal Register (58 FR 5341); (2) that the 1993
surveys were accomplished using standardized techniques that have been
developed and improved upon for over a decade; (3) that the submitted
numerical estimates represent additional data points in a long-term
description of kangaroo populations in the commercial utilization areas
of four different states; (4) that a substantial assessment of the
status of kangaroos and kangaroo management is made in this final rule;
(5) that the Service has actively sought input into the kangaroo issue
by sending Service biologists to Australia in 1980, 1990 and 1992; (6)
that the destructive fires of 1993 were largely outside the commercial
utilization areas of New South Wales and Queensland; and (7) that the
Service has a responsibility to delist species that are not presently
threatened or endangered. The Service has considered and used the best
available scientific and commercial information available in this
decision and believes that no further data is necessary for it to make
this delisting decision. The Service makes this decision based on all
of the factors required by the Act as discussed specifically in this
rule. In addition, the comment periods provided for consideration of
this proposal met the requirements imposed by law; and this delisting
will not breach the ESA duty to conserve the species as they are no
longer threatened under the Act.
Other comments by CIEL pertaining to the alleged political nature
of the listing decision, the perceived failure of the Service to
exercise its responsibilities to provide protection to commercially
utilized species, and the importance of drought as an environmental
hazard threatening kangaroo populations are addressed above in this
final rule.
The Kangaroo Protection Cooperative, Ltd., and the Australian
Wildlife Protection Council believed the selection of large males in
the commercial harvest would threaten the future fitness of the
species. It is likely that this selective harvest will shorten the age
structure in populations of wild kangaroos, but it is not evident
whether it will adversely impact the gene pool of the species. The
Species Survival Commission of the World Conservation Union (IUCN/SSC)
Australasian Marsupial and Monotreme Specialist Group lists populations
of the three species as stable with no genetic concerns (Kennedy 1992).
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), the Australian and
New Zealand Federation of Animal Societies, Dr. John Auty, representing
the Australian Wildlife Protection Council, and CIEL each expressed
concern about the estimates of major reductions in the kangaroo
populations of Western Australia, from 1990-1993, and the explanation
for that decline offered by ANCA. Dr. Gerry Maynes, of the ANCA, in a
March 4, 1994, letter to Mr. Chris Wold of CIEL, offered the following
explanation for the Western Australian data:
``The results for 1990 may be distorted by population estimates for
the two blocks 012 and 013, which together contributed 50to the
overall estimate (this contrasts with contribution of 20and 22 10n
1984 and 1987, respectively). The estimated density in the 012 block
(45 per sq km) is far higher than in any previous year for either
kangaroo species. This result may be an artifact of change placement in
the transect line; in 1990 the flight line coincided exactly with the
distinct vegetation ecotone of mallee and open plain (ideal habitat for
kangaroos), but in previous years this may not have been so
(navigational variation of a few kilometers is common, even with
satellite navigation gear, and this could lead to such variation
between years). Placement of only one line in each of these blocks in
the 1990 and previous surveys would facilitate such possible random
variation. We therefore suggest caution when interpreting the recent
acceleration in population numbers, and recommend that in future
surveys two lines be allocated to these blocks. Thus, while the long
term increase is likely to be real, the estimated increase of 99 0.000000rom
1987 to 1990 may be an overestimate of the increase.''
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service believes the kangaroo
populations in Western Australia should be more intensively monitored
to enhance the quality of their management.
Several commenters suggested that the recent devastating fires in
New South Wales and Queensland represented environmental disasters that
threatened these species. Dr. Gerry Maynes of ANCA in a March 7, 1994,
letter to Dr. C. Dane, indicated that:
``The area in which fires occurred was from the Queensland border
to just north of the Victorian border. These fires had no effect on
population numbers of kangaroos in the commercial harvest zone of New
South Wales * * * Although the fires were widespread throughout the
non-commercial zone they have had variable impacts on wildlife
including kangaroos due to the variable areas involved and intensities
of the fires. The New South Wales National Parks and Wildlife Service
has initiated follow-up research in parks which were burnt to determine
the effects of the fires and the recovery of wildlife populations.
While fires have had localized impacts on wildlife populations,
wildfires are only a significant threat to populations of wildlife
which are restricted in distribution * * * or do not possess
adaptations to avoid the immediate impacts of the fire or to recover
quickly after the fire.''
The HSUS indicated that the kangaroo species should be listed on
CITES before [[Page 12895]] being removed from the lists of endangered
and threatened species. This is not a statutory pre-condition to
delisting, and is not relevant in light of the Service's finding that
Australian regulatory mechanisms are adequate. Neither the HSUS nor any
other group or individual petitioned the Service to list these
kangaroos on the CITES Appendices when the Service published a Federal
Register notice on July 15, 1993 (58 FR 38112) inviting CITES
proposals. In addition, neither the HSUS nor any other group or
individual commented on the absence of these kangaroos from the
proposed list of species to be considered by the Service for possible
CITES action, (59 FR 3832, January 27, 1994).
Two comments dealing with the validity of the population estimates
were received after the close of the February 18, 1994, comment period
and are herein addressed. The first comment alleged that the Caughley
correction factors overestimated the number of red kangaroos and the
second comment alleged that the Caughley correction factors
overestimated the number of gray kangaroos during extended drought
conditions. The Service notes that a senior FWS biometrician traveled
to Australia in 1990 and evaluated the procedures currently used to
estimate kangaroo populations. His assessment, summarized in item A
(above), indicates that current surveys are very extensive, properly
standardized, well thought out, and that additional work to improve
visibility correction factors is ongoing. Results from surveys, listed
in Tables 1-4, indicate trends that are interpretable using data that
have driven successful kangaroo management programs for over a decade.
Further development of sampling procedures, including the additional
refining of visibility correction factors, should further improve
census data.
Other comments submitted in response to the February 18, 1994,
Federal Register notice are also addressed above in this final rule.
These comments concern the impact that a meat market might have on the
commercial utilization of kangaroos, the belief that staff cuts to the
U.S. Customs Service might lead to nefarious activities in commerce,
the belief that cruelty is rampant in the harvest of kangaroos, the
belief that population data and management activities and trade
controls are inadequate in kangaroo management, the argument that
harvest quotas should consider all forms of mortality, and the
perception that droughts and periodic floods represent substantial
hazards to kangaroo populations.
Summary of Factors Affecting the Species
Section 4(a)(1) of the Act and regulations implementing the listing
provisions of the Act (50 CFR part 424) set forth the procedures for
adding species to or deleting species from the List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife. A species shall be listed or reclassified on the
basis of the best scientific or commercial data available after
conducting a review of the species' status with regard to the five
following evaluation factors: (A) The present or threatened
destruction, modification or curtailment of its habitat or range; (B)
overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; and, (E) other natural or manmade
factors affecting its continued existence.
This final rule is based on an assessment of the five listing
criteria within the Act. The assessment considered the present
biological status of the three kangaroo species in mainland Australia.
The five factors, as they apply to eastern gray kangaroo (Macropus
giganteus), western gray kangaroo (Macropus fuliginosus), and red
kangaroo (Macropus rufus) are as follows:
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of Its Habitat or Range
Extensive kangaroo habitats have been lost or seriously degraded
where urbanization and several forms of intensive agriculture have
occurred. The eastern gray kangaroo has lost important habitats to
development and agriculture in eastern Queensland, New South Wales
(NSWNPWS 1991a) and throughout Victoria. The species, however, is
considered abundant and widespread over large areas of eastern
Australia where annual rainfall exceeds 250 mm but has little seasonal
trend or where summer rains exceed winter rains (ANPWS 1991b). That
publication summarizes habitats for the eastern gray kangaroo as
including semi-arid mallee scrub, woodland, and forest. The densities
of eastern gray kangaroos are frequently low in the more arid portion
of their potential range, where they may be confined to narrow belts of
woodland bordering watercourses, and are sometimes high elsewhere. The
1991 density of gray kangaroos, for example, was estimated at about 1
per sq km in arid extreme northwestern New South Wales and averaged
more than 10 per sq km on about 125,000 sq km of habitat in mesic
northcentral New South Wales (NSWNPWS 1991b). Caughley, et al. (1987)
listed densities for eastern gray kangaroos that were greater than 20
kangaroos per sq km on some transects in extreme southcentral
Queensland as determined from 1980-1982 aerial surveys. The western
border of the range of the species has apparently moved westward since
European settlement because of the establishment of numerous semipermanent
watering points for stock. Pastoral development is considered
to have generally favored the eastern gray kangaroo (NSWNPWS 1991a).
The action plan for the conservation of Australasian Marsupials and
Monotremes (Kennedy 1992) listed an increased geographic range since
European settlement for eastern gray kangaroos.
The red kangaroo is considered abundant over much of inland
Australia in areas receiving less than 500 mm annual rainfall (ANPWS
1991). The species occurs in mulga and mallee scrub, shrubland,
woodland, grassland, and desert. The species seems to prefer open
plains with scattered trees or shrubs. The 1991 density of red
kangaroos was estimated at less than 3 per sq km in central NSW but at
more than 14 per sq km on about 125,000 sq km of habitat in arid
extreme northwestern NSW (NSWNPWS 1991a). Caughley, et al. (1987)
listed densities greater than 20 per sq km for the red kangaroo on some
transects determined from 1980-1982 aerial surveys. Red kangaroos occur
in almost a continuous distribution but at varying densities over all
the pastoral areas and a large portion of the interior of South
Australia. The red kangaroo favors the open but better watered country
inside the 2000 km dingo-proof fence in lands used primarily for sheep
grazing. Red kangaroo densities are much lower outside the fence
(SANPWS 1991). The habitat changes associated with sheep grazing such
as closely spaced stock water, the production of shrubland with
ephemeral grasses, and the exclusion of the dingo are considered
favorable for the red kangaroo. The action plan for the conservation of
Australasian Marsupials and Monotremes (Kennedy 1992) listed an
increased geographic range since European settlement for the red
kangaroo.
The western gray kangaroo occurs across the south of the continent
from Western Australia to extreme southcentral Queensland but generally
not east of the great divide. This distribution generally corresponds
to the area where winter rainfall predominates. Caughley, et al. (1987)
listed densities greater than 10 per sq km for transects in a
relatively small [[Page 12896]] area of southwestern New South Wales as
determined from 1980-1982 aerial surveys. The increase of watering
points to aid the pastoral industry has been beneficial to the western
gray kangaroo but intensive agriculture has adversely impacted some
habitats. Arnold (1990), for example, indicated that the sizes of some
populations of western gray kangaroos have declined significantly where
habitat fragmentation to favor intensive agriculture has occurred in
southwestern Western Australia. Arnold (1990) further believes losses
to kangaroo populations will continue in these areas as the remnant
native vegetation continues to be degraded. The western gray kangaroo
occurs widely through the southern agricultural area of South Australia
and extends into the central pastoral areas. This macropod is
considered to be basically a dweller of scrublands and woodlands that
grazes at the edges of adjacent grasslands. That portion of the gray
kangaroo's range in the pastoral zone of South Australia has been
favored by management actions beneficial to sheep production. A portion
of the gray kangaroo's range in the southern agricultural zone has been
degraded or destroyed by extensive habitat destruction caused by the
clearing of native vegetation for agricultural and industrial purposes
and for urban and suburban developments (SANPWS 1991). The action plan
for the conservation of Australasian Marsupials and Monotremes (Kennedy
1992) listed no change to a decline of less than 10 percent in the
geographic range of the western kangaroo since European settlement.
The three species of kangaroos occur over a vast region of
Australia. Census lines representative of about 2.25 million sq km of
habitat are routinely surveyed by air to estimate kangaroo numbers.
Kangaroos are abundant in major portions of this habitat. As indicated
below, an extensive series of parks and reserves totaling over 400,000
sq km has been and is being established that will contribute directly
to the conservation of macropods throughout their natural range.
Current kangaroo populations could exceed those present before European
man arrived on the continent. This seems possible because kangaroos
have a reproductive capability efficiently attuned to the boom-or-bust
nature of the usual precipitation-range forage cycle on arid lands and
because kangaroos have been an impressive and inadvertent beneficiary
of the sheep management system that included the clearing of woodlands,
production of watering points, and the control of predators. Kangaroos
that inhabit vast areas of Australia in impressive numbers cannot be
considered threatened because of habitat and range conditions even
though much native range is severely degraded. Kangaroos do well when
habitats are in adequate condition due to sufficient rainfall and more
poorly when droughts occur. This cyclic or fluctuating pattern in
response to the vegetative condition of rangelands is a normal
periodicity in the arid land system and does not in itself comprise a
threat to the species.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
The intent of kangaroo conservation in Australia is to maintain
viable populations of the three species of kangaroos over their
existing range and minimize any deleterious effects that high densities
of these species could have on agricultural and pastoral products.
Management is an art in the arid-zone ecosystems that comprise much of
interior Australia where lands normally cycle in productivity in
response to a variable rainfall. Viable kangaroo populations need to be
maintained when range productivity and carrying capacities are low, but
kangaroos can represent an additional range resource when populations
and range productivities are increased. The ANCA and the Parks and
Wildlife Services of the individual states regularly monitor population
trends of red and gray kangaroos. The species are protected on National
Parks and Reserves that total about 5 percent of the continental land
area (over 400,000 sq km). Some of these lands represent important
kangaroo habitats. The species can be legally killed, but not
commercially utilized, by permitted actions in many urban, suburban,
and agricultural areas for damage mitigation reasons. A major
commercial harvest of kangaroos occurs in large designated areas of
Queensland, New South Wales, South Australia, and Western Australia.
The magnitude and characteristics of this commercial harvest are
regulated by the ANCA as a wildlife management strategy. The total
commercial harvest is conducted within the framework of a harvest quota
system. The commercial quota is the maximum number of kangaroos of a
designated species that may enter domestic or international commerce
during a specific year after having been taken in accordance with
approved State management plans.
The assessment of this factor did not evaluate whether the
commercial utilization of kangaroos violates their protected status as
provided by Australian legislation or the legitimacy of the commercial
kangaroo industry. Those are Australian domestic issues. The Service
assumed that kangaroo products are a legitimate product of the land if
kangaroos are managed as a sustainable resource, and if Australian
society approves of the harvest. The Service's evaluation in particular
focused on whether the commercial enterprise threatened the existence
of kangaroos, whether the Commonwealth and State governments adequately
manage the kangaroo resource, and how harvest management responds to
changes in kangaroo populations, especially during droughts.
Kangaroo population levels are estimated from large-scale aerial
and/or ground surveys. These population estimates reflect the effects
of all forms of mortality acting on kangaroos. Commercial harvest
quotas are determined from estimates of the living population and are
intended to regulate the harvest which is the principle human-caused
form of mortality. The commercial harvesting of kangaroos is directly
controlled through the licensing of shooters and their operations.
The population surveys are accomplished during winter (JuneAugust),
annually in South Australia, New South Wales, and Queensland
and triennially in Western Australia. The raw data from surveys
represent index values that can be compared to develop trends, or they
can be expanded by the use of suitable correction factors to provide
estimates of kangaroo populations. Correction factors strive to account
for differences in the behavior of kangaroo species regarding their
sightability and the ability to view kangaroos in different habitats.
Research is ongoing to further enhance the quality of surveys and
correction factors. In Western Australia, where aerial surveys are only
accomplished at 3-year intervals, population status in the intervening
years is assessed from monthly reports of the commercial harvest, the
intermittent aerial surveys and ground surveys and patrols by
appropriate staff (WADCLM 1991a and 1991b).
Harvest quotas are determined on the basis of population
information, estimates of habitat quality, and the perceived or
estimated requirements for damage mitigation. Conservation interests
are considered to drive the establishment of harvest quotas because
quotas are usually fixed as conservative proportions of the estimated
populations. Individual States could temporarily set quotas at high
rates if their stated management goal was to [[Page 12897]] reduce
statewide or localized kangaroo populations to more sustainable levels.
Tables 1-9 provide population estimates and data about the
commercial harvest of kangaroos in Western Australia, South Australia,
New South Wales, and Queensland. Population estimates, except for South
Australia, usually include the mean and the standard error, which is a
measure of the variance around the mean. Population estimates and data
about the commercial harvest of red and western gray kangaroos from the
Commercial utilization areas (CUAs) of Western Australia, from 1987-
1993, are listed in Tables 1 and 2. Population data within the CUAs are
only collected at 3-year intervals in Western Australia so status and
trend data are weaker than in the other three states. Red kangaroo
populations were apparently similar in 1987 and 1990 and significantly
reduced in 1993, and populations of western gray kangaroos seemed
increased in 1990 and significantly reduced in 1993. Australian
authorities believe the reduced estimates of kangaroo populations in
1993 could be sampling anomalies, but this will remain unknown until
additional population surveys have been conducted. Harvest quotas for
red and western gray kangaroos in 1994 are each about 15 percent of the
mean populations estimated in 1993. Because the commercial kill is
consistently less than the commercial quota, it is expected that the
1994 harvest will be less than 15 percent of the estimated 1993
populations in Western Australia.
Table 1.--Population Estimates and Data About the Commercial Harvest of Red Kangaroos From Western Australia
Population estimate Percent
(mean +/-SE) (total Commercial Commercial males in
survey area) quota kill kill
1987............................................ 2,335,900<plus-minus>17
7,500 200,000 150,462 58.4
1988............................................ NA 230,000 216,834 56.8
1989............................................ NA 290,000 186,042 58.0
1990............................................ 2,365,500<plus-minus>16
5,600 290,000 224,423 58.6
1991............................................ NA 290,000 186,749 55.2
1992............................................ NA 350,000 107,605 50.1
1993............................................ 1,362,700<plus-minus>90
,200 350,000 139,833 47.8
1994............................................ NA 220,000 NA NA
Table 2.--Population Estimates and Data About the Commercial Harvest of Western Gray Kangaroos From Western
Australia
Population estimate Percent
(mean +/-SE) (total Commercial Commercial males in
survey area) quota kill kill
1987............................................ 691,000<plus-minus>167,
500 45,000 40,092 55.1
1988............................................ NA 45,000 29,061 55.2
1989............................................ NA 45,000 28,355 53.0
1990............................................ 1,069,100<plus-minus>14
5,600 45,000 36,868 56.8
1991............................................ NA 45,000 38,043 58.4
1992............................................ NA 65,000 46,694 57.1
1993............................................ 433,500<plus-minus>170,
900 65,000 47,070 NA
1994............................................ NA 60,000 NA NA
Population estimates and data about the commercial harvest of red
and western gray kangaroos from the commercial utilization area of
South Australia, from 1987-1993, are listed in Table 3 and 4. Estimates
of red kangaroo populations may not differ significantly at least from
1988-1993, and populations of the western gray kangaroo may be greater
in 1992 and 1993 than in some of the earlier years. The 1993 commercial
harvest of red kangaroos totaled 15 percent and that of western gray
kangaroos totaled about 9 percent of the estimated 1993 populations,
and the 1994 harvest quota totaled 19 percent and 14 percent,
respectively, of the 1993 population estimates.
Table 3.--Population Estimates and Data for the Commercial Harvest of Red Kangaroos From South Australia
Percent
Population estimate Commercial Commercial males in
(mean +/- SE) quota kill kill
1987............................................ \1\963,000 180,000 100,507 \2\NA
1988............................................ 1,491,900 146,000 118,232 NA
1989............................................ 1,428,500 260,400 124,173 NA
1990............................................ 1,950,000 276,300 172,793 NA
1991............................................ 1,669,100 408,600 213,628 NA
1992............................................ 1,647,400 317,700 219,338 NA
1993............................................ 1,483,700 290,400 227,056 55
1994............................................ NA 286,500 NA NA
\1\Population estimates that ANCA has received from South Australia do not include standard errors.
\2\Information is unavailable about the sex ratios of kangaroos killed in South Australia, except for 1993.
[[Page 12898]]
Table 4.--Population Estimates and Data for the Commerical Harvest of Western Gray Kangaroos From South
Australia
Commercial Percent
Population estimate harvest Commercial males in
(mean +/- SE) quota kill kill
1987............................................ \1\208,000 30,900 14,849 \2\NA
1988............................................ 222,600 31,700 13,778 NA
1989............................................ 253,200 33,000 11,546 NA
1990............................................ 193,900 36,850 18,593 NA
1991............................................ 272,600 31,700 14,533 NA
1992............................................ 358,100 35,500 18,999 NA
1993............................................ 380,800 48,600 32,798 67
1994............................................ NA 55,600 NA NA
\1\Population estimates that ANCA has received from South Australia do not include standard errors.
\2\Information is unavailable about the sex ratio of kangaroos killed in South Australia, except for 1993.
Population estimates and data about the commercial harvest of red,
western gray, and eastern gray kangaroos from the commercial
utilization areas of New South Wales, from 1987-1993, are listed in
Tables 5 to 7. Populations of red kangaroos apparently increased to
1991 and have diminished since that time, possibly in response to
locally severe drought conditions. The commercial kill in 1993 was
about 13 percent of the 1993 population and the 1994 harvest quota is
about 18 percent of the 1993 population estimate. The pattern of
population change of western gray kangaroos also suggests a population
increase to 1991 and a decrease since that time. The 1993 commercial
kill was about 10 percent of the population estimated in 1993 and the
1994 commercial quota was set at about 21 percent of the 1993
population estimate. Populations of the eastern gray kangaroo on the
Western Plains also increased to 1991 and have apparently diminished
since that year. The 1993 commercial harvest totaled about 12 percent
of the 1993 population estimate. The 1994 harvest quota has been set at
27 percent of the 1993 population estimate.
Table 5.--Population Estimates and Data for the Commercial Harvest of Red Kangaroos From New South Wales
Commercial Percent
Population estimate harvest Commercial males in
(mean +/-SE) quota kill kill
1987........................................... 2,777,000<plus-minus>18
9,400 313,000 270,467 \1\NA
1988............................................ 3,440,000<plus-minus>21
7,000 354,000 218,086 NA
1989............................................ 4,101,000<plus-minus>32
3,200 487,000 297,029 NA
1990............................................ 4,499,000<plus-minus>25
4,200 626,000 377,155 NA
1991............................................ 4,755,000<plus-minus>28
9,500 706,000 495,986 NA
1992............................................ 3,384,900<plus-minus>29
9,300 956,000 412,189 NA
1993............................................ 2,759,800<plus-minus>18
1,700 598,800 359,820 NA
1994............................................ NA 483,850 NA NA
\1\NSW does not calculate percent males on a regular basis, as they have found that it varies greatly due to
shooter preference--averaging 70but varying from 50-90
Table 6.--Population Estimates and Data for the Commerical Harvest of Western Gray Kangaroos From New South
Wales
Commercial Percent
Population estimate harvest Commercial males in
(mean +/-SE) quota kill kill
1987............................................ 741,500<plus-minus>61,9
08 75,000 62,926 \1\NA
1988............................................ 616,000<plus-minus>48,5
46 105,000 72,786 NA
1989............................................ 940,000<plus-minus>78,9
52 95,000 67,253 NA
1990............................................ 1,296,000<plus-minus>93
,632 152,000 83,708 NA
1991............................................ 1,391,700<plus-minus>11
8,624 220,000 106,629 NA
1992............................................ 1,320,000<plus-minus>10
8,966 327,700 117,994 NA
1993............................................ 1,250,000<plus-minus>78
,423 307,800 129,378 NA
1994............................................ NA 268,050 NA NA
\1\NSW does not calculate percent males on a regular basis, as they have found that it varies greatly due to
shooter preference--averaging 70but varying from 50-90
Table 7.--Population Estimates and Data for the Commercial Harvest of Eastern Gray Kangaroos From New South
Wales
Commercial Percent
Population estimate harvest Commercial males in
(mean +/- SE) quota kill kill
1987............................................ 1,906,500<plus-minus>15
9,192 189,000 140,061 \1\NA
[[Page 12899]]
1988............................................ 1,442,000<plus-minus>11
3,654 271,000 130,335 NA
1989............................................ 2,007,000<plus-minus>16
8,548 222,000 136,073 NA
1990............................................ 2,755,000<plus-minus>19
8,968 394,000 170,766 NA
1991............................................ 2,957,000<plus-minus>25
2,076 584,000 253,791 NA
1992............................................ 2,683,000<plus-minus>22
1,434 790,300 264,447 NA
1993............................................ 2,440,000<plus-minus>15
3,077 757,000 284,344 NA
1994............................................ NA 657,200 NA NA
\1\NSW does not calculate percent males on a regular basis, as they have found that it varies greatly due to
shooter preference--averaging 70but varying from 50-90
Population estimates and data about the commercial harvest of red
and eastern gray kangaroos from the commercial utilization areas of
Queensland, from 1987-1993, are listed in Tables 8 and 9. Recent
population trends are unclear in the data of Table 8 and 9 because two
different techniques have been used to estimate populations.
Queensland, from 1984-1992, annually surveyed over 500,000 sq km of
habitat in the pastoral zone by fixed-wing (FW) aircraft and, since
1991, has surveyed selected 0.5 by 0.5 degree blocks by helicopters
(Hel). Surveys from FW aircraft seem to consistently produce low
estimates of kangaroo populations in woodland habitats, such as the
190,000 sq km of mulga woodlands in southcentral Queensland. Presumably
the ``Caughley correction factors'' developed in the sparsely vegetated
zones of western New South Wales are not adequate multipliers for
estimating kangaroo populations in the woodland habitats of
southcentral Queensland. Data in Table 8 suggest that the population of
red kangaroos may have diminished since 1991, presumably because of
locally severe drought conditions, and that 1993 populations of eastern
gray kangaroos may also be diminished from 1991 levels. The commercial
kill of red kangaroos in 1993 was about 20 percent of the 1993
population estimate and the commercial quota for 1994 is about 20
percent of the 1993 population estimate. The 1993 commercial kill of
eastern gray kangaroos was about 12 percent of the 1993 population
estimate and the 1994 commercial quota has been set at about 15 percent
of the 1993 population estimate (Table 9).
Table 8.--Population Estimates and Data for the Commercial Harvest of Red Kangaroos From Queensland
Commercial Percent
Population estimate harvest Commercial males in
(mean +/- SE) quota kill kill
1987 (FW)....................................... \1\1,476,800<plus-minus
>102,100 375,000 365,138 75
1988 (FW)....................................... \1\1,758,100<plus-minus
>145,100 320,000 359,985 77
1989 (FW)....................................... \1\1,538,500<plus-minus
>121,700 480,000 473,985 66
1990 (FW)....................................... \1\1,817,300<plus-minus
>176,000 480,000 476,636 67.5
1991 (FW)....................................... \1\1,136,400<plus-minus
>146,300 480,000 471,643 \2\NA
1991 (Hel)...................................... \3\4,630,000 ........... ........... ...........
1992 (FW)....................................... \1\1,328,800<plus-minus
>94,468 600,000 570,885 61.5
1992 (Hel)...................................... \4\3,070,000<plus-minus
>910,000 ........... ........... ...........
1993 (Hel)...................................... \5\2,960,000<plus-minus
>950,000 600,000 595,488 55.5
1994 (Hel)...................................... ....................... 600,000 ........... ...........
\1\Fixed Wing estimates have been corrected using Caughley Correction Factors for Habitat but have not been
corrected for temperature.
\2\ANCA does not have this data for 1991.
\3\Estimate received from the 1992 Quota application.
\4\Estimate received from the 1993 Quota application.
\5\Estimate received from the 1994 Quota application.
Table 9.--Population Estimates and Data for the Commercial Harvest of Eastern Gray Kangaroos From Queensland
Commercial Percent
Population estimate harvest Commercial males in
(mean +/- SE) quota kill kill
1987 (FW)....................................... \1\3,341,200<plus-minus
>176,700 1,300,000 1,231,889 79
1988 (FW)....................................... \1\2,916,700<plus-minus
>192,600 1,300,000 1,292,196 79
1989 (FW)....................................... \1\2,598,500<plus-minus
>172,300 1,500,000 1,143,314 66
1990 (FW)....................................... \1\2,278,300<plus-minus
>232,000 1,500,000 1,097,890 62.5
1991 (FW)....................................... \1\1,736,900<plus-minus
>155,600 1,300,000 1,017,086 \2\NA
1991 (Hel)...................................... \3\10,280,000 ........... ........... ...........
1992 (FW)....................................... \1\2,782,400<plus-minus
>184,700 1,500,000 919,234 62.5
1992 (Hel)...................................... \4\10,310,000<plus-minu
s3,260,000 ........... ........... ...........
1993 (Hel)...................................... \5\8,360,000<plus-minus
>2,670,000 1,500,000 989,578 58.1
[[Page 12900]]
1994............................................ ....................... 1,250,000 ........... ...........
\1\Fixed Wing estimates have been corrected using Caughley Correction Factors for Habitat but have not been
corrected for temperature. Caughley correction factors for gray kangaroos are known to give very conservative
estimates of total population numbers. They are maintained in the publicly published figures to enable
comparisons in population trends with the earlier published data for gray kangaroos until an agreed revised
set of correction factors is published for the species.
\2\ANCA does not have this data for 1991.
\3\Estimate received from the 1992 Quota application.
\4\Estimate received from the 1993 Quota application.
\5\Estimate received from the 1994 Quota application.
The total national commercial quota in 1992 for red and gray
kangaroos in the commercial utilization areas was 4,942,000, which was
about 19 percent of the estimated 1992 red and gray kangaroo population
of 26.2 million (using the estimates developed for Queensland from 1992
helicopter counts, for New South Wales and South Australia from 1992 FW
surveys, and for Western Australia from 1990 FW surveys). The 1992
commercial kill was 2,676,000, which was 54 percent of the commercial
quota and about 10 percent of the presumed 1992 population estimate.
The total national commercial quota in 1993 for red and gray kangaroos
was 4,517,600 which was about 21 percent of the estimated 1993 red and
gray kangaroo population of 21.4 million in the CUAs (data from 1993
helicopter counts in Queensland, and 1993 FW counts in South Australia,
New South Wales, and Western Australia). The 1993 commercial kill was
2.8 million which was 62 percent of the 1993 commercial quota and 13
percent of the 1993 population estimate. The 1994 national commercial
quota is set at 3.88 million, which is about 18 percent of the 1993
population estimate. An additional 153,000 red and gray kangaroos were
reported killed during 1993 for damage mitigation purposes outside the
commercial harvest quotas. This damage mitigation kill was an unknown
small percent of the continental population of red and gray kangaroos
(153,000 equals about 0.7 percent of the 1993 presumed population of
red and gray kangaroos within the CUAs which comprise a fraction of the
continental land area).
Queensland has received criticism in past years for its harvest
management system. That system has been substantially modified in
recent years (QNPWS 1992). Queensland now establishes its kangaroo
harvest quota in the following manner. Survey data from aerial and
ground surveys are utilized to provide population estimates. A
conservative possible harvest quota is formulated from this mid-winter
survey information. This statewide potential quota for the state, by
management areas, is reviewed by the Area Director, Regional Director,
and the Manager-Wildlife Management, Queensland. The potential quota is
then passed before the Macropod Management Committee (a State
Ministerial committee) to receive public input from the rural
community, pastoralists, graziers, shooters, dealers, the Department of
Primary Industries, conservation groups, and politicians whose
constituents are impacted by kangaroos. The committee advises on the
acceptability of the proposed quota and may make recommendations about
the quota. The proposed quota and the comments are passed to the
Queensland Minister, who determines the final quota to be submitted to
the Commonwealth for approval. Commonwealth approval may be gained
after the proposal has been reviewed by ANCA and the Commonwealth
Minister's Scientific Advisory Committee on Kangaroos.
The CUA in South Australia occurs on about 282,000 sq km of
pastoral landscape, which comprises about 28 percent of the State's
land area. The harvest quota in South Australia is based on the winter
aerial survey of the CUA and is developed for each of 10 kangaroo
management zones within the CUA. The commercial quota is set as a best
estimate of the maximum number of each species that may need to be
killed to contain deleterious effects on stock, crops, or property
without jeopardizing the viability of kangaroo populations (SANPWS
1991). The proposed quota has to be approved by the appropriate South
Australian Minister before its submission to the Commonwealth. The
Commonwealth Minister subjects the proposed quota to review by ANCA and
the Minister's Scientific Advisory Committee on Kangaroos before any
implementation of the kangaroo management program can occur.
The CUA covers the western two-thirds of New South Wales. The
harvest quota in the State is based on population estimates from the
most recent annual surveys, recent trends in population numbers and
distribution, harvest monitoring data, information about nonharvest
mortality and noncommercial harvest mortality, climatic conditions over
at least the past year, current land use, the proportion of the
population not subject to damage mitigation culling, and the demand for
agricultural damage mitigation culling (NSWNPWS 1991a). The proposed
quota is subject to peer review by the NSW Kangaroo Management Review
Committee and must be approved by the appropriate New South Wales
Minister before its submission to the Commonwealth. The quota must be
approved by the Commonwealth Minister, after its review by ANCA and the
Minister's Scientific Advisory Committee on Kangaroos, before the
harvest program can be implemented.
The CUA may total about one-half of Western Australia. Parks,
reserves, and State forest lands occupied by and providing protective
status to western gray and/or red kangaroos may total 100,000 sq km
within this vast state. The harvest quota in Western Australia is
conservatively established on the basis of current population trends,
seasonal conditions, the review of previous annual harvests, the
proportion of the habitat and population not subject to harvesting,
current land use practices, and the significance of the take outside
the commercial quota (WADCLM 1991a and 1991b). The proposed quota is
subject to peer review by the Kangaroo Management Advisory Committee
and must be approved by the appropriate Western Australian Minister
before being forwarded to the Commonwealth Government. The Commonwealth
Minister (after review by ANCA and the Minister's Scientific
[[Page 12901]] Advisory Committee on Kangaroos) must approve the quota
before the harvest program can be implemented.
Individual states have the capability to monitor their kangaroo
harvest. For example, Queensland has recently established a Macropod
Management System that is a new and large computerized database
containing information about shooters' records, dealers' records,
location of kill, date of kill, sex and species of kill, etc. The
capability to track harvest information helps managers assess whether
populations are being overharvested. A computerized database in Western
Australia, built on harvest data, allows for the analysis of total
commercial take by management area, trends in the sex ratio of the
commercial take, trends in the average weight of kangaroos in the
commercial take, and trends in the commercial take per unit effort
(WADCLM 1991a and 1991b). South Australia is collecting, but not yet
utilizing in its kangaroo management program, monitoring data about
catch per unit of effort, sex ratio of the kill, and average weight of
carcass by sex for each species (SANPWS 1991). New South Wales obtains
specific information from trappers, chillers, and faunal dealers to
determine catch per unit effort, average carcass weight by sex per
species, sex ratios of kill, and the distribution of the harvest. This
information is available by management zone and on a statewide basis
(NSWNPWS 1991a).
The monitoring and assessment of population trends and harvest
returns as specified in the approved kangaroo management programs are
intended to ensure the conservation of the species.
The State and Commonwealth governments have the capability to
police and regulate the commercial take of kangaroos. State governments
control illegal trade in kangaroos through regular and random field
inspections of shooter and dealer operations and checks on the returns
required from them. Law enforcement staff may also respond to public
reports of illegal activities. The primary focus in law enforcement
activities at the State or Territory level is to detect illegal trade
long before material may be proposed for export. This is feasible
because of the relatively small number of people involved in the
commercial kangaroo industry and the difficulties involved in obtaining
and dealing in large quantities of kangaroo meat or skins in a
secretive manner. There is also little incentive to become involved in
illegal activities when quotas are not being reached (on average only
about 70 percent of the total quotas have been taken in recent years)
(ANPWS in litt.).
The Commonwealth capability to control illegal trade rests
primarily with Customs officers and the Australian Federal Police.
Checks on permitted exports of kangaroo products by Customs officers
usually are restricted to the inspection of paperwork associated with
the export. Customs officers will conduct more detailed inspections and
enforcement activities where intelligence indicates that illegal
activities may be occurring (ANPWS in litt.). The Wildlife Protection
Squad formed within the ANPWS in 1992 is intended to coordinate
enquiries/investigations into allegations of illegal trade in wildlife.
Annual surveys are useful indicators of the comparative health of
kangaroo populations over time. Drought is the major natural event that
influences the numbers of red and gray kangaroos throughout the CUAs.
Annual surveys in New South Wales have been conducted for a sufficient
time to indicate the influence of drought on populations. Combined
populations of red and gray kangaroos in the CUAs of New South Wales
from 1981-1993 (with numbers of animals commercially harvested listed
in parentheses) are estimated as follows (population numbers are in
millions of animals): 1981=7.05(0.49), 1982=9.40(0.66),
1983=5.50(0.40), 1984=2.74(0.23), 1985=4.16(0.33), 1986=4.66(0.45),
1987=5.43(0.47), 1988=5.50(0.42), 1989=7.05(0.50), 1990=8.55(0.63),
1991=9.10(0.86), 1992=7.39(0.79), and 1993=6.45(0.77). The data,
unfortunately, provide an imperfect comparison because both census
procedures and evaluation areas changed somewhat during the evaluation
period. The trend seems clear, however: a population buildup to 1982, a
major population reduction measured in 1983 and 1984 in response to the
severe drought in summer 1982-1984, a gradual population recovery to
1991, with populations again declining in 1992 and 1993 as the sheep
range of New South Wales was again impacted by a severe drought in
1991-2. The commercial harvest (numerically identified in the
parentheses, above) is managed as a product of current kangaroo
populations, which seem ultimately to be driven by current or recent
rainfall conditions. Similar trends may exist for the other states, as
well, but the data bases are not as complete or as extensive as those
of New South Wales. For example, the data base in Queensland reflects
the original use of FW aircraft and more recent use of helicopters in
aerial survey efforts, and aerial surveys have been conducted only at
3-year intervals in Western Australia.
Nevertheless, population information for 1981, 1984, and 1987
(Fletcher, M. et al., 1990) clearly indicates that kangaroo populations
subject to harvesting can recover from significant droughts such as
occurred in Eastern Australia in 1982-1984.
The major problem in the sheep range is too little herbage and too
many herbivores. Efforts to implement a total grazing management policy
call for the elimination of feral herbivores and introduced rabbits
coupled with reductions in numbers of either sheep and kangaroos, or
both.
Skill is required to manage animal populations that tend to respond
to fluctuating environmental conditions. For example, New South Wales
managed its kangaroo harvest during the drought by monitoring the
progression of the drought and transferring harvest quotas from
northern management zones where the drought was impacting habitats to
more southerly management zones where drought effects were minimal and
kangaroo populations were little affected. New South Wales did not
reduce the notional quota for the second half of 1992 because the midwinter
1992 surveys indicated that kangaroo populations remained high.
However, New South Wales did hold back and did not allocate 15 percent
of the potential harvest quota in case extensive habitat deterioration
occurred after the mid-winter surveys were accomplished.
The Service finds that State and Commonwealth governments manage
kangaroo populations sufficiently well to ensure that red and gray
kangaroo populations are not being overutilized in mainland Australia
at this time.
C. Disease or Predation
There is no evidence that kangaroos at this time are threatened by
disease or predation. Predation by dingos may have been an important
limiting factor before the arrival of Europeans. Dingo predation has
been severely curtailed to enhance sheep husbandry, and kangaroos have
incidentally benefitted from this action. Mortality of red and gray
kangaroos, believed caused by an unidentified post-flood agent, was
observed in southwestern Queensland following the April 1990 floods.
The impact was short-term (ANPWS 1990), however, as regenerating
vegetation stimulated increases in subsequent kangaroo populations.
[[Page 12902]]
D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Red and gray kangaroos have protected status in all parts of their
respective distributional ranges throughout Australia under relevant
State or Territory legislation. The responsibility for wildlife
conservation rests with individual State or Territorial governments
through their faunal conservation authorities (ANPWS 1991). The
decision to provide for a commercial harvesting industry is determined
by State or Territory government policy and legislation. The
Commonwealth has no power in law to influence how States and
Territories manage red and gray kangaroos except for those populations
subject to export or international agreements. The Commonwealth would
be powerless, for example, to directly intervene should any individual
State or Territory, with no export program, develop or operate an
intrastate program that was counter to the Commonwealth views of
conservation and management. The ANCA, however, is aware of the level
of protection provided in mainland States and Territories that do not
seek to export kangaroo products, and the Commonwealth is satisfied
that management in those mainland States and Territories (Victoria,
Northern Territory, Australian Capital Territory) is in significant
agreement with Commonwealth standards of conservation and management
(ANPWS in litt.).
The management of kangaroos in New South Wales, Queensland, South
Australia, and Western Australia is based on legal protection and
regulations controlling the harvest of kangaroos. Each of these four
States has a kangaroo management program that includes provisions for
the establishment of harvest quotas and for the reduction of harvests,
if necessary, and each State has the responsibility to implement the
provisions of its individual kangaroo management programs. The largest
populations of red and gray kangaroos occur in the four States, and the
Commonwealth Government does have a mechanism to enhance the protection
of those populations. That mechanism exists through the Wildlife
Protection (Regulation of Exports and Imports) Act of 1982 (WP(REI)A).
The WP(REI)A consolidated wildlife controls into a single act so the
Commonwealth could more effectively implement the objectives of CITES.
Commercial trade is permitted only if it has been conclusively
established that the native species will not become threatened because
of the inadequate control of exports or through the import of some nonnative
species. The Commonwealth Minister for the Arts, Sport, the
Environment and Territories can approve or disapprove of proposed
management programs for individual species after having been advised of
their merit by the ANCA and the Minister's Scientific Advisory
Committee on Kangaroos. State governments in Western Australia, South
Australia, New South Wales, and Queensland have each developed kangaroo
management plans that have been approved by the Commonwealth so that an
export trade in kangaroo products is allowed from each of those States.
The kangaroo management plan for each State has a monitoring provision
for both population trends and harvest returns to ensure that
conservation of the species is the foremost objective.
An approved kangaroo management program indicates that kangaroo
products for export must be from kangaroos taken in a specified and
approved manner. An approved kangaroo management program must contain
sufficient biological information so it can be evaluated. There also
needs to be ample proof that the biological information has been
considered in developing the program, and discussions must have
occurred between the State and Commonwealth governments so the
management programs attain acceptable standards. The management program
must ensure that taking in the wild will not be detrimental to the
survival of the species, will be carried out at minimal risk to the
continuing role of that species in the ecosystem, will occur in a
humane manner, and that adequate periodic monitoring and assessment of
the effects of the taking of specimens will occur to ensure the longterm
survival of the species.
The kangaroo management programs are generally based on multipleuse
tenets and are designed to ensure the continued survival of
kangaroos throughout their range. The programs assume that kangaroos
are successful native herbivores whose numbers frequently need to be
controlled. The programs are based on population monitoring and use a
licensing system to control the legal harvesting of animals. The
individual States have the responsibility to ensure that the harvesting
of kangaroos does not significantly affect the distribution and
abundance of the species.
The general objectives of the kangaroo management programs are to
(1) maintain viable populations of kangaroos throughout their natural
range, (2) minimize the effects of kangaroos on pastoral and
agricultural development, (3) maintain populations of kangaroos at
levels that will not produce long-term adverse impacts to habitat, and
(4) manage the species as a renewable resource. Implementation to
achieve objectives includes enabling legislation and an administering
organization with sufficient funding to accomplish appropriate
research, management, and monitoring activities.
The New South Wales National Parks and Wildlife Service controls
the harvest of kangaroos through the National Parks and Wildlife Act
1974. All kangaroos entering commercial trade must be legally taken in
accordance with this Act, and it is an offense to kill kangaroos or
have them in possession without an appropriate license. Landholders
have to approach the NSWNPWS for a permit to kill kangaroos on their
property, and tags are issued if the killing is found to be warranted.
Shooters, commercial dealers, and tannery operators are each licensed
so controls exist at several levels of the commercial harvest. The
total allowable commercial harvest occurs within the framework of the
commercial quota. The development of the quota has been described in a
general manner under factor B above.
The legislation protecting and conserving nature in Queensland is
the Faunal Conservation Act 1974, which has been replaced by the Nature
Conservation Act 1992. The new Queensland Act has been implemented for
kangaroos, replacing the existing legislation. The Nature Conservation
Act 1992 creates classes of protected areas; designates classes of
wildlife; and provides for development of conservation plans to
protect, use, and manage protected areas, critical habitats, and
classes of wildlife. The Queensland kangaroo management program
describes how the activities of shooters and dealers are regulated, how
the size and/or composition of the population is to be monitored, the
harvest regulations and checks to prevent illegal harvest or overharvest,
and other measures to ensure the conservation of the species.
The approval of Queensland's kangaroo management program by the
Commonwealth Government indicates an assurance that commercialism will
not threaten the survival of kangaroo populations throughout their
range.
Kangaroos and all native fauna in South Australia are protected
under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972. A permit is required to
take any animal for damage mitigation purposes and any kangaroo that
enters the commercial [[Page 12903]] trade must be tagged with a
species-specific tag. Quotas are developed after the direct monitoring
of populations on an annual basis, and individual properties may be
monitored through ground surveys and property inspections before
receiving a quota. Quotas are released in stages so management can
respond to changes in climatic conditions. Kangaroo shooters are
licensed to shoot on individual properties.
The Department of Conservation and Land Management has the
responsibility for the conservation and protection of all flora and
fauna under the Western Australia Conservation and Land Management Act
of 1984. The Department has authority under the Wildlife Conservation
Act 1950 and associated regulations to control the killing of red and
gray kangaroos. Landowners and their agents may take kangaroos noncommercially
for damage mitigation purposes in open-season areas.
Kangaroos can only be taken under a damage license specifically issued
to particular properties in non-open-season areas. The harvest is
monitored by using species-specific tags and by monitoring monthly
reports from licensed shooters and dealers. Population trends are
monitored on a triennial basis because of the State's vast area and
because kangaroo densities are frequently low.
Critics of the kangaroo management program in Australia cite the
incongruity of legislation granting a measure of protection to the
species and the presence of a commercial industry that is responsible
for the harvest of several million kangaroos per year. Critics also
state that few studies substantiate claims that kangaroos are major
depredators of range and agricultural crops, so that arguments that
kangaroos are harvested to reduce damage especially to range products
are specious, especially when sheep numbers remain too high for fragile
ranges. The Service believes that any perceived incongruity in domestic
laws needs to be resolved domestically and is not a reason for an ESA
listing decision. It is additionally not necessary for the Service to
address the argument that the commercial killing of kangaroos is solely
for damage mitigation purposes to make a decision on a listing status.
Kangaroos incidentally prosper at this time because of land management
accomplished for other purposes. Active kangaroo management essentially
only regulates kind and level of take so that overutilization does not
occur and so that sustainable populations are maintained throughout
their range. Regulatory mechanisms in place are adequate to perform
this function.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
Kangaroo populations fluctuate in response to environmental and
climatic conditions. Appropriate wildlife management agencies routinely
evaluate kangaroo populations over a wide area and monitor current
harvest statistics to track population trends. This activity is
intended to provide a sufficient understanding so that harvest
activities, can be slowed or terminated if that becomes necessary. This
may be appropriate, especially during drought, when kangaroo
populations may become reduced and are most vulnerable to population
control activities.
There is great concern among critics that management programs both
for individual States and the Commonwealth are insensitive to the
plight of kangaroos during environmental stress periods as during the
1982-1984 drought. The perceived insensitivity at that time was an
apparent inability or unwillingness to reduce the commercial harvest of
kangaroos in what critics considered a timely manner during an
environmental stress period. The critics argue that demands from the
pastoral industry and the commercial kangaroo industry superseded
important kangaroo management decisions. The present concern with
insensitivity occurred because some important kangaroo habitats
experienced droughts during 1992 at a time when a record macropod
harvest quota of 5.2 million animals (including 4,942,000 red and gray
kangaroos) was established. The Commonwealth indicates (ANPWS in litt.)
that the determination of quotas during a dry period as during a normal
period is on the basis of estimated kangaroo populations.
Droughts are quite variable in their duration and distribution and
kangaroo populations do not automatically decline in response to dry
seasonal conditions. The 1983 harvest quotas were set at high levels
because kangaroo populations measured during the June-August 1982
winter period were still high. The actual harvest during 1983 was
considerably less than the actual quota and the quotas in 1984 and 1985
were maintained below 2 million animals as populations recovered.
Kangaroo populations have risen across Australia since that time
and quotas have correspondingly increased. For example, the 1991 midwinter
kangaroo population in New South Wales was estimated at 9.1
million and the 1992 harvest quota in NSW was fixed at 2.1 million (23
percent of the 1991 population estimate). The mid-winter 1992 kangaroo
population in NSW (obtained while the 1992 drought was still ongoing)
was estimated at 8.04 million and a 1993 harvest quota of 1.66 million
(21 percent of the 1992 population estimate) was established. The 1992
mid-winter survey indicated that statewide the populations of red
kangaroos were diminished by about 40 percent (a statistically
significant reduction, P< 0.05) and gray kangaroo populations were
diminished about 8 percent (a statistically non-significant reduction).
The 1992 mid-winter survey also indicated that kangaroo populations in
central and southern management zones were little-changed from 1991
levels. The NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, in mid-year,
consequently switched some harvest quotas from northern to more
southerly harvest management zones. The NSWNPWS also determined in midyear
that 15 percent of the 1992 harvest quota would be held back and
not allocated during 1992. The NSW commercial kangaroo harvest during
1992, when a portion of the state was involved in a drought event,
totalled about 800,000 kangaroos during a year when the potential
harvest quota totalled 2.1 million. The kangaroo harvest strategy was
thus to actively adapt and modify management plans as a dry season
developed into a drought.
States have additional regulatory mechanisms to reduce actual
harvest to levels below the commercial quota. Licenses to take animals
may be amended to restrict the numbers taken in a particular area, to
limit harvesting to certain species, or to cease hunting altogether.
Thus, management may progressively restrict and then cease all
harvesting of kangaroos in response to declining populations. Following
the 1982-83 drought in New South Wales, a moratorium on harvesting wa
![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}