Outfoxing a serious threat

Ian Rist

WHILE I agree no one wants foxes to become established in Tasmania, I believe a lot of the claims made have been totally irresponsible; there has been a lot of stupid hoaxing and I also believe there has been fabrication of evidence.
I have studied this topic with great interest for at least the last eight years and especially after the irresponsible claims were made that fox cubs had been imported, reared and released in Tasmania. The import theory was based on rumour, innuendo and gossip. Forty odd pages of FOI relevant to Tasmania Police investigation have concluded there was no substance in these allegations. So if foxes have arrived here, how did they get here? Container shipping and roll on roll off vessels would have to be the logical answer.

I believe there have been fox incursions through these accidents, at least three and possibly more.

There has been much sensational speculation through the media persons with vested interests have certainly fed some pretty outrageous claims, such as suggestions of fox plagues etc.etc.

The fox issue is a very complex one; politicians are terrified of it. The poor Pollies are often between a rock and a hard place, not wanting to be seen to be wasting taxpayers’ money but not wanting to be seen as environmentally irresponsible if they don’t act and a genuine Tasmanian fox does turn up.

Several comments in a local paper’s “our say” do need to be commented on; The Lillico fox cub remains that would have fitted in a match box after at least two months on the shoulder of a road were not conclusive of a fox population and certainly not evidence (as suggested) of a breeding population. Follow-up at this site led to nowhere again, no fox scats, no natal dens, no photos of sibling or adult foxes.

A two to three month old cub would have been totally dependent on its parents for survival. The lack of any follow up supportive evidence suggests this cub arrived at this site by other means.

The Old Beach incident leaves more questions than answers; a resident reports a chicken kill and authorities are called.

The chickens are left in situ and sand traps, motion cameras and hair traps are set up. Five days of surveillance reveal dogs, cats, quolls, devils but no fox.On the fifth day several spots of blood are discovered and are sent away for analysis and come back DNA tested positive fox. Results of hair samples have never been released. So how did the blood get there with no back up supportive evidence?

The “warm” Cleveland carcass was portrayed in the media as the clincher; however this carcass has been proven by an independent pathologist through its histology and bacteria spread in tissue samples to be two to three days older than originally stated.

Government press releases claim the “fox kill driver” came forward several days later and gave a statement. This is difficult to accept as this person, whose name was withheld, was there and interviewed on the morning of the fresh discovery but said nothing then about hitting a fox that ran out from the left hand side of the road.

If this money is available to keep Tasmania fox free let us all go forward with accuracy, integrity and absolute honesty and solve what could become a massive problem when coupled with the out of control feral cat problem and the obvious catastrophe facing our iconic Tasmanian Devils.

Ian Rist is a former professional Wildlife and Game management expert. Rist has represented the State and Australia internationally at competitive shooting and was for sometime a professional hunter. He has a passion for all wildlife and is an opponent of indiscriminate, non-selective poisoning.