Once more for the record

David Obendorf

The likelihood of entry of foxes into Tasmania is not disputed … but it is not for the simplistic and shallow reason that the State Government wishes the populace to believe.

QUESTIONS about the authenticity of the physical evidence offered to support the proposition that foxes are established in Tasmania continues. In my view this is because the ‘hard’ physical evidence offered fails to meet the critical test of ‘two factor verification’.

As has been argued in earlier articles on this topic one can apply a ‘Precautionary’ approach to managing the potential risk of foxes establishing in Tasmania based purely on the Risk Assessment Matrix that shows that the Likelihood on entry, establishment & spread have been moderate to high AND the Consequences of doing nothing would be very serious to Tasmania’s biodiversity.

If Tasmania’s approach to keeping the island fox-free was based on that approach ALONE, it would be far more authentic, credible and productive than the current approach which is predicated on an unsubstantiated premise for how foxes entered and is based on unsupported corroborative evidence that fails to meet the ‘two factor verification’ test.

These two critical errors of judgement have caused the current problems that the Taskforce now faces. It undermines community confidence, funding prospects and the overall effectiveness of the program.

A careful review of all the significant Tasmanian fox incidents involving the presentation of physical evidence from 2001 to 2007, fails to satisfy the most essential prerequisite — authenticity.

The likelihood of entry of foxes into Tasmania is not disputed … but it is not for the simplistic and shallow reason that the State Government wishes the populace to believe.

The entry of single foxes into Tasmania via shipping of trade freight has been occurring for sometime. The difference, in the last 10-15 years, has been the growth in the size of that Trans-Bass Strait freight trade and the various means whereby foxes could gain access to Tasmania. Put simply the risk of fox entry has increased.

The Port of Melbourne, the freight forwarding hub, has had an acknowledged status as a fox breeding hotspot. In addition containerised cargo — in standard shipping sea-tainers — has been a principal mode of transfer of tradeable produce including feed grain. Containers can pass from rural parts of south-eastern Australia, through freight forwarders and transfer points, arriving with their accompanying documentation and go directly into locations across decentralised Tasmania for unloading.

It’s important to highlight the serious weaknesses in Tasmania’s Biosecurity & Quarantine procedures have led to the opportunity for the fox entry risk. That incursion threat and practical ways of addressing those entry points are now being considered, however, it was convenient for the State Government to blame the fox threat on intentional smuggling rather than take the responsibility.

A covert smuggling racket in fox cubs was a convenient explanation but despite a $50,000 State Government reward for information leading to a conviction; it remains unsubstantiated rumour.

The ‘inconvenient’ explanation — for the State Government — on fox entry was the weakness in Tasmania’s barrier quarantine; those failures have continued to operate until quite recently.

The behaviour and response of DPIWE and the Minister’s office over the last 6 years on this matter are quite illustrative in themselves. There was a tendency to condemn, ridicule and bully anyone who questioned the official announcements and formal findings on fox issues. Similarly requests for information from government or its bureaucracies are met with delays and other means of avoiding presentation.

There is no doubt in my mind that perception & spin has overwhelmed and hook-winked an uncritical media into just accepting the government’s version of events as ‘fact’.

As a person who has worked with Emergency Response Planning for exotic threats I’ve been surprised and disappointed by the response to what they believed was prima facie evidence of fox presence in Tasmania.

A robust response to one fox escaping from a container or a boat was totally acceptable, but there have been limited attempts to increase the certainty about claims that foxes have ‘established’ in numbers and are breeding in Tasmania. This should be a priority activity and, in my view, will require a review of current responses.

Let’s assume Tasmania has now effectively stopped any more live foxes entering the State by whatever means. With the door now closed the focus should be on determining whether one (or more) foxes exist in the hotspot sites. In my opinion, the development of overall community confidence in the reality of a fox threat can only occur if the field evidence is objectively credible, authentic and meets the two factor verification test.

This should be the No. 1 priority for 2007.

Postscript

Here is just one of several ‘retrospectives’ strongly expressing the ‘incredible’ performance of Tasmania on this matter. It also well highlights how ordinary Tasmanians can be side-lined.

In 2002 the then Senator for Tasmania Shane Murphy expressed his position on the fox evidence and was publicly criticised for doing so.

Commenting on claims of alleged fox smuggling made an ABC- TV Catalyst program that went to air on 12 September 2002, Senator Murphy said:

“It’s the greatest load of nonsense and dishonest reporting that you would ever want to hear. ABC staff preparing the program were either lied to or failed to do any real research at all.”

“[Tasmania] Police had conducted an extensive investigation into reports of fox smuggling and found no evidence whatsoever.”

“And yet, an ABC program called Catalyst can make statements very clear and concise that two years ago [2000] a group of ‘environmental vandals’ committed the unthinkable crime.”

“I say to Catalyst, on what basis do you make this statement, because it is the greatest load of crap that I have ever heard!”

On the basis of these allegations and sensational reporting the Tasmania Fox Task Force received [at that time] $400,000 in federal funding, but have failed to produce any results, Senator Murphy said.

But Senator Murphy, a recreational hunter, said he knew who could do the job.

“They will not involve the recreational hunters of this State, for what reason I don’t know, but I suspect they don’t really want to find a fox, because if they did involve the recreational hunters of the State, they would find a fox if it was there.”[Reference: Canberra Times – 20 September 2002]

In The Mercury Senator Murphy was quoted to say:

“Don’t get me wrong. If there are foxes, we should certainly do everything possible to get rid of them.”

“We all know foxes can be pretty smart but these Tasmanian ones would have to be the smartest. They can hide from dozens of hunters’ spotlights, avoid thousands of motor vehicles and leave no trace of their existence. Even the Phantom would be in awe of that sort of ability.” [Reference: The Mercury May 2002]