Right: A chart of cuts from a kangaroo carcass. Will these become a common sight on butcher shop walls?.Arguments against farming kangaroos
1. Kangaroos are not suitable for commercial farmingMany farmers have rejected Professor Garnaut's suggestion that they should farm kangaroos rather than sheep and cattle. They argue that kangaroos are not well suited to commercial exploitation.
Mallee livestock and crop farmer Leonard Vallance has stated, 'It really is an absurdity to suggest and it reflects very poorly on Garnaut that he would make such a suggestion. Anyone that's ever had anything to do with kangaroos knows that they're a nomadic animal. The livestock that Western agriculture farms have been domesticated for 2000 years or more.'
Some scientific studies have also suggested that kangaroos do not suit domestication. A CSIRO study conducted in 1983 concluded that a number of factors were likely to preclude the intensive farming of kangaroos.
Kangaroo meat production under intensive conditions is limited by a low reproduction rate and a slow growth rate.
Handling difficulties would also ensure many husbandry problems. Rangeland farming of kangaroos is limited by the mobility of kangaroos, their ability to jump stock fences and behaviour patterns which prevent mustering or herding.
Markets for meat and skins are limited and are adequately supplied from the existing rangeland harvest (that is kangaroo hunting).
Farmed kangaroos could not compete successfully in these circumstances because of high costs associated with establishing and operating a kangaroo farming enterprise.
In an article published in Online Opinion in 2006, Ian Mott outlined those factors which would make kangaroo farming prohibitively expensive. After factoring in fencing and other costs, Mott concluded, 'Each kangaroo sold will have to be worth $465 more than what the farmer paid for it, or could have received for it if he sold it as a joey the year before. The problem is ... that the young male and mature female Eastern Grey Kangaroos only weigh an average of about 31kg live weight. And this means their cost price would be $15/kg in the yard against the current beef price of about $2.00/kg. And this would mean the retail price of kangaroo meat would be 7.5 times higher than the current price of beef. And that would mean the urban consumer would need to pay $150/kg for kangaroo steak and $75/kg for mince.'
2. Kangaroo meat is not widely accepted by Australian consumers
There have been two recent government-sponsored surveys of Australian consumers' attitudes toward the consumption of kangaroo meat. One conducted in 1997 and the other in 2007. Though there has been a growth in acceptance of the meat it cannot be regarded as well-accepted by the Australian market. Currently kangaroo meat represents only some 1% of the Australian meat market.
The 2007 survey indicated that 58.5% of respondents had tried kangaroo at some time in the past year. 14.5% had eaten kangaroo at least 4 times per year and 44% had eaten it at least once but not regularly.
Of the 41.5% who had not eaten kangaroo meat, half (that is 25% of available non-export consumers) indicated that they were not prepared to try it.
The 1997 survey indicated concern over consuming an animal that was regarded as a national symbol. This concern seems to have largely disappeared; however, others remain. For example, there remain issues around the harvesting of animals.
Across the sample of those surveyed in 2007, there was a widespread (and incorrect) belief that kangaroo populations are managed in fenced farms (36.4%) or 'free-ranged' on properties like cattle stations (35.8%).
Only 27.8% believed they were harvested as wild animals. Knowing the animals were harvested did not change attitudes to eating kangaroo amongst focus groups participants but there was an indication of increased sensitivity to hygiene factors and the welfare of the animal in the harvest.
Further, there is consumer uncertainty about how to prepare kangaroo meat. This remains an issue for all but the medium to high consumers, and even most consumers in that category perceive limited scope for preparing kangaroo.
Also, a potential barrier is the level to which kangaroo steak or fillets are cooked, as, while half the consumers surveyed prefer their red meat cooked medium to well-done, the general recommendation is that kangaroo meat should be served rare or medium-rare, due to the very low fat content. The recommendation that the meat be served rare to medium rare is at odds with consumer concerns about hygiene which prompt a desire that the meat be well-cooked.
3. Increased use of kangaroo meat would damage Australian beef and lamb production and food security
There has been concern expressed that attempts to either encourage or require the farming of kangaroos in marginal areas will damage the existing beef and cattle industries and will not supply a meat that can either be sustained or is wanted by the Australian market..
Ben Fargher of the National Farmers' Federation's has stated, 'What we have to make sure is that we set up a scheme so that cattle and sheep production is not disadvantaged to a point where those industries are put out of business.
They [cattle and beef industries] are responding to market demand. The market demand is strong. Kangaroo meat is not going to substitute that.'
The Federal Opposition's Environment spokesman, Greg Hunt, has argued that the Federal Government cannot allow the undermining of livestock farmers that Garnaut is predicting.
Mr Hunt has stated, 'You [will] have a food security problem if you suddenly try to wack new costs on our farmers.'
It has further been noted global warming will create major difficulties for Australian farmers and that whatever solutions proposed to these problems cannot afford to actually worsen the farmers' situation.
David Crombie, the president of the National Farmers' Federation, has stated, 'Australia must not take an 'at any cost' approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, particularly as there is no certainty about the contribution to be made by other nations - especially our trade competitors ... We risk a disproportionate impact on Australian food production. Our farm sector is responsible for 12% of GDP, 1.6 million jobs, $30 billion in exports and 93% of our daily domestic food supply, and it could be absolutely devastated...'
4. There are other ways of reducing methane pollution
There is a wide range of initiatives being considered to reduce the methane emissions of sheep and cattle.
Japanese researchers have found that oil from the cashew shell mixed into feed can reduce methane emissions in livestock. Initial studies showed as much as ninety percent lower greenhouse gas emissions from cattle fed the cashew oil.
Another area of study has been the mapping of the methane genome, which a New Zealand research organization has accomplished. With this knowledge they will work toward producing a vaccine to prevent belching and flatulence. Vaccine development and refinement may take some time.
Some cattle and sheep naturally produce less methane. Efforts are underway to determine the gene or genes involved. Farmers could then breed for lower greenhouse gas producing livestock. As with the flatulence vaccine, ensuring that new problems are not created in the effort to genetically manage existing ones will be key to taking advantage of this inherited trait.
New Zealand and Australia are working on a joint venture to alter grasses to make them more digestible, thereby reducing methane production. A range of other feed-based solutions are being explored to address the problem.
Australia is also investigating ways of transferring to the stomachs of cattle and sheep microbes from the intestinal tracts of kangaroos. The kangaroos' intestinal microbes allow them to digress grass and other vegetation without producing significant quantities of methane.
5. Global warming will dramatically reduce kangaroo numbers
A study conducted by researchers at James Cook University has suggested that Australia's kangaroo population could be devastated by climate change. Such a decline in kangaroo numbers would reduce the likelihood of kangaroo meat being able to reduce Australians' consumption of beef and lamb.
The study found that a temperature rise of two degrees, which is likely by the second half of this century, would reduce the range of most kangaroo and wallaby species by half. A six-degree increase would lead to the territory where kangaroos can survive reducing by 96 per cent. Such a decline would cause large-scale marsupial extinctions.
Dr Euan Rotchie, who led the three-year study, stated,'The area where kangaroos and wallabies are able to survive is probably going to get smaller, so you would have to expect the populations to drop quite significantly.
Although rainfall in northern Australia may increase as the climate changes, the temperature will also be going up, so you might see a net loss of water through evaporation.'
The World League for the Protection of Animals presented a submission to the Federal Environment Minister in August 2008 which stated, 'The kangaroo populations are under severe pressure from continuing drought and from the unknown and as yet unquantified effects of climate change.'