Right: A Victorian Game Management Authority poster urging hunters to reduce wounding of ducks. Many thousands of shot ducks are claimed to have died in pain due to hunters having lost sight of downed birds.
 Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said. |
Arguments in favour of banning duck hunting
1. Duck hunting causes birds unnecessary pain and sufferingOne of the main reasons critics oppose duck hunting is the cruelty that they claim is inevitably involved. Those who condemn duck hunting object to the pain and suffering inflicted on the hunted ducks.
Critics claim that duck shooting is an imprecise form of hunting which imposes injury and severe distress upon the birds being hunted. Dr Bronwyn Orr, President of the Australian Veterinarian Association (AVA), has claimed that the practice is inhumane and inevitably results in many animals being critically injured and left to die. Dr Orr has noted that the shotgun pellets disperse widely and often inflict wounds that do not result in immediate death. Usually, only those birds aligned with the central cluster of pellets will be fatally injured; birds hit at the perimeter of the shotgun volley may receive pellet injury and survive.
Dr Orr has explained, 'Hunting ducks with shotguns often results in non-fatal injuries, where the birds are hit with the outer cluster of pellets, but not retrieved. This results in an ethical animal-welfare problem, as the bird may live for a number of weeks with a crippling injury, receiving no veterinary treatment.' The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) has further explained why many birds are shot without immediately dying from their injuries. Its knowledgebase paper on duck hunting states 'If the bird is flying alone and shot from a relatively close range, a large number of pellets are likely to hit vital organs increasing the chances of causing death rapidly. Death occurs from damage to vital organs, bleeding and shock. However, if a bird is shot at by a hunter from too far away, the pellets will spread further out and, coupled with the reduced pellet velocity, this will result in the wounding of both the target bird and the birds surrounding it, inevitably leading to pain and suffering.' It has been noted that if left uncollected, wounded birds can suffer from the disabling effects of the injury, including pain and infection, or thirst or starvation if unable to drink or eat. All of these increase the likelihood of being taken by a predator. Mortality due to crippling may not happen immediately after injury and may take days or weeks before the wounded bird dies from long-term effects.
A study in Victoria reported that up to 33 percent of hunted birds were wounded in shooting, but not retrieved - resulting in crippling injuries such as wing, bill, and leg fractures. A radiographical study spanning 20 years reported that between 6 percent and 19 percent of trapped live ducks (of mixed species) had embedded shot. The Victorian Game Management Authority has acknowledged the duck wounding rate could be between six and 40 percent. When using the reported total harvest figure of 262,567 ducks from the 2022 season, this equates to between 15,700 and 105,000 ducks being wounded and not killed outright in the 2022 season. Referring to the current duck season in Victoria, Dr Liz Walker, the chief executive officer of RSPCA-Victoria, has stated, 'Regardless of the reduced season length, based on a 35-day hunting season approximately 87,000 birds will be killed during the 2023 Victorian duck hunting season and up to 35,000 wounded and left to die.'
Animal suffering is an ongoing problem that critics claim is inevitably associated with duck shooting. Coupled with the large number of wounded birds left to die, critics note that many hunters do not know how to efficiently kill birds that they take wounded from the water. In 2021 the RSPCA's head, Dr Walker, warned, 'We remain very concerned at the high wounding rate and lack of knowledge on how to effectively dispatch a downed duck.'
As Animals Australia has noted, 'Some [birds] may drown in the water. Some may be scooped up, but instead of being met with kindness, be injured further and eventually killed at the hands of inexperienced shooters.' 2. The regulations governing duck hunting are inadequate
Critics of continued duck hunting argue that the game management regulations that are claimed to protect waterfowl during the duck hunting season are inadequate.
There are major criticisms raised about the duck recognition tests that hunters are required to pass before they are given a hunting licence. Duck hunting opponents note the 22 question 'Waterfowl Identification Test'(WIT) only has to be sat once and requires only 75 percent accuracy. There is no requirement that hunters requalify or take refresher training which means it is likely that, over time, hunters, who at most hunt for only three months in any year, will lose the ability to identify birds accurately. Animals Australia has noted, 'Some shooters may not have taken the test for 25 years.'
It has also been noted that adolescents and international visitors can legally fire shotguns at waterbirds without demonstrating any knowledge of which species are protected. Research commissioned by the Game Management Authority (GMA) in 2020 relating to hunter knowledge found that when asked about identifying game ducks, only 20 percent of respondents answered correctly. Critics claim that the inadequacy of the WIT testing requirements has devastating consequences for threatened bird species. Animals Australia has revealed, 'Only weeks into the 2016 duck shooting season, "protected" species were massacred. The same happened again in 2017, with 113 freckled ducks (one of the world's rarest species of waterbird, and Australia's rarest duck species) slaughtered by shooters. 68 of these endangered waterbirds were found dead on the opening weekend of the three-month season.'
In the same period, the Coalition Against Duck Hunting collected the carcasses of nearly 450 illegally shot threatened or protected species, including the threatened, blue-billed duck. The same complaints were made at the start of the duck season in 2022. Wildlife Victoria's chief executive officer, Lisa Palma, has stated, 'Duck shooting is horrendous given the ever-diminishing state of our water bird population and the fact that many of the shooters can't differentiate between one species over another.' In 2022, Palmer led a triage mission to care for injured ducks left at Lake Bael in Kerang, near the New South Wales border. Among the bids Wildlife Victoria found shot were blue-winged shovelers and hardheads or white-eyed duck, both species which the state government had explicitly warned are 'listed as threatened due to declining populations.'
The white-eyed duck, is the only true diving duck found in Australia. The regulations also allow hunting 30 minutes before sunrise and 30 minutes after sunset. Critics have argued that the combination of poor bird identification skills and poor visibility mean that many protected species are at risk because hunters are unable to recognise them. Opponents of duck hunting further argue that duck hunting regulations are inadequate because there is no requirement that hunters be competent shooters. Animals Australia has noted that duck hunters do not have to pass a compulsory shooting accuracy test. The development of an accuracy improvement course for shooters has been funded by taxpayers; however, it has attracted little interest from shooters. In 2018, fewer than one hundred shooters attended the one-day course. That year more than 26,000 duck shooters were licensed for the duck hunting season.
A recent report giving the findings of a survey of duck hunters knowledge of their sport found that three out of five hunters did not know how to shoot to minimize wounding and achieve a clean kill. 85 percent did not understand the safety risks associated with firing at ducks at close-range. Animals Australia has claimed that many hunters are so unskilled that they 'lack the most basic knowledge when it comes to animal welfare, and risk personal and public safety.' Finally, critics complain that there are no regulations requiring hunters to learn how to humanly kill wounded birds. For example, in South Australia, the regulations stipulate that shooters must adhere to the Code of Practice for the Humane Destruction of Birds by Shooting in South Australia - but there is no requirement to undertake any training or prove any competency in killing injured birds 'humanely' in order to obtain a shooting licence.
Research commissioned by the Victorian Gaming Management Authority (GMA) in 2020 found that only 13 percent of respondents knew how to kill wounded birds without extending the animals' suffering. 3. The regulations governing duck hunting are not adequately enforced
Critics of duck hunting claim that the regulations meant to govern the sport are not adequately enforced, either because they are impossible to implement effectively or because the different state gaming management authorities are both promoters and regulators of duck hunting and so are not motivated to properly stamp out abuses.
Numerous instances over many years of flagrant violation of duck hunting regulations have led many critics to claim that the game management authorities are not fit to perform their function. Laurie Levy, head of the Coalition Against Duck Hunting, has claimed for years that the Victorian Game Management Authority is a 'paper tiger', without the will or the capacity to enforce the regulations it is charged with overseeing. Levy has claimed that the Coalition always passes on to the GMA its film footage of hunters violating regulations. He states, 'We always give our footage to the GMA, and you would expect those shooters to be charged. But the GMA always has an excuse about why they won't prosecute - never once has a hunter been prosecuted for animal cruelty.'
It has often been acknowledged that the various game management authorities are under-equipped to enforce the hunting regulations in their different states. The South Australian Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals has stated, 'National Park rangers have the task of monitoring shooters during the South Australian duck shooting season. However, they are not present at all shooting locations when shooters are in action - especially as much of the shooting in South Australia takes place on private land, where no monitoring at all is required.'
Not only animal welfare groups make this point. Some sporting shooter organisations have commented similarly. In 2023, the Sporting Shooters Association of Victoria (SSAA) noted, 'SSAA understands the limitations of the Game Management Authority's (GMA) enforcement capabilities. GMA officers cannot cover every wetland in the state, and we do not expect them to.' However, the SSAA went on to suggest that the Authority could make a greater effort to effectively employ its current resources. The SSAA stated, 'What we do expect is that they make a genuine and concerted effort to stamp out illegal behaviour... Instead of blaming all hunters for illegal behaviour, there needs to be a real enforcement effort to target those doing the wrong thing.'
A recent government commissioned report on the Game Management Authority (GMA) in Victoria found that duck shooting is poorly regulated in Victoria and hunting laws may be impossible to enforce effectively under the current regulatory system. The findings of the report, produced by Pegasus Economics, were first leaked to news outlets in March 2018. The report referred to mass shootings of protected birds and the mass dumping of bird carcasses suggesting a disregard for animal life and that bag limits were often being exceeded. The report concluded 'Non-compliance with the game hunting laws is commonplace and widespread.' The report suggested that there was insufficient distance between the GMA and the hunting associations, so that the regulator was 'vulnerable to capture' by the very interests it was seeking to regulate. It concluded, 'The GMA's inability to ensure compliance with the hunting laws has seriously undermined its credibility as an independent and effective regulator and raises questions about the integrity and sustainability of the regulatory regime.'
The report additionally noted that the GMA's own staff do not believe it can ensure compliance with the hunting laws or effectively punish those who break them. Other criticisms include that the GMA focuses too much energy on managing protesters instead of policing hunters, that the licensing regime is ineffective and that the GMA sometimes "slides into advocacy and promotional roles that conflict with its responsibilities as a regulator".
Animals Australia has summed up these concerns claiming, 'The Game Management Authority has a major conflict of interest being simultaneously a promoter and regulator of duck shooting... leaving our precious native wildlife and peaceful regional communities to suffer terribly as a result.' 4. Duck hunting places further strain on native bird populations that are already stressed
Those who argue that duck hunting should be banned across Australia maintain that duck populations are facing many pressures and that hunting adds a major avoidable threat to species' survival.
Critics claim that climate change has resulted in years of rising temperatures and dry conditions that have seriously affected the wetlands that duck species rely on as their habitat. It has also been claimed that land management practices, such as diverting rivers and draining wetlands, have added to habitat loss.
This has been acknowledged as an Australia-wide problem. The Australian government's 2022 independent report on the state of the national environment found that 7.7 million hectares of threatened species habitat was destroyed in Australia between 2000 and 2017.' The report further noted, '[Australia has] one of the highest rates of species decline amongst developed countries in the OECD. The report reveals that the list of new threatened species, and species listed in a higher category of threat, has grown by 8 percent since 2016 and... will increase substantially in coming years because of the 2019-20 bushfires.' A 2012 report from the Environment Defenders Office (Victoria) noted, 'At least two thirds of Victoria's wetlands have been lost since settlement, amounting to around 4,000 natural wetlands and 191,000 hectares. Remaining wetlands are threatened by a lack of water, physical change for development, pollution, and poor land management.' Numerous duck species are currently threatened because of habitat loss, leading critics to argue that recreational hunting is not sustainable. As an instance of duck species' perilous state, a 2003 Department and Sustainability Environment Action Statement regarding the Blue-billed Duck noted, 'There are only 25 wetlands at which more than 100 Blue-billed Ducks have been recorded at any one time in surveys conducted since 1987. Even though the species is rare it has regularly featured in the list of most frequently shot nongame species.'
Another species at risk is the threatened duck which is listed as 'threatened' in Victoria, 'vulnerable and rare' in New South Wales and South Australia, 'likely to become extinct, or is rare' in Western Australia and as 'protected' in Queensland. Despite this, duck hunting in its habitats continues to result in birds being killed. A 2022 Department and Sustainability Environment Action Statement noted, 'Freckled Duck are vulnerable to shooting because flocks, when disturbed, are often reluctant to leave a favoured wetland and because of misidentification...Estimates from surveys indicate that the percentage of Freckled Duck shot.
on samples of waters open to hunting during the opening weekend of the duck hunting season over three years varied from 33 percent in 1988 to 93 percent in 1989.
Though duck identification tests have improved these figures the birds are still being shot. In the opening days of the duck hunting season in Victoria in 2017, the bodies of some 450 threatened or protected species were retrieved from duck hunting sites by animal activists. Among these birds were freckled ducks and blue-billed ducks. Critics argue that all duck species are at risk due to habitat loss and that duck hunting must not continue. In 2021, researchers led by conservation biologist Richard Kingsford recorded the third lowest tally of water bird abundance across the eastern seaboard in almost 40 years of monitoring. Australasian shovelers, they found, now number fewer than 60, compared to thousands just decades ago.
Paleoecologist Peter Gell argues that government attempts to conserve and restore habitats are incompatible with continued hunting. He has stated, 'It goes against the kind of widespread investment in recovery if we allow duck shooting to continue at the expense of our native fauna.' 5. The economic benefits of duck hunting are exaggerated
Opponents of duck hunting claim that the supposed economic benefits of this practice are highly exaggerated.
It has been claimed that only a small proportion of the Victorian population, for example, takes part in duck hunting and that the contribution it makes to rural economies is minor. On February 7, 2023, the Victorian branch of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA-Victoria) noted 'Estimates show that only 11,549 hunters hunted in 2022, meaning only 0.17 percent of the Victorian population is actively participating in duck hunting and a regular season runs for around 12 weeks a year showing that a ban will have negligible impact on the economy due to the extremely limited participation rate.'
Although total expenditure by duck shooters may appear significant, critics further note that its actual contribution to both the Victorian economy and the economies of regional areas is small. A 2014 study conducted for the Department of Environment and Primary Industries (DEPI) found 'With a GSP [gross state product] of $439 million including flow-on effects, the economic impact of hunting activity by game licence holders was estimated to make up 0.13 percent of the Victorian economy. Hunting activity is concentrated in certain areas, with the highest concentration of hunting being [the] Mansfield local government area (LGA) where hunting accounts for 2.5 percent of the LGA's economy.' Opponents of duck hunting argue that tourism contributes far more to both state and regional economies. The previously cited 2014 study conducted for the Department of Environment and Primary Industries (DEPI)on the impact of duck hunting on the Victorian economy found 'The direct economic impact of the tourism industry in Victoria was estimated to be $8,650 million in 2011/12, or $8,970 in today's [2014] dollars. At $177 million, the direct economic impact of hunting by game licence holders was 2.0% of tourism's direct economic impact.'
It has further been noted that duck hunting may actually discourage eco tourists, who form a significant proportion of the tourist market. In a comment released in January 2023, Wildlife Victoria urged the state's Game Management Authority (GMA) 'to consider the negative impact on domestic and international tourism, and the damage duck hunting has on Victoria's cultural and environmental reputation.' Wildlife Victoria further stated, 'The economic benefits of birdwatching and wildlife tourism are well documented and provide compelling evidence for ending duck hunting.' The lobby group Regional Victorians Opposed to Duck Shooting has stated, '"Birding" is cited as one of the fastest growing past times in the world. Typically, "birders" are affluent, well-educated tourists who "stay longer and spend more", in places they visit. Our rural cafes, shops, wineries and B&B's to name a few, could significantly benefit from this.' Numerous regional tourist businesses have expressed concern regarding the negative impact of the annual Victorian duck hunting season on regional tourism. In a letter published in The Age on September 4, 2022, Mae Adams, owner-manager of the Venus Bay Eco Retreat has written, 'Duck shooting has no benefit to regional Victoria and is threatening the much more viable and sustainable nature tourism sector. Water bird populations have been in decline for years, and it is time for Victorian Labor to stop cruel duck shooting permanently.'
It has further been argued that were duck hunting banned, those who participate in this interest are likely to take up other outdoor activities and the expenditure associated with these other activities would compensate for what would be lost because of the duck hunting ban. A 2012 review of the economic impact of duck hunting in Victoria, conducted by the Australian Institute, concluded 'Claims that duck hunting - or any recreational hunting - contributes significantly to the economy of Victoria are false. They assume that without hunting any related expenditure would be lost to Victoria. On the contrary, our survey shows that if duck hunters were prevented from hunting ducks they would go fishing, hunt other species, or go camping. There would be no impact on expenditure in Victoria from a duck hunting ban.'