Right: Changing from lead shot to steel removed one of the environmental objections, but duck hunting is still under pressure from animal welfare groups.
 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. |
Duck and quail hunting should be banned in Victoria
1. Native waterbirds suffer pain and distress because of hunting
Opponents of duck and quail hunting claim that birds are inevitably traumatised and often suffer painful, lingering deaths because of hunting.
Numerous authorities have claimed that duck and quail hunting always cause pain and distress for wounded animals. The RSPCA has noted, 'In recreational duck and quail hunting people use a shotgun to shoot the birds; this causes inevitable pain and suffering as not every bird is killed outright. While no recent studies have been conducted, one historical report showed that on average nearly a quarter of ducks were wounded and not killed outright, but the figure could be as high as one third. No wounding rate figures are available for quail.'
The RSPCA has explained this in further detail, stating 'a shotgun releases a spray of pellets rather than a single bullet. To kill a game bird, the bird's vital areas (i.e., brain or heart/lung) must be hit by pellets, but the chance of achieving a fatal shot decreases the further the bird is from the shooter. 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.' Not all hunters kill wounded birds humanely. A study done in Minnesota in the United States reported approximately one-third of ducks are injured but escape capture. A similar study in Victoria reported 14 to 33 percent of birds were wounded but not retrieved.
The South Australian RSPCA has claimed, 'Every year shooters are caught on camera wounding (not killing) ducks in flight with pellets sprayed from shotguns, and then failing to kill the wounded birds quickly or humanely after they fall from the sky. The footage has also shown that some shooters do not bother to retrieve wounded birds. . . And some shooters have also been filmed leaving wounded birds accessible to their dogs, even holding the flapping birds up and appearing to encourage their dogs to snap at them.' The Animal Justice Party has also claimed 'wounded birds often continue to fly or fall from the sky into dense reeds where they are difficult or impossible to locate. [Further] 'windmilling' (swinging the duck by the neck around in an arc/circle) is frequently observed on the wetlands despite resulting in a slow and painful death. If this fails to kill the wounded bird, they are often shoved into a shooter's belt or box, still alive.' Wing, bill, and leg fractures are common in surviving birds. If left, 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. Studies have found that death due to crippling may not happen immediately after injury and may take days or weeks from long-term effects. Retained shotgun pellets have been found in around 10 percent of birds surveyed, even after intensive hunter education campaigns. A radiographical study in Victoria carried out over almost 20 years reported that between 6 and 19 percent of trapped live ducks (of mixed species) had embedded shot.
Numerous studies have shown that waterfowl are sentient creatures that suffer physical pain and the effects of trauma. Professor Gisela Kaplan, an Emeritus Professor in Animal Behaviour in the School of Science and Technology at the University of New England has stated, 'There is ample evidence that birds feel pain, fear, shock, and sorrow much like humans do. Many birds are monogamous and form lifelong pairs. When a bird is shot, its mate may never recover or find a new mate. The effects will hence ripple through a species.'
2. Duck and quail hunting kills threatened species and non-game birds and causes further reduction in bird numbers
Opponents of duck and quail hunting claim that every year threatened species are killed because of this activity. It is claimed that despite being required to pass waterfowl identification tests, hunters continue to shoot endangered species and non-game species through carelessness or lack of skill. It is also claimed that the bird population figures used to justify duck and quail hunting are likely to be inaccurate and that wild bird numbers are in long-term decline.
Critics of duck and quail hunting note that every hunting season there are frequent reports of protected species being injured and killed. PETA Australia reported during the 2022 season 'Within just a few short days of the commencement of Victoria's duck-hunting season for 2022, threatened bird species are already being killed illegally. First, an Australasian shoveler - a member of a threatened species - was taken to the Wildlife Victoria triage tent on opening day. The duck's injuries were so severe that she had to be euthanised. A few days later, a baby great crested grebe - also not on the game species list - was found shot in the back of the head and across his back.'
In 2023 the ABC reported that duck hunting has been banned at Lake Buloke in western Victoria after threatened species were allegedly shot there during the opening week of the new hunting season. Not-for-profit conservation group Wildlife Victoria said eight threatened duck species were recovered from nearby wetlands, which prompted independent hunting authority the Game Management Authority (GMA) to review and assess hunting at the site in Donald. According to Wildlife Victoria, the waterbirds picked up by conservationists included the hardhead duck, blue-winged shoveler and the freckled duck, which is listed as endangered in Victoria. All had been left in the field. Wildlife Victoria chief executive Lisa Palma claimed, 'I would suggest that the numbers of waterbirds that are killed or wounded and just left is probably well into the thousands.' This is believed to include threatened species which are only recognised postmortem. Non-game species are also frequently traumatised and killed because of duck and quail hunting. In May 2023, Glenys Mahler, a wildlife activist, said she saw a black swan fall from the sky at Gunbower Creek, near Echuca, less than two hours after the start of the season. Although the swan had 'no bullet hole', Ms Mahler said she saw the bird fly into a power line and break its neck, reportedly after bullets startled it.
Animal Liberation Australia has claimed 'With no accuracy tests and minimal [regulatory] authority present on the wetlands, protected, rare, and non-game species are caught in the crossfire. Every year, the Coalition Against Duck Shooting finds their bodies and reports them to the authorities.' It is also claimed that the population figures used to justify duck and quail hunting are not reliable and ignore the long-term decline in bird numbers across Victoria. Critics claim that the extrapolations that are made from limited population survey data give highly unrealistic estimates of bird numbers in the wild. In the case of quails, Regional Victorians Opposed to Duck Hunting have noted that the first Game Management Authority 'count' was conducted in only 2022. It found 101 birds in the areas surveyed. This was extrapolated to a total population of 3.1 million. The highest anticipated error factor was 29 percent. The following year 400 quail were counted which was extrapolated to a supposed 7 million. Regional Victorians Opposed to Duck Hunting are skeptical of these figures, describing them as 'incredible'. The lobby group notes that these estimates are in opposition to the trend observed in annual quail harvests between 1991 and 2023. These are the tallies of the number of quail claimed to have been shot each year over this period. These quail harvests have declined by about 50 percent over this time.
Opponents of continued duck and quail hunting stress that waterfowl numbers in eastern Australia are in long-term decline. The Eastern Australian Waterbird Survey is conducted every year by the Centre for Ecosystem Science at the University of New South Wales in partnership with the New South Wales Office of Environment & Heritage with financial support from the New South Wales, Queensland, and Victorian governments. The 2022 survey, the most recent survey published, commented on a pattern of long-term decline in bird populations. It found that total waterbird abundance in 2022 increased significantly from 2021 but remained well below the long-term average: coming in at the 11th lowest level in 40 years. The survey found 'Despite two successive La Nina years, three major indices for waterbirds (total abundance, number of species breeding and wetland area index) continued to show significant declines over time.' The survey noted that these 'Long term trends are more informative for predicting population status than year to year fluctuations.'
Six of eight duck species that the government allowed to be killed for recreation were found to be in serious long-term decline. Two species of 'game' ducks, Pink-eared and Hardheads, were resilient in earlier times but have suffered population collapse during the last decade. Two further 'game' species are now on Victoria's threatened species list (Hardhead and Blue-winged Shoveler). 3. The regulation of duck and quail hunting is inadequate
Those who oppose duck and quail hunting in Victoria argue that the training supplied to hunters to reduce harm to all species and protect endangered species is ineffective. They also claim that the in-the-field monitoring and regulation supposedly supplied by the Victorian Game Management Authority (GMA) is inadequate.
Critics claim that training hunters to recognise species and shoot them cleanly and humanely is difficult and often ineffective. Dr Liz Walker, the chief executive officer of RSPCA Victoria has noted, 'The government wants to invest $10 million into mandatory training, hoping this will reduce wounding rates, however Denmark, a world leader in wounding reduction, took 20 years to reduce wounding rates, and these rates still sit unacceptably high at around 10 percent.'
Regarding bird recognition, Animals Australia has complained 'Duck shooters are required to sit a 22 question "Waterfowl Identification Test". You can pass this test with just 75 percent accuracy [this has since been raised to 85 percent - Echo editor] - and you only need to sit it once - meaning some shooters may not have taken the test for 25 years.' In addition, duck hunters currently do not have to demonstrate shooting accuracy. Animals Australia has critically observed, 'Duck hunters don't have to pass a compulsory shooting accuracy test - despite the government's own data revealing shooters are likely to cause injury rates of up to 30 percent. The development of an accuracy improvement course for shooters was funded by taxpayers but attracted little interest from shooters. Fewer than one hundred shooters are believed to have attended the one-day course - yet more than 26,000 duck shooters are licensed for the 2018 season.'
From 2025, there will shooter accuracy training and testing; but critics have complained that this is not sufficient. Anyone applying for a duck hunting licence in Victoria from 2025 will have to undertake a clay target test, aimed at reducing wounding, however, the Coalition Against Duck Hunting has argued 'There is no proposal to test existing licence holders for shooting accuracy.' The Coalition has warned, 'Only new shooters will be tested. But the existing shooters are the ones whose wounding behaviour has prompted this program. There will be "incentives" to entice existing shooters to pass tests. But the worst shooters won't want to do any tests, and they will perpetuate the worst behaviours. The proposed online knowledge test for all is easily flouted by getting "help" from friends.'
It is also argued that there is no process for ensuring that all hunters know how to humanely kill injured birds. A shooter survey in Victoria found that 84 percent of shooters did not know how to kill quickly and relatively painlessly ducks that they had shot and injured. This means that if a hunter collects an injured bird, they are likely to cause additional and prolonged pain and suffering.
In addition, critics claim that the hunting areas that must be monitored by Victoria's Game Management Authority (GMA) are too many and too large to be regulated effectively. Animals Australia's chief executive officer Glenys Oogjes has stated, 'We know that there are too many wetlands for any level of robust regulatory management.'
Wildlife Victoria has similarly maintained, 'We contend it is next to impossible to oversee an entire statewide network of both public and private wetlands, particularly where even the few remaining duck shooters are widely dispersed, and wetland topography makes it challenging to supervise and observe in field activity.' In 2017, Pegasus Economics conducted an 'Assessment of the GMA's compliance and enforcement function'. The review found '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.'
4. A duck and quail hunting ban would not harm regional economies
Those who support a ban on duck and quail hunting argue it would not harm rural economies. They claim the supposed benefits that come from hunting have been exaggerated and that other regional industries, such as tourism, are more significant and would develop more rapidly if duck and quail hunting were banned.
Opponents of duck and quail hunting argue that the supposed economic advantages of hunting for regional communities have been overstated. It has been claimed that the economic contribution of hunting to Victoria's economy was initially overblown because the figures were based on estimates of supposed expenditure supplied by duck hunters. Shooters were asked to 'guesstimate' their expenditure on hunting. Kerrie Allen, a spokesperson for Regional Victorians Opposed to Duck Shooting Incorporated, has said of this process, 'The results were ludicrously high but have been quoted relentlessly to justify taxpayer subsidies. The millions allegedly spent by duck shooters equate to an incredible $235 per duck bagged.'
Alternate figures have been supplied by the Australian Institute, an independent think tank based in Canberra, which has used RM Consulting Group (RMCG) to survey and supply figures on hunters' expenditure. RMCG is an environmental and agricultural consultancy which provides advice to government agencies, water authorities, institutions, and private sector clients. The Australian Institute has stated, 'Based on calculations from RM Consulting Group, duck and quail hunting results in economic activity of between $4 million and $11 million each year. Even at the top of the range - $11 million - duck and quail hunting represent just 0.002 per cent of Victoria's gross state product of $501 billion.' It has further been noted that if duck hunting were banned in Victoria, hunters would probably pursue other related outdoor activities which would be likely to contribute comparable amounts to regional economies. Rod Campbell, the Research Director of the Australian Institute, has stated, 'The RMCG work . . .has percentages in the 90s of respondents saying that in the absence of any kind of hunting they would go fishing, go boating et cetera. You know, polling aside, I think it just makes real-world sense that if you are a person interested in the outdoors and one kind of outdoor activity is not available you would be very likely to substitute that with another kind of outdoor activity.'
It has further been noted that tourism from among non-hunters would be likely to increase if the duck and quail hunting season in Victoria were banned. Rod Campbell, the Research Director of the Australian Institute, has stated, 'Our surveys asked people who were not hunters if they were more or less likely to go to areas for a general tourism visit if they knew that there was hunting occurring there. I think it is not very surprising that the numbers are pretty high . . . [with] about 76 per cent of people saying they would be less likely to visit an area that has a hunting season going on at it.'
Related findings were made by Regional Victorians Opposed to Duck Shooting Incorporated in its surveys of regional businesses. The lobby group found that 'Businesses want to expand but tourist numbers shrink during duck shooting seasons.' Supporters of a duck and quail hunting ban argue that tourism has far more to offer all Australian regional economies than any form of hunting. In a letter published in The Gippsland Times on March 16, 2021, Kerrie Allen, a spokesperson for Regional Victorians Opposed to Duck Shooting Incorporated, noted, 'Tourism typically contributes more to Australia's economy than agriculture, forestry, fishing, media and communications combined. Even during COVID it was worth more than $50 billion, employed about five per cent of working Australians and supported one in eight businesses (Tourism Satellite Account). Nature-based tourism is the fastest growing component . . . More overnight domestic tourists went birdwatching than visited the Great Barrier Reef. When independent economists report most holidaymakers avoid shooting areas, it's clear we must make a choice. It's not rocket science to see 860,000 birdwatchers is a better economic opportunity for regional areas than 7000 active duck shooters (Game Management Authority statistics) who typically camp and bring their own supplies.'
5. Residents of wetlands in regional Victoria are endangered and inconvenienced by duck and quail hunting.
Among those who oppose duck and quail hunting are residents of regional Victorian wetlands who claim their lives are made unsafe and their enjoyment of their local environment is reduced by the annual hunts.
There are many residents of regional Victoria who oppose duck and quail hunting because of the harm they claim the activity causes to their lives and local environments. The organisation representing those in Victorian wetland regions opposed to duck and quail hunting is Regional Victorians Opposed to Duck Shooting Incorporated. It claims to represent 'farmers, business owners and residents.' In its submission to the recent Parliamentary Inquiry into Victoria's Recreational Native Bird Hunting Arrangements, the lobby group stated, 'We experience the bird shooting without a choice. We are often the ones who are witnessing what goes on when the hunters think no-one is watching. As individuals, many of us are too afraid to speak up given the disturbing hunter behaviour we are privy to. The gunfire occurs close to our homes, on and adjacent to our properties. That in itself is quite disturbing and destructive enough, but we also contend with armed trespassers, the distressing sight of dead and injured birds, theft of firewood and the aftermath of rubbish and contamination strewn around our properties in the wetlands.'
Anti-duck hunting wetland residents have noted that their family lives are disrupted, and their own recreational activities are obstructed. Their submission to the Parliamentary Inquiry into Victoria's Recreational Native Bird Hunting Arrangements further stated, 'We have to console our scared and worried children, take measures to manage petrified pets and move horses and other stock to agistment. The resultant heightened anxiety levels leave some residents legitimately fearful of their safety. Furthermore, the shooting encroaches onto areas where other outdoor pursuits normally take place. Activities such as cycling, bushwalking, horseriding, birdwatching, fishing, school nature excursions and kayaking are all unwillingly deterred by the shooting. This not only curtails the freedom and ability of others to enjoy the outdoors, but it impacts negatively on the tourism potential of these unique and beautiful places.'
It has also been noted that it is difficult for residents to move safely around their local environment during duck and quail hunting season as the location of many shooting areas is not known. Kerrie Allen, a spokesperson for Regional Victorians Opposed to Duck Shooting Incorporated testified to the 'Inquiry into Victoria's recreational native bird hunting arrangements' that 'Only a very small number [of hunting locations] are signposted as shooting areas. They are largely at the state game reserves. There are only about 200 of those. The vast majority of public shooting areas are not signposted, and the maps are incorrect. It is not possible to know for sure where shooting can and cannot take place . . . Apparently, the maps are incomplete. GMA (Game Management Authority) have said to us that not all public foreshore areas are showing up on the hunting maps because they are not yet at a standard of accuracy . . . They have got no idea . . . Nobody seems to be able to give us an answer or even tell us whether it is closer to 8000 public waterways or 20,000 - it is scary - that we do not have any oversight of where these shooting areas are.'
In an opinion piece published in The Age on August 2, 2021, Kerrie Allen gave the results of surveys her organisation had conducted among wetland residents. She stated, 'In the absence of any government consultation to do so, our organisation has run surveys to capture the impacts of bird shooting on those who live or work near it. Concerns have flooded in from regional people relieved to be finally heard.' Residents' complaints apparently included 'Shotgun pellets landing on roofs and in water tanks. Wounded ducks flapping into backyards. Children shrieking in horror, asking why people do this to animals. The shooting is too close to homes, including a retirement village. Hunters' trespass is common.'