Why we must rethink our cruel approach to dingo management

A matter of survival

In my years as a medical practitioner, I learned that you cannot fix a systemic health issue by merely treating the symptoms. Yet, when I look at the current legal framework surrounding our native dingo, that is exactly what we are doing. We are ignoring the diagnosis while continuing with a treatment plan that causes immense harm.

This week in the Legislative Council, we debated a motion regarding the classification of the dingo. It is a classic example of contradictory policy: the law recognises the dingo as native wildlife while simultaneously branding it a declared pest. This is not just a semantic quibble. This classification strips the dingo of legal protections, opening the door for aerial baiting, strychnine trapping, and even bounty programs. It is a system that has become dangerously desensitised to suffering.

The human and ecological cost

We often speak of the farming bottom line, but we must also speak of the public safety and emotional toll. Thousands of poisons are deployed across our landscape. These substances are not selective. They do not distinguish between a target predator and a family pet wandering off a trail during a weekend national park visit. The suffering caused by 1080 and strychnine is visceral: it is a slow, agonizing process for any animal that encounters these baits. For the families who have experienced the loss of a beloved companion dog in this way, the fear is real. It is not just bureaucracy; it is a waiting room where tragedies happen.

If you want to stay updated on our work to bring evidence-based solutions to these complex issues, please subscribe to my YouTube channel for regular updates from the House.

Searching for a smarter balance

While the major parties often default to tried and failed lethal methods, we are working to champion a forward-thinking approach. The science is evolving. We know that dingoes are not merely pests; they are apex predators essential for maintaining ecological balance. When we disrupt their social structures through indiscriminate culling, we do not solve the problem. In some cases, we actually exacerbate it by triggering ecological collapse and making hybridisation more likely.

We must begin to listen to the experts, including traditional owners who share thousands of years of knowledge about living in harmony with this landscape. It is not about abandoning our regional communities. It is about acknowledging that after decades of poisoning and trapping, we are still locked in the same cycle of conflict. True governance requires the courage to investigate whether there are more humane, science-based models of coexistence available to us, rather than repeating the same failed experiments.

You can read the full, nuanced debate regarding this motion in the official Hansard record. If you believe it is time for Western Australia to embrace more compassionate and intelligent policies, I invite you to join our movement at Legalise Cannabis WA.