The Dingo Paradox: Why We Must Rethink Our War on Nature
Dr Brian Walker argues that current approaches to dingo management are scientifically outdated, ecologically damaging, and rely on practices that cause unnecessary suffering to our native apex predator.
The Cruel Contradiction
In my years as a GP, I never saw a patient cured by red tape. Yet, in our approach to the dingo, we have created a labyrinth of conflicting laws that defies both science and common sense. One page of our legislation protects the dingo as vital native wildlife, while the next labels it a pest to be eradicated. This is not just a technical oversight: it is a administrative failure that licenses profound cruelty. When we frame a living creature primarily as a pest, we stop looking at its role in the landscape and start looking for the fastest way to kill it.
The consequences for our environment are stark. We are poisoning the very systems that sustain us. We know that 1080 and strychnine are indiscriminate. They do not pause to verify if a target is a dingo or a family pet. We have seen the heartbreak of people who lose their dogs simply for walking in the bush, and we have seen the silent, hidden cost of a food web interrupted by the careless use of toxins. This is not just bureaucracy; it is a waiting room where the health of our natural heritage dies.
Are you following our fight for science-based policy in the Legislative Council? Please subscribe to my YouTube channel to stay updated on these important debates.
Learning from the Mistakes of History
Humanity has a long, regrettable history of deciding we know better than nature. I often think of the lessons from history, such as the catastrophic attempt to eradicate sparrows in China which decimated harvests, or the initial fear of wolves that led to their near-extinction in the United States. Eventually, we learned that the wolf was not a villain but a guardian of ecological balance. When wolves were returned to their habitats, the forests returned to life, the rivers became healthier, and the ecosystems rebalanced themselves. Why do we insist on repeating these same cycles of destruction when we could choose wisdom?
We are currently operating on an outdated model that ignores 60,000 years of ecological intelligence. We view the bush as something to be tamed or conquered rather than a complex, living system that requires the presence of its apex predators to remain stable. The evidence is clear: disrupting the dingo’s family structure through mass culling often makes the very problems we fear, such as hybridisation or unpredictable behaviour, more likely, not less.
A Path Toward Coexistence
While the major parties play politics, we look at the evidence. We know that there are landholders in our own state who have proven that coexistence is not just a theory; it is a practical, successful way to restore land health. By stepping back from the reliance on systemic, government-funded poison programs, we could finally allow the land to breathe. As we celebrate our bicentennial, we must ask ourselves what legacy we wish to leave behind. Do we want to be remembered as a society that chose to poison its own soul, or one that had the courage to align with nature?
I support the call to stop relying on blind eradication and start a genuine, evidence-based investigation into how we live in balance with our environment. You can read more about this motion in the full Hansard record. If you believe it is time for a more intelligent, compassionate approach to our natural world, I invite you to join us at Legalise Cannabis WA as we continue to push for transparency and logic in all areas of public policy.
