Page 3016 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 14 September 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The committee has heard a series of opinions through the submission process and through public hearings. We have now reached the position where we have taken a direction, and we are making very clear to the public what direction we have in mind, giving them the opportunity to indicate to us whether they consider that appropriate. The direction taken by this discussion paper is, first of all, to recognise that the greatest concern, in terms of feral animals and invasive plants, is probably with invasive plants, although we recognise that the much more emotional concerns are those to do with feral animals.
I would like to take, first of all, the issue of invasive plants in the ACT. The discussion paper outlines quite clearly in chapter 4 a range of plants and the concerns we have about their extent and the effects the plants have as pests in the ACT. Some of us would recognise a range of species, such as most cotoneaster species, English hawthorn, firethorn species and pampas grass. We also recognise the impact these will have, not only on Canberra Nature Park and Namadgi National Park but also on agricultural areas, although most of us consider the parks to be the greatest problem and the most difficult areas to control. These plants are of such great concern that the immediate reaction is to say that what we need to do is destroy them, that we should rip them out where they are a problem. A logical and rational look at that, recognising limited resources, would indicate that with some invasive plants, and the same will apply to feral animals, we have to come to a position where we recognise that they are part and parcel of our environment at this stage and try to ensure that none of those plants or feral animals go out of control.
With this in mind, I would like to move on to some of the issues involved with feral animals. The feral animals that have been identified in the report include rabbit, hare and fox, and you will note that it is the fox we have chosen as part of the logo on the front of this report, rather than feral cats, which is what some people thought we would do. The reason we have not chosen cats - and I digress a little - is that that is the area of most concern to the public. People are very close to their cats, and the committee is keen to assure people that we are not about attacking responsible cat ownership. Responsible cat ownership plays an important part in many people's lives. We have just heard a paper from Mr Berry on Alzheimer's disease, and we know that elderly people in particular get a great deal of pleasure from the companionship of cats. The other feral animals we might be concerned with are pigs, goats, black rats, starlings, mynas, blackbirds, feral pigeons, feral ducks and geese, and a much more difficult area to control, feral fish, such as trout, carp and redfin. Each of these issues we have dealt with in the discussion paper to give an indication of how we think they should be handled.
Turning specifically to the emotional area of cat management, I emphasise again that in no way is the committee interested in being seen to attack responsible cat ownership. We have attempted to set out the sorts of issues we feel may assist us in ensuring that we do not have an environmental problem with cats. There has been a great deal of debate in this chamber about dog control, and it is appropriate for us to consider carefully in what way dogs are a threat to people.
In the case of cats, the issue is about the environment much more than it is about people. However, I must say that I have had a phone call since this discussion paper went out about somebody having been attacked quite viciously by a cat. This was an elderly woman who was very worried. I have never experienced this sort of situation myself; that is probably because I open my eyes up when cats are
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .