The conflict between animal welfare and conservation

Abstract

IT is a measure of a civilized society that its inhabitants are concerned about the welfare of animals. Furthermore, there has been increasing concern about conservation, especially of threatened species. In many countries, including Australia, there is now extensive legislation to cover both animal welfare and the protection of many native species. Whereas welfare deals with individuals, conservation is concerned with populations. Thus, researchers must always weigh potential gains in knowledge against the consequences of their activities (see Gaunt and Oring 1997). Ironically, management for conservation often involves the killing of individuals of one species, typically predators or competitors, for the good of the population of another species. In Australia many of the animals that are killed are feral (e.g., foxes and rabbits). As some feral species also have major impacts on agriculture, the need to control their numbers is generally accepted and attracts little attention. However, there is mounting evidence that a number of native species may pose threats to declining or endangered native species. For instance, Pied Currawongs Strepera graculina are known to be nest predators and Noisy Miners Manorina rnelanocephala are known to drive most other small birds from the vicinity of their colonies. Many woodlarid birds are experiencing long-term decline and it has been hypothesized that Pied Currawongs and Noisy Miners contribute to this decline (Ford et al. 2001). We set out to test experimentally the hypothesis that Pied Currawongs are major nest predators.