HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2011-10-19 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Parliamentary Committees

NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE: LITTLE PENGUINS

The Hon. S.W. KEY (Ashford) (11:04): I move:

That the 59th report of the committee, entitled Little Penguins: Away with the fairies, be noted.

This report is a report of the committee's investigations into little penguins in South Australia. The committee's interest in little penguins began in December 2010, when committee member the Hon. Robert Brokenshire MLC raised the issue in response to a request from Mr John Ayliffe, Manager of the Kangaroo Island Penguin Centre in Kingscote.

This report is not the result of a formal inquiry, rather, the committee has taken evidence from Mr Ayliffe and a number of others interested in penguins, as well as seeking advice from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the Kangaroo Island NRM board. A number of individuals with relevant expertise were contacted and a preliminary literature review taken. This report is a summary of the evidence gathered.

There are approximately 80 colonies of little or fairy penguins in South Australia. Most colonies are small but there are also larger ones, such as at Pearson Island (60 kilometres south-west of Elliston in the state's west) with 12,000 birds. Most of the colonies are genetically isolated, which means that they have not been in contact with each other for 100 years, or more. Kingscote and Penneshaw colonies on Kangaroo Island are genetically isolated meaning that, if either became extinct, they would be unlikely to be replaced by birds migrating from the other one.

Overall, I am pleased to say that little penguins are not considered endangered in either South Australia or nationally. While the species overall may not be under threat, members were still concerned to hear of the recent rapid decline of penguin numbers on Granite Island at Victor Harbor, 80 kilometres south of Adelaide. Members were shocked to hear that little penguin numbers on Granite Island have declined from 1,548 in 2001 to 146 birds in 2010, with just 102 left in 2011.

There are circumstances on nearby West Island where numbers dropped to around 2,000 in early 2000-01, with fewer than 50 individuals in 2010. The most likely cause of this decline is believed to be increased predation by New Zealand fur seals, which are enjoying a population boom after the cessation of commercial sealing last century. Predation by dogs, cats, rats and fluctuating fish stocks may also be factors.

While New Zealand fur seals are clearly implicated in the declining penguin numbers, it appears that different mechanisms may be at work, and the overall picture remains unclear. For example, little penguin numbers have declined on the islands that do not have seal colonies or are not known as haul-out locations for seals. In other locations, large penguin colonies are thriving in close proximity to large seal colonies. This suggests that there is much more need for research (as is recommended in the report) in order to ensure an appropriate response.

Recently, members may have heard reports that New Zealand fur seals have been spotted in the Upper Spencer Gulf, near Port Lowly, which is the world-renowned spawning site for the giant cuttlefish. Madam Speaker, as I am sure you would be aware, these unique cephalopods are under pressure on a number of different fronts, and so many additional pressures, such as those poised by rapidly expanding bands of marauding fur seals, are particularly ill-timed.

Returning to penguins, Mr Ayliffe was particularly concerned that Kingscote's little penguin colony may suffer the same fate as Granite Island, and drew the attention of members to the small number of young male 'bachelor' seals targeting the penguins. The position of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources was that the Kingscote colony appeared stable for the time being. We should know whether this is correct soon as the annual Kangaroo Island penguin census—expanded this year to four locations on the island—has just begun.

Unfortunately, the colony at Penneshaw was reported to be in terminal decline, with numbers collapsing from 200 birds three years previously to fewer than half a dozen, according to Simone Summerfield who runs the Penneshaw Penguin Centre. Mr Ayliffe put to the committee that, within three to five years, there will be no commercially-exploited penguin colonies in South Australia unless there is some management of the seals. Mr Ayliffe's fears were that the local extinction of penguins would impact on both Kangaroo Island's ecological diversity and also the local economy due to the loss of tourist ventures at Penneshaw and Kingscote.

In contrast, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources described the decline of the penguin colonies used as tourism assets as tourism rather than an NRM issue. The department's position put to our committee was that the numbers of penguins had become artificially inflated in recent decades in response to the reduced numbers of seals, and that they were now seeing the declining penguin numbers return to the status quo.

It was also hypothesised that little penguins on Kangaroo Island may be modifying their colonising behaviour by scattering along the southern coastline at lower densities unattractive to seals, and also choosing to inhabit places distant from the New Zealand fur seal colonies. If correct, such mechanisms might hopefully ensure the survival of the species in South Australia, even if some colonies do become extinct.

The problem with the department's assertion that penguin numbers will stabilise once fur seals have returned to pre-European levels is that there is an absence of accurate pre-sealing population estimates, and DENR cannot predict what the status quo that we are supposedly heading for might look like, or when it will happen.

One recent estimate suggests 57,000 New Zealand fur seals exist Australia-wide. Historical records indicate that 100,000 and 300,000 seal skins were taken by sealers off Kangaroo Island between 1803 and the 1960s, although the unregulated nature of the industry, especially in the early days, means that these numbers may significantly under-report the number of animals killed.

Regardless of the exact figures, it is important to recognise that the current 10 to 15 per cent per annum seal population increase could continue for another 10 to 15 years. Such a massive increase in seal numbers would even stimulate cause for the resumption of commercial seal harvesting in years to come—a proposal likely to generate significant public discussion, to say the very least.

Anyway, I return to Mr Ayliffe from Kingscote. Mr Ayliffe proposed to our committee a small and strictly controlled trial targeting the individual seals identified as impacting on penguin tourist assets. Suggestions involve bleach marking and tagging 'problem' seals to better keep track of them and harassing seals away from penguin colonies used for tourism using non-lethal deterrents. Relocating 'problem' seals away from penguins was suggested as a last resort.

In response, the department (and much of the published literature) countered that attempts to manage seals in other jurisdictions have proven to be 'fairly ineffectual, incredibly resource hungry and expensive to deliver'. The department suggested, instead, that the best course of action was to undertake a community education program to tell people that the process of penguin decline was a natural one. While penguin decline may be a natural phenomenon, members of our committee argue that Mr Ayliffe's suggestion should at least be properly considered by the department.

Members of our committee will be keeping a close eye on the little penguin population, and we urge the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the NRM boards to work cooperatively with interested individuals such as Mr Ayliffe to try to ensure that shorter term impacts on penguin tourism are given due consideration as well as the longer term survival of little penguins in South Australia.

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN (Stuart) (11:13): I will be fairly brief. Our chair has ably outlined the report and the views of the committee. It is important to point out that this is a report rather than an inquiry and that does have different implications. Nonetheless, I thank the staff and the people who provided evidence, because to come to Parliament House and provide evidence, on their part, is equally the same amount of work and I think that should be recognised; and certainly the staff have put time and effort into this.

It is also important that I point out that, being the member for Stuart, I am not an expert on little penguins, but I have learnt a lot through the work of the committee just recently. One of the most important issues to point out is that there is a wide range of possible reasons why the little penguins might be suffering. There may well be dogs, cats, humans, pollution, climate change potentially, changing or reducing food sources or rats—a whole range of reasons why these animals are actually classified as vulnerable. What is important is to try to find out what is really going on.

One of the things that is highlighted in our committee's report is that the natural distribution of the New Zealand fur seals and the little penguins is almost the same around the southern coastline of Australia. I do not think that is just because the seals are chasing the penguins; there are other reasons for that. It is also not surprising, if they are living in the same waters and sharing the same beaches and habitat, that there is going to be strife for the penguins and not the seals.

With regard to the recommendations that our committee has put forward, they are quite clear, and our chair has already mentioned them. I would like to focus on recommendation No. 2, which can be summarised by asking DENR to consider a scientifically robust trial targeting problem predators. The problem predators may not just be the seals; they may well be the seals, but trying to find out exactly what the issue is is important.

The other issue, aside from whether it is actually the seals that are the key predators, is the recommendation in relation to 'individual problem predators'. I have a view, as an individual member of parliament, that if the issue is that problem seals are causing difficulty for specific little penguin colonies—not only for the penguins but also for tourism, business and other flow-on benefits that come from these penguins—the problem predators or problem seals need to be dealt with one way or another.

If it really is as simple as seals versus penguins, I am not sure that there is much that parliament, DENR, the government or anybody else can or should do about it. The seals are not an invasive pest. People have not put them onto boats, brought them here and dropped them off. They did not come with the First Fleet. They have not come more recently. They have not hitched rides inadvertently. The seals are as natural as the penguins in the waters of southern Australia, so to my mind, trying to identify whether there are individual problem predators will be the most important work we recommend that DENR does.

The SPEAKER: I am sure I have seen penguins at Marree—Marree penguins—but I had been driving for a long time at the time!

An honourable member: How big were they?

The SPEAKER: Only little ones.

Mr PENGILLY (Finniss) (11:17): It is with a good deal of interest that I have followed the progress of this particular matter, as two of the main areas that were looked at by the member for Ashford's committee were Granite Island and Kingscote. I point out that I have the utmost respect for the operator of the Granite Island penguin visitor operation; however, that respect does not extend to Kangaroo Island, and I will come to that shortly.

I have had close and ongoing discussions with the representative of DENR over this, and I believe that DENR is on the right track. One of the things that we have done, because the penguin numbers were up, the seal numbers were down and they have risen to where they are now, is that we have created visitor attractions at Kingscote, Penneshaw, Granite Island and other places particularly for the visiting public and travellers to go and look at the penguin experience. That has been terrific, but we are actually putting in place a visitor attraction which, to all intents and purposes, is only there as long as nature allows us to have it.

The seal numbers have grown exponentially; there is no question about that. The New Zealand fur seal is an aggressive animal—an extremely aggressive animal. They eat penguins, along with other things, and there is no question about that either. It is also interesting (and I will just talk about the Kingscote area) that the seals have been lounging around on the beach in front of the Ozone Hotel. That has become a new visitor experience for the international travellers particularly, and they really enjoy it.

The Hon. K.O. Foley: Watching the seals eat penguins?

Mr PENGILLY: No, Kevin—watching the seals on the beach, not eating the penguins. They would have to go swimming to see the seals eat the penguins. They have become an attraction in their own right but, as local fishermen have told me in the last couple of weeks, the seals have disappeared, to all intents and purposes, from Kingscote and other parts because, as the warmer weather comes, the seals look for colder waters, and they have headed off to other areas to lounge around and feed.

I am not for one moment suggesting that the seals are not eating the penguins. They are part of the diet of seals and, as their numbers grow, eventually, they are going to eat themselves out of house and home and either die off or move elsewhere. As with the koala debate about a decade ago, when we looked at the possibility of reducing koala numbers through a shooting program, that was not undertaken. What was put into place was a sterilisation program.

I think there needs to be a bit of work done on that, and that is something that the committee, under the chairmanship of the member for Ashford, may choose to do. I seriously question the vast amounts of money still going into sterilising koalas when 100,000 hectares of the island were burnt out in 2007, including large amounts of koala habitat. No-one has thought about that. So, I think that is something the committee could look at.

Also, the member for Ashford mentioned the census on penguins. I am reliably informed that the census this year actually showed that there has been a preliminary analysis that penguin numbers have gone down. However, I am also reliably informed that the number of volunteers who turned up to count the penguins was much lower, so there was far less effort put into the penguin census this year because the volunteers were simply not there.

I would desperately love to see the penguins return to all places. I know that there is a very distraught operator at Penneshaw, and I know that the Granite Island experience is nowhere near what it was for visitors. One day it may all turn around and come back.

In relation to the Kingscote experience and John Ayliffe, Mr Ayliffe has a track record that goes back many years. He is probably the most devious and manipulative person I know, and I do not for one moment trust anything he says. I trust implicitly Mr Graham Trethewey, who went to the committee with Mr Ayliffe.

I will put on the record that, recently, the Tourism Kangaroo Island AGM was being held at the Ozone Hotel in Kingscote. People who were sitting drinking coffee, or whatever, at the hotel looked out into the bay and saw a group of seals 100 metres or so from the front of the hotel and, to their horror, saw Mr Ayliffe come out in his dinghy, with an outboard motor on it, with a dog on board, and harass the seals in front of everybody.

That is the sort of credibility Mr Ayliffe has. He really made a brilliant move, because he was seen by everybody, and I think he was paid a visit by DENR the next day. So, you cannot take at face value anything Mr Ayliffe says. I do not seek to go on any further about that, but I would be very careful in my dealings with him.

On occasion over the last decade, I have taken legal action against Mr Ayliffe, and others have, too. The second time legal action was nearly taken against him was in the lead-up to the election in 2006, when he was distributing material which was blatantly defamatory to myself. The Christies Beach CIB was prepared to act, but they were asked not to because it was only going to further infuriate the situation.

Only in the last two years I once again consulted a QC, and Mr Ayliffe received further legal representation from my lawyers. I do not trust Mr Ayliffe—I am sorry—and I wish the committee all the best as it goes about its work. I know that the committee had its best foot forward, but a few things needed to be put on the record. However, I hope the penguin experience improves for visitors who want to see them. They are terrific to visit.

The Hon. K.O. Foley interjecting:

Mr PENGILLY: You can come after you retire, Kevin. Come over and I will take you on a night tour. With those comments, I support the committee, but just be very careful about how you go about it.

Mr PEGLER (Mount Gambier) (11:23): First of all, I would like to commend the Natural Resources Committee and the chair, the member for Ashford, on this report. In the South-East, we have for many years been trying to protect our penguins by baiting and poisoning foxes and cats and encouraging people not to go to their nesting sites, and this has proved very beneficial for the penguins.

As far as the seals and penguins are concerned, they are both naturally occurring, and I believe that it is just the balance of nature finding its own equilibrium. We might end up with a few more white pointers, which will put the seals back in order and everything will be right.

On a recent visit to South Africa, I had a look at what they had done with the seals over there. I went to a town called Simon's Town in the north-western part of False Bay, which is right at the tip of South Africa. They had had problems with seals and they took the approach that it was better to recruit more penguins by fencing off their nesting areas and providing nesting boxes.

They also put in boardwalks so that people could see the penguins without interfering with them. Because of that recruitment program and the penguins only being preyed on by the seals and not by land-based animals and man, the equilibrium is returning.

As far as relocating the seals, in one area of South Africa they captured and relocated 60-odd seals that were preying on the penguins, but of course the ones that were the most devious at catching penguins were the ones that were the hardest to catch and it made no difference whatsoever.

So, I think that what we must do is ensure that the area where the penguins nest is protected. We can do that and perhaps use the experience over there where they are charging people to go onto those boardwalks so that it is being funded by the people themselves. It is a program that has worked exceptionally well.

As far as I am concerned, it is just the balances of nature occurring, and we must make sure that the nesting sites are the ones that are protected.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY (Port Adelaide—Minister for Defence Industries, Minister for Police, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Motor Sport, Minister Assisting the Premier with the Olympic Dam Expansion Project) (11:26): I feel compelled to speak on this topic. I do not want to be critical of my colleague the member for Ashford and her hard work and that of her committee, but it is not just the penguins on Kangaroo Island that are under threat. Has anyone gone down to Granite Island recently?

Members interjecting:

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: Did you cover Granite Island in your work?

Members interjecting:

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: Oh, you did, right. I was down there recently and there are no penguins. As I count down my days in this place the quality and subject matters of debate are, to say the least, interesting. The suggestion that a bunch of politicians could come up with a strategy to save fairy penguins I find interesting—amusing.

The Hon. S.W. Key: We failed.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: You failed.

Members interjecting:

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: It probably would help. As a cabinet minister I was in a cabinet meeting where we discussed with the Chief Scientist—for your ears only, a cabinet secret—the koala bear problem on Kangaroo Island. The advisers were adamant that we had to have a culling of koala bears, which would be somewhat problematic for our tourism industry. It would receive plenty of coverage in America and Europe, but for all the wrong reasons.

Mrs Geraghty: And Japan.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: And Japan. But I think there needs to be some lateral thinking. If somehow we could have the seals show interest in the koala bear then we could solve two problems. I am just saying that sometimes we need to think laterally to resolve problems. Having contributed to this debate, I am happy for it to be closed.

Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg) (11:29): I thank the member for Ashford for her report and the work of the committee on this important issue. That, together with the question of abundant native species, is an issue which this state and this parliament, I think, has to deal with. The penguins' current plight, for those that are left in the state that have not already been on the dinner plate of seals, I think is a serious indicator of the problem.

We have had major problems with corellas in the metropolitan area, which certain agencies, including the Natural Resource Management Board, have ignored. When I say 'metropolitan area', I mean on the Adelaide Plains and Mount Lofty areas. This is the way they have dealt with it, unlike some more effective ways on Kangaroo Island: they have stripped the trees in Strathalbyn and the NRM Board say it is a noise problem, so the local council have to fix it up. We have seen responsibility shifting on these issues for a long time.

I welcome the report on the penguins and their plight for survival that has been prepared by this committee. I read with interest the case studies that were examined in an attempt to manage this issue in South Africa or around the precincts there. I had the opportunity to have a look at some of the background of those in the short time we have had to consider this report. What I would say to the committee is that I consider that the findings of those examinations that they have taken into account are flawed, not only in the lack of data over a time period but also the samples that they used.

One finding of those investigations or reviews of the programs in South Africa was one that suggested that there had been an abandonment of the program to cull and manage seals because the seals had learned to identify the boat that would come along that housed the people that were going to deal with them. In other words, they had some learned behaviour that the people on the boats were going to kill them and therefore they moved out of the district.

I say to the parliament that, when the committee looks at these sorts of things, the validity and basis upon which they rely on these reports does need some scrutiny. If we are going to make recommendations based on material that is unreliable then that only continues to perpetuate the disadvantage that we are all at in coming to some resolution of this matter and others like it.

I repeat the concern I have, and that is that somewhere, at some time, somebody has to take responsibility for how we are going to deal with abundant native species. We have to remember that it is not always a circumstance that is a problem over a prolonged period. Sometimes they are intermittent. Sometimes they respond to drought, heavy rainfall periods, geographical changes or changes to the availability of food sources to some species, etc.

Another example might be the advent of presenting a piece of major road infrastructure through an area where kangaroos might hop and cause damage to motor vehicles, as deer do in the northern part of America. However, somebody, some time has to deal with it.

I was disappointed to read in this report that further research needs to be done and that it will be considered again at some other later date. The situation is with us now. It needs to be dealt with. It is not just a question of whether there are small areas of koala infestation that are stripping trees on a part of Kangaroo Island. It is not just an issue of whether corellas are causing damage to crops and to native fauna. It is not just an issue of whether the seals are harvesting through the poor little penguins after they have eaten all the fish.

These sorts of things have lots of implications, including to the current government's consideration of marine parks. Once the penguins are gone—there are not many left, and there is concern about whether the seals are eating them—are they then going to eat the fish? Are the fishermen going to be blamed for that? How are marine parks going to protect the fish or other water users—obviously not penguins because they will all be eaten.

In raising my concern about the failure of anybody to actually deal with these issues, let me conclude with the fact that the cuttlefish in the Upper Spencer Gulf have also come on the agenda, and they have been referred to in the report. I think most members would appreciate that the cuttlefish in the breeding grounds around Port Lowly in the northern Spencer Gulf have not picked up the paper and said, 'Oh, goodness! BHP are going to put a desalination plant here so we might just move home.'

A legitimate explanation may be that there appears to have been recently an identification of a reduction of cuttlefish. Let me alert the house to what local fishermen say. Local fishermen have already seen seals in significant populations in areas which they have not previously inhabited in the Spencer Gulf up towards the Point Lowly area. I say to the house: if you want some serious response, if you want some decent information about what is going on out there, ask the people who actually live and work in these regions. Ask the fishermen.

One who has had experience for over 30 years in the fishing industry, including along this stretch, has said to me, 'I have identified that there are a number of seals there, Vickie, and BHP needn't be worried about whether their desal plant is going to cause a salinity problem that is going to kill the cuttlefish because the seals are already out there eating them.' This is a new source of food for the seals which, of course, we have heard are in very significant number, and they are growing.

It is not just a question of whether or not you cull. In the interests of protecting human beings who swim at beaches and undertake recreational activity, and in the interests of promoting tourism, we keep sharks and other predators of seals outside of those waters, so it is obvious when we interfere with the natural order of predators of seals. Of course, we are not in the sealing and whaling industries anymore—for good reason. I am not suggesting that be advocated.

Once you interfere with the natural structure, the pecking order in nature—and in this instance we have ensured that we have programs. We have ships that go out, we have helicopter surveillance, we keep away sharks and others that might be detrimental to our own recreation and tourism activity in this state. Once you do that, there are consequences, and the direct consequence here is that seals are having a great time and they are breeding. They have plenty of fish still, a few penguins are left. They have plenty to be able to develop, and what I am saying is that, if you look at the interference in the natural chain of events, you get some answers about why we have this.

If we are going to maintain an interference at some level of this food chain in the ocean, rather than just proposing marine parks where we draw a line on the sea, let's look at it more seriously. Let's understand why we have an abundance of native species which is causing harm to other natural habitats of the environment, whether they be fauna or flora. Let's not just bury ourselves behind reports that say, 'Let's look at some more research.' Let's have a real understanding here. We have a problem here. It is not just a human inconvenience or about danger or safety; it is to the peril of other native species and it is about time we addressed it and did something about it.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT