Category: Community Action

The common Indian myna (Acridotheres tristis), also known as the common myna, is one of Australia’s most recognisable and least loved invasive species. A stocky, chocolate-brown bird with a distinctive yellow eye patch and a bold, aggressive temperament, the Indian myna has established large populations across urban and suburban areas of eastern Australia, where it competes fiercely with native birds and small mammals for nesting hollows and food resources. Voted Australia’s most hated pest in a 2005 survey, the Indian myna is a striking example of how even a seemingly innocuous introduction can have far-reaching consequences for native biodiversity.

Introduction and Spread

The Indian myna is native to southern Asia, where it is found from Iran to Southeast Asia. It was deliberately introduced to Melbourne in 1862 by the Acclimatisation Society of Victoria, initially in the hope that it would control insect pests in market gardens. Further introductions occurred in other parts of Victoria and in Queensland during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, including releases in the cane-growing districts of north Queensland where mynas were expected to help control insect pests in sugar cane — an aspiration that, like the later introduction of the cane toad, proved to be spectacularly misplaced.

From these initial introduction points, the Indian myna spread steadily through eastern Australia, aided by its remarkable adaptability to urban and modified environments. Today, Indian mynas are abundant throughout the coastal and hinterland regions of eastern Australia, from north Queensland to Victoria and into parts of South Australia. They are particularly common in urban and suburban areas, where they exploit the food and shelter resources provided by human habitation, but they are also expanding into rural and semi-rural landscapes, raising concerns about their potential impact on native bird communities in these environments.

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has listed the Indian myna among the world’s 100 worst invasive species, recognising the significant threat that this aggressive and adaptable bird poses to native biodiversity wherever it has been introduced outside its natural range.

Biology and Behaviour

Indian mynas are medium-sized passerine birds, measuring approximately 25 centimetres in length and weighing around 120 grams. They are readily identified by their dark brown body plumage, black head, yellow bill and eye patch, and distinctive white wing patches that are visible in flight. Their calls are loud, varied, and often described as raucous, including a range of chattering, whistling, and squawking vocalisations.

Mynas are highly social birds that typically roost communally in large flocks, sometimes numbering in the thousands. These roosts can create significant noise and mess, and are a source of considerable annoyance to residents in affected areas. Mynas are omnivorous and opportunistic feeders, consuming insects, fruit, seeds, scraps, and human food waste. Their willingness to exploit a wide range of food sources contributes to their success in urban environments.

One of the most concerning aspects of Indian myna behaviour is their aggressive competitiveness for nesting hollows. Tree hollows are a critical and increasingly scarce resource in Australian landscapes, and they are essential nesting sites for many native birds, including parrots, lorikeets, kookaburras, and owls, as well as native mammals such as sugar gliders, possums, and microbats. Indian mynas aggressively compete for and defend these hollows, often evicting native species from their nests and destroying eggs and chicks in the process.

Impact on Native Wildlife

The impact of Indian mynas on native wildlife has been the subject of considerable research and debate. While some studies have found strong correlations between high myna densities and reduced diversity of native bird species, others have argued that the relationship is complicated by confounding factors such as habitat modification and urbanisation, which independently affect both myna abundance and native bird diversity.

What is clear, however, is that Indian mynas are aggressive competitors that directly impact native hollow-nesting species. Research conducted in the ACT and surrounding regions by the Australian National University and various community groups has documented instances of mynas attacking and evicting native species from nesting hollows, including crimson rosellas, eastern rosellas, and sugar gliders. In areas where myna populations are high and hollow availability is limited, this competition can have a significant impact on the reproductive success of native species.

Indian mynas have also been observed harassing and mobbing native birds, including species much larger than themselves. Their aggressive territorial behaviour can exclude native species from feeding areas and roosting sites, reducing the ability of native birds to access food and shelter in shared habitats. The cumulative effect of competition for hollows, aggression towards native species, and food competition can result in a significant decline in native bird diversity in areas where Indian mynas are abundant.

Community Action

The fight against Indian mynas has inspired one of Australia’s most impressive examples of community-driven conservation action. Across eastern Australia, dozens of community groups have formed specifically to address the Indian myna problem in their local areas. These groups typically operate myna trapping programmes, in which specially designed cage traps are loaned to residents, who catch mynas in their backyards and return them for humane euthanasia.

The Canberra Indian Myna Action Group (CIMAG), established in 2006, is one of the most successful and well-known community myna control programmes in the country. CIMAG has coordinated the trapping and removal of tens of thousands of Indian mynas from the Canberra region, using a network of volunteer trappers and a standardised trapping methodology. Monitoring data collected by CIMAG and citizen scientists has shown a significant decline in myna numbers in suburbs where intensive trapping has been conducted, along with an increase in the abundance and diversity of native bird species.

Similar community programmes have been established in many other regions, including the Sunshine Coast, the Gold Coast, northern New South Wales, and parts of Melbourne. These programmes demonstrate the power of community engagement in addressing invasive species problems and provide a model for citizen-driven conservation action that could be applied to other pest species.

Management Approaches

In addition to community trapping programmes, several other management approaches are used to control Indian myna populations. The installation of nest boxes designed specifically for native species can help to increase the availability of nesting sites and reduce the competitive advantage that mynas gain from their aggressive hollow-takeover behaviour. Nest box programmes have been shown to benefit native hollow-nesting species in areas where natural hollows are scarce.

Habitat management practices that reduce the availability of food and shelter for mynas can also help to limit their populations in urban and suburban environments. Reducing open food waste, managing compost bins, and limiting access to pet food and poultry feed can all reduce the food resources available to mynas. Planting dense native vegetation provides habitat for native species while being less suitable for mynas, which prefer open, modified environments.

Research into the potential for landscape-scale myna control, including the development of species-specific toxins or biological control agents, remains in its early stages. The CSIRO and other research organisations continue to investigate potential approaches, but the development of a safe and effective broad-scale control method for Indian mynas remains a significant scientific challenge.

Health and Amenity Concerns

Beyond their ecological impacts, Indian mynas pose health and amenity concerns in urban environments. Large communal roosts can create significant noise pollution, particularly in the early morning and evening when birds are arriving at and departing from roosting sites. The accumulation of droppings beneath roost trees can be unsightly and malodorous, and can pose health risks due to the presence of fungal spores and bacteria.

Indian mynas are also known to nest in the roofs and walls of buildings, where they can cause damage to insulation, wiring, and building materials, and create noise and odour problems for occupants. Their nesting material can block gutters and downpipes, leading to water damage, and the mites and parasites associated with myna nests can cause skin irritation and allergic reactions in humans.

A Community Challenge

The Indian myna is a pest that every Australian can help to manage. Whether through participating in a local trapping programme, installing nest boxes for native species, reducing food waste that attracts mynas, or simply reporting myna sightings to local community groups or the Atlas of Living Australia, individual actions can collectively make a meaningful difference in controlling this invasive species and supporting native bird populations.

The success of community myna control programmes across Australia demonstrates that ordinary people, working together with passion and commitment, can make a real and measurable impact on invasive species management. The Indian myna may be a formidable and adaptable opponent, but the growing movement of community action against this avian bully offers genuine hope for the native birds and animals that share our urban and suburban landscapes. Every myna removed is a hollow saved for a native bird, and every native bird that nests safely is a small but significant victory in the ongoing battle to protect Australia’s extraordinary biodiversity.

Feral goats (Capra hircus) are among the most abundant and widespread large feral herbivores in Australia. With a national population estimated at several million individuals, feral goats are found across vast areas of the arid and semi-arid rangelands, particularly in western New South Wales, South Australia, Western Australia, and Queensland. Their voracious and indiscriminate browsing habits cause significant damage to native vegetation, accelerate soil erosion, and threaten the survival of rare and endangered plant species. Yet, uniquely among Australia’s feral animals, goats also represent a significant and growing commercial resource, with the harvesting and export of feral goat meat generating substantial revenue for rural communities.

Origins and Establishment

Domestic goats were first brought to Australia with the First Fleet in 1788 and were subsequently imported in large numbers throughout the colonial period. Goats were valued as a reliable source of milk and meat, particularly in remote areas where cattle or sheep were difficult to maintain. They were also kept on ships as a source of fresh milk during long voyages, and it was common for goats to be released on offshore islands as a food reserve for future mariners.

Throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, goats were widely kept by settlers, miners, and pastoral workers across the Australian interior. Escapes and deliberate releases were frequent, and feral populations became established in many areas. The hardy nature of the goat — its ability to survive on sparse vegetation, tolerate extreme heat, and go without water for extended periods — made it exceptionally well suited to the Australian outback environment.

By the mid-twentieth century, feral goat populations had become firmly established across the rangelands of southern and central Australia. Their numbers have fluctuated significantly in response to drought, management activities, and commercial harvesting, but the underlying population has proven remarkably resilient. Today, feral goats are found across approximately 28 per cent of the Australian mainland, with the highest densities occurring in the semi-arid pastoral zones of New South Wales and South Australia.

Environmental Impacts

The environmental damage caused by feral goats is substantial, particularly in arid and semi-arid environments where vegetation is slow to recover from grazing pressure. Goats are mixed feeders, meaning they browse on shrubs, trees, and woody plants as well as grazing on grasses and herbs. This dietary versatility means that goats can exploit a wider range of plant species than most native herbivores, placing pressure on vegetation communities that might otherwise be relatively resilient to grazing by native or domestic stock.

In rangeland environments, heavy goat browsing can prevent the regeneration of native shrubs and trees, leading to a progressive simplification of vegetation structure and a decline in overall biodiversity. Goats are particularly damaging to drought-stressed vegetation, as they continue to browse on shrubs and trees that other herbivores would avoid, stripping bark, consuming seedlings, and eventually killing mature plants. Research by the CSIRO has documented the impact of goat browsing on key rangeland plant species, including mulga, native pines, and various species of acacia and chenopod shrubs.

Feral goats also cause significant damage to rocky habitats, including cliff faces, gorges, and rocky outcrops that provide important habitat for native species such as rock-wallabies, native plants, and reptiles. The yellow-footed rock-wallaby, one of Australia’s most charismatic and endangered marsupials, has been particularly affected by competition with feral goats for food and shelter in its rocky hillside habitat. The removal of feral goats from key rock-wallaby habitat has been shown to result in rapid recovery of wallaby populations, demonstrating the significant suppressive effect that goat competition exerts on this threatened species.

Soil erosion is another significant consequence of feral goat activity. By removing ground cover and compacting soil with their hooves, goats contribute to accelerated erosion in areas that are already vulnerable due to low rainfall and sparse vegetation. In steep or sloping terrain, goat trails can create channels that concentrate water flow during rainfall events, leading to gully erosion and the loss of topsoil from critical catchment areas.

Competition with Native Species

Feral goats compete directly with native herbivores for food and water, and this competition can be a significant factor in the decline of native species, particularly during drought when resources are scarce. In addition to the yellow-footed rock-wallaby, species such as the brush-tailed rock-wallaby, the black-flanked rock-wallaby, and various species of euro and wallaroo are affected by competition with feral goats.

The Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water recognises the competition and land degradation by feral goats as a key threatening process under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. This listing acknowledges the significant and ongoing threat that feral goats pose to Australia’s native biodiversity and provides a framework for coordinated management action at the national level.

Commercial Harvesting

One of the most distinctive aspects of the feral goat issue in Australia is the significant commercial value of the feral goat harvest. Australia is the world’s largest exporter of goat meat, and a substantial proportion of this export comes from feral goats harvested from the rangelands. The feral goat meat industry generates hundreds of millions of dollars in export revenue each year, with major markets in the United States, Canada, Taiwan, South Korea, and the Caribbean.

For many pastoral properties in western New South Wales and other rangeland regions, the harvesting of feral goats has become a significant and sometimes essential source of income. Professional goat harvesters muster feral goats using vehicles, motorcycles, and dogs, and transport them to processing facilities where they are slaughtered and prepared for export. The income derived from goat harvesting can help to sustain pastoral enterprises during drought years when income from traditional livestock such as sheep and cattle is reduced.

However, the commercial value of feral goats creates a tension with environmental management objectives. Some landholders are reluctant to reduce goat numbers on their properties because of the income they generate, even though high goat densities may be causing significant environmental damage. Balancing the economic benefits of the feral goat industry with the need to protect native ecosystems is one of the key challenges facing rangeland management in Australia.

Management Strategies

A range of management strategies are employed to control feral goat populations, including mustering and commercial harvest, aerial shooting, trapping at water points, exclusion fencing, and Judas goat techniques. The Judas goat method involves fitting a radio collar to a captured goat and releasing it back into the wild, where it naturally seeks out and joins other feral goats. Managers can then use the radio signal to locate and remove groups of goats that might otherwise be difficult to find in remote and rugged terrain.

Cluster fencing — the construction of large-scale exclusion fences around groups of properties — has emerged as an increasingly popular approach to managing both feral goats and other pest animals such as kangaroos and wild dogs. By excluding feral goats from fenced areas, landholders can protect pastures and native vegetation while still allowing commercial harvesting of goats outside the fenced area. The Invasive Species Council supports integrated management approaches that combine commercial harvesting with targeted control activities to achieve both economic and environmental outcomes.

Looking Forward

The management of feral goats in Australia will continue to require a nuanced approach that balances environmental protection with economic realities. The commercial goat industry provides valuable income for rural communities, but this must not come at the expense of Australia’s native biodiversity and landscape health. By investing in integrated management programmes that combine commercial harvest with targeted environmental control, and by supporting research into more effective management tools and strategies, Australia can work towards a future where the impacts of feral goats are managed sustainably and the ecological values of the rangelands are protected for future generations.

The feral goat story illustrates both the challenges and the opportunities inherent in managing invasive species in Australia. Unlike many other pest animals, the commercial value of feral goats creates a pathway for management that can deliver economic benefits alongside environmental outcomes. Realising this potential will require cooperation between landholders, industry, government, and conservation organisations, all working together towards a shared vision of healthy, productive, and biodiverse rangelands.

No feral animal issue in Australia generates as much passionate debate as the question of what to do about brumbies — the nation’s wild horses. Romanticised in literature, immortalised in Banjo Paterson’s iconic poem “The Man from Snowy River,” and deeply embedded in the Australian cultural identity, brumbies occupy a unique and contentious position in the national conversation about invasive species management. Yet beneath the cultural mythology lies a serious and growing environmental crisis, as expanding brumby populations cause significant damage to some of Australia’s most fragile and ecologically valuable alpine and subalpine ecosystems.

Origins of Australia’s Wild Horses

Horses first arrived in Australia with the First Fleet in 1788, when seven horses were transported from Cape Town to the fledgling colony at Sydney Cove. Over the following decades, thousands more horses were imported to serve the needs of the expanding colonial economy, providing transport, powering agricultural machinery, and supporting the pastoral industry that became the backbone of the Australian frontier.

As with many introduced species, horses inevitably escaped or were deliberately released into the wild. During the nineteenth century, it was common practice for pastoralists to release horses during droughts or periods of economic hardship, intending to recapture them when conditions improved. Many of these horses were never recovered and formed the nucleus of free-ranging wild herds. The mechanisation of agriculture and transport in the early twentieth century led to further large-scale releases, as horses became surplus to requirements on farms and stations across the country.

Today, Australia’s feral horse population is estimated at between 400,000 and 600,000 individuals, making it one of the largest wild horse populations in the world. Feral horses are found across a wide range of habitats, from the tropical savannas of the Northern Territory to the alpine meadows of the Snowy Mountains, and from the Gulf Country of Queensland to the desert ranges of central Australia.

Environmental Damage

While brumbies hold a special place in the hearts of many Australians, the environmental damage they cause is well documented and, in many areas, severe. Horses are large, heavy animals with hard hooves that compact soil, damage streambanks, and trample native vegetation. In sensitive alpine and subalpine environments, where soils are thin and vegetation grows slowly, the impact of horse activity can be devastating and long-lasting.

In Kosciuszko National Park in New South Wales, which is home to one of Australia’s largest brumby populations, the damage caused by feral horses has been extensively documented by researchers from the Australian National University and other institutions. Studies have shown that horses degrade fragile sphagnum bogs, trample rare alpine flora, erode streambanks, and pollute waterways with their waste. These alpine and subalpine ecosystems are among the rarest and most biologically significant in Australia, and many of the species that depend on them are found nowhere else on Earth.

The sphagnum bogs of the Australian Alps are particularly vulnerable to horse damage. These ancient wetlands act as natural water filters and reservoirs, storing and slowly releasing water that feeds the headwaters of some of Australia’s most important river systems, including the Murray and the Murrumbidgee. When horses trample through these bogs, they destroy the sphagnum moss, compact the peat substrate, and create channels that drain water from the wetland, fundamentally altering the hydrological function of these critical ecosystems.

Beyond the alpine zone, feral horses cause significant damage in arid and semi-arid environments, where they compete with native herbivores for scarce water and food resources. In the Northern Territory, large feral horse populations in areas such as the Finke Gorge National Park and the surrounding ranges threaten rare native plants, including ancient cycads and relict palm species that have survived in these isolated gorges for millions of years.

The Cultural Dimension

The intensity of the debate over brumby management reflects the deep cultural significance that wild horses hold for many Australians. The brumby is woven into the national mythology of the bush — a symbol of freedom, resilience, and the untamed spirit of the Australian frontier. For many people, particularly those with connections to rural and pastoral communities, the brumby represents an important part of Australia’s heritage that deserves protection and respect.

This cultural attachment has had a direct and significant impact on management policy. In 2018, the New South Wales Government passed the Kosciuszko Wild Horse Heritage Act, which afforded protection to brumbies within Kosciuszko National Park and required the development of a management plan that prioritised non-lethal methods of population control. The legislation was widely criticised by scientists, conservation organisations, and the Invasive Species Council, who argued that it prioritised cultural sentiment over scientific evidence and would lead to further environmental degradation of the park’s fragile alpine ecosystems.

The debate over the Kosciuszko Wild Horse Heritage Act has continued to be one of the most contentious environmental policy issues in Australia. Conservation groups have called for the repeal or significant amendment of the legislation, arguing that the growing horse population is causing irreversible damage to nationally significant ecosystems. Brumby advocacy groups, on the other hand, maintain that non-lethal management methods such as rehoming and fertility control can effectively manage horse numbers without resorting to culling.

Management Approaches

Managing feral horse populations is complicated by the emotional and political dimensions of the issue. A range of management methods are available, including aerial and ground-based culling, passive trapping, mustering for rehoming, and fertility control. Each method has its advantages, limitations, and associated controversies.

Trapping and rehoming has been pursued in several areas, with captured horses offered to accredited rehoming organisations for gentling and rehoming as riding or companion animals. However, the capacity of rehoming programmes is limited, and the demand for rehomed brumbies falls far short of the numbers that need to be removed to achieve ecologically meaningful population reductions. The cost of trapping, transporting, and caring for captured horses is also substantial.

Fertility control, using immunocontraceptive agents such as porcine zona pellucida (PZP) vaccines, has been trialled in some locations. While this approach offers a non-lethal alternative to culling, it requires individual treatment of each horse and repeated booster doses, making it impractical for managing large, dispersed populations across remote landscapes. At best, fertility control is considered a useful supplementary tool rather than a stand-alone management solution.

Aerial culling remains the most cost-effective and efficient method for reducing feral horse numbers across large and remote areas. However, it is also the most controversial, attracting strong opposition from animal welfare organisations and brumby advocacy groups. The RSPCA Australia has called for strict animal welfare standards to be applied to any culling operations, including the use of trained and accredited marksmen and mandatory monitoring of animal welfare outcomes.

Finding a Path Forward

The challenge of managing Australia’s brumbies ultimately requires a willingness to engage honestly with the tension between cultural values and environmental imperatives. While the cultural significance of the brumby is real and should be acknowledged, it cannot be allowed to override the scientific evidence of environmental harm or the obligation to protect Australia’s unique and irreplaceable natural heritage.

A balanced approach that combines multiple management methods — including humane culling where necessary, rehoming where feasible, fertility control where practical, and the exclusion of horses from the most environmentally sensitive areas — offers the best prospect for managing brumby populations while respecting the cultural attachment that many Australians feel towards these iconic animals.

What is clear is that the status quo is not sustainable. As brumby populations continue to grow and the damage to fragile ecosystems intensifies, the case for more decisive management action becomes increasingly urgent. Australia’s alpine meadows, sphagnum bogs, and unique native species cannot wait indefinitely for a resolution to the brumby debate. The time for action — informed by science, guided by compassion, and driven by a genuine commitment to environmental stewardship — is now.