Is it illegal to own a rabbit in Queensland unless you're a magician?
skeptics.stackexchange.com
skeptics.stackexchange.com
> From Queensland's Department of Agriculture and Fisheries brochure Can I have a pet rabbit?,
> Why are pet rabbits illegal in Queensland?
> Rabbits are Australia's most destructive agricultural and environmental introduced animal pest, [...]
> Can I get a permit for a pet rabbit?
> A permit cannot be issued for keeping pet rabbits of any variety for any private purpose.
> A permit to keep domestic rabbits in Queensland can only be approved if the animal is being kept for an approved purpose:
> certain forms of public entertainment (e.g. magic show and circuses)
> scientific and research purposes
So you could be a magician OR a scientist
Edit: I was making a tongue and cheek joke for all the rick and morty fans out there sorry if that was out of line
Again, I can't delete it, and I stand by having fun every once and awhile. I however apologize again if I was simply detracting.
Reproduction beats predators apparently
Like so many invasive species that now run amuck on islands around the world, mongooses were intentionally introduced to Hawaii. Sugar cane farmers took their cue from Jamaican plantation owners who imported mongooses to control rat populations. In 1883 the mongooses were let loose in the fields, an approach that proved to be colossally uninformed. As it turns out, rats are nocturnal and mongooses are diurnal. The exotic predators never came in contact with their rodent prey, and native bird populations began crashing instead.
https://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/11/an-invader-advanc...
In addition Australia doesn't have many large predators that weren't introduced, except for reptiles. The most impressive of those, the saltwater crocodile, isn't exactly suited to hunt anything far from shore.
That's the entire point behind rabbits and also rat-species.
Nature favors two strategies. Simple, fast, often reproduction with quick-to-sexual-maturity where they can stand to lose many of the nest and keep spreading. Or, a few babies that take (relatively) forever to mature and need protected but once mature, are stronger and more intelligent.
Quality vs quantity. Both are viable strategies according to nature.
Turtles and tortoises sexually mature slowly and live for a very long time, but they also lay tons of eggs and don't invest anything on individual young.
Are they r- or k-strategists?
In Australia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red-eared_slider#An_invasive_s...
Because of this rabbits actually support invasive predators as well (foxes, cats, etc...)
The only real "native" predator it has is the dingo, but those too were introduced by humans (only they were introduced thousands of years ago so they've been naturalized to the environment).
That is a systemic problem in conservation: where in the timeline do we say that the "natural" state existed? In Australia and similar countries we place that mark not at the point that humans arrived, but at the point white people showed up. I live in the pacific northwest where we do the same. This practice almost equates indigenous humans with animals, both being "natural" in that the do not negatively impact "their" environment. The reality is that native populations radically altered ecosystems, that any non-human state only ever existed in deep history.
On long-inhabited island nations (Japan, UK Australia etc) the predator issue is a big deal only because of human efforts. Each wiped out their large predators long ago. Japan should have tigers and bears. The UK should have wolf packs. Australia too should have its big predators, but they were wiped out long before Europeans arrive. So we call that "natural". Something as simple as setting a date is in reality a twisted conflation of race, religion and political histories.
These would take care of the rabbits: http://earthsky.org/earth/early-humans-wiped-out-big-animals...
Environmentalism wasn't as popular when the dingo was introduced... So there isn't much we can do about its initial impact to the ecosystem... So, yes, date does matters very much... It's not about race or religion or political history... It's actually very much about biology...
It's not arbitrary...
I feel like you're introducing a racist element where there needn't be one.
The key factor to a species adapting to its environment is time, and the timeframe that European colonisers have been in Australia, America and similar nations is a tiny blip on an evolution scale timeline.
"In southern Europe, the scarcity of rabbits threatens the conservation of predator species higher up the food chain that are endangered and depend on small-game such as rabbits. These include the Iberian lynx and the Iberian imperial eagle. For that reason biological warfare in Australia is a serious concern for conservation experts working in other parts of the world where the preservation of a viable rabbit population is problematic."
Stoats were introduced by European settlers (ironically, to deal with rabbits, which themselves were introduced, and quickly ran wild).
The stoats soon started decimating the native bird population, and are now public enemy number 1.
Meanwhile back in Europe, stoat populations are under threat, so NZ provides a potential source of stoats to re-stock elsewhere.
Does any agency offer a bounty on rabbits? For example in some lakes in Colorado you can get a bounty for catching and killing non-native northern pike[1]. Does Australia have a similar system in place? There is lots of data about how much of a pest they are [2] but other than dogs and foxes I don't see a bounty program. Trappers decimated the American west of Beaver because they could sell the pelts, perhaps a market for rabbit pelts would be enough incentive to encourage trappers?
[1] http://www.gameandfishmag.com/conservation-politics/20-north...
[2] http://agriculture.vic.gov.au/agriculture/pests-diseases-and...
Rabbits can have up to 1,000 offspring in their life.
I could see the argument for keeping a fixed one as a pet because there's no risk if a fixed one escapes... But even then, that would still create cottage industry of breeding them, and that's bad.
Lucky? How do you stop them?
Also, it's Australia. Rabbits got out of control because people had this hubris about managing them; they won't permit that mistake again.
Answer: Australia has very strict bio-security laws.
Maybe some system where rabbits could be certified as "imported fixed" and tagged as such? So only intact animals could be legally imported?
Rabbits are a huge problem in regards to protecting the native marsupials.
Australia's attitude towards rabbits is completely different than areas where they're native because they are such pests.
This makes me wonder: I saw no exemption in that article of owning rabbits for meat production, so does that mean that down under, there is no rabbit on any restaurant's menu?
I remember as a child in Australia eating a lot of rabbit. My father would hunt them and Mum's speciality was curried rabbit. I used to love it.
They really are vermin in Australia. Ever time I see a rabbit in Europe I have an almost visceral desire to kill it. Growing up in rural Australia I've seen first hamd the damage they can do if left unchecked.