On or around the 22nd of July 2016, two dingoes/dogs (the specified taxa differed depending on the outlet, though both appear interchangeably) were released onto a remote far north Queensland island, approximately 100km north of Townsville and 50km off shore from the Hinchinbrook coastline. Before this, they were trapped, sedated, desexed, and subjected to an experiment so sick it beggars belief. Soon thereafter, the Australian and international media began publishing sordid accounts of chemical cruelty. Before long, we received promises that the project was over. We were lied to.

According to the responsible Council, Pelorus Island “has a pristine, fragile environment” that needed protection from a ravaging colony of goats believed to be the direct descendants of animals released on the island during the 1800s as a source of meat, milk and fibre to sustain sailors in the event of shipwreck. In this regard, they are no different to the vast majority of species currently branded as “pests” across the country.

----

The Pelorus Island project, however, was dramatically different from the day that it began.

-----

The following day, the ABC published an article on the so-called “death-row dingoes". Originally hailed as an environmental-innovation-cum-pest-control-scheme to be transplanted to other regions, the Pelorus Project was thoroughly and irredeemably criticised as “cruel” and “inhumane” by various Queensland Ministers (then-Minister for Environment and Heritage Steven Miles and then-Minister for Agriculture Leanne Donaldson, respectively).

-----

We, the undersigned, call upon you Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk, to transparently review this irredeemably cruel project.

-----

The following passage is taken from Queensland Government Hansard records (18 August 2016), and quotes the Minister Steven Miles:

“Apparently, the dingoes have been surgically sterilised and implanted with time delayed poison [1080] pellets. The Queensland community has quite rightly reacted with alarm. Members of the public, the RSPCA and even some members opposite have opposed the plan. The member for Whitsunday [Mr. Jason Costigan] has written to me to say the plan was inhumane and it involved outright cruelty that should not be allowed. The member for Mogill [Mr. Christian Rowan] has told me that Queenslanders were appalled and considered the situation to be as horrendous as the recent live-baiting greyhound scandal”.

-----

The current Minister will note that sodium (mono-)fluoroacetate (commonly referred to as Compound 1080 / "ten-eighty") is a restricted, Schedule 7 substance. It is acutely toxic and has been described as "homicidal" in its potency. It is known to be particularly potent to canids, like dingoes and domestic dogs. There is no known antidote. The Coalition represents a growing sector of concerned organisations and individuals demanding a phasing out and eventual ban of this poison. Prior to the Pelorus experiment, it had not been utilised in an invasive or surgical manner.

-----

This petition urgently encourages you to review the ICO process and any contraventions therein, particularly as they relate to the marketing and sale of the island as a boutique retreat. It is understood that the ICO as issued by then-Minister Miles has been lifted, though the rationales are challenged. Given the seriousness and substantial penalties (3000 penalty units, akin to that of money laundering) associated with compliance with the ICO (s109), the public expects the influencing factors to be transparently considered.

It is apparent that the Project is in direct contravention of relevant Codes and legislative requirements. We ask you to thoroughly and transparently consider these as a matter of urgency.

Thus, the present petition holds that, as it applies to relevant Codes, the Pelorus Project was cruel, unacceptable, and patently inefficient.

Similarly, the present petition holds that, as it applies to relevant decision-making authorities, the approving AEC patently failed in its responsibilities to "take appropriate action in response to unexpected adverse events to ensure that animal wellbeing is not compromised, the issue is addressed promptly, and activities that have the potential to adversely affect animal wellbeing cease immediately,” as per clause 2.1.5[v][d] of the NHMRC Code.

-----

Given that death via 1080 is not justified as a euthanasia agent for domestic or companion canids also subject to medical experimentation or otherwise used in research (i.e., those governed by the Code), it is unclear what specific justifications were given to permit its active use for the experimental euthanasia of dingoes/wild dogs under the same Code.

-----

Finally, the present petition holds that the relevant institutions failed to rectify "alleged breaches of legislation" as it relates to animal welfare. The Minister is advised to consult File 16-168 with the relevant Right to Information (RTI) authorities to ensure this is reliably assessed.

-----

The present petition holds that the cruelty inherent in the Pelorus Project is unacceptable. It urges the Premier to immediately, thoroughly, and transparently assess this project as per the rationales provided above, noting that the ACPA includes Sections that only exempt offences if "an act is done in a way that causes the animal as little pain as is reasonable". Given the above, we the undersigned hold that this project has patently failed to do so.