The culling of grey headed flying foxes Pteropus poliocephalus in the Royal Melbourne Botanic Gardens, Victoria, Australia

There is no evidence to suggest that established grey-headed flying-fox colonies can be totally and permanently removed from an area. Extreme methods have been tried in the past (i.e extermination shoots, high explosives, flame-throwers etc.) and all of these efforts have failed. Even in cases where the site has been destroyed (trees cut down or burnt) the colony has usually re-established close to the original site. Considering the difficulties of even temporally moving the colonies, it would seem that a lot of time and energy has been wasted on trying to remove the colony from Fern Gully.

Non-lethal solutions to the MBG flying-fox crisis exist

Despite the difficulty of removing an entire colony from a site, this does not mean that the bats can not be discouraged from occupying the trees at greatest risk. Here, there are several sound approaches that can can be used to minimise the potential damage to individual Heritage Listed trees. One example is the "Phoenix Bat Wailer" that offers considerable promise according to Lawrence Pope of the Humane Society.

From all accounts it seems that MBG would have been much better off putting more effort into managing the level of damage in Fern Gully, rather than trying to eradicate the flying-foxes. Kerryn-Parry Jones outlines just some of the things that could have been done by the Gardens management:

During the trials when mono-filament line was placed around the colony it was noticed that bats roosted on it rather than trees. There has been no attempt to try to reduce the pressure on damaged trees by designing alternatives for roosting bats.
Dead trees have not been removed and replaced by similar specimens.
Seed or cuttings have not been collected and grown for future replanting programmes.
Most flying-fox faecal material is dropped outside the colony site when the bats are foraging, with only a fraction is deposited in the early morning when the bats come back to the site. To get the build-up seen on the paths throughout Fern Gully, it is obvious that they have not been cleaned. If paths were hosed each morning and this would not only reduce their slipperiness but the smell and look of Fern Gully and so improve the safety and quality of the Gully for visitors.
If the undergrowth is left covered with urine and faeces, this will eventually burn the soft leaves and can kill the plants. However most of this damage can easily be controlled with daily hosing - perhaps using an automatic sprinkler system.

Another, equally viable plan to mitigate tree damage is to extend Fern Gully. This would not increase the population of bats, but would decrease the damage done to existing foliage. Flying-foxes love to roost in palms, and do no damage to new growth (new shoots are vertical, so they can't hang from them), palms can be transplanted as large trees (so wouldn't have to wait for them to grow), and palms also cope with the rich fertiliser that bats provide. Other fast growing trees such as the giant stinging trees, which flying foxes happily roost in could also be planted.

The failure to mitigate the damage to plants and the amenities of the Melbourne Botanic Gardens is in stark contrast to the situation at Sydney’s Royal Botanic Gardens. At Sydney the colony site has regular maintenance (the paths and the surrounding vegetation are clean), the smell is minimal and the bat colony has become an attraction for international and local tourists.

Managing the MGB requires a commitment to protect both the trees and the bats

In the Botanic Gardens in Sydney - Frank Howarth, the Executive Director has said that the Sydney Gardens has no plans now or in the future to cull any bats. "We are going to continue to work with Greg Richards and Les Hall to explore non-harmful methods of minimising the damage and keeping the populations at a sustainable level." he said.

In contrast, Phillip Moors, the Director of the MBG has stated he is not open to any management solutions that will include bats in the gardens. The only short-term options that have been discussed by the MBG are culling and relocation. Neither of these options are likely to make a difference to the problems in Fern Gully - unless the attractiveness of the area as a roosting site for flying foxes is changed.

We believe that Phillip Moors' attitude to bats is the only obstacle preventing a solution to the problem that protects both Heritage Listed trees and flying-foxes. Since his 5 year plan is to rid the gardens of bats altogether, they are doomed if he does not resign. For this reason, we argue that his resignation must be part of any solution. More than anything else, the gardens needs to have a director who is OPEN TO REAL SOLUTIONS, and is willing to work with scientists and environmental organisations to provide a win - win solution to the problem.

In an address to BATLINE, Kerryn Parry-Jones states that "Any short-term strategy to "save" Fern Gully can only be done if the Board of the Royal Botanic Gardens Melbourne understands that in the short-term, the presence of bats in Fern Gully has to be accepted. The Board’s responsibility must lie in controlling the damage to the vegetation and the Public amenity of Fern Gully as effectively as possible."

Given the massacre now taking place, it seems that MBG will not accept such a view. Therefore the only long-term solution to the problem may lie in relocation. With much hope and promise, Ian Temby (Department Natural Resources and the Environment) has been developing plans to simultaneously reduce the attractiveness of the MBG to flying-foxes, while creating sanctuaries for the species along the Yarra. Given the current uncompromising attitude of the MBG, we this may be the only long-term approach that will save Melbourne's flying-foxes from extinction.



The collective views of scientists, wildlife carers and animal-rights groups over the culling of grey headed flying foxes in the Royal Melbourne Botanic Gardens All flying-fox photos copyright © 2001Vivien Jones		The Solution There is no evidence to suggest that established grey-headed flying-fox colonies can be totally and permanently removed from an area. Extreme methods have been tried in the past (i.e extermination shoots, high explosives, flame-throwers etc.) and all of these efforts have failed. Even in cases where the site has been destroyed (trees cut down or burnt) the colony has usually re-established close to the original site. Considering the difficulties of even temporally moving the colonies, it would seem that a lot of time and energy has been wasted on trying to remove the colony from Fern Gully. Despite the difficulty of removing an entire colony from a site, this does not mean that the bats can not be discouraged from occupying the trees at greatest risk. Here, there are several sound approaches that can can be used to minimise the potential damage to individual Heritage Listed trees. One example is the "Phoenix Bat Wailer" that offers considerable promise according to Lawrence Pope of the Humane Society. From all accounts it seems that MBG would have been much better off putting more effort into managing the level of damage in Fern Gully, rather than trying to eradicate the flying-foxes. Kerryn-Parry Jones outlines just some of the things that could have been done by the Gardens management: During the trials when mono-filament line was placed around the colony it was noticed that bats roosted on it rather than trees. There has been no attempt to try to reduce the pressure on damaged trees by designing alternatives for roosting bats. Dead trees have not been removed and replaced by similar specimens. Seed or cuttings have not been collected and grown for future replanting programmes. Most flying-fox faecal material is dropped outside the colony site when the bats are foraging, with only a fraction is deposited in the early morning when the bats come back to the site. To get the build-up seen on the paths throughout Fern Gully, it is obvious that they have not been cleaned. If paths were hosed each morning and this would not only reduce their slipperiness but the smell and look of Fern Gully and so improve the safety and quality of the Gully for visitors. If the undergrowth is left covered with urine and faeces, this will eventually burn the soft leaves and can kill the plants. However most of this damage can easily be controlled with daily hosing - perhaps using an automatic sprinkler system. Another, equally viable plan to mitigate tree damage is to extend Fern Gully. This would not increase the population of bats, but would decrease the damage done to existing foliage. Flying-foxes love to roost in palms, and do no damage to new growth (new shoots are vertical, so they can't hang from them), palms can be transplanted as large trees (so wouldn't have to wait for them to grow), and palms also cope with the rich fertiliser that bats provide. Other fast growing trees such as the giant stinging trees, which flying foxes happily roost in could also be planted. The failure to mitigate the damage to plants and the amenities of the Melbourne Botanic Gardens is in stark contrast to the situation at Sydney’s Royal Botanic Gardens. At Sydney the colony site has regular maintenance (the paths and the surrounding vegetation are clean), the smell is minimal and the bat colony has become an attraction for international and local tourists. In the Botanic Gardens in Sydney - Frank Howarth, the Executive Director has said that the Sydney Gardens has no plans now or in the future to cull any bats. "We are going to continue to work with Greg Richards and Les Hall to explore non-harmful methods of minimising the damage and keeping the populations at a sustainable level." he said. In contrast, Phillip Moors, the Director of the MBG has stated he is not open to any management solutions that will include bats in the gardens. The only short-term options that have been discussed by the MBG are culling and relocation. Neither of these options are likely to make a difference to the problems in Fern Gully - unless the attractiveness of the area as a roosting site for flying foxes is changed. We believe that Phillip Moors' attitude to bats is the only obstacle preventing a solution to the problem that protects both Heritage Listed trees and flying-foxes. Since his 5 year plan is to rid the gardens of bats altogether, they are doomed if he does not resign. For this reason, we argue that his resignation must be part of any solution. More than anything else, the gardens needs to have a director who is OPEN TO REAL SOLUTIONS, and is willing to work with scientists and environmental organisations to provide a win - win solution to the problem. In an address to BATLINE, Kerryn Parry-Jones states that "Any short-term strategy to "save" Fern Gully can only be done if the Board of the Royal Botanic Gardens Melbourne understands that in the short-term, the presence of bats in Fern Gully has to be accepted. The Board’s responsibility must lie in controlling the damage to the vegetation and the Public amenity of Fern Gully as effectively as possible." Given the massacre now taking place, it seems that MBG will not accept such a view. Therefore the only long-term solution to the problem may lie in relocation. With much hope and promise, Ian Temby (Department Natural Resources and the Environment) has been developing plans to simultaneously reduce the attractiveness of the MBG to flying-foxes, while creating sanctuaries for the species along the Yarra. Given the current uncompromising attitude of the MBG, we this may be the only long-term approach that will save Melbourne's flying-foxes from extinction.