Professor Mike Archer on animal extinction

Sunday, March 4, 2001

60 Minutes presents a live interview with Professor Mike Archer, Director of the Australian Museum, who has been talking about how we have managed to wipe out 400 species of native animals in the past 200 years.

Host amicus_9msn: Mike, thank you for joining us tonight to talk to us about this very important issue.

Professor Mike Archer: It's my pleasure and I hope the message of the program is taken seriously because I think there is a crisis at hand.

Host amicus_9msn: Mike, to begin, can you tell us what your role is at the Australian Museum.

Professor Mike Archer: I'm the director of the Australian Museum and am attempting to use the museum to fulfill the goals of long-term conservation.

Jack: How many species was it that we lost in 200 years?

Professor Mike Archer: The figure quoted on the program was about 400, but that includes fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, mammals and even invertebrates such as insects.

concerned: How did this happen? I know that sounds simplistic, but how could we have let this happen?

Professor Mike Archer: The answer is that we inflicted on Australia a land use philosophy that was based on European strategies. Ironically, it even failed in Europe. Broadly, the core of the problem is Australian agriculture, which on balance is unsustainable in the long run, producing four billion dollars in land degradation per year. We need to trial indigenous land management practices such as sustainable harvesting of native wildlife for additional conservation capacity. This may sound contradictory, but traditional reliance on protected areas is demonstrably failing. Much more land used for multiple purposes — including conservation — is required for long-term conservation and sustainable futures for regional and rural Australia as well.

Jack: How long would it take to do such destruction, if man didn't exist?

Professor Mike Archer: In some cases it can be almost instantaneous, like when a meteor strikes the earth, and 10km-size meteors do frequently collide with earth, such as the one that took out the dinosaurs. But generally, extinction events of the kind that we are facing now take thousands or even millions of years. More worrying is that it takes 15-million years on average to recover from an extinction even of this kind. How long can you wait?!

Pitt: Why does the government allow this to happen, when surely the government experts and advisers know the impact we are having, or is it simply about money?

Professor Mike Archer: The answer to this is complex, as you will understand, and each case needs to be looked at on its own. However, the common denominator in most of these situations involves land clearance for agriculture. Considering that most agriculture in Australia is unsustainable in the long term, this seems a terrible reason to cause such damage. Wildlife needs much more room than we are giving it to survive into the future. We must find ways to multiple-use our land in the way that Aborigines did if we are serious about conservation.

Jack: Mike, why didn't they create more awareness before this got so big?

Professor Mike Archer: There have been too many other vested interests that have dominated the land-use decisions that have led to these disasters — primary among them is certainly the agricultural lobby group. However, a major factor as well is the awful stream of introduced foreign species that Australians have obsessively tried to introduce since settlement. In this regard, I highly recommend reading the book Feral Futures by Tim Lowe.

Al: Mike, doesn't the cloning factor lesson the risk of animals becoming extinct — that we can take DNA from animals at risk and increase the number?

Professor Mike Archer: The cost and work involved in trying to clone the thylacine is so great that it alone should be a warning to us all not to rely on this method, even if we are successful in bringing it back from the dead. In the long run, there is no practical solution except to find ways to conserve the amount of land required for conservation by Australia's endangered creatures.

Marko_ipos: Mike Archer, in one of your lectures at UNSW you mentioned that it is possible to adopt native species as house pets. Could you elaborate a little on that?

Professor Mike Archer: I would love to elaborate for hours on this topic. In the time that I have been associated with Australian mammals, I have kept many that were brought to me that were commonly damaged by pussy cats. In fixing them up, I often took them home, where they lived with me as they healed, and by far the majority bonded very strongly with me and were wonderful companions — more rewarding in many ways than cats and dogs. Quolls, for example, were obsessive users of kitty litter, loved to play and remained playful like kittens through their life. Unfortunately, legal restrictions enable us to breed cats — which I regard as an immoral exercise — but we risk fines if we keep native animals. I think this is a balance that the Australian society should re-examine.

ELE_deadplanet: Mike, do you believe getting people to keep native animals is one way to help things by giving the animals value?

Professor Mike Archer: Very definitely yes. If we do not value Australian wildlife in many different ways, we will lose it. One way among many to value wildlife is to consider keeping native animals as pets — in particular the ones most in danger of extinction through reliance on current methods which may prove inadequate. I like to think of the effort to conserve Australia's animals as being similar to a golfer's challenge in winning a game. If the golfer puts just one club in his bag, he is unlikely to win. Conservationists too need many strategies in their bag if they are serious about winning conservation goals. These strategies are entirely compatible, it needn't be just one or the other.

wona: I was just wondering about how you would monitor the way people keep native animals as pets if they were allowed to?

Professor Mike Archer: The way we would suggest is a trial program involving a breeding facility carefully controlled to be disease-free, with animals being released to individuals and families on an experimental basis with careful monitoring of the particular situation. If the trial generally is a success, the program could be broadened. It would be good to think that enough money would be paid by prospective owners to enable a large percentage to be committed to conventional conservation programs as well as systems ensuring the care and wellbeing of the native companions.

charlie: Mike, what endangered animals would be most appropriate to keep as pets?

Professor Mike Archer: There are many candidates. I would think on the immediate front we would consider animals that have recently become extinct in particular areas, such as the eastern quoll — which is now extinct from mainland Australia where it was once common — and Mitchells hopping mouse, which is now extinct in NSW but thrives in SA where many are kept as pets.

Kate: What is the use in keeping native animals as pets if we have no habitat to release them into?

Professor Mike Archer: Very good point! This is why we must use multiple conservation strategies, including recovery of enough suitable habitat to enable releases to be successful, as in the case of the numbat. But even here, we should realise that the numbat used to extend across the whole of southern Australia right into NSW, so we should be looking for enough habitat eventually that we can recover. But keeping native animals has more value than that. It also engages and inspires interest in native animals in our children. At the moment, Australian children are far more aware of cats and dogs than they are of any Australian marsupial. If these kids are not committed to the welfare of Australian animals in the future, what hope is there?

wona: Mike, would selling native wildlife as pets be prohibited?

Professor Mike Archer: In most cases at the moment it is prohibited. In fact, it is ironic that there are probably more sugar gliders being kept as pets in the USA than exist in the wild in Australia. Until we recognise as a nation that we have the world's precious animals and need to value them in every way we can, the laws that prohibit us keeping native animals are going to be difficult to change.

Propofol: Why do we need so many native animals?

Professor Mike Archer: The simple answer is that high biodiversity provides stability and security for us. Simple ecosystems with few species such as monocultures of sheep and wheat are prone to environmental disasters more frequently than complex natural ecosystems that have many species. Resilience is the key here. The more complex the ecosystems, the more resilient they are to human as well as natural disasters. Since we sit on the top of most ecosystems, it's our own rear ends that may be most in danger of obliterating wildlife.

zap: Why is it that we try so hard to save cute creatures, but forget about the not-so-cute?

Professor Mike Archer: That's a very good point. This is why valuing wildlife with its inevitable focus on cute, cuddly and most useful is important. If we care for the species we value, we will have to look after the habitats those species require. In doing this, we will inadvertently be looking after the not-so-cute creatures like insects and spiders and other creatures that would not readily receive the attention of conservationists.

Mitch: Mike, how many species are currently on the critical list?

Professor Mike Archer: The simple answer is I don't know, but it has to be at least half of the Australian mammals that are in one way or another at risk. I don't know how many birds but probably a similar number and so on down the line. Frogs may be the canaries of our environments and we have been losing many of these, not only in Australia but also around the world. When it comes to invertebrates and plants, I would think similar numbers are being lost, but these are much harder to determine. Every now and then a wonderful thing happens and a species we thought was extinct is rediscovered. Recently, scientists from the Australian Museum and NSW National Parks were excited to discover that the Lord Howe Island stick insect — long thought to be extinct — still survives on Balls Pyramid. But like so many species hanging on by the skin of their digits, it's not out of the woods yet. Sadly, rediscoveries are far and away an exceptional situation.

polarbear: Professor, how does Australia rank against other countries in the number of animals on the endangered list? For example, if it is this bad here, what's happening on a global level?

Professor Mike Archer: Australia at the moment is sadly at the forefront of losses of this kind. In part, this is because Australia, among continents, has been the most recent to suffer European land management strategies. While Australia as a mega-diverse region is of concern to the whole world, it is also the case that it has been damaged less than the other continents precisely because the damaging processes have been for a shorter period of time. This gives me hope that there is still time to turn this situation around. I am a vigorous optimist and in the Australian Museum we have begun the FATE project (Future of Australians Total Ecosystems). We are planning now with partners such as the Royal Botanic Gardens, National Parks and Wildlife Services, universities and many other government and non-government organisations a new and exciting project to turn this situation around and yet keep rural and regional Australia healthy, both biologically and culturally.

concerned_citizen: What measures are being undertaken to ensure that the remaining old growth forests are allowed to remain relatively untouched?

Professor Mike Archer: Not enough effort is being made in this area and state and federal governments have to be urged to be more proactive in conserving Australia's old growth forests. While in principle I am in support of the ability to sustainably harvest some native forests — each case needing to be considered on its merits — it's hard to find any justification to fell any of the remaining old growth forests. Some of the trees in these situations are 500 years old and the suggestion that this could be sustainable in this situation is nonsense.

Mort: Mike, how long before the cloning of the Tasmanian tiger is completed?

Professor Mike Archer: We are keeping our fingers crossed that we will be able to do this in the near future. At the moment, however, we are taking it one step at a time. Certainly the most exciting hurdle to overcome was to discover that our pickled pup did in fact have wonderful high-quality DNA. We are now in the process of beginning to construct a DNA library, stage 2. As director of the Australian Museum, my main focus is to ensure that everything we do is good science that builds on solid foundations. While I want to be the first person in line to see the resurrected thylacine step out of the lab, my suspicion is I will have many more grey hairs before that wonderful moment.

polarbear: Professor, as a concerned citizen, what can I do at a local level? I'd also like to say that I thought your comments on how our wildlife helps form the basis of our national identity, our "uniqueness", were very elegant! And spot on.

Professor Mike Archer: Thanks for your support. The best thing you can do is read as much as you can about these issues and be vocal in all local community groups that should take an interest in these topics. Letters to your local government representative and certainly the federal government in support of rational exploration of these issues can only help. The IUCN and the federal government are all developing policies in conservation based on valuing systems. All of us as Australians who love our unique animals have to take a serious look at the new strategies that may be required if our grandchildren are to know what a bilby is.

kez: Mike, three of my children attend Southmoor Primary School and they are currently doing studies on Australian endangered species. Could you please advise myself or the school about the best places the students can obtain information that they can understand and relate to. Their years of education are grades three and four.

Professor Mike Archer: There are many resources that school kids can use including libraries, but I would suggest using the Web if possible to make contact with the Australian Museum or other museums in other states. The Australian Museum's website is http://www.austmus.gov.au and there are also many books that you can use to gain education at all levels on Australian animals. Books written by Steve Parish are available in most post offices and are very good. But the museum website will allow students to go as deeply into the topics as they like. National parks agencies in most states also have lots of information, as do the Wilderness Society branches in most states — good luck!

rj: Mike, I would like to donate money on a monthly basis for any/all good causes for animals. Can you recommend which organisation I should approach?

Professor Mike Archer: I would love to tell you that the most deserving institution is the Australian Museum! But there are many that would be grateful for that help. It is important to focus on government organisations, because they are least likely to be pushing specific interests. If you would like our address, I would be happy to supply it! Donations to these institutions are also tax deductible as well as being much appreciated! We certainly are going to need financial support to get the FATE project up and running.

Host amicus_9msn: Okay Mike, give it a plug and let them know how they can send the Australian Museum money.

Professor Mike Archer: Any tax deductible amount to the Australian Museum can be sent to The Director, Mike Archer, 6 College Street, Sydney, 2000 and our gratitude will be boundless! We have an immortality club — it helps biodiversity research. Species can be named after particularly helpful donors. These names are immortal and will forever tie a wonderful new species to the name of the benefactor. This is a popular program and is one of the ways in which we raise support for the conservation of biodiversity in the Australian Museum.

ELE_deadplanet: Do you think we have a chance to save what is left or will mankind's ignorance cause us to lose our most precious commodity, our wildlife?

Professor Mike Archer: I'm definitely an optimist. If we grasp this problem now and focus on it rationally, bringing every bit of wisdom and science to bear on the crisis, I think we can turn it round. If I didn't believe this, I would be among the potentially endangered species.

Wonga_Bonga: What rules would you put in place to save our wildlife?

Professor Mike Archer: One, I would certainly prohibit any land clearing from any part of the continent unless it was a matter of life and death. Two, I would plead for programs that would put back the 49 percent of our original native vegetation that has been destroyed during European settlement. Three, I would hope all Australians in rural and urban areas would become involved in programs that seriously examine the potential benefits of indigenous management strategies through Australia. Four, I would want a red button that when I pushed it, would cause all the feral cats and foxes and rabbits to disappear from rural and regional Australia!

Host amicus_9msn: Mike, thank you for joining us tonight and sharing your deep knowledge and passion for this subject.

Professor Mike Archer: It's my pleasure.

Host amicus_9msn: Mike, once again thank you and good night. This concludes our 60 Minutes live chat with Mike Archer, March 4, 2001. Produced by ninemsn.com.au in Sydney, Australia ninemsn.com.au, copyright 2001.