Bush stone curlew in Five Dock

["Paul Burcher" <>]

Andrew

 

We could carry on being bush lawyers but I still think the owner is liable under the NP&W Act on part a alone below.  This is the relevant section:

 

118A   Harming or picking threatened species, endangered populations or endangered ecological communities

(1)  A person must not:

(a)  harm any animal that is of, or is part of, a threatened species, an endangered population or an endangered ecological community, or

(b)  use any substance, animal, firearm, explosive, net, trap, hunting device or instrument or means whatever for the purpose of harming any such animal.

 

From DECC's web page on enforcing the legislation (http://www.threatenedspecies.environment.nsw.gov.au/tsprofile/legislation_reg.aspx) is the following

 

The decision to prosecute alleged offenders is discretionary. Factors that influence the decision to prosecute include the value of the prosecution as a deterrent to other offenders, the availability of evidence and the level of impact on the species, population or ecological community. In making this decision DEC will consider alternatives to prosecutions such as penalty notices, stop work orders, interim protection orders, warning letters or any combination of these other tools.

 

So it would depend on the level of ignorance or disregard the owner exhibited (should anyone bother carrying it through).  $1000 for letting your dog mortally injure an endangered species doesn't seem much.

 

 

Paul