Wednesday, 17 June 2026

 Tim BULL (Gippsland East) (11:09): I rise to make a contribution on the Environment and Planning Committee’s inquiry into securing Victoria’s food supply. My reference is page 34 and the comment about the need to protect and enhance the future of agriculture by ensuring it is well placed to respond to various matters. One of those matters is pests, and that is what I want to talk on. I have mentioned this in the chamber in the past, and I do want to put it on the record again. I want to talk about wild dogs, and I refer to them as wild dogs rather than dingoes. The reason for that is very simple: they are not purebred dingoes. I will go into that a little bit later.

But the reality is farmers do not care what we call them; they are killing their stock, and in some cases they are forcing them off the land.

I did read a few months ago a claim by the Dingo Conservancy that numbers are plummeting, suggesting that inaction around protections will send them the same way as the Tasmanian tiger. This is just complete and utter rot. The stock kills are happening nightly. Farmers are reporting more dogs than they have ever seen before. I raised in Parliament recently one farmer who had genuine concerns, because these dogs are getting bigger and they are getting bolder. The government has cut aerial baiting, which has obviously had an impact – it has allowed numbers to grow. The reality of it is we need to keep strong controls in place.

I have put this on the record in the past, and I just want to put to bed that myth that these are purebred dingoes. And on that, I received information from Dr Kylie Cairns in 2023 telling me her DNA research showed that 87 per cent of the animals she tested were purebred dingoes and the rest had more than 80 per cent dingo DNA. Interestingly, her research was funded by the Australian Dingo Foundation and some other conservation groups, and Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action certainly swallowed the bait on this research, it is fair to say – excuse the pun there – but it was wrong. And more recent research led by the University of Munich geneticist Lachie Scarsbrook – and he had a team of about 25 or 26, I think – proved it wrong. His study found, and I quote from that study:

We also showed that many dingoes, particularly those from Southeast Australia, experienced admixture with European dogs.

…

… Our study… reveals evidence for widespread interbreeding across Australia prior to the 21st-century.

So how can one lot of DNA testing say they are purebred dingoes and then the next lot of extensive DNA testing say there are hardly any? Well, the reason is, when the first study was done, it appears they did not use precolonial dingo DNA. I mean, what a mistake to make when you are studying the history and the heritage. I have put in some emails to Dr Cairns to get her explanation, but surprise, surprise, I have not had a response. But I want to make the point that regardless of what we call them – and there is going to be a push coming out now by some conservation groups to say any of these animals with any level of dingo DNA need to be treated as dingoes, and yes, they do play an important role in our ecology and they do need protection – there needs to be a balance. Removing controls simply will not work, and it will leave our farmers too vulnerable and will have them forced off the land. So that will be the next push – ‘Any percentage of dingo DNA, we’ll call it a dingo’ – and they think that in calling it a dingo it will be afforded full protection. We need to protect these animals; we do. We need to make sure they exist, because they are part of our ecology. But particularly on the farming interface, they need to be controlled.

Before I finish on pests, I want to give a quick shout-out to the member for Greenvale, who last sitting week, speaking on the Outdoor Recreation Victoria Bill 2026, spoke about the need to control carp so native fish like redfin are able to thrive. Newsflash: redfin are an introduced species, also known as English perch. They eat our native fish, they spread disease in our native fish and they are taking over rivers –

Vicki Ward interjected.

Tim BULL: The minister at the table, are you objecting to this? They are an introduced species.

Vicki Ward interjected.

Tim BULL: Oh, well done. She is supporting me. But redfin are a big problem in the Murray, the Loddon, the Campaspe, the Goulburn, the Wimmera. They are impacting our native fish numbers – they eat them, they spread disease – but we have got the member for Greenvale standing up saying, ‘We need to create an environment to get rid of carp where they thrive.’ I mean, God help us if we have got members of the government thinking redfin are a native fish that need to be protected. I think that says a lot about this government’s knowledge of how things happen in rural and regional Victoria.