Ian Tucker: You suggest that introducing elephants into the Australian ecosystem isn’t such a radical idea as it first sounds?
David Bowman: The Australian ecosystem is in a bad way and ecologists and prehistorians are involved in a big debate about it. We know that about 40,000 years ago, when humans colonized Australia, a large assemblage of animals — marsupials, giant birds and reptiles — became extinct. Imagine deleting all the animals out of the African environment — what you would be left with is an Australian landscape.
IT: Then the Europeans introduced species ...
DB: The Europeans who came to Australia didn’t know about the extinct mega-fauna; all they could see was really good range country. They introduced animals such as sheep and cattle and some of their animals, such as foxes and cats, escaped and became feral. The result is that lots of small native animals are going extinct, but we’ve introduced new animals that are really thriving, such as camels and water buffalo. These introductions were completely ad hoc; there wasn’t ecological engineering — stuff happened.
IT: And the gamba grasses are an alien species, so they require an alien species to control them?
DB: Most of these grasses were introduced when the Australian government had people trying to improve range production. They found this plant in West Africa called gamba grass; they thought: “Beauty! It’s big, it has deep roots and it grows like fury.” They did trials and one thing led to another and it escaped. Weeds often sit and then something happens and they take off. And that takeoff happened with gamba grass during my lifetime in the Northern Territory.
I wrote a piece in 1999 saying that in the next two decades, we’ll know whether this thing will go crazy or not, and it has. Some scientists have predicted it could take over 5 percent of the continent. It’s a grass cane toad, if you like.
IT: So it was introduced to feed a herbivore and become rampant, so requires a mega-herbivore to control it?
DB: My suggestion is deliberately provocative. It’s an elephant of a grass from Africa; maybe the only way to control it is with an African animal. The orthodoxies such as spraying herbicide don’t work effectively.
IT: Although there are well-documented cases where introducing an alien species has been a disaster, you say there have been successes?
DB: The control of the prickly pear with a moth is a textbook example. There is also a very good example that isn’t well known. In the early 19th century, the British wanted to establish another trading port in northern Australia, so they set up Port Essington. The idea failed and the inhabitants died or abandoned it. One of the animals they left behind was a cattle species. The Aborigines knew about it, but science didn’t know about it until it got rediscovered in 1961. Genetic analysis discovered that this thing is banteng — a highly endangered wild Southeast Asian cattle species. So Australia now has the largest population of it by accident. The punchline is that the Aboriginals [sic] value it, safari hunters hunt it and it doesn’t appear to have any environmental detriment to the national parks where it resides — it may even be quite good, a lot of small mammals have done quite well.
IT: And camels and water buffalo have flourished in Australia ...
DB: It’s like these animals have found an empty house and moved right in. It goes back to the fact that these ice age extinctions occurred. We’re not advocating restoration of the ecosystem, rather reconstructing ecosystems to return ecological functions. All the big marsupials are extinct, so you use what’s on offer. African game managers have suggested to me that rhino and zebra would also be suited to the task.
IT: Can you be sure they wouldn’t eat other vegetation that other species feed on, or rip up trees?
DB: The grass-fire cycle is set to destroy the savanna anyway.
IT: How would you put together a study to test this idea?
DB: I think we will use the animals, such as water buffalo, cattle and donkeys, we have already got. The first thing we have to do is break the grass-fire cycle, to control an invasive grass that burns fiercely. Having an autonomous machine to do that, namely an animal is pretty cool. In Queensland, they are already trialing the use of cattle to control infestations of these grasses in nature reserves. The key thing here is using exotic animals for conservation outcomes, not food production.
IT: You also say there’s a conservation argument for introducing elephants?
DB: Australia could play an important role in preserving the remaining mega-fauna on Earth, a plan B. Soon we’re going to be confronting the issue that some of these animals might become extinct, so Australia could play a role as an ark, to help conserve some of these species.
There are complex issues with that, because conservationists in Africa say it might diminish the value of their parks, which are under enormous pressure. Australia is well placed for this role; it has already had a mammal extinction event and does use land for exotic animal production on cattle ranches. Why not game parks? We’re looking at a global biodiversity crisis. Is it right to say: “We can’t go there, it’s impossible”?
IT: What has been the reaction to your idea?
DB: Maybe the people who hate me just haven’t got around to telling me. I’ve had people from Africa writing to me and saying I’m on to something. A number of Australian land managers have congratulated me. They are in this mad situation. We have to do something different. To critics I would say: “Wake up and realize we are in a brave new world without a time machine.”
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs