Increasingly, it seems, when a hard but right decision is made, say, to cull some individuals from a population that is out of control, governments block plans that are deemed unpopular or politically incorrect, thereby causing harm, but usually improving their own public image. In my opinion the morality of this wilful but ill-informed interference needs to be dragged out into the open and questioned much more vigorously and objectively in the future. Exotic species of plants and animals need careful management. Complete elimination of these is usually impossible and may even be undesirable, since exotics often have already displaced original populations. Rabbits and introduced rodents have now become a staple food for a wide variety of birds, reptiles and the limited numbers of surviving indigenous mammalian carnivores.
Many exotic plants provide shelter and food to native species.
Large cockatoos like the galah, corella and sulphur-crested have adapted to eat almonds and other exotic food, while many birds have acquired a taste for commercially important fruits. Surprisingly, crows are becoming a vineyard pest. The range and population size of some species has extended by several orders of magnitude, so that they are themselves exotics in their new homes. Another important part of habitat retention is the planning and implementation of responses to natural disasters including bushfire, flood and drought. A neglected national park that serves only as a nursery for exotic pests and bushfire fuel is worse than having no public asset at all.