Talk:Rabbits in Australia

message: Shouldn't this be renamed "Rabbits in Australia" or somesuch? The parentheses notation is used for disambiguation, as for a different meaning of the word, such as "Rabbit (car)". —Ashley Y 01:49, 2004 Aug 14 (UTC)
OK, I'm going to move this to Rabbits in Australia unless someone objects. —Ashley Y 05:44, 2004 Aug 31 (UTC)
_______________________________________________________________
If there is a Rabbits in Australia page, why is it I can't find a "Possums in New Zealand"
page and a "Stoats in New Zealand" page? Possums were introduced into New Zealand and are
a nuisance and so are stoats (this is a very serious problem). We also have rainbow
lorikeets in NZ (unwanted by many) so where is the page on that?. As for "invasion" by
rabbits in Australia, rabbits didn't arrive in space ships from the planet BUNNICULOUS
they were a deliberately introduced species along with many others.
If we have one page for "Rabbits in Australia" then
I think it's only fair to put up pages on all the other introduced species. We also need
a "Foxes in Australia, Camels in Australia, Goats in Australia, Pigs in Australia" and so on.
The rabbit is not that big a problem that it needs a whole page plus if we are going to have
rabbits in Australia, it is only fair to mention that CSIRO has been promoting rabbit
farming in the Eastern States while in Queensland, a scientist with past
associations with CSIRO seemed to be supporting a total ban on the keeping of any domestic/farmed rabbit at all (can you believe the Queensland Government won't allow the
keeping of any domestic or farmed rabbit, even sterilised and microchipped and they increased
fines for the keeping of a pet rabbit to $30,000. I believe they are scared of another
species emulating the cane toad. Elsewhere in Australia, every State has deregulated the
keeping of pet rabbits.....go figure that one out). During the escape of the last deadly
virus tested to kill rabbits , CSIRO put out a press release
saying it was OK to eat rabbits infected with Viral Hemorrhagic Disease of rabbits (they
quickly withdrew this statement after it was pointed out eating meat from diseased
animals isn't healthy.....anyone want an E.Coli sausage?? see the convoluted logic and
the desperation in trying to convince people spreading diseases and eating subsequently 
diseased animals was safe???.
This all needs to be added to "Rabbits in Australia" as it is fact and points out the
strange attitude of some people in Australia towards rabbits.
----
Hi,
I am considering putting up my own version of "Rabbits in Australia" since the beat up/spin
on this page is so convoluted, misinformed and a continuation of the spiel put out by certain
persons who have based their careers on portraying the feral rabbit in Australia as the
main perpetrator of environmental degradation. Nowhere do we see a proper discussion of the
rabbit/degradation/loss of species issue which takes an Eastern States (of Australia) problem, leaves out many facts and then deems the feral rabbit to be the main cause of uncountable
wrongs, loss of species etc without exposing the whole truth. This issue is becomeing so tiresome and annoying that I am sure I am not the only one who has had enough. The worst problem with the whole "feral rabbit in Australia being the MAIN cause of environmental degradation/species loss blah, blah, blah," is the suseptibility of people from other countries to swallow this story in all its entirety. I will shortly pick up the pen and start putting wrong to right (I am not paid to perpetuate spin doctored information like some, so my time is donated, free, to get the story straight). Start looking at the Goyders line of rainfall and the
history of European settlement before you blame the feral rabbit for being a sole cause of species loss etc etc. European settlement North of the Goyders line (which really designates
an area where sustainable agriculture and clearing of land was inappropriate due to the
overall lack of rain), is one main causes of irreversable degradation and species loss where
European settlers repeatedly ignored scientific data not to inhabit and clear the land
or graze large numbers of livestock there. The type of damage done by the European settler
and introduced species such as sheep, cattle, goats, camels, wild pigs etc etc as well as
the European rabbit is never properly explained by those vilifying the feral rabbit.
Damage done to the Australian environment through continued grazing by sheep, cattle etc
far outweighs damage done by rabbits but many will not discuss this because the economy
derives income from the economically acceptable introduced species while those (such as
the feral rabbit) which compete with the cattle/sheep are vilified. Really, we are becoming
tired of all the hype surrounding the rabbit. Where I live, precious bushland is being
continually ripped out for the urban sprawl (Australia's best land is in coastal areas
where humans compete with native animals for space). No-one will stop this devastation
and just look at Tasmania and Western Australia where huge irreplaceable tracts of superb
forest are sold for a pittance as woodchips and NATIVE ANIMALS (in Tasmania) die in agony
from 1080 for daring to eat the tree saplings on tree farms that are replacing native
forests (they are deliberately poisoned with 1080 baits). Please don't be hoodwinked by Australian authorities who seem to want to fight to
the death to preserve jobs and careers based on vilification of the rabbit while much of
our country is destroyed by humans, introduced cotton and bad irregation and a hundred
other issues of far greater importance than continuing misinformation about rabbits in order
to preserve a few careers and reputations. 
And to those who redirected my small explanation of what my website was about (Rabbit Information Service) to the Rabbits in Australia site, this was a stupid and futile attempt
to continue to stifle debate. I have undertaken years of FOI and research and on rabbits
and rabbit diseases and your inept attempts to silence my voice including your attempt
to underhandedly link my website with yours shows how afraid you are of people learning
the truth about your inaccuracies. I know you are funded and are adults but you really need to
grow up mentally and stop resorting to stupid attempts to stifle speech and distort facts
by ommission.
M. (- 203.59.186.143)
M., here at Wikipedia, we assume good faith and try to keep free of personal attacks. It's understood that this issue may be very dear to someone--they may have made it their life's work. Also, they may know much more about it than anyone else currently editing. However, even the experts have to provide backup for their claims--us lowly "amateurs" prefer reassurance that we are taking part in the spreading of truth, not misinformation, and your cooperation would be very much appreciated. This means, however, that you must try to stay calm and keep cool. Try having a nice cup of tea, if you'd like. But please try not to be a fanatic.  Phoenix Song (talk) 14:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: I've revised some of the language on this page in order to be more in line with what I consider to be encyclopaedic writing.  If I've removed/re-worded anything which someone feels strongly about, don't be shy and let me know here about any problems you see.  
The article contained some strange comments about human impacts on the ecology of Australia - which would be fine if the article weren't about Rabbits in Australia.  I've tried to retain the fact that humans have also affected the ecology while making the effects of rabbits more central.  An article on the ecology of Australia would be a more suitable place for discussing the impacts of humans on Australia beyond what is currently included in the article.
Most importantly, I added headings and sectioned the text a bit better.
--ABQCat 05:39, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  re-doing some things 

message: While reviewing the recent edits to this article, I noticed [ these two edits] by .  While they seem to be legitimate attempts to improve the article by condensing it, I can't help but feel that, to me at least, the overall impact seems mostly negative.  To be sure, some of the removed prose was a bit clunky, and the Strabo quote probably didn't really need to be placed just there, but the resulting version doesn't read that well either, and some of the removed information seems quite encyclopedic.  It's not referenced, unfortunately, but then neither is the rest of the article...
It would help if the IP had bothered to give an edit summary explaining why they chose to make those changes.  Given that they didn't, does anyone else have an opinion as to whether those edits should stay or be undone?  —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content removals by 81.145.240.83, what do you think? 

message: IMHO, the image 'Rabbits' enemies' is not good enough for a Wikipedia article (no offence to the artist) and I hope someone can replace it with something better. Alpheus 09:20, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually being a historical document, it can outline past behaviours associated with the Rabbits introduction. Enlil Ninlil 18:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image not up to standard 

message: John Ballard said what preditors the rabbit has. They would be the Dog, Cat, Quolls, Tasmanian Devil, Wedge tailed Eagle etc. So is there any evidence that they were affected by the decline in the Rabbit population at any time? Enlil Ninlil (talk) 06:58, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My thinking was that most predators were feral, so the decline in rabbit numbers would be good on that score also. I did think of the Tassie Devil, but it said Calici was less strong in colder climates anyway. I forgot about the Wedge Tailed Eagle or Quoll. Anyway, if a cite can be found saying that the decline had a negative effect on native predators, it can go back in, but it sounded dubious to me. The sentence was originally put in by an editor with only 2 edits to his/her name. Peter Ballard (talk) 07:10, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You were correct in removing the edit. But it got me thinking that many native species would have become use to their pressence, and some would identify them as food. I will search over the next few weeks and post any liks on this talk page. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 07:19, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Predators

message: Seriously. There was a professional job which centered on rabbit killing. Why isn't it mentioned?  --Luigifan (talk) 01:28, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where are the rabbitohs? 

message: Why does this article begin with: "Since their introduction from Europe in 1859..." when according to the second reference rabbits were reported as: "becoming so numerous..." in 1827?
It seems the first rabbits were brought to Australia by Lieutenant-Governor King when he arrived in Sydney on 23 September 1791. He purchased them for the colony at the Cape of Good Hope. ("Historical Records of New South Wales" Vol. 1 Part 2, Government Printer, p. 493.)SydneysiderJ (talk) 12:41, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've fixed it. FurrySings (talk) 06:33, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Odd dates 

message: I moderate the Culture Victoria website and have added an external link to our video: Nox-All Rabbits. This video documents the 1932 plague and methods of control.Eleworth (talk) 02:05, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added external link 

message: This uncited statement:
"It is possible that native predators, particularly carnivorous dasyurids, were much more effective as natural controllers of the population than the later foxes and feral cats. When their populations collapsed as a result of habitat destruction, and sometimes deliberate hunting, rabbit populations could rise with far less restraint."
Quolls and such can catch rabbits?  Just look at the Quoll.  Does that sound believable to you?  How in the world could a quoll be better at catching rabbits than a cat or fox?  I can't belive it.  I plan to remove it.  Chrisrus (talk) 06:39, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Quolls are effective predators within their habitats. It was noted in the 19th century that many rural farmers did not have chickens because of the devastation of 'native cats' or quolls.  Quolls, at least the modern surviving species, will hunt animals in their burrows.  What makes you think they would not be equal to fox / cat? [[60.242.50.195 (talk) 07:06, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: So if "it was noted" where was it noted? It could be our source (for something that still seems a bit unlikely to me) HiLo48 (talk) 07:12, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

text: Maybe so, but you don't say where you get the information from.  And it seems unlikely because rabbits are larger, faster, and more atheletic than quolls.  I suppose underground they might be able to catch one, but it hardly seems likely.  I think the default thing would be to not include it until someone can cite something authoritative saying that quolls can and do catch rabbits. Chrisrus (talk) 14:39, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually if you read the sentence my diff made, it makes reference to this scientific article. 99of9 (talk) 22:22, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  extraordinary claim? 

message: When I was reading this, someone inserted the sentence "can i get aids" several times. McBenjamin (talk) 23:54, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism? 

message: At the moment, as far as I know, Queensland is the only state to ban the keeping of rabbits.  There's a brief mention of this on the talk page but it seems notable enough for the main article.  But recently I saw an old newsreel that showed rabbits being surrendered at a Victorian zoo due to a recent ban.  Does anyone have any more info on the current Queensland ban, and any previous state bans that have since ended.  There's occasional talk about stopping the Queensland ban but never gets taken seriously. --Dmol (talk) 01:55, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bans on keeping pet rabbits. 

message: It's tempting to think that the decline in the use of fur and skins over the last few decades has had an impact on the use of rabbits commercially.  This market would not be as susceptible to virus infections like the rabbit meat trade would.  I don't want to put any original research in to the article, but wonder if there is any reliable sources information to support this. (or refute it ??) --Dmol (talk) 02:09, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Decline in the skin and fur markets. 

message: Was the introduction of Foxes one early countermeasure? Another one that failed, because the foxes preferred some endemic species to the rabbits. User:ScotXWt@lk 15:01, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope. Foxes were introduced around the same time as rabbits, and for the same purpose: for the sport and entertainment of the leisured class, though to be fair to those gentlemen, the outcome could not reasonably have been predicted. Doug butler (talk) 07:46, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Foxes 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Rabbits in Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050722013034/http://www.austmus.gov.au/eureka/2000/winner_pol.htm to http://www.austmus.gov.au/eureka/2000/winner_pol.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090208223109/http://www.abc.net.au:80/rural/features/rabbitingon/ to http://www.abc.net.au/rural/features/rabbitingon/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070304222740/http://www.csiro.au:80/communication/rabbits/qa4.htm to http://www.csiro.au/communication/rabbits/qa4.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110306094416/http://www.cv.vic.gov.au/stories/but-thats-another-story/9395/nox-all-rabbits/ to http://www.cv.vic.gov.au/stories/but-thats-another-story/9395/nox-all-rabbits/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:21, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Rabbits in Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050722133944/http://agspsrv34.agric.wa.gov.au/programs/app/barrier/history.htm to http://agspsrv34.agric.wa.gov.au/programs/app/barrier/history.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121218144317/http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/173733/Rtn08a.pdf to http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/173733/Rtn08a.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100215045032/http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/invasive/publications/pubs/rab006-rabbit-warren-destruction-ripping.pdf to http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/invasive/publications/pubs/rab006-rabbit-warren-destruction-ripping.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150226233249/http://ddmrb.org.au/About%20DDMRB.htm to http://www.ddmrb.org.au/About%20DDMRB.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:51, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have read (some time ago: no ref) about cats spread in the wild against rabbits. Then those cats became themselves a new pest (lol!), more precisely an invasive species. The article does not (seem to) talk about that. Is it a legend? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Denispir (talk • contribs) 
:Worth adding a link in See also. I'm not sure the article needs more than that seeing as it's specifically about rabbits. BTW you might be interested in the article Cat predation on wildlife. Daß Wölf 09:40, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about cats against rabbits?