Chapter 30: Feral pigs in Australia and New Zealand331
only been economically viable in a limited number of areas due
to the logistics of harvesting pigs over large areas and deliver-
ing fresh carcasses of acceptable quality to processing stations.
Recently, the industry has suffered from a decline in the num-
ber of accredited harvesters, which has made it difficult to meet
demand from Europe and maintain market share in the face of
increasing competition from other countries.
Social Impacts
In addition to their small but sometimes important value as an
export product, feral pigs are highly valued as a game species by
many recreational hunters throughout much of Australia and
New Zealand, perhaps more so than in many other countries
due to the relative scarcity or restricted distribution of other
large game animals such as buffalo and deer. This is evidenced
by the profusion of popular magazines and films devoted spe-
cifically to pig hunting (at least six regular magazines in 2015),
and the substantial expense and effort that many hunters bear
to pursue feral pigs (Tisdell 1982; Meurk 2014). The number of
active recreational hunters in Australia was recently estimated
at between 200,000 and 350,000, or about 1.5 per cent of the
population (Finch et al. 2014), and a large proportion of this fig-
ure is likely to hunt pigs.
Feral pigs can also be an important cultural and food
resource for some Australian Aboriginal communities. Pig
hunting can be particularly important for maintaining social
and family structure as well as connections to traditional lands
and lifestyle (Koichi et al. 2012). These connections can be
important in protecting individuals from falling into patterns
of antisocial behaviour and for promoting community well-
being (Homel et al. 1999; Koichi et al. 2012). However, pigs can
also damage important cultural and subsistence resources, and
are therefore more commonly viewed as a pest in some com-
munities or at some times (Robinson et al. 2005; Fordham et al.
2006; Koichi et al. 2012). It has also been suggested that feral pig
control programmes conducted on Aboriginal lands could be
used to generate financial reward for Traditional Owners under
Australian carbon pollution abatement policy, but establish-
ing an acceptable method for doing so would require consider-
able high-risk investment (Bengsen & Cox 2014). Feral pigs in
New Zealand are regarded as taonga (treasure) by some Māori
as Captain Cook presented them as a gift when he landed. Many
New Zealanders regard pigs as a resource and recreational pig
hunting is widely practised (Nugent et al. 1996). They also have
a commercial value for their meat and as a target for professional
hunting guides (Nugent et al. 1996).
Feral Pig Management and Control
in Australia and New Zealand
For many decades, feral or free-roaming pigs were seen largely
as an agricultural pest, although they have only been widely rec-
ognized as such since the 1950s when the first research began to
emerge. Attempts to manage their impacts on agricultural pro-
duction were typically based on ad-hoc regulations which varied
greatly among jurisdictions. The spread of feral pig populations
during this period suggests that these approaches were ineffective.
During the 1970s, governments began taking the feral pig
problem more seriously and invested substantially in research
and extension, although pigs were still seen mainly as an agricul-
tural pest. This work provided the foundation for the adoption
of more strategic approaches to feral pig management, coincid-
ing with a paradigm shift towards recognition of the importance
of strategic pest management more generally (e.g. Braysher
1993; Choquenot et al. 1996; Fleming et al. 2014). Subsequent
research and extension has provided many benefits, including:
establishment of codes of practice for feral pig control (Sharp
& Saunders 2014); new tools and methods for controlling pigs
(e.g. Cowled et al. 2008b; Lapidge et al. 2012); greater recogni-
tion of pigs as an environmental pest (DEH 2005); mapping of
feral pig distribution and threats on a national scale (West 2008;
Anonymous 2010); insights into some of the social and eco-
nomic barriers and drivers of effective management (e.g. Koichi
et al. 2012; Gentle & Pople 2013); and greater use of integrated
and coordinated feral pig management (e.g. Ferris 2010).Contemporary Management
Today, feral pig management policy and practice in Australia
largely aims to reduce the damage that pigs cause to environ-
mental and agricultural assets. The development and admin-
istration of legislation and policy to protect these assets is the
responsibility of eight states and territories. Management at a
national or continental level is mostly restricted to international
trade and biosecurity issues (e.g. feral pig exports, exotic dis-
eases) and facilitating consistency among states through various
committees and strategies.
Importantly, a national pest animal strategy (Vertebrate Pest
Committee 2007) and threat abatement plan for predation, habitat
degradation, competition and disease transmission by feral pigs
(DEH 2005) provide a foundation for consistent approaches to
management across the country. Consequently, all jurisdictions
have legislation and policy that require landholders to reduce the
impacts or abundance of feral pigs on their property or prohibit
actions that facilitate the persistence or spread of pig populations.
Furthermore, feral pig populations are not managed as a game
resource to be protected from over-exploitation in any jurisdic-
tion. This high-level coordination and lack of protection for feral
pigs contrasts with other countries and regions where wild pigs
can be a pest, such as Europe and the Americas (Apollonio et al.
2010; Ballari et al. 2015; Centner & Shuman 2015).
Eradication of feral pig populations is not possible in most
cases because pigs are too well established and widespread to
allow complete removal of all animals and prevent reinvasion
(Massei et al. 2011; Hone 2012). Despite widespread recogni-
tion of the importance of focusing on damage reduction, rather
than population reduction (Braysher 1993; Braysher et al. 2012),
most pig management programmes aim to reduce population
densities in the expectation that this will reduce damage (e.g.
Ferris 2010). Diversionary feeding, the practice of providing
feed to divert pigs from damaging crops and other resources
(e.g. Geisser & Reyer 2004), is illegal in most jurisdictions and is
not known to be used. Population reduction is achieved through
lethal control because there are no practical means of reducing
recruitment through fertility control (Bengsen et al. 2014b)..03212:55:46