Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Feral violence

The Pelorus experiment

Bibliographic Data

ID4464617
AuthorsF Probyn-Rapsey (0000-0002-3908-0816, University of Technology Sydney, corresponding author), Rebecca Lennox (0000-0001-8862-2354, University of Technology Sydney)
Year2022
Volume5
Issue1
Pages362-380
Publication date2022-03-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueEnvironment and Planning E Nature and Space (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2514-8486 • E-ISSN: 2514-8494
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/2514848620976959
OpenAlexW3116373398
LanguageEN
Citations received5
References cited36

In early July 2016, two male dingoes were brought by ferry to a small island called Pelorus in the Great Barrier Reef, off the coast of north Queensland, Australia, as part of an experimental 'feral' goat eradication project. What was remarkable about this project was that the two dingoes released on the island had been implanted with a slow-release capsule containing sodium fluoroacetate, commonly known as '1080'. These so-called 'Tik Toks', produced by a firm called Scientec, were designed to release their poison into the bodies of the dingoes in approximately 600 days, after they had served their purpose as goat exterminators. The public and political backlash that the Pelorus experiment aroused reveals a gap between the team's ambitions to 'set the platform' for the conservation of 'pristine' islands and community sentiment concerning animal cruelty. Just how this 'bizarre' experiment (as it was described in State parliament) gained ethics approval is one part of this story. Another relates to implants themselves and what this 'innovation' ('the stuff of horror films' as one petitioner described it) reveals about attitudes to 'killing for conservation'. The Pelorus experiment also shows us what is frequently concealed by eradication programmes, which is that they rely not on a single act of eradication, but a cycle of violence that we describe here as a form of 'feral violence'. In the case of Pelorus, the 'implants' tipped Conservation's motif from the romance of 'rescuing nature' to that of horror, imperilling the social licence that conservation projects assume

Criminology · Cruelty · Environmental ethics · Political science · Sociology · Geographies of human-animal interactions · Human-Animal Interaction Studies · Law · Wildlife Conservation and Criminology Analyses

  • Strained encounters of the anthropogene

    Open Access•Lara Choksey•Medical Humanities•2025

  • Colonialism and Conservation

    Open Access•Rebecca Lennox, Rowena Lennox et al.•Borderlands Journal•2021

  • Animal geographies III

    Open Access•Leah Gibbs•Progress in Human Geography•2024

  • Slow violence against animals

    Open Access•Paula Arcari•Geoforum•2023

  • Strange birds of a feather

    Open Access•Eran Nisan Schwarzfuchs•Environment and Planning E Nature…•2026

  • Every Twelve Seconds

    Timothy Pachirat•Every Twelve Seconds•2011

  • Don’t Mind Meat? The Denial of Mind to Animals Used for Human Consumption

    Open Access•Brock Bastian, Steve Loughnan et al.•Personality and Social Psychology…•2012

  • Summoning compassion to address the challenges of conservation

    Open Access•Arian D Wallach, Marc Bekoff et al.•Conservation Biology•2018

  • Title unavailable

    Open Access•null null•Philosophy study•2016

  • The War against Animals

    Dinesh Joseph Wadiwel, Dinesh Wadiwel•War Against Animals•2015

  • Strong Patient Advocacy and the Fundamental Ethical Role of Veterinarians

    Open Access•Simon Coghlan•Journal of Agricultural and…•2018

  • Transitioning towards human–large carnivore coexistence in extensive grazing systems

    Open Access•Louise Boronyak, Brent Jacobs et al.•AMBIO•2020

  • The First Wave

    Heather Burke•Australian Historical Studies•2020

  • Wildlife conservation, multiple biopolitics and animal subjectification

    Open Access•Timothy Hodgetts•Geoforum•2016

  • Animals, Equality and Democracy

    Open Access•Simon O’sullivan, Siobhan O’sullivan et al.•Animals, Equality and Democracy•2011

  • Making the 'man-eater

    Open Access•Joseph Margulies•Political Geography•2019

  • Cougar - Human Entanglements and the Biopolitical Un/Making of Safe Space

    Open Access•Rosemary-Claire Collard, Rosemary‐claire Collard•Environment and Planning D…•2012

  • Killing for Conservation

    Edward I Steinhart, Rosaleen Duffy et al.•The International Journal of…•2001

  • Caring for the Collective

    Open Access•K Srinivasan•Environment and Planning D…•2014

  • Where species don't meet

    Open Access•Paula Arcari, F Probyn-Rapsey et al.•Environment and Planning E Nature…•2021

  • The Anthropocene's animal? Coywolves as feral cotravelers

    Open Access•Scott Rutherford•Environment and Planning E Nature…•2018

  • Killing squirrels

    Open Access•Sarah L Crowley, Sarah Crowley et al.•Environment and Planning E Nature…•2018

  • Conservation biopolitics and the sustainability episteme

    Open Access•K Srinivasan•Environment and Planning A…•2017

  • Life for Sale? The Politics of Lively Commodities

    Open Access•Rosemary-Claire Collard, Rosemary‐claire Collard et al.•Environment and Planning A…•2013

  • Of place' or 'of people

    Lauren E Van Patter, Alice J Hovorka•Social & Cultural Geography•2018

  • Vermin Beings

    Clapperton Chakanetsa Mavhunga•Social Text•2011

  • Decisions about the Use of Animals in Research

    Catherine A Schuppli•Anthrozoös•2011

  • Necropolitics

    Achille Mbembe•2019

Unique citing works5
Citations per year1
Citation span2021 - 2026 (6)
Citation velocitycurrent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 4
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae