Agree and disagree with some claims here. Way back when the thylacine disappeared we didn't know enough about conservation to prevent it happening. In fact they might have died out anyway with or without human intervention. Hopefully enough quolls and devils will survive through conservation efforts and modern know-how. Whether 1080 is a contributing factor I'm not sure, compared say to road kill and habitat destruction.

I do agree that there is little evidence of foxes taking hold in Tasmania. They are easy to spot and have a distinctive sound and odour. Therefore eradication efforts should be postponed until the evidence is compelling. The current drama over foxes is both an overreaction and a waste of funds.

Foxes in Tasmania is a Psychological Operation mounted by Animal Liberationists in order to discredit hunters.

There are no foxes is Tasmania any so called evidence has been planted by AL zealots.

The baiting of feral animals in Australia and elsewhere, by the heinous 1080 bait, is considered the lesser of two evils.

However, like all governments and senior bureaucrats, catastrophic decisions are formed by them before they move on to be replaced by equally ignorant governments and incompetent senior bureaucrats.

We are well aware of the disastrous manufacture of hazardous chemicals in the 20th century which made a few chemical companies very rich.

Some of these included the organochlorines namely the dioxin laden Agent Orange, chlordane, hexachlorobenzene, heptachlor, DDT etc. Many (not all) have now been banned in Australia but not before wreaking long-term and bio-accumulative havoc on humans, animals and their eco-systems.

More forgiving people tend to say "Oh but we didn't know about that then." Is it not time for ambitious scientists and governments to adhere to a "Precautionary Principle?" After all, despite all the previous "you beaut silver bullets" released into our eco-systems for the betterment of mankind, these highly contaminated systems are now struggling for survival and threatened species are on the increase.

The following scientific link written in 2003, recommends that further studies on 1080 should include the:

Potential impact on food webs

Fecundity studies on chronic toxicity to wild-life

Studies on chronic human toxicity apart from endocrine disruption

http://www.jcu.edu.au/jrtph/vol/v02weaver.pdf

Those who like to hunt and consume feral animals may be unwittingly ingesting traces of the 1080 bait with unknown long-term health effects.

"After the politically-sanctioned extermination of the thylacine has Tasmania learnt nothing?"

No - nor has the rest of this nation!

I always believed, like earlier commenters, that foxes did not exist on Tasmania. Maybe I am mistaken.

I must say though, that if they do exist, then I think there must be better measures out there than 1080 baiting, especially given Tasmania's beautiful and unique wildlife environment, unlike any other part of Australia (apart from, perhaps other islands like Rottnest - WA, Kangaroo Island - SA and a few others in QLD). Surely if, IF there are only an estmiated 400 foxes on the island, there could be a mass organised shoot of the things. Tassie is big, but not that big that you couldn't at least significantly impact fox numbers with a properly organised, controlled shoot. That way, native wildlife won't suffer and the mere 400 foxes (as opposed to probably tens of thousands on the mainland) would be mostly eradicated.