Victoria’s animal welfare regulator should not be misrepresenting the work of the Game Management Authority.
An article in the increasingly rabid anti-hunting birdcage liner, the Geelong Advertiser, penned by RSPCA Victoria CEO Dr Liz Walker, accuses Victoria’s duck hunting season of being “poorly regulated”.
That claim would be laughable if it weren’t coming from the Government-funded animal welfare regulator.
Victoria’s duck season is not an unregulated free-for-all. It is one of the most structured and closely managed wildlife harvests in the country.
Hunters must:
- hold a Victorian Game Licence
- hold a Firearms Licence
- complete mandatory waterfowl identification testing
- comply with strict bag limits and season dates
- use non-toxic ammunition
- follow strict firearm safety requirements
- submit to compliance checks from authorised officers and police
In recent years those requirements have only increased.
Yet Dr Walker claims the season is “poorly regulated”.
That accusation is not just wrong; it is inappropriate.
The Game Management Authority is the statutory regulator responsible for hunting compliance in Victoria. Its authorised officers conduct extensive patrols throughout the season, checking licences, equipment, bag limits and compliance with hunting laws across wetlands and public land.
To suggest that Victoria’s duck season is “poorly regulated” is therefore not simply a criticism of hunters; it is a direct sleight on the work of the professionals responsible for managing and enforcing those laws.
For the Chief Executive of a taxpayer-funded regulator to casually dismiss the regulatory framework and the compliance work of another statutory authority is extraordinary.
Public regulators carry a particular responsibility to speak accurately and respectfully about the work of other agencies. Misrepresenting the regulatory framework governing hunting does nothing to advance animal welfare. What it does do is undermine public confidence in the institutions responsible for managing wildlife and enforcing the law.
That is simply not appropriate.
The RSPCA’s convenient amnesia
Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of Dr Walker’s article is the tone of moral authority with which it is delivered.
In 2016, the RSPCA itself was the subject of a damning independent review into its operations.
The review, led by former Victoria Police Commissioner Neil Comrie, examined the organisation’s role as both an animal welfare enforcement agency and a political campaigner.
The findings were clear.
The RSPCA’s dual role created a serious conflict of interest because the organisation responsible for enforcing Victoria’s animal welfare laws was simultaneously campaigning against those same laws.
The review recommended that the RSPCA cease public activist campaigning against existing laws.
Dr Walker publicly accepted that recommendation at the time.
For a brief moment, the organisation appeared to acknowledge the problem. Its “Stop the Slaughter” anti-duck hunting campaign quietly disappeared from its website.
But the moment passed.
The activism returned.
The crocodile tears stopped.
And the business…and we do mean business…rolled on.
Because anti-hunting outrage is good for fundraising.
Fear sells.
Sensationalism attracts headlines.
Accuracy, it seems, is optional.
The macabre dead Swan hoax
Victorians should also remember the RSPCA’s conduct during the 2016 duck season opening.
Dr Walker, a trained veterinarian, attended alongside activists and a Greens MP and posed with what was clearly a long-dead swan.
The RSPCA then suggested via social media that hunters had illegally shot it.
That claim was false.
Anyone with even basic veterinary experience could see the bird had been dead for some time.
Yet neither Dr Walker nor the RSPCA has ever retracted, explained or apologised for that misleading stunt.
Which raises two simple questions.
If the animal rights movement’s case against duck hunting is so strong…why do they need to mislead the public so often?
And given how often they do…what exactly can people rely on them to tell the truth about?
The truth
Duck hunting in Victoria is legal, regulated and sustainable.
It is conducted under a strict licensing system, monitored by wildlife regulators and supported by ongoing scientific research into waterbird populations.
It is also a long-standing regional tradition that contributes to wetland conservation and local economies.
Hunters are not the enemies of wildlife.
In many cases, they are among its most committed custodians.
Which is precisely why attempts by taxpayer-funded regulators to misrepresent lawful hunting should concern everyone – whether they hunt or not.
Public confidence in animal welfare enforcement depends on honesty, professionalism and respect for the regulatory framework.
When organisations blur the line between regulator and activist, that confidence is inevitably undermined.
And that is something Victoria should take far more seriously than another predictable anti-hunting opinion piece.
