Molly the magpie is homeward bound, but carers barred from using bird for commercial gain

Comments

• zero_gravitas@aussie.zone ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  … but you can guarantee other Instatockers who want their five minutes of fame will be out there collecting whatever they can get their selfish mitts on …

  Yeah, but hopefully this has at least made people aware of the law now, enough that this kind of thing will get people reported quickly.

  I worry, though, that people might keep an animal secretly until it’s non-rehabitable, at which point they figure they can get away with doing the same thing these people have done.

  I don’t know if it’s possible under the law, but swift seizure of the proceeds of crime would go a long way. Probably most people aren’t going to want to go to the hassle of getting licensed, so at least they will be black-and-white in the wrong and it’s doesn’t have to be investigated in detail whether they’re making profit.

  I imagine (I’m not a lawyer) that it might be hard to delineate what exactly is commercial gain from the animal, and what is commercial gain from ‘expertise’ or ‘life experience’ of the keeper.

  I’ll be interested to see where the book deal goes from here. I expect proceeds will be given to wildlife causes (upkeep of the bird is fair enough), and I’m hoping there will be a HEFTY chapter towards the end about how you should not do what they did.

  source
• hanrahan@slrpnk.net ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  The fuck is the Premier of the state doing getting involved in this nonsense.

  Has he solved homelessness?

  source
• autotldr@lemmings.world [bot] ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  This is the best summary I could come up with:

  ---

  A Gold Coast couple whose pet magpie was seized by Queensland authorities will have it returned on the condition they no longer profit from the bird.

  Last month the pair surrendered the bird to the Department of Environment, Science and Innovation (DESI), which claimed the magpie was “taken from the wild and kept unlawfully with no permit, licence or authority”.

  But following a public outcry and calls from Queensland Premier Steven Miles to return the bird, DESI agreed to work with the couple to issue an appropriate licence.

  The department said in a statement that independent expert veterinary advice had shown that Molly was highly habituated and may have developmental issues, meaning he can never be rehabilitated or returned to the wild.

  Bond University associate professor of law Wendy Bonython said it was vitally important for the government to not set a precedent of allowing people to profit from native wildlife.

  “It’s going to depend an awful lot on what the Instagram account is being used for, whether it’s being used to generate personal profit, whether it’s being used to promote wildlife conservation and protection measures, or whether it’s somebody posting essentially photos of their pet,” she said.

  ---

  The original article contains 467 words, the summary contains 198 words. Saved 58%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  source

  • saltesc@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Those idiots. Every Australian knows you can have wild magpies come chillout with you around your home. They’re smart and social. You don’t need to capture one. Just a few days of feeding bits of ham and talking, they’ll come visit and be on your shoulder in no time. The problem is when they get too confident and go in the house and give you sass telling them to gtfo. Or they disappear to have kis and come back with the fam

    source

    • Dkarma@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Sounds like they had to capture it to save its life and didn’t do it to make the thing a sideshow.

      source

      • -> View More Comments