Urgent Request for Answers on Koala Management and Accountability in Victoria

At Budj Bim World Heritage National Park, 1061 koalas have been shot from helicopters by Victoria’s Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action (DEECA).

The situation is alarming. The park is bordered by blue gum plantations, home to thousands of koalas. These plantations are being cleared without any requirement to retain koala habitat trees. Displaced koalas are then forced to migrate — often ending up as roadkill or seeking refuge in the last remaining natural areas, nearby state and national parks.

This recent cull appears to have been triggered by such a migration into Budj Bim. While a fire was reported, its timing is suspicious — impacting an area already overpopulated with koalas. DEECA claimed to assess 2,200 koalas, raising questions: How does a park with regular sterilisation and culling programs still have such high numbers?

Instead of mounting a rescue, DEECA deployed aerial shooters under the guise of “welfare.” Shooting from helicopters offers no humane guarantee, especially for pouch young left to suffer. While euthanasia may be necessary for severely burned animals, indiscriminate culling like this is unacceptable.

The public was never informed. Premier Jacinta Allan supported the operation, despite being aware of the broader systemic failure.

Let’s be clear: this isn’t about animal welfare.

Koalas have been breeding in plantations for nearly two decades with no contingency for when those trees are harvested. With over 110,000 hectares of plantations in the region and an estimated 50,000 koalas dependent on them, why hasn’t DEECA planned for their survival? Instead, their “solution” is quiet extermination — out of sight, out of mind.

If DEECA truly cared about welfare, they would have made plantation companies accountable, enforced the preservation of habitat, or banned blue gums years ago when they knew they attracted koalas. Instead, they chose silence, the suppression of wildlife carers, and lethal force.

Will YOU speak up for koalas?

Take Action now:

Email decision makers responsible for the oversight of wildlife and let them know Koalas deserve better protection. Please add your own comments to our letter below. 
(This option is available to everyone, including our overseas koala supporters)

To the Victorian Minister for the Environment and the Conservation Regulator,

I am writing as a concerned member of the public regarding what appears to be a long-standing and systemic failure by your department to protect Victoria’s koalas, particularly those living within commercial plantation landscapes.

It has come to public attention that approximately 48,000 koalas currently inhabit plantations across the state. Given the scale of this population, it is alarming that no clear, enforced measures have been implemented to safeguard their welfare during or after harvesting operations. The following specific questions require full and detailed responses, as a matter of public interest and accountability:

1. Why has no enforceable plan been implemented to protect koalas living in blue gum plantations after logging?
- Why is it deemed acceptable to leave just eight trees as post-harvest habitat, when this is clearly insufficient for any folivorous species to survive?
- What evidence does DEECA rely on to justify this standard?

2. Why has DEECA not created a mandatory Code of Practice for plantation harvesting that includes all of the following:
- The retention of significant areas of unharvested plantation to provide wildlife refuge;
- Mosaic harvesting practices to reduce stress and displacement;
- The establishment of native habitat corridors to ensure safe movement and long-term species viability?

3. Why has DEECA allowed the plantation industry to generate billions in profits while failing to address the widespread suffering and death of koalas—a protected and nationally significant species—associated with this industry?

4. Koalas are reportedly the only native species subjected to regular “health checks” under DEECA-issued permits.
- What are the results of these health checks, and why have they never been made publicly available?
- Who oversees these checks, and what happens to the koalas found unwell or injured?

5. Why does DEECA not monitor plantation harvesting operations directly, and instead rely solely on spotters using ProofSafe to record injuries and deaths?
- Why is the data from ProofSafe not released to the public, despite it being funded by taxpayer resources?

6. In 2014, DEECA authorized the culling of over 700 koalas in the Otways due to over-browsing. What concrete actions—aside from "health checks"—has DEECA taken in the last ten years to prevent this from happening again?
- Why is DEECA currently permitting Parks Victoria and local councils to collar manna gums to block koalas from accessing their native food, particularly in areas recently logged?

7. Are “health checks” now being used as a pretext for further culling of koalas, and if not, what assurance can DEECA provide to the public that these checks are not being misused to justify lethal outcomes?

8. Given the lack of adequate habitat planning, monitoring, and public reporting, how can DEECA justify the continuation of culling practices under the guise of health or population management?
- What evidence-based habitat recovery or expansion strategies has DEECA implemented to reduce the need for intervention in the first place?

These actions—or lack thereof—do not reflect a commitment to conservation. Instead, they suggest years of mismanagement, neglect, and a failure to uphold the public’s expectation of wildlife protection.

Victorians have a right to transparent, science-based policies and clear answers on how their tax dollars are being used in relation to the management of our native wildlife.

I request that each of the above questions be answered in full and in writing, with the answers available to the public.

The continued secrecy and absence of public accountability around the treatment of koalas is unacceptable and demands urgent redress.