Equine Collaborative International roundtable blasts Australia’s Brumby cull

Equine Collaborative International hosted an international roundtable on June 24 that condemned New South Wales’ aerial Brumby cull in Kosciuszko National Park and questioned the government’s data, oversight and transparency. Speakers also raised conflict-of-interest concerns and urged pressure on Australian consulates.

Why it matters: - The Brumby cull in Kosciuszko National Park has become a broader fight over animal welfare, government credibility and how conservation decisions are made. - Roundtable participants argued that weak cruelty laws, disputed population figures and limited independent oversight erode public trust. - The discussion also raised cultural concerns, including the Ngarigo people’s long-standing connection to the Brumbies.

What happened: - Equine Collaborative International hosted an International Roundtable on June 24, 2026, with participants from diverse backgrounds, education levels and equine experience. - The roundtable focused on three issues: cruelty laws, the need for stronger advocacy coordination, and the Brumby cull in Kosciuszko National Park in New South Wales, Australia. - The event concluded with calls for people to contact Australian consulates about the cull. - A link for consulate information was shared: Find your consulate.

The details: - Participants said New South Wales Environment Minister Penny Sharpe had not been engaging with constituents on the Brumby shooting and was not responding to phone calls or emails. - The roundtable said aerial shooting had been outlawed after the Guy Fawkes River National Park shooting in 2000. - The discussion said Sharpe ordered aerial shooting to begin again in 2023, two years before the law was rescinded in 2025. - Speakers questioned the relationship between Sharpe’s senior policy adviser, Emily Dyball, and Invasive Species Council CEO Jack Gough, calling it a conflict of interest. - Mel Rowe described the Invasive Species Council as a political lobbyist group masquerading as a conservation group. - The roundtable said the government and the Invasive Species Council had not used an impartial third party to conduct accurate Brumby counts. - Speakers said reported population growth rates were biologically implausible, including an estimate of a 315% increase in one year. - The discussion noted that Brumbies have an 11-month gestation period and roughly a 50% female population. - Rowe said the government’s integrity was rated poorly because it was not transparent and was not allowing external investigation. - Rowe also said Australians deserved honesty and that the issue was about trust, integrity and the treatment of an iconic Australian animal. - The roundtable argued that data and population figures were manipulated to support a predetermined narrative. - Speakers said framing the cull as a response to a crisis helped excuse cruelty and shield decision-makers from accountability. - The discussion said labeling Brumbies as invasive made their destruction socially acceptable. - The roundtable said the government promoted an “Eco vs Ego” hierarchy that places humans as masters of the landscape rather than custodians. - Speakers said this approach ignored Indigenous kinship and cultural and spiritual connections to the Brumbies. - Dean Marsland, who has long experience in Kosciuszko National Park, said he has photographed the land and its inhabitants for years and has provided photographic evidence of aerial shooting effects. - Marsland challenged Jack Gough’s comments about people using lies and manipulating information rather than backing in the science. - Marsland said Gough’s referenced science relied on selected studies and excluded research that did not support the claims. - Marsland also challenged Gough’s call to rely on Parks staff, the RSPCA and independent veterinarians. - The discussion said many Parks staff do not agree with the cull and that some are sent to work elsewhere or told to take holidays during the shooting. - The roundtable said the RSPCA publicly stated it did not sign off on aerial shooting. - The discussion said independent veterinarians inspected roughly 40 of the 270 horses shot during the trial in the southern end of Kosciuszko National Park. - The roundtable said the remaining 230 horses shot in steep, heavily timbered areas were not inspected. - The discussion questioned whether a licensed veterinarian can sign an assessment when the only visual came from a flying helicopter. - Marsland said the headwaters cited by Gough are already dammed and diverted by a human-made hydroelectric scheme.

Between the lines: - The roundtable was not just about Brumbies. It was a challenge to the credibility of the institutions shaping the cull. - The strongest theme was that conservation language can be used to justify lethal action when the underlying data and review process are disputed. - The conflict-of-interest allegation and the inspection concerns suggest the controversy is as much about process as it is about the horses.

What's next: - Equine Collaborative International urged people to contact Australian consulates and share opposition to the cull. - The dispute over population counts, oversight and aerial shooting is likely to remain central as public pressure on the New South Wales government continues. - Calls for outside review and greater transparency are expected to intensify if the cull continues.

The bottom line: - The Brumby fight has become a test of whether New South Wales can defend its conservation policy, its data and its ethics at the same time.