Flying Fox Case

The Flying Fox Case involved an application for an injunction in the Federal Court of Australia under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) (EPBC Act) to restrain the killing of thousands of Spectacled Flying Foxes on a lychee farm in North Queensland using a large electric grid.

The case was brought by a conservationist, Dr Carol Booth, after she visited the farm in late 2000 and found extensive evidence of the killing.

The following footage was taken by her on the farm and used as evidence in the court proceedings. It shows dead Spectacled Flying Foxes on the ground at base of the electric grids and hanging in the electric grids running down lines of lychee trees. In one section Dr Booth is shown with a live juvenile bat found clinging to its dead mother.

Due to the large numbers of flying foxes being killed, Dr Booth initially sought an interim injunction to immediately halt the killing. That application was unsuccessful.

The application for an injunction to restrain the operation of the electric grids proceeded to trial in mid-2001 and Branson J granted the injunction sought, stating:

"the Court concluded, on the balance of probabilities, that the number of female Spectacled Flying Foxes killed by the operation of the Grid during the 2000-2001 lychee season fell within the range of 9,900-10,800.

Further, the Court accepted expert evidence that the total Australian population of Spectacled Flying Foxes in early November 2000 did not exceed 100,000. On that basis, the Court, again assisted by expert evidence, concluded that the probable impact of the operation of the Grid, if allowed to continue on an annual basis during future lychee seasons, will be to halve the Australian population of Spectacled Flying Foxes in less than five years. Such an impact would be sufficient to render the species endangered within that time frame.

The Court was satisfied that the Spectacled Flying Fox contributes to the heritage values of the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area in two ways. First, as part of the record of the mixing of the faunas of the Australian and Asian continental plates following their connection. Secondly, as a species which contributes to the character of the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area as "one of the most significant regional ecosystems in the world" and as an important and significant natural habitat for in-situ conservation. In the circumstances, the Court was satisfied that the action of the respondents in operating the Grid is an action that is likely to have a significant impact on the world heritage values of the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area.

... The Court concluded that an injunction restraining the operation of the Grid should be made. However, as the action of the respondents in operating the Grid constitutes a contravention of the Act only while there is no approval of the taking of the action by the respondents in operation under the Act, the injunction will be a conditional one. The person authorised by the Act to grant such an approval is the Minister for the Environment."

After Branson J granted the injunction restraining the operation of the electric grids the farmers referred for the Minister's approval under the EPBC Act an application to kill "approximately 5,500 Spectacled flying foxes" in the 2002 lychee season. The application was refused.

Following the trial the Spectacled Flying Fox species was listed as vulnerable to extinction under the EPBC Act. The Queensland Government also decided it would no longer allow electric grids to be used to kill flying foxes. Shooting flying foxes is, however, still permitted.

Key documents for the court proceedings are:

Application and pleadings

• Application;

• Statement of Claim;

• Amended Defence;

• Reply;

Interim injunction

• Applicant's outline of submissions for an interim injunction;

• Judgment refusing an interim injunction by Spender J: Booth v Bosworth [2000] FCA 1878;

Trial

• Applicant's outline of submissions and submissions in reply for final injunction and order to dismantle grid;

• Judgment granting a final injunction by Branson J: Booth v Bosworth [2001] FCA 1453; (2001) 114 FCR 39; (2001) 117 LGERA 168.

• Judgment granting costs by Branson J: Booth v Bosworth [2001] FCA 1718.

Referral of grids to Minister

Key documents for the referral to the Minister following the trial were:

• Minister's decision that the proposed action was a controlled action requiring approval under the EPBC Act;

• Public submission by Dr Carol Booth on why approval should be refused (Nb. This is an example of a well written public submission - it is clear, logical, relevant to the issues the decision-maker must consider, and based on evidence rather than an emotional plea);

• Minister's decision to refuse the proposed action.

Application for removal of injunction

In 2004 one of the farmers applied to the Federal Court to have the injunction removed. That application was refused: Bosworth v Booth [2004] FCA 1623. An appeal against that decision was also refused.

Significance of this case

An article explaining the background to this case and its significance is available here. It was also used as a case study of public interest environmental litigation in an article available here.

By late-2012, the lychee farm had been scaled back from 10,000 to 2,500 trees and was applying for a permit to shoot flying foxes.

Other cases to protect flying foxes from electric grids

Dr Booth successfully sought orders requiring other electric grids used to kill flying foxes to be dismantled in two other cases in the Queensland Planning and Environment Court:

• The Frippery Case; and

• The Yardley Case.