How YOU Can Help Brumbies From Your Couch or Desk
Dear Brumby Lover and general all-round decent human being🫶 We know there are incredible people fighting for brumbies on the front line; preparing legal challenges, digging through environmental papers, lobbying politicians, and fronting the media. Their work matters so very much. But not everyone has the time, money, or mental clarity and fortitude to do that level of advocacy. So I thought I would put together a list of ideas of things that you could do mostly from your couch or desk! Please remember you don't have to do everything, doing something will help and you can be proud to say you were part of this movement when the morally wrong are brought down.
I'm going to try and make it simple, if you need further information please don't hesitate to send me a message. Everything in this blog is my opinion and in no way am I quoting other organisations, and where I make claims, it is of course allegedly!
If you already know all the ins and outs of what going on
If you're new to the Brumby cause, here's some info to fast-track your knowledge
Brumby Advocacy Lexicon (Key Abbreviations)
The baddies
DCCEEW — Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water Sets national environmental policy frameworks that states use to justify brumby reduction and ecological impact claims.
ISC — Invasive Species Council Lobby group pushing strong eradication measures. Their reports often rely on selective data and urgent framing that critics say exaggerates brumby impact and drives political pressure. Scaremongers at best, they frighten the Australian public into believing we are under attack to garner huge budgets running into the $billions. Offshoot projects such as Reclaim Kosci, wholly created to promote getting Brumbys out of the KNP. So beware of groups that may be associated to these extremists.
IUCN — International Union for Conservation of Nature Global conservation body whose invasive‑species definitions and ecosystem guidelines are frequently cited to justify brumby reduction.
NSW NPWS — National Parks and Wildlife Service Implements trapping, removal, and aerial culling under direction from the NSW Labor Government. Provides limited operational transparency.
Penny Sharpe — NSW Minister for the Environment Approves and defends aerial culling as “necessary.” Her decisions directly shape NPWS operations and the current reduction strategy.
Snowy Hydro Major energy corporation reshaping large areas of Kosciuszko. Snowy Hydro 2.0 construction has caused land clearing, sinkholes, and repeated environmental breaches, yet brumbies are publicly framed as the primary threat to native species — a major inconsistency.
RSPCA NSW Animal‑welfare enforcement body. Did not conduct independent carcass inspections and relied on NPWS self‑reporting. Their 2026 stance supports aerial culling as compliant with welfare standards.
AVA — Australian Veterinary Association Peak veterinary body. Has not provided independent welfare assessments or challenged the lack of transparent evidence around aerial culling.
Additional Culprits
1080 Poisoning (Sodium Fluoroacetate)
A highly toxic chemical used in Australia for pest control. Connection: mooted to being used in the KNP. 1080 is central to the broader wildlife‑management debate because it is deployed widely across national parks. Advocates highlight 1080 as an example of controversial, non‑selective, slow‑acting poison, raising concerns about suffering, accidental ingestion, and ecosystem impacts. Now advocates of this abomination will tell you it is a naturally occurring substance so our native species 'have a high tolerance' to it. Do not believe this BS, native and especially dogs are very sensitive to it. Passing poison through the food chain is a ticking timebomb.
30 by 30 (30×30)
A global conservation initiative aiming to protect 30% of land and sea by 2030. Connection: Some environmental groups frame brumby reduction as part of achieving “restored ecosystems” within protected areas. Advocates argue that 30×30 can be used to justify aggressive wildlife removal under the banner of ecological restoration.
Red Energy
A retail electricity company owned by Snowy Hydro. Connection: It is not directly involved in brumby management, but it is often mentioned because it is wholly owned by Snowy Hydro, which operates across the same region where brumby policy is contested. Brumby advocates argue that horses are being blamed and removed while far larger environmental impacts and breaches linked to Snowy Hydro 2’s construction and land disturbance go unaddressed.
Government Biodiversity and Clean Energy Credits
This is a complex web that in my opinion is not regulated well. $billions are on offer, and we know who is getting rich.
1. Clean Energy Regulator (CER) Controls:
ACCUs – Australian Carbon Credit Units (carbon credits)
NRM biodiversity certificates – under the Nature Repair Market
How national parks benefit:
Parks cannot earn ACCUs or NRM certificates.
But CER‑aligned projects (run by NGOs or private proponents on park land) can bring contract funding, project money, and management grants into park budgets.
Parks benefit indirectly, through funding tied to “ecosystem improvement” metrics that CER frameworks help justify.
2. Nature Repair Market (NRM) Controls:
Biodiversity certificates for voluntary nature‑repair projects
Federal biodiversity project register
How national parks benefit:
Parks cannot sell certificates, but NRM projects can be partnered or co‑located on park land.
This brings federal biodiversity funding, research contracts, and “restoration” money into park operations.
The NRM’s scoring system can also justify increased government allocations for parks labelled “high‑value biodiversity assets.”
3. NSW Dept of Planning & Env (NSW DPE) Controls:
BAM credits – ecosystem credits + species credits
NSW biodiversity offset scheme used by developers
How national parks benefit:
Parks cannot generate or sell BAM credits.
BUT BAM scores influence state funding decisions:
“Threatened ecosystems”
“High‑value conservation land”
“Restoration priority zones”
These labels help parks secure larger budgets, more staff, more conservation grants, and more political leverage.
The Bottom Line: How Parks Profit Without Selling Credits
National parks do not earn credits, but they do earn money from the
frameworks behind them:
Credit systems create metrics (vegetation condition, habitat scores, carbon storage).
Those metrics feed into funding justifications for parks.
The more “threatened” or “high‑value” a park is scored, the more money flows from state and federal governments.
Introduced species can distort these metrics, making parks appear to be “improving” or “recovering,” which can boost funding allocations.
In short: Credits don’t pay national parks, but the scoring systems behind them absolutely do.
The Associated Regulatory Bodies
ACNC — Australian Charities and Not‑for‑profits Commission
Regulates charities. Useful for verifying whether organisations involved in the brumby debate are properly registered, transparent, and compliant.
ASIC — Australian Securities and Investments Commission
Not directly involved in brumby management. Relevant only when charities or advocacy groups need to be checked for legitimacy, governance, or compliance. Connection: They allow the Invasive Species Council to use the word “Council”, making it sound official when it is not.
NEMA — National Emergency Management Agency
Oversees national disaster and emergency planning. Connection: Their interest in brumbies is tied to fire‑load reduction in national parks, where vegetation management and fuel risks intersect with wild horse numbers.
CASA Firearm‑from‑Aircraft Approval
Formal approval required from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) for any operation involving the carrying and discharge of firearms from aircraft. Connection: Aerial shooting of brumbies cannot legally occur without this approval. The Air Operator’s Certificate holder must obtain the authorisation, and all personnel must ensure the approval is valid and complies with every condition in the documentation.
CAR (Clean Energy Regulator) The Clean Energy Regulator assesses carbon credit projects. Depending on
the project rules, landholders may need to change land management
practices, which can sometimes include controlling introduced species, to
increase carbon storage or reduce emissions.
Australian DCCEEW– Biodiversity Division The Biodiversity Division develops national biodiversity policy and threatened‑species frameworks. It sets the overarching direction for biodiversity programs, while implementation is carried out by state agencies. Current policy settings often rely on species removal or control to demonstrate ecological improvement.
Government
The current government
The current NSW Labor Government supports strong reduction of brumby numbers in Kosciuszko National Park (and others) and authorises aerial culling under its environmental policy framework. Be very careful when strategically voting, check first that the party you are voting for aligns with your beliefs.
MLAs — Members of the Legislative Assembly (State Lower House)
State‑level elected representatives in the State Legislative Assembly.
Connection: MLAs vote on State Laws, including anything affecting National Parks, NPWS operations, land management, and brumby policy. They are the primary people who can influence brumby legislation directly.
(Readers should always confirm current status.)
MLCs — Members of the Legislative Council (State Upper House)
State‑level representatives in the State Legislative Council. Connection: MLCs review, amend, and vote on State legislation. They can block, modify, or delay bills affecting brumbies, making them strategically important for advocacy.
(Readers should always confirm current status.)
MPs — Members of Parliament (Federal Lower House)
Federal MPs represent electorates in the House of Representatives (Canberra). Connection: They do not control brumby policy, which is a State matter. But they can:
raise the issue federally,
question DCCEEW,
support inquiries,
amplify public concerns nationally. Useful for visibility and pressure, but not for direct policy change.
(Readers should always confirm current status.)
Senators — Members of the Australian Senate (Federal Upper House)
Federal representatives who review, amend, and vote on national legislation. Connection: Senators cannot change State brumby policy directly, but they can:
raise the issue in Senate committees,
question federal agencies,
bring national attention to state‑level concerns. They are valuable for federal‑level scrutiny and visibility.
(Readers should always confirm current status.)
Brumby Supporting Politicians
MLCs — Legislative Council (Upper House)
These are the strongest and most consistent brumby advocates.
Rachel Merton (Liberal, MLC) Most vocal defender of brumbies in NSW Parliament. Opposed aerial culling and continues to advocate for protection.
Emma Hurst (Animal Justice Party, MLC) Opposes lethal control. Advocates for animal welfare and non‑lethal management.
Rod Roberts (Independent, MLC) Opposed the repeal that enabled aerial culling. Continues to speak against mass killing.
Tania Mihailuk (Independent, MLC) Opposed the repeal. Supports animal‑welfare‑focused positions.
Wes Fang (Nationals, MLC) Opposed the legislative changes that enabled aerial culling.
Sarah Mitchell (Nationals, MLC) Has opposed aerial culling measures and supported humane alternatives.
MLAs — Legislative Assembly (Lower House)
Only one MLA has been publicly supportive in 2026.
Nicole Overall (Nationals, MLA) Opposed the repeal enabling aerial culling and has shown support for humane brumby management.
Federal MPs (House of Representatives)
Angus Taylor (Liberal, Member for Hume) Spoke at a pro‑brumby rally in 2026. Called aerial shooting “inhumane.” Publicly supportive of communities opposing the cull.
Federal Senators (Senate)
No federal Senators have made public pro‑brumby statements in 2026.
Brumby Advocates - non-government
You, me and thousands of others, some you don't even see or hear about!
The most influential currently are:
ABMO (Australian Brumby Management Organisation) — welfare‑focused management advocates.
Alan Jones — media figure amplifying anti‑culling concerns.
Bluewater Brumbies Inc. — active humane‑treatment advocates.
Brumby Action Group — high‑visibility grassroots campaigners.
Carmen Jackson — prominent public campaigner against culling.
Charlie Massy — author challenging ecological simplifications.
Coffin Bay Brumby Preservation Society — sanctuary operators with heritage focus.
Forever Free Brumby Rescue — small informal sanctuary; advocates for brumby protection.
Heritage Brumby Advocates Australia — heritage and welfare campaigners.
HOOFS2010 — major rehoming and long‑term welfare advocates. Independent aerial observers — provide footage shaping public perception.
Jan Carter (Save the Brumbies Inc.) — long‑standing sanctuary leader. Peta Credlin — commentator raising transparency concerns.
Peter Cochran — former MP; major heritage‑horse advocate.
Regional landholders near Kosciuszko — supply on‑ground evidence and testimony.
Save the Brumbies Inc. — established sanctuary and heritage advocates. Sky News regional commentators — amplify public debate and scrutiny. Snowy Brumby Supporters Network — strong community mobilisation and monitoring.
The Pulse News - an agricultural orientated news channel, honest and investigative. Our friend and ally is Mike Ryan
Other
KNP = Kosciuzko Nation Park, NSW, where the latest atrocity was carried out
Brief history of what has been going on
2018: NSW passes the Kosciuszko Wild Horse Heritage Act, legally recognising brumbies as part of the park’s cultural heritage.
The Act requires a management plan balancing heritage values with environmental protection.
2019: NPWS begins drafting new population targets and management strategies under the Act.
2020: Debate intensifies between environmental groups and heritage advocates over population estimates.
2021: NPWS releases updated counts; advocates dispute accuracy and methodology.
2021–2022: Trapping and rehoming continue, but numbers removed remain low compared to targets.
2022: Pressure grows from lobby groups calling for stronger reduction measures.
2023: NSW Government repeals key protections in the 2018 Act, removing barriers to lethal control.
Late 2023: Aerial shooting of brumbies resumes in Kosciuszko for the first time in decades.
The operation is conducted with limited transparency and no independent carcass inspections.
RSPCA NSW endorses NPWS reports without conducting its own welfare audits.
Public outrage escalates as footage and eyewitness accounts emerge.
2024: NPWS continues aerial culling under ministerial approval; population estimates remain contested.
Community groups increase monitoring and documentation of operations.
Rescue organisations struggle to obtain trapped horses due to reduced rehoming pathways.
2025: Advocacy intensifies; several NSW MLCs publicly oppose aerial culling.
Federal MPs raise the issue in Canberra, though federal government has no direct authority.
Media commentators begin covering concerns about transparency and animal welfare.
2026: NSW Labor Government continues aerial culling in Kosciuszko, with NPWS conducting multiple operations and reporting “no adverse outcomes,” a stance supported by RSPCA NSW. Large numbers of carcasses are left across the park, raising concerns about water quality, scavenger disruption, and lack of independent welfare oversight. Brumby advocates challenge the accuracy of population estimates and call for humane management, transparency, and reinstatement of heritage protections. September 2026 – Independent Welfare Review (3‑day sample only): An observer monitored three days (they were shooting for approx 4 weeks) of the aerial shooting program in Kosciuszko National Park. Across this short window, 180 horses were chased, 154 killed and 26 escaped. The report claimed zero non‑fatal wounding, but only for the days observed. Shot counts remained high (average 6.6 per horse), chase times reached over six minutes, and all juveniles present were killed. No foals were seen during the observer’s limited attendance. The findings apply only to this brief sample, not the full multi‑week operation.
As this 'goes to press' additional information In September, brumby advocate Carmen Jackson successfully halted planned aerial shooting in Yuraygir National Park through urgent court action, forcing NPWS to pause operations pending further legal consideration. Brumby advocates continue pushing for humane management, accurate population data, and reinstatement of heritage protections. Also pending is a decision on the KNP shooting activities. We have many opponents, but our greatest adversary is the one spreading fear and convincing Australians that our nation is under constant attack. These claims are often based on exaggeration and alarmism rather than fact. Too many decent, well-meaning Australians have been misled into accepting this narrative and, without realising it, end up supporting actions they may never have endorsed had they been presented with the full truth.
Brumby Advocate Points to refute government claims
Brumbies existed in the Snowy Mountains for over a century before Kosciuszko was declared a national park, meaning they were part of the landscape long before modern park boundaries or management frameworks were created.
The Ngarigo people, traditional custodians of the region, publicly called for the shooting to stop, but their concerns were not incorporated into government decision‑making, raising questions about cultural consultation and respect for Indigenous voices.
Government population estimates have varied dramatically year‑to‑year, raising concerns about accuracy.
Independent counters have produced lower numbers than NPWS modelling.
Aerial surveys rely on extrapolation rather than direct counts, increasing uncertainty.
NPWS has not released full raw survey data for independent verification.
No independent carcass inspections were conducted during aerial culling operations.
Welfare assessments relied solely on NPWS self‑reporting, not external oversight.
Shot‑placement claims (“no incorrect shots”) were not supported by physical evidence.
Carcasses were not made available for veterinary examination.
RSPCA NSW endorsed NPWS reports without conducting its own field investigations.
The AVA has not provided independent veterinary scrutiny of aerial shooting impacts.
Government claims of “instant death” conflict with eyewitness accounts of prolonged suffering.
Advocates report inconsistencies between NPWS statements and on‑ground observations.
Environmental impact claims often cite selective or outdated studies.
Government messaging rarely acknowledges positive ecological roles brumbies may play.
Heritage considerations outlined in the 2018 Act were side-lined after legislative changes.
Rehoming pathways were reduced, limiting humane alternatives.
Community groups were denied access to observe operations or verify outcomes.
NPWS transparency declined after aerial culling resumed, increasing public distrust.
Government statements emphasise “no adverse outcomes,” despite lack of independent evidence.
Advocates argue that policy decisions appear driven by political pressure rather than balanced science. he Invasive Species Council frames brumbies as the primary threat, while ignoring larger, well‑documented pressures on native species.
ISC messaging often relies on selective data, presenting worst‑case ecological claims without acknowledging uncertainty or conflicting studies.
Advocates argue ISC uses emotionally charged language (“ecological collapse”, “invasive destruction”) that exaggerates brumby impact.
ISC frequently cites population numbers that have not been independently verified, contributing to public confusion.
ISC rarely acknowledges that native species declines pre‑date brumby population growth, indicating other drivers are responsible.
Human activity — including recreation, roads, ski resorts, mountain bike parks, campsites, fire roads and tracks, hikers, 4x4 bush hoons and errant hunters driving through bushland — causes widespread habitat disturbance not reflected in ISC messaging.
Wildfire remains one of the largest causes of native species decline, yet ISC commentary often downplays its role compared to horses.
Climate change has altered alpine ecosystems dramatically, affecting species distribution and survival independent of brumby presence.
Snowy Hydro operations have cleared large corridors of land, reshaped waterways, and caused repeated environmental breaches, yet these impacts receive little ISC scrutiny.
Snowy Hydro’s construction footprint is significantly larger than any area disturbed by brumbies, but ISC rarely includes this in public impact comparisons.
The widespread use of 1080 poison across national parks affects scavengers, predators, and non‑target wildlife, yet ISC seldom addresses these risks.
1080 poisoning contributes to ecosystem imbalance by removing key predator species, indirectly affecting native fauna survival.
ISC messaging often omits the cumulative impact of human‑driven pressures such as tourism, infrastructure, and fire‑trail expansion.
Advocates argue ISC presents brumby removal as a simple ecological fix, despite the complexity of alpine ecosystem decline.
ISC campaigns frequently highlight herbivore damage but rarely contextualise it against larger disturbances caused by human land‑use.
ISC public statements tend to portray brumby impacts as catastrophic, even when evidence shows mixed or localised effects.
ISC rarely acknowledges that some native species declines are driven by disease, climate cycles, or historical land management practices.
Advocates reject ISC claims because they appear to support predetermined policy outcomes rather than balanced ecological analysis.
ISC messaging often discourages public scrutiny by framing dissenting views as “misinformation,” reducing open scientific debate.
Overall, advocates argue that ISC narratives oversimplify complex ecological issues and unfairly attribute broad environmental decline to a single species.
Helicopter pursuit drives horses to exhaustion, causing panic, falls, and injuries; advocates report cases of horses breaking legs during high‑speed chases.
Pregnant mares are not exempt from aerial operations, raising serious welfare concerns about stress, trauma, and fetal loss.
The 2023 veterinary audit documented an average of 7.5 bullets per horse, with some horses showing up to 15 entry wounds, contradicting claims that aerial shooting is humane or instantaneous.
Helicopter downdraft can disorient wildlife, scatter birds, and disturb ground‑dwelling species; ricocheting bullets pose additional risks to non‑target animals.
In 2026, over 1,000 horse carcasses were left in Kosciuszko National Park, creating contamination risks for waterways and offering no benefit to native species recovery.
The words feral and invasive aren't necessarily scientific fact, often time they are opinion.
What you can do
Donate
Donate what you can afford, be it $5, $20, it doesn't matter, a hundred $5 donations soon add up!
Legal Funds
Dedicated advocates such as Carmen Jackson from the Facebook group Australian Human Rights Heritage are working to support brumby-related legal action and advocacy. These efforts can involve significant
legal costs.
If, after doing your own research, you believe legitimate and worthwhile work is being undertaken to help protect Australia's brumbies, please
consider making a donation if you are able. There may be other groups also working on legal routes to end the attrocities.
This is Carmen's Facebook group:https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61591453322403
Media News. The Pulse, available on YouTube, Roku, Apple TV, Amazon Fire, is a news channel, supporting the Brumbys and many other concerns that Australians have regarding the way the country is going. Investigative, concerned with agricultural matters, is looking at the big picture when it comes to the Brumby situation. They are very concerned about the ISC, an organisation that needs regulating. Check out their website THE PULSE - TODAY'S NEWS TALK or these broadcasts The invasives cult (my words not The Pulse)
The lack of science (my words not The Pulse) If you like them, bung them a few quid, help them spread the word. Donate to the Pulse
Advocacy groups. These are a key donation option for supporters who want brumbies to remain in the national parks. These organisations focus on public awareness, heritage protection, political pressure, documenting NPWS operations, challenging population estimates, and pushing for humane, transparent management. Donations help them run campaigns, produce evidence, lobby MPs and MLCs, and keep the issue visible in media and parliament. Before donating make sure the organisation aligns with your beliefs.
Legitimate pro‑brumby advocacy groups include the Snowy Brumby Sustainability Group, Brumby Action Group, and the Snowy Brumby Supporters Network, all of which support keeping brumbies on‑country in Kosciuszko National Park.
Brumby Rescues. This is a bit of a minefield, seek out those rescues that are releasing the horses, in their family groups, onto large swathes of land. At a push, when there is no option, i.e. the shooting has started, donate to any rescue that doesn't sell the horses at horse sales.
Not for consideration are
❌ General environmental organisations
❌ Broad conservation charities
❌ National park “friends” groups
❌ Large wildlife NGOs
❌ Anyone selling at horse sales
Many of these groups explicitly support brumby removal — not necessarily killing, but removal to zero, which still aligns with eradication.
Social Media
Join legitimate Brumby advocacy groups. The more connected you are, the more good information you’ll see, and the more impact your engagement has.
Engage with posts that genuinely help the cause. If a post adds value, give it a Like or Love, leave a supportive comment, like other people’s comments, and share it with anyone who would care. Just a "Fantastic❤️" is enough if you have nothing else to add. The algorithm sees this and recommends the post to more people.
Watch out for political opportunists and trolls. Some people jump into Brumby spaces just to push a political party or stir trouble. Spot them early, ignore them, and report trouble makers to group admins.
Don't use the Brumby posts for political leverage. Unless it relates directly to the Brumby post. For example just saying vote blah blah, but not state what their Brumby policy is, is going to get you ignored and labelled as an chancer.
Don’t be afraid to contribute. If you have useful information, an idea for action people can take, or a fresh angle, create your own post. Good content strengthens the whole movement.
Use hashtags strategically. Tag your posts and comments with #brumby and #mustang. If these start trending, it boosts visibility for both Australian brumbies and our friends in the USA fighting for their mustangs.
Stay out of infighting. Some disagreements are just personality clashes or long‑running feuds. They drain energy, fracture groups, and help no one. Scroll past it and keep your focus on the horses.
Ask smart questions on non-Brumby public pages. Jump onto Facebook pages for Councils, NEMA, ASIC, ACNC, RFS, DCCEEW, IUCN, ISC, NSWNPWS, Penny Sharp, political parties, and individual MPs where they may be referring directly to Brumbys or generally to 'Invasive' species. Leave fact‑based, polite statements on appropriate posts, never on sensitive posts involving historical events, tragedies, or personal loss, that would be a home goal for the Brumbys. Staying respectful helps you stay on a page, visible insults will only get you blocked (ask me how I know😂). You will probably eventually get blocked anyway because the truth hurts.
Tagging. When commenting and where appropriate tag the culpable organisations on posts by putting a @ before their name, it should appear in a dropdown and you can select it.
Subscribe to and watch the Pulse The Pulse YouTube Channel
Post or Share posts to your local community page. Most don't allow this but some do. Expect most commenters to be hostile towards you. If it gets too much, Just copy and paste a list of facts in reply to them, then go to the three dots and turn off comments. This is so annoying to them😂
Keep your comments and posts factual! We all let off steam and like to call the culprits names, but keep on the right side of the law. No threats to harm etc.
Support the organisations and politicians that are our friends. Join their social media pages and show them support. Thank them for any post advocating for the Brumbys and tell them how much you appreciate them:
Rachel Merton (Liberal, MLC)
Emma Hurst (Animal Justice Party, MLC)
Rod Roberts (Independent, MLC)
Tania Mihailuk (Independent, MLC)
Wes Fang (Nationals, MLC)
Sarah Mitchell (Nationals, MLC)
Nicole Overall (Nationals, MLA)
Angus Taylor (Liberal, Member for Hume)
YouTube, carry out a search for 'Brumby' and Subscribe, Like and Comment, Share to other Brumby lovers if appropriate
Petitions
Take a moment to read each petition before signing, some may not fully align with your values.
Sign as many as you can.
Sharing petitions helps them gain traction: copy the petition’s web address and paste it into a social media post, encouraging others to sign.
Some petitions are restricted to certain states, meaning you must live in that state to be eligible.
Go to Change.org > Click Menu > Click Search > Type in Brumby. Sign as many as you can. You don't have to donate. But can if you feel it is a cause making a real difference.
Go to MP Angus Taylors Petition and join
Go to the Government Petitions Site > Go to Search > Type in Brumby
Change Your Electricity Supplier
If your electricity is supplied by Red Energy, use an independent Comparison site such as Compare The Market to find a better deal and switch
It's really important to phone Red Energy and tell them why you're switching
Contact Your Government Representatives
Method
You can email your intended recipient(s), one at a time or make use of the Microsoft Email-Merge function and send one message to many email addresses separately at the touch of a button. Check out this link on how to carry out an email-merge.
You can:
Contact all
government representatives. If you follow the link (just above), you will find downloadable Excel sheets that include all Federal MPs, all Senators, all NSW and Victoria MLAs and MLPs.
Contact specific political party representatives.
You can filter the downloadable Excel sheets by political party, by state or by both.
Contact just those in your local area.
Post a letter
You can post a letter to your intended recipient(s). Or you can print many copies of the same letter, addressed to different recipients at the touch of a button by making use of the Microsoft mail-Merge function.
Telephone
You can telephone the office of your chosen government representative(s) and speak directly with a staff member. If you take this approach, you’ll need to feel confident discussing the issue clearly and calmly.
Call into your local government representatives office
Calling in will obviously mean a face-to-face discussion, so go prepared with plenty of facts and try to stay on your intended agenda and stay calm!
Online Forms
Most government ministers will have a website that is likely to have an online form. These are good options if you are only sending a few. Note that the PRIME MINISTER can ONLY be contacted on his online form, link below https://www.pm.gov.au/contact#no-back
What to discuss or write
It's difficult to advise what to write because the Brumby situation is fluid at the moment. Here are options on who to contact and also some suggestions for questions you could ask. It is your letter you decided.
Who to Contact
BEST OPTIONS FOR NSW RESIDENTS
Local Councilor / Mayor
The cruelty of the 2026 aerial killing — demand they acknowledge that horses were shot without independent oversight and ask if/why local government didn’t insist on humane standards.
The inflated and unverified brumby numbers — raise the fact that population estimates used to justify the killing were never independently audited.
The role of the Invasive Species Council — ask if/why no local-level pressure was applied for an investigation into ISC lobbying, funding, and influence over state policy.
The NSW Labor Government acting with impunity — point out that lethal action was taken without transparency, without observers, and without releasing carcass data.
The absence of local scrutiny — if councils didn’t demand answers, ask if/why they allowed a major wildlife operation to proceed without accountability.
STATE MP (Lower House)
The cruelty of the 2026 aerial killing — demand they confront the fact that horses were shot without independent oversight, with no welfare verification, and ask if/why NSW allowed an operation with zero external scrutiny.
The incorrect and inflated brumby numbers — raise the fact that the population figures used to justify the killing were never independently audited, yet were treated as gospel by the NSW Government.
The need for a full investigation into the Invasive Species Council — highlight concerns about ISC lobbying, funding sources, and their influence over NSW Labor’s wildlife policy.
The NSW Labor Government acting with impunity — point out that lethal action was taken while withholding carcass data, shot‑placement records, and operational documentation from the public.
The absence of accountability mechanisms — demand they explain if/why no independent review has been commissioned into the operation’s conduct, modelling, or welfare breaches.
STATE MLC (Upper House)
The cruelty of the 2026 aerial killing — highlight that the operation was carried out without independent oversight and demand they confront the welfare implications of an unmonitored mass shooting.
The inflated and unverified brumby numbers — point out that the population modelling used to justify the killings was never independently audited, yet was accepted at face value by NSW decision‑makers.
The need for a full investigation into the Invasive Species Council — raise concerns about ISC lobbying, funding, and their influence over NSW Labor’s wildlife policy, especially given their role in promoting the modelling behind the operation.
The NSW Labor Government acting with impunity — emphasise that lethal action was taken while withholding carcass data, shot‑placement records, and operational documentation from the public and parliament.
The failure of parliamentary oversight — demand they explain if/why the Upper House has not initiated a formal inquiry into the operation’s conduct, modelling, NGO influence, and welfare breaches.
FEDERAL MP (House of Representatives)
The cruelty of the 2026 aerial killing needs to be addressed at the federal level — ask if/why an unmonitored mass shooting was allowed to proceed without independent welfare oversight.
The incorrect and inflated brumby numbers used to justify the killings demand federal scrutiny — ask if/why no national audit was pursued to verify the modelling.
The influence of the Invasive Species Council requires investigation — ask if/why federal representatives haven’t examined ISC lobbying, funding, and its role in shaping NSW Labor’s wildlife policy.
The impunity of the NSW Labor Government must be challenged — ask if/why carcass data, shot‑placement records, and operational documents were withheld without federal intervention.
The lack of a federal review is unacceptable — ask if/why a precedent‑setting lethal operation has been allowed to stand without national scrutiny.
FEDERAL SENATOR (Upper House)
The cruelty of the 2026 aerial killing needs to be confronted at the national level — ask if/why the Senate hasn’t demanded independent welfare oversight or a formal inquiry.
The incorrect and inflated brumby numbers used to justify the killings require federal scrutiny — ask if/why no independent audit of the modelling has been pursued.
The influence of the Invasive Species Council must be examined — ask if/why ISC lobbying, funding, and policy influence over NSW Labor hasn’t been investigated by the Senate.
The impunity of the NSW Labor Government demands accountability — ask if/why carcass data, shot‑placement records, and operational documents were withheld without federal challenge.
The lack of national standards or review is unacceptable — ask if/why a precedent‑setting lethal operation has been allowed to stand without federal oversight or reform.
NSW ENVIRONMENT MINISTER
The cruelty of the 2026 aerial killing — ask why the Minister authorised an operation with no independent welfare oversight and no external monitoring of shot placement.
The incorrect and inflated brumby numbers — ask why the Minister relied on unverified modelling and didn’t commission an independent audit before approving lethal action.
The influence of the Invasive Species Council — ask why ISC lobbying, funding, and modelling were allowed to shape government policy without a conflict‑of‑interest review.
The impunity of the NSW Labor Government — ask why carcass data, shot‑placement records, and operational documents were withheld from the public and parliament.
The lack of transparency and oversight — ask why the Minister refused independent observers, withheld operational details, and avoided releasing post‑operation evidence.
The alleged staff connection to the ISC — ask it is true that a member of her staff is married to an ISC representative, and why she believes this does not represent a conflict of interests.
NSW PREMIER
The cruelty of the 2026 aerial killing — ask why the Premier kept Penny Sharpe in charge while she authorised an operation with no independent welfare oversight and no external monitoring of shot placement.
The incorrect and inflated brumby numbers — ask why the Premier allowed Penny Sharpe to rely on unverified modelling and did not intervene to demand an independent audit before lethal action was approved.
The influence of the Invasive Species Council — ask why the Premier let Penny Sharpe shape policy using ISC lobbying, funding, and modelling without ordering a conflict‑of‑interest review.
The impunity of the NSW Labor Government — ask why the Premier allowed Penny Sharpe to withhold carcass data, shot‑placement records, and operational documents from the public and parliament.
The lack of transparency and oversight — ask why the Premier permitted Penny Sharpe to refuse independent observers, conceal operational details, and avoid releasing post‑operation evidence.
The alleged staff connection to the ISC — ask why the Premier has not addressed concerns that Penny Sharpe’s staff member is married to an ISC representative, and why he has allowed this conflict of interest to go unexamined.
THE PRIME MINISTER (use the website form on the link below https://www.pm.gov.au/contact#no-back
The cruelty of the 2026 aerial killing — ask why the Prime Minister allowed the NSW Premier to keep Penny Sharpe in charge while she authorised an operation with no independent welfare oversight and no external monitoring of shot placement.
The incorrect and inflated brumby numbers — ask why the Prime Minister did nothing federally while the Premier allowed Penny Sharpe to rely on unverified modelling without commissioning an independent audit.
The influence of the Invasive Species Council — ask why the Prime Minister did not intervene when the Premier allowed Penny Sharpe to shape policy using ISC lobbying, funding, and modelling without a conflict‑of‑interest review.
The impunity of the NSW Labor Government — ask why the Prime Minister did not challenge the Premier after Penny Sharpe withheld carcass data, shot‑placement records, and operational documents from the public and parliament.
The lack of transparency and oversight — ask why the Prime Minister allowed the Premier to continue supporting Penny Sharpe while she refused independent observers, concealed operational details, and avoided releasing post‑operation evidence.
The alleged staff connection to the ISC — ask why the Prime Minister has not addressed concerns that Penny Sharpe’s staff member is married to an ISC representative, and why he allowed the Premier to leave this conflict of interest unexamined.
OTHERS
So from those above you should get the gist of it. What you ask is up to you. Here are some more suggestions, perhaps these are more your area of concern or expertise.
NSW Agriculture Minister
NSW Climate Change / Biodiversity Minister
NSW Minister for Regional NSW
NSW Minister for Aboriginal Affairs
NSW Attorney‑General
NSW Ombudsman
NSW Premier (you mentioned them, but haven’t done the bullet‑point set yet)
NSW Deputy Premier
BEST OPTIONS FOR ALL OTHER STATES
Local Councillor / Mayor
The cruelty of the NSW operation — ask if/why your council hasn’t condemned an unmonitored aerial killing that sets a dangerous precedent for all states.
The incorrect numbers used in NSW — demand your council recognise that unverified modelling can be weaponised anywhere in Australia.
The need for ISC investigation nationwide — raise concerns that the same lobbying and modelling pressures influencing NSW may also influence your state.
Government acting without oversight — highlight that NSW’s lethal operation happened with withheld data and no independent observers and ask if/why your council hasn’t pushed for national standards.
The risk of similar policy spreading — ask if/why your council hasn’t taken steps to ensure your state never repeats NSW’s failures.
STATE MP (Lower House)
The cruelty of the NSW operation — ask if/why your MP hasn’t condemned an unmonitored aerial killing that sets a dangerous precedent for every state in Australia.
The incorrect numbers used in NSW — demand your MP acknowledge that unverified population modelling can be weaponised anywhere, including your own state.
The need for a nationwide ISC investigation — raise concerns that the same lobbying and modelling pressures influencing NSW may also be shaping wildlife policy in your state.
Government acting without oversight — highlight that NSW conducted lethal action while withholding critical data and ask if/why your MP hasn’t pushed for national standards to prevent similar behaviour.
The risk of NSW-style policy spreading — ask if/why your MP hasn’t taken steps to ensure your state never repeats NSW’s failures, especially regarding modelling, transparency, and NGO influence.
STATE MLC (Upper House)
The cruelty of the NSW operation — ask if/why your state’s Upper House has not condemned an unmonitored aerial killing that sets a dangerous precedent for wildlife management nationwide.
The incorrect numbers used in NSW — demand your MLC acknowledge that unverified population modelling can be weaponised anywhere in Australia, including your own state.
The need for nationwide ISC scrutiny — raise concerns that the same lobbying and modelling pressures influencing NSW may also be shaping wildlife policy in your state.
Government acting without oversight — highlight that NSW conducted lethal action while withholding critical data and ask if/why your Upper House hasn’t pushed for national standards to prevent similar behaviour.
The risk of NSW-style policy spreading — ask if/why your MLC hasn’t taken steps to ensure your state never repeats NSW’s failures, especially regarding modelling, transparency, and NGO influence.
FEDERAL MP (House of Representatives)
The cruelty of the NSW operation sets a dangerous national precedent — ask if/why your federal MP hasn’t condemned an unmonitored aerial killing.
The incorrect numbers used in NSW highlight the risk of unverified modelling nationwide — ask if/why your MP hasn’t addressed the potential for similar misuse in your own state.
The need for a nationwide investigation into the Invasive Species Council is clear — ask if/why ISC influence across Australia hasn’t been scrutinised federally.
The lack of transparency in NSW Labor’s operation demands national standards — ask if/why your MP hasn’t pushed for rules preventing any state from withholding carcass data and operational records.
The risk of NSW‑style policy spreading must be addressed — ask if/why your MP hasn’t acted to prevent your state from repeating NSW’s failures in modelling, transparency, and NGO influence.
THE PRIME MINISTER
The cruelty of the 2026 aerial killing — ask why the Prime Minister allowed the NSW Premier to keep Penny Sharpe in charge while she authorised an operation with no independent welfare oversight and no external monitoring of shot placement.
The incorrect and inflated brumby numbers — ask why the Prime Minister did nothing federally while the Premier allowed Penny Sharpe to rely on unverified modelling without commissioning an independent audit.
The influence of the Invasive Species Council — ask why the Prime Minister did not intervene when the Premier allowed Penny Sharpe to shape policy using ISC lobbying, funding, and modelling without a conflict‑of‑interest review.
The impunity of the NSW Labor Government — ask why the Prime Minister did not challenge the Premier after Penny Sharpe withheld carcass data, shot‑placement records, and operational documents from the public and parliament.
The lack of transparency and oversight — ask why the Prime Minister allowed the Premier to continue supporting Penny Sharpe while she refused independent observers, concealed operational details, and avoided releasing post‑operation evidence.
The alleged staff connection to the ISC — ask why the Prime Minister has not addressed concerns that Penny Sharpe’s staff member is married to an ISC representative, and why he allowed the Premier to leave this conflict of interest unexamined.
FEDERAL SENATOR (Upper House)
The cruelty of the NSW operation sets a dangerous precedent for all states — ask if/why your Senator hasn’t condemned an unmonitored aerial killing.
The incorrect numbers used in NSW highlight the risk of unverified modelling nationwide — ask if/why the Senate hasn’t addressed the potential for similar misuse in other states.
The need for a nationwide investigation into the Invasive Species Council is clear — ask if/why ISC influence across Australia hasn’t been scrutinised federally.
The lack of transparency in NSW Labor’s operation demands national standards — ask if/why your Senator hasn’t pushed for rules preventing any state from withholding carcass data and operational records.
The risk of NSW‑style policy spreading must be addressed — ask if/why your Senator hasn’t acted to prevent other states from repeating NSW’s failures in modelling, transparency, and NGO influence.
NSW ENVIRONMENT MINISTER
The cruelty of the NSW operation — ask why the Minister authorised an unmonitored aerial killing that sets a dangerous precedent for wildlife management nationwide.
The incorrect numbers used in NSW — ask why the Minister relied on unverified modelling that could influence policy in other states if left unchallenged.
The need for scrutiny of the Invasive Species Council — ask why ISC lobbying and modelling were allowed to shape NSW policy without national oversight or transparency.
The lack of transparency in NSW Labor’s operation — ask why the Minister withheld carcass data and operational records, creating a model other states could copy.
The risk of NSW‑style policy spreading — ask why the Minister hasn’t acknowledged the national implications of flawed modelling, withheld evidence, and NGO influence.
The alleged staff connection to the ISC — ask why it is true that a member of her staff is married to an ISC representative, and why she believes this does not represent a conflict of interest affecting national policy.
THE PRIME MINISTER (use the website form on the link below https://www.pm.gov.au/contact#no-back
The cruelty of the 2026 aerial killing — ask why the Prime Minister allowed the NSW Premier to keep Penny Sharpe in charge while she authorised an operation with no independent welfare oversight and no external monitoring of shot placement.
The incorrect and inflated brumby numbers — ask why the Prime Minister did nothing federally while the Premier allowed Penny Sharpe to rely on unverified modelling without commissioning an independent audit.
The influence of the Invasive Species Council — ask why the Prime Minister did not intervene when the Premier allowed Penny Sharpe to shape policy using ISC lobbying, funding, and modelling without a conflict‑of‑interest review.
The impunity of the NSW Labor Government — ask why the Prime Minister did not challenge the Premier after Penny Sharpe withheld carcass data, shot‑placement records, and operational documents from the public and parliament.
The lack of transparency and oversight — ask why the Prime Minister allowed the Premier to continue supporting Penny Sharpe while she refused independent observers, concealed operational details, and avoided releasing post‑operation evidence.
The alleged staff connection to the ISC — ask why the Prime Minister has not addressed concerns that Penny Sharpe’s staff member is married to an ISC representative, and why he allowed the Premier to leave this conflict of interest unexamined.
OTHERS
So from those above you should get the gist of it. What you ask is up to you. Here are some more suggestions perhaps these are more your area of concern or expertise.
Federal Agriculture Minister
Federal Climate Change / Biodiversity Minister
Federal Minister for Regional Development
Federal Minister for Indigenous Australians
Federal Attorney‑General
Federal Ombudsman
Deputy Prime Minister
BEST OPTIONS FOR INTERNATIONAL CITIZENS
Where your country has perhaps conservation ties to Australia
The cruelty of the 2026 aerial killing — ask if/why their government hasn’t raised concerns about an unmonitored mass shooting carried out without independent welfare oversight.
The incorrect and inflated brumby numbers — ask if/why they haven’t questioned Australia’s reliance on unverified modelling that influences international conservation narratives.
The influence of the Invasive Species Council — ask if/why they haven’t examined ISC lobbying and funding, given its role in shaping policy that is often cited internationally.
The impunity of the NSW Labor Government — ask if/why they haven’t responded to Australia withholding carcass data, shot‑placement records, and operational documentation.
The lack of transparency and oversight — ask if/why they haven’t challenged Australia’s refusal to release post‑operation evidence or implement independent observers
Contact other Government bodies/regulators
There are many government agencies that you can contact if for no other reason than to stir up awareness that we are not happy with their performance.
Everyone
Parks Australia
Australian Government Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water
National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC)
Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC)
Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC)
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry
Local Land Services NSW
National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA)
Federal Environment Minister
The Clean Energy Regulator
DCCEEW – Biodiversity Division info@dcceew.gov.au
Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) communications@anao.gov.au
Commonwealth Ombudsman
House of Representatives Standing Committee on Climate Change, Energy, Environment and Water environment.reps@aph.gov.au
Inspector-General of Environmental Regulation iger@environment.gov.au
Clean Energy Regulator – General Enquiries
enquiries@cer.gov.au
Clean Energy Regulator – Media
Clean Energy Regulator – Renewable Energy Target / REC Registry
New South Wales
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NSW NPWS)
NSW Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW)
contact@environment.nsw.gov.au
NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC)
NSW Ombudsman
NSW Audit Office
NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA)
NSW State Emergency Service (SES)
Fire and Rescue NSW
NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS)
NSW Parliament Animal Welfare Committee
animal.welfare@parliament.nsw.gov.au
NSW Biodiversity Conservation Division
NSW Auditor-General
auditorgeneral@audit.nsw.gov.au
NSW Ombudsman
Biodiversity Conservation Trust (NSW)
NSW Biodiversity Conservation Division info@environment.nsw.gov.au
NSW Auditor‑General
auditorgeneral@audit.nsw.gov.au
NSW Ombudsman
nso@ombo.nsw.gov.au
NSW Parliament Portfolio Committee No. 7 (Planning & Environment) PortfolioCommittee7@parliament.nsw.gov.au
Information and Privacy Commission NSW
Northern Territory
Northern Territory Parks and Wildlife Commission
Department of Lands, Planning and Environment (NT)
Queensland
Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service (QPWS)
Department of the Environment, Tourism, Science and Innovation
South Australia
National Parks and Wildlife Service South Australia
Department for Environment and Water (SA)
Tasmania
Tasmania Parks and Wildlife Service
Department of Natural Resources and Environment Tasmania
Victoria
Parks Victoria
Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action (DEECA)
Western Australia
Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (DBCA)
Parks and Wildlife Service WA
via DBCA
What should you write?
The Brumby situation is in a constant state of change. We learn more and more and evolve. At this moment, early September 2026, these are just my ideas, from the limited information and understanding I have. Here are some sample letter suggestions:
Please do your own fact checking
Please re-word it a little so it doesn't look like a junk mail-shot
Please check the email addresses they can change
Please don't forget to add your name!!
To download the letters:
Click on one of the icons below
It will start downloading
Go to your Downloads folder and find the letter
Copy and paste the text into an email or save as your letter
You could complain to your politician of choice, or a whole group of them about the review of the recent killing in KNP.
You could complain to the ACNC (charities commission) about the ISC (invasives) scaremongering the public, with a letter similar to that below, again make changes, check the facts.
Send to
Australian Charities and Not‑for‑profits Commission (ACNC)
Complain to the Biodiversity and Clean Energy Authorities about the cruelty being used to justify huge bio and clean energy credits
Send to
NSW Biodiversity Conservation Division info@environment.nsw.gov.au
NSW Auditor-General auditorgeneral@audit.nsw.gov.au
NSW Ombudsman nso@ombo.nsw.gov.au
Biodiversity Conservation Trust (NSW) info@bct.nsw.gov.au
Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) communications@anao.gov.au
Commonwealth Ombudsman ombudsman@ombudsman.gov.au
House of Representatives Standing Committee on Climate Change, Energy, Environment and Water environment.reps@aph.gov.au
Inspector-General of Environmental Regulation iger@environment.gov.au
NSW Biodiversity Conservation Division info@environment.nsw.gov.au
NSW Auditor‑General auditorgeneral@audit.nsw.gov.au
NSW Ombudsman nso@ombo.nsw.gov.au
Clean Energy Regulator – General Enquiries enquiries@cer.gov.au
Clean Energy Regulator – Media media@cer.gov.au
Clean Energy Regulator – Renewable Energy Target / REC Registry
Legal Disclaimer
This blog reflects my personal opinions, commentary, and interpretations based on publicly available information and advocacy discussions. Any references to organisations, agencies, public figures, or government bodies relate solely to their public roles and publicly reported actions. Nothing here is intended as a statement of fact unless supported by publicly available evidence. Where claims or allegations are mentioned, they are presented as opinion only. This content is not intended to defame, mislead, or harm any individual or organisation. Readers should verify information independently and form their own conclusions.
Comments