Winton backs shire fence

SHIRE fences would be a better solution than the larger multi-shire option, according to Winton Wild Dog Control Group chairman Peter White.

He supported his shire council's decision to favour cluster fencing over an exclusion fence that would encompass 8.8 million hectares, saying it was a responsible position to take in light of the financial struggle landholders were going through.

"They don't want another burden at this stage," he said.

"I take my hat off to the group proposing the check fence but I think we would be better off having one shire having full control rather than four shires negotiating."

The group originally expressed disappointment at not being included in the 1400km fence proposal.

Mr White said 70 per cent of the sheep in the shire ran within 50km of its proposed boundary and it would have only increased the pressure of wild dogs and kangaroo populations.

"We thought, if it can't help the whole shire, it's not worth doing at all."

He was not against fencing though, noting that his grandfather had fenced Athelstane when he came back from World War 1.

As other graziers did the same, the Winton shire eventually stepped in and linked them all up on its southern boundary.

"It worked well while the shire council was responsible for maintenance," he said.

Visit link:
Winton backs shire fence