Significance Governments spend billions of dollars each year managing invasive plant species. Many invasive plants have escaped from pastures and now degrade natural areas and transform ecosystems. New pasture taxa are promoted to help achieve sustainable intensification of agriculture by increasing production without using more land. However, plant characteristics that increase production also increase invasion risk. Combined with inadequate regulation and management to establish large feed-plant populations, new taxa will likely exacerbate problems with invasive species. Livestock production accounts for 30% of the world's land area. Risks associated with invasive feed-plants have been largely overlooked, even by studies explicitly critiquing the environmental risks of sustainable intensification. We suggest a suite of protocols to reduce these risks in sustainable intensification of agriculture.

Compassionate conservation is based on the ethical position that actions taken to protect biodiversity

In NSW, free-roaming cats are regarded as one the biggest threats to biodiversity. Yet, at one stage they were classified as “the enemy of the rabbit” and were protected and released in their thousands. The purpose of this article is to examine the changing status of cats in Australia, demonstrating that regulation frequently depends on a narrow set of values based on the usefulness of cats at a given point in time. By the late twentieth century, the status of free-roaming cats had changed from enemy of the rabbit, to threat to biodiversity and then in the twenty-first century, to a risk to biosecurity. Once the status of cats changed from enemy of the rabbit, management practices followed historically-driven pathways that rely on lethal methods, which do not necessarily prioritize efficacy, animal wellbeing, or changing community outlooks. This is reflected in current practice, which gives scant regard to non-lethal processes, such as Trap-Neuter-Release, and in some cases makes the feeding and release of free-roaming cats, illegal. This article argues that regulatory preferences for employing lethal methods, now occur in a society which increasingly questions the efficacy of these measures, as well as the very need to kill. While TNR is unlikely to provide a complete solution to the problem of free-roaming cats in Australia, given the success of TNR among community groups, accompanied by changing societal perspectives, the time has come for regulators to engage with alternative control methods and include them in their suite of official measures.

No abstract

No abstract