THE Tasmanian Department of Primary Industry & Water now accepts that the fox discovered of Glen Esk road was already dead for at least 24 hours beforehand and that its tissues were discomposing.

That’s the astounding admission from DPIW triggered by an independent review of the pathology related to this important incident. That fox discovery was publicly proclaimed as a still warm, very freshly dead fox; a wild fox that had run across the road and been hit by an anonymous driver.

Last Monday — 6 months after the fox discovery — I received an email from a Department manager stating that ‘some tissues are more decomposed than would be expected was noted by all [six pathologists that have reviewed the case].’

‘[T]he body was likely to be older than 12 hrs, probably more like region of 24 hrs.’

So DPIW is acknowledging that the fox was dead for some time before it was discovered on that Tuesday morning of 1 August and refutes the press release from DPIW on Thursday 3 August that an anonymous person hit a live fox crossing the road at ‘very close to 9.30 am’.

The email still maintains: “It is much more likely that it [the fox] died after being run over on Glen Esk Rd sometime the night before discovery.’

‘All agree it was most likely killed on site by being run over and the observed signs of freshness would be very difficult to maintain if someone had been trying to lead us up the garden path.’

I, for one, have my doubts it was killed ON SITE and see no difficulty maintaining signs of freshness.

An authenticity report on this fox incident — released in September — concluded that this was an incident involving the accidental killing of a free-ranging fox living in the Cleveland/Conara area. But there was an alternative conclusion:

‘The only reasonable alternative conclusion, suggested anonymously and supported by some aspects of the carcass cooling, is that the fox was road-killed earlier on the same morning at a nearby location and relocated. If that was the case, the person claiming to the Taskforce to have run over the fox (and who assumed he had killed it) indeed did so but it was already dead on the roadside.’

But now DPIW acknowledges the fox has been dead for at least 24 hours before its discovery … 

DPIW, in a press release (3 August 2006) and in replies to Parliamentary Questions, stated that a person actually hit a fox that ‘emerged from the left-hand side of the road, ran across the path of the vehicle and was struck by a tyre. The report fixes the time of the incident very close to 9.30am.’ 

This was a miraculous fox!  A fox killed the night before, yet next morning it ran across that road and was accidentally struck by a passing vehicle.

Contrary to the extensive and sensational media coverage given to this incident in all local papers on 2 August 2006 variously describing the incident as the ‘real deal’, ‘dead certain’ and ‘Tassie’s final proof’, DPIW now says they never thought this find was ‘of great consequence in terms of evidence of fox invasion’ into Tasmania’.

And it seems that not even the possibility of a fabrication of this incident has ruffled DPIW.

The DPIW senior manager wrote: ‘I accept that some elements of the evidence may have been fabricated by some troubled soul but it is not plausible, in my assessment, for all the evidence to be explained away in this way.’

 

 

 

 

David Obendorf

DPIW, in a press release (3 August 2006) and in replies to Parliamentary Questions, stated that a person actually hit a fox that ‘emerged from the left-hand side of the road, ran across the path of the vehicle and was struck by a tyre. The report fixes the time of the incident very close to 9.30am.’ 

This was a miraculous fox!  A fox killed the night before, yet next morning it ran across that road and was accidentally struck by a passing vehicle.

Contrary to the extensive and sensational media coverage given to this incident in all local papers on 2 August 2006 variously describing the incident as the ‘real deal’, ‘dead certain’ and ‘Tassie’s final proof’, DPIW now says they never thought this find was ‘of great consequence in terms of evidence of fox invasion’ into Tasmania’.