❓ A parliamentary question on notice addresses the WA Minister for Agriculture regarding wild dog management, perceived risks to the environment and human population, and the effectiveness of current control measures, including the possibility of a bounty system.
AnsweredQoN 470Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to recent media reports that the Minister for Agriculture, the Hon Kim Chance, has stated that “it was inevitably up to property owners to control wild dog numbers” and that “land owners … were not fulfilling their minimum legal obligations”, can the Minister please advise -
(1) Are wild dogs considered by the Government to have become a major risk to the natural environment and if so, what risks do they present?
(2) Has the State Government taken any steps to analyse the extent of the wild dog population in Western Australia, and if so what did that analysis reveal?
(3) Can you explain how isolated property owners can reasonably be expected to manage this problem, as dogs are notoriously free-ranging, and predictably will operate both within AND outside of the boundaries of individual property owners?
(4) What steps does the State Government intend to take to address this problem?
(5) In addition, are wild dogs considered by the Government to have become a major risk to the human population, and if so, what steps will you take to address this risk?
(6) Has the Minister considered allocating a bounty for each wild dog killed by those shooters who are already licensed to cull kangaroos?
(1) Are wild dogs considered by the Government to have become a major risk to the natural environment and if so, what risks do they present?
(2) Has the State Government taken any steps to analyse the extent of the wild dog population in Western Australia, and if so what did that analysis reveal?
(3) Can you explain how isolated property owners can reasonably be expected to manage this problem, as dogs are notoriously free-ranging, and predictably will operate both within AND outside of the boundaries of individual property owners?
(4) What steps does the State Government intend to take to address this problem?
(5) In addition, are wild dogs considered by the Government to have become a major risk to the human population, and if so, what steps will you take to address this risk?
(6) Has the Minister considered allocating a bounty for each wild dog killed by those shooters who are already licensed to cull kangaroos?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
8 November 2005
Responded by
Minister for Agriculture and Forestry
Response time
27 days
2. Research has been carried out on wild dogs in Western Australia for many decades. Amongst other findings, it has been clearly demonstrated that wild dogs have a significant impact on livestock production, particularly in sheep grazing areas. Actual numbers and density of wild dog populations vary, depending on natural factors such as the availability of food, as well as on the level of control conducted. Wild dog populations in many desert areas are naturally sparse, and are generally higher in remote rangeland cattle-grazing areas. Problems with domestic dogs attacking livestock also increase closer to townsites and communities. 3. An industry review of the wild dog program in 2004 concluded that landholder complacency, a scaling down in the amount of ground control work carried out, and a gradual over-reliance on aerial baiting, have all contributed significantly to the progressive build-up of wild dog numbers in Western Australia. Problems were by no means restricted to isolated individuals, and large areas were (and are) experiencing problems with wild dogs. It was clear that a more consistent and coordinated approach to wild dog control was needed across all land managers in affected areas. Hence the report made a number of recommendations which focus on the need for better planning at the local level, better oversight by the local Zone Control Authority (ZCA), and strengthening of community ownership involving all landholders. These recommendations are being implemented at both a State and local level. At the State level a stakeholder committee (including representatives from industry, community and Government) has been formed which has developed a State strategy that provides future direction on management and research. At the local level the Department of Agriculture has been encouraging ZCAs and private and public landholders to implement an integrated wild dog management program. This involves facilitating effective planning, coordinating aerial and ground baiting programs, encouraging the formation of Declared Animal Groups to employ doggers, and training of landholders. 4. To progress the implementation of the recommendations of the Review, the Government allocated an extra $300,000 to wild dog management in December 2004. These funds are being expended on actions identified in the State Strategy. It should be noted that the 2004/05 expenditure on wild dog management (not including the in-kind contribution from pastoralists who are undertaking ongoing wild dog control) has been estimated at $2.1 million of which the Government has contributed $1.6 million. 5. There is no general significant threat to human populations posed by wild dogs. There have been isolated incidents reported from the north-west and Goldfields that involved wild dogs and humans. The behaviour of the wild dogs in these cases was perceived by some people to be threatening. The Department of Agriculture has provided appropriate advice on dog control in townsites and elsewhere and has worked with local land managers to ensure there are effective coordinated wild dog management programs on land surrounding affected towns. Many of the 'wild' dog issues in townsites are caused by unlicensed dogs residing within the townsites. 6. The use of bounties was trialled in the Laverton area at the request of local pastoralists, with minimal scalps returned for payment. This trial was implemented even though the local ZCA did not support the use of bounties, believing that bounties are ineffective and inefficient in dealing with the issue, and that the limited funds should be directed at more effective means of control. Previous studies both in Australia and overseas have also shown that bounty systems are ineffective in dealing with pest problems. Further advice has been sought from Zone Control Authorities via the Agriculture Protection Board regarding the assessed merits and practicalities of bounties for wild dogs.
3. An industry review of the wild dog program in 2004 concluded that landholder complacency, a scaling down in the amount of ground control work carried out, and a gradual over-reliance on aerial baiting, have all contributed significantly to the progressive build-up of wild dog numbers in Western Australia. Problems were by no means restricted to isolated individuals, and large areas were (and are) experiencing problems with wild dogs. It was clear that a more consistent and coordinated approach to wild dog control was needed across all land managers in affected areas. Hence the report made a number of recommendations which focus on the need for better planning at the local level, better oversight by the local Zone Control Authority (ZCA), and strengthening of community ownership involving all landholders. These recommendations are being implemented at both a State and local level. At the State level a stakeholder committee (including representatives from industry, community and Government) has been formed which has developed a State strategy that provides future direction on management and research. At the local level the Department of Agriculture has been encouraging ZCAs and private and public landholders to implement an integrated wild dog management program. This involves facilitating effective planning, coordinating aerial and ground baiting programs, encouraging the formation of Declared Animal Groups to employ doggers, and training of landholders. 4. To progress the implementation of the recommendations of the Review, the Government allocated an extra $300,000 to wild dog management in December 2004. These funds are being expended on actions identified in the State Strategy. It should be noted that the 2004/05 expenditure on wild dog management (not including the in-kind contribution from pastoralists who are undertaking ongoing wild dog control) has been estimated at $2.1 million of which the Government has contributed $1.6 million. 5. There is no general significant threat to human populations posed by wild dogs. There have been isolated incidents reported from the north-west and Goldfields that involved wild dogs and humans. The behaviour of the wild dogs in these cases was perceived by some people to be threatening. The Department of Agriculture has provided appropriate advice on dog control in townsites and elsewhere and has worked with local land managers to ensure there are effective coordinated wild dog management programs on land surrounding affected towns. Many of the 'wild' dog issues in townsites are caused by unlicensed dogs residing within the townsites. 6. The use of bounties was trialled in the Laverton area at the request of local pastoralists, with minimal scalps returned for payment. This trial was implemented even though the local ZCA did not support the use of bounties, believing that bounties are ineffective and inefficient in dealing with the issue, and that the limited funds should be directed at more effective means of control. Previous studies both in Australia and overseas have also shown that bounty systems are ineffective in dealing with pest problems. Further advice has been sought from Zone Control Authorities via the Agriculture Protection Board regarding the assessed merits and practicalities of bounties for wild dogs.
These recommendations are being implemented at both a State and local level. At the State level a stakeholder committee (including representatives from industry, community and Government) has been formed which has developed a State strategy that provides future direction on management and research. At the local level the Department of Agriculture has been encouraging ZCAs and private and public landholders to implement an integrated wild dog management program. This involves facilitating effective planning, coordinating aerial and ground baiting programs, encouraging the formation of Declared Animal Groups to employ doggers, and training of landholders. 4. To progress the implementation of the recommendations of the Review, the Government allocated an extra $300,000 to wild dog management in December 2004. These funds are being expended on actions identified in the State Strategy. It should be noted that the 2004/05 expenditure on wild dog management (not including the in-kind contribution from pastoralists who are undertaking ongoing wild dog control) has been estimated at $2.1 million of which the Government has contributed $1.6 million. 5. There is no general significant threat to human populations posed by wild dogs. There have been isolated incidents reported from the north-west and Goldfields that involved wild dogs and humans. The behaviour of the wild dogs in these cases was perceived by some people to be threatening. The Department of Agriculture has provided appropriate advice on dog control in townsites and elsewhere and has worked with local land managers to ensure there are effective coordinated wild dog management programs on land surrounding affected towns. Many of the 'wild' dog issues in townsites are caused by unlicensed dogs residing within the townsites. 6. The use of bounties was trialled in the Laverton area at the request of local pastoralists, with minimal scalps returned for payment. This trial was implemented even though the local ZCA did not support the use of bounties, believing that bounties are ineffective and inefficient in dealing with the issue, and that the limited funds should be directed at more effective means of control. Previous studies both in Australia and overseas have also shown that bounty systems are ineffective in dealing with pest problems. Further advice has been sought from Zone Control Authorities via the Agriculture Protection Board regarding the assessed merits and practicalities of bounties for wild dogs.
At the local level the Department of Agriculture has been encouraging ZCAs and private and public landholders to implement an integrated wild dog management program. This involves facilitating effective planning, coordinating aerial and ground baiting programs, encouraging the formation of Declared Animal Groups to employ doggers, and training of landholders. 4. To progress the implementation of the recommendations of the Review, the Government allocated an extra $300,000 to wild dog management in December 2004. These funds are being expended on actions identified in the State Strategy. It should be noted that the 2004/05 expenditure on wild dog management (not including the in-kind contribution from pastoralists who are undertaking ongoing wild dog control) has been estimated at $2.1 million of which the Government has contributed $1.6 million. 5. There is no general significant threat to human populations posed by wild dogs. There have been isolated incidents reported from the north-west and Goldfields that involved wild dogs and humans. The behaviour of the wild dogs in these cases was perceived by some people to be threatening. The Department of Agriculture has provided appropriate advice on dog control in townsites and elsewhere and has worked with local land managers to ensure there are effective coordinated wild dog management programs on land surrounding affected towns. Many of the 'wild' dog issues in townsites are caused by unlicensed dogs residing within the townsites. 6. The use of bounties was trialled in the Laverton area at the request of local pastoralists, with minimal scalps returned for payment. This trial was implemented even though the local ZCA did not support the use of bounties, believing that bounties are ineffective and inefficient in dealing with the issue, and that the limited funds should be directed at more effective means of control. Previous studies both in Australia and overseas have also shown that bounty systems are ineffective in dealing with pest problems. Further advice has been sought from Zone Control Authorities via the Agriculture Protection Board regarding the assessed merits and practicalities of bounties for wild dogs.
4. To progress the implementation of the recommendations of the Review, the Government allocated an extra $300,000 to wild dog management in December 2004. These funds are being expended on actions identified in the State Strategy. It should be noted that the 2004/05 expenditure on wild dog management (not including the in-kind contribution from pastoralists who are undertaking ongoing wild dog control) has been estimated at $2.1 million of which the Government has contributed $1.6 million. 5. There is no general significant threat to human populations posed by wild dogs. There have been isolated incidents reported from the north-west and Goldfields that involved wild dogs and humans. The behaviour of the wild dogs in these cases was perceived by some people to be threatening. The Department of Agriculture has provided appropriate advice on dog control in townsites and elsewhere and has worked with local land managers to ensure there are effective coordinated wild dog management programs on land surrounding affected towns. Many of the 'wild' dog issues in townsites are caused by unlicensed dogs residing within the townsites. 6. The use of bounties was trialled in the Laverton area at the request of local pastoralists, with minimal scalps returned for payment. This trial was implemented even though the local ZCA did not support the use of bounties, believing that bounties are ineffective and inefficient in dealing with the issue, and that the limited funds should be directed at more effective means of control. Previous studies both in Australia and overseas have also shown that bounty systems are ineffective in dealing with pest problems. Further advice has been sought from Zone Control Authorities via the Agriculture Protection Board regarding the assessed merits and practicalities of bounties for wild dogs.
It should be noted that the 2004/05 expenditure on wild dog management (not including the in-kind contribution from pastoralists who are undertaking ongoing wild dog control) has been estimated at $2.1 million of which the Government has contributed $1.6 million. 5. There is no general significant threat to human populations posed by wild dogs. There have been isolated incidents reported from the north-west and Goldfields that involved wild dogs and humans. The behaviour of the wild dogs in these cases was perceived by some people to be threatening. The Department of Agriculture has provided appropriate advice on dog control in townsites and elsewhere and has worked with local land managers to ensure there are effective coordinated wild dog management programs on land surrounding affected towns. Many of the 'wild' dog issues in townsites are caused by unlicensed dogs residing within the townsites. 6. The use of bounties was trialled in the Laverton area at the request of local pastoralists, with minimal scalps returned for payment. This trial was implemented even though the local ZCA did not support the use of bounties, believing that bounties are ineffective and inefficient in dealing with the issue, and that the limited funds should be directed at more effective means of control. Previous studies both in Australia and overseas have also shown that bounty systems are ineffective in dealing with pest problems. Further advice has been sought from Zone Control Authorities via the Agriculture Protection Board regarding the assessed merits and practicalities of bounties for wild dogs.
5. There is no general significant threat to human populations posed by wild dogs. There have been isolated incidents reported from the north-west and Goldfields that involved wild dogs and humans. The behaviour of the wild dogs in these cases was perceived by some people to be threatening. The Department of Agriculture has provided appropriate advice on dog control in townsites and elsewhere and has worked with local land managers to ensure there are effective coordinated wild dog management programs on land surrounding affected towns. Many of the 'wild' dog issues in townsites are caused by unlicensed dogs residing within the townsites. 6. The use of bounties was trialled in the Laverton area at the request of local pastoralists, with minimal scalps returned for payment. This trial was implemented even though the local ZCA did not support the use of bounties, believing that bounties are ineffective and inefficient in dealing with the issue, and that the limited funds should be directed at more effective means of control. Previous studies both in Australia and overseas have also shown that bounty systems are ineffective in dealing with pest problems. Further advice has been sought from Zone Control Authorities via the Agriculture Protection Board regarding the assessed merits and practicalities of bounties for wild dogs.
6. The use of bounties was trialled in the Laverton area at the request of local pastoralists, with minimal scalps returned for payment. This trial was implemented even though the local ZCA did not support the use of bounties, believing that bounties are ineffective and inefficient in dealing with the issue, and that the limited funds should be directed at more effective means of control. Previous studies both in Australia and overseas have also shown that bounty systems are ineffective in dealing with pest problems. Further advice has been sought from Zone Control Authorities via the Agriculture Protection Board regarding the assessed merits and practicalities of bounties for wild dogs.
3. An industry review of the wild dog program in 2004 concluded that landholder complacency, a scaling down in the amount of ground control work carried out, and a gradual over-reliance on aerial baiting, have all contributed significantly to the progressive build-up of wild dog numbers in Western Australia. Problems were by no means restricted to isolated individuals, and large areas were (and are) experiencing problems with wild dogs. It was clear that a more consistent and coordinated approach to wild dog control was needed across all land managers in affected areas. Hence the report made a number of recommendations which focus on the need for better planning at the local level, better oversight by the local Zone Control Authority (ZCA), and strengthening of community ownership involving all landholders. These recommendations are being implemented at both a State and local level. At the State level a stakeholder committee (including representatives from industry, community and Government) has been formed which has developed a State strategy that provides future direction on management and research. At the local level the Department of Agriculture has been encouraging ZCAs and private and public landholders to implement an integrated wild dog management program. This involves facilitating effective planning, coordinating aerial and ground baiting programs, encouraging the formation of Declared Animal Groups to employ doggers, and training of landholders. 4. To progress the implementation of the recommendations of the Review, the Government allocated an extra $300,000 to wild dog management in December 2004. These funds are being expended on actions identified in the State Strategy. It should be noted that the 2004/05 expenditure on wild dog management (not including the in-kind contribution from pastoralists who are undertaking ongoing wild dog control) has been estimated at $2.1 million of which the Government has contributed $1.6 million. 5. There is no general significant threat to human populations posed by wild dogs. There have been isolated incidents reported from the north-west and Goldfields that involved wild dogs and humans. The behaviour of the wild dogs in these cases was perceived by some people to be threatening. The Department of Agriculture has provided appropriate advice on dog control in townsites and elsewhere and has worked with local land managers to ensure there are effective coordinated wild dog management programs on land surrounding affected towns. Many of the 'wild' dog issues in townsites are caused by unlicensed dogs residing within the townsites. 6. The use of bounties was trialled in the Laverton area at the request of local pastoralists, with minimal scalps returned for payment. This trial was implemented even though the local ZCA did not support the use of bounties, believing that bounties are ineffective and inefficient in dealing with the issue, and that the limited funds should be directed at more effective means of control. Previous studies both in Australia and overseas have also shown that bounty systems are ineffective in dealing with pest problems. Further advice has been sought from Zone Control Authorities via the Agriculture Protection Board regarding the assessed merits and practicalities of bounties for wild dogs.
These recommendations are being implemented at both a State and local level. At the State level a stakeholder committee (including representatives from industry, community and Government) has been formed which has developed a State strategy that provides future direction on management and research. At the local level the Department of Agriculture has been encouraging ZCAs and private and public landholders to implement an integrated wild dog management program. This involves facilitating effective planning, coordinating aerial and ground baiting programs, encouraging the formation of Declared Animal Groups to employ doggers, and training of landholders. 4. To progress the implementation of the recommendations of the Review, the Government allocated an extra $300,000 to wild dog management in December 2004. These funds are being expended on actions identified in the State Strategy. It should be noted that the 2004/05 expenditure on wild dog management (not including the in-kind contribution from pastoralists who are undertaking ongoing wild dog control) has been estimated at $2.1 million of which the Government has contributed $1.6 million. 5. There is no general significant threat to human populations posed by wild dogs. There have been isolated incidents reported from the north-west and Goldfields that involved wild dogs and humans. The behaviour of the wild dogs in these cases was perceived by some people to be threatening. The Department of Agriculture has provided appropriate advice on dog control in townsites and elsewhere and has worked with local land managers to ensure there are effective coordinated wild dog management programs on land surrounding affected towns. Many of the 'wild' dog issues in townsites are caused by unlicensed dogs residing within the townsites. 6. The use of bounties was trialled in the Laverton area at the request of local pastoralists, with minimal scalps returned for payment. This trial was implemented even though the local ZCA did not support the use of bounties, believing that bounties are ineffective and inefficient in dealing with the issue, and that the limited funds should be directed at more effective means of control. Previous studies both in Australia and overseas have also shown that bounty systems are ineffective in dealing with pest problems. Further advice has been sought from Zone Control Authorities via the Agriculture Protection Board regarding the assessed merits and practicalities of bounties for wild dogs.
At the local level the Department of Agriculture has been encouraging ZCAs and private and public landholders to implement an integrated wild dog management program. This involves facilitating effective planning, coordinating aerial and ground baiting programs, encouraging the formation of Declared Animal Groups to employ doggers, and training of landholders. 4. To progress the implementation of the recommendations of the Review, the Government allocated an extra $300,000 to wild dog management in December 2004. These funds are being expended on actions identified in the State Strategy. It should be noted that the 2004/05 expenditure on wild dog management (not including the in-kind contribution from pastoralists who are undertaking ongoing wild dog control) has been estimated at $2.1 million of which the Government has contributed $1.6 million. 5. There is no general significant threat to human populations posed by wild dogs. There have been isolated incidents reported from the north-west and Goldfields that involved wild dogs and humans. The behaviour of the wild dogs in these cases was perceived by some people to be threatening. The Department of Agriculture has provided appropriate advice on dog control in townsites and elsewhere and has worked with local land managers to ensure there are effective coordinated wild dog management programs on land surrounding affected towns. Many of the 'wild' dog issues in townsites are caused by unlicensed dogs residing within the townsites. 6. The use of bounties was trialled in the Laverton area at the request of local pastoralists, with minimal scalps returned for payment. This trial was implemented even though the local ZCA did not support the use of bounties, believing that bounties are ineffective and inefficient in dealing with the issue, and that the limited funds should be directed at more effective means of control. Previous studies both in Australia and overseas have also shown that bounty systems are ineffective in dealing with pest problems. Further advice has been sought from Zone Control Authorities via the Agriculture Protection Board regarding the assessed merits and practicalities of bounties for wild dogs.
4. To progress the implementation of the recommendations of the Review, the Government allocated an extra $300,000 to wild dog management in December 2004. These funds are being expended on actions identified in the State Strategy. It should be noted that the 2004/05 expenditure on wild dog management (not including the in-kind contribution from pastoralists who are undertaking ongoing wild dog control) has been estimated at $2.1 million of which the Government has contributed $1.6 million. 5. There is no general significant threat to human populations posed by wild dogs. There have been isolated incidents reported from the north-west and Goldfields that involved wild dogs and humans. The behaviour of the wild dogs in these cases was perceived by some people to be threatening. The Department of Agriculture has provided appropriate advice on dog control in townsites and elsewhere and has worked with local land managers to ensure there are effective coordinated wild dog management programs on land surrounding affected towns. Many of the 'wild' dog issues in townsites are caused by unlicensed dogs residing within the townsites. 6. The use of bounties was trialled in the Laverton area at the request of local pastoralists, with minimal scalps returned for payment. This trial was implemented even though the local ZCA did not support the use of bounties, believing that bounties are ineffective and inefficient in dealing with the issue, and that the limited funds should be directed at more effective means of control. Previous studies both in Australia and overseas have also shown that bounty systems are ineffective in dealing with pest problems. Further advice has been sought from Zone Control Authorities via the Agriculture Protection Board regarding the assessed merits and practicalities of bounties for wild dogs.
It should be noted that the 2004/05 expenditure on wild dog management (not including the in-kind contribution from pastoralists who are undertaking ongoing wild dog control) has been estimated at $2.1 million of which the Government has contributed $1.6 million. 5. There is no general significant threat to human populations posed by wild dogs. There have been isolated incidents reported from the north-west and Goldfields that involved wild dogs and humans. The behaviour of the wild dogs in these cases was perceived by some people to be threatening. The Department of Agriculture has provided appropriate advice on dog control in townsites and elsewhere and has worked with local land managers to ensure there are effective coordinated wild dog management programs on land surrounding affected towns. Many of the 'wild' dog issues in townsites are caused by unlicensed dogs residing within the townsites. 6. The use of bounties was trialled in the Laverton area at the request of local pastoralists, with minimal scalps returned for payment. This trial was implemented even though the local ZCA did not support the use of bounties, believing that bounties are ineffective and inefficient in dealing with the issue, and that the limited funds should be directed at more effective means of control. Previous studies both in Australia and overseas have also shown that bounty systems are ineffective in dealing with pest problems. Further advice has been sought from Zone Control Authorities via the Agriculture Protection Board regarding the assessed merits and practicalities of bounties for wild dogs.
5. There is no general significant threat to human populations posed by wild dogs. There have been isolated incidents reported from the north-west and Goldfields that involved wild dogs and humans. The behaviour of the wild dogs in these cases was perceived by some people to be threatening. The Department of Agriculture has provided appropriate advice on dog control in townsites and elsewhere and has worked with local land managers to ensure there are effective coordinated wild dog management programs on land surrounding affected towns. Many of the 'wild' dog issues in townsites are caused by unlicensed dogs residing within the townsites. 6. The use of bounties was trialled in the Laverton area at the request of local pastoralists, with minimal scalps returned for payment. This trial was implemented even though the local ZCA did not support the use of bounties, believing that bounties are ineffective and inefficient in dealing with the issue, and that the limited funds should be directed at more effective means of control. Previous studies both in Australia and overseas have also shown that bounty systems are ineffective in dealing with pest problems. Further advice has been sought from Zone Control Authorities via the Agriculture Protection Board regarding the assessed merits and practicalities of bounties for wild dogs.
6. The use of bounties was trialled in the Laverton area at the request of local pastoralists, with minimal scalps returned for payment. This trial was implemented even though the local ZCA did not support the use of bounties, believing that bounties are ineffective and inefficient in dealing with the issue, and that the limited funds should be directed at more effective means of control. Previous studies both in Australia and overseas have also shown that bounty systems are ineffective in dealing with pest problems. Further advice has been sought from Zone Control Authorities via the Agriculture Protection Board regarding the assessed merits and practicalities of bounties for wild dogs.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.