Despite the pleas of wildlife experts and the concerns expressed by tenured wildlife carers about the welfare of Molly the magpie — the bird rescued four years ago by a Gold Coast couple who failed to turn him over for release, prompting his surrender last month from a suburban home to authorities from the Department of Environmental, Science and Innovation (DESI) — on Wednesday Queensland Premier Steven Miles announced that Molly would be returned to his unlicensed carers, Juliette Wells and Reece Mortensen, after they leveraged their social media following to petition the department to give him back.

But notwithstanding the premier’s assurances, can Molly’s return ever really comply with wildlife husbandry guidelines?

Based on a report from DESI, and following an independent veterinary assessment of the bird, it is now understood that Molly is “highly habituated” to humans, has developmental issues and “is not releasable” to the wild, making him dependent on human caring for the rest of his life. This assessment is critically at odds with the couple’s claims that Molly is a wild bird, free to come and go, and who chooses to visit their home and yard.

The veterinary assessment indicates Molly will need a high level of on-going care for the remainder of his life — a job typically assigned to experienced carers such as zookeepers and sanctuaries. Magpies in the wild can live for as long as twenty-five years and have challenging diet and husbandry needs.

As part of his bargain with DESI, the premier says he will give Wells and Mortensen a license to care for wildlife. And if it is determined that the couple have made suitable changes to their lifestyle — including pledging to no longer profit commercially from having the magpie in their care (the couple published a book about their story, called Peggy and Molly, in 2023) — DESI will return the magpie to the couple under strict conditions, which includes some manner of reporting to the department.

What becomes of the “Insta-famous” couple?

Many people have followed the Molly and Peggy social media accounts to see Molly and the couple’s sweet-tempered grey staffy, Peggy, spending time together. But in order to fully comply as “licensed” wildlife carers, it has to be assumed that Molly and Peggy can no longer interact, because domestic pets are not permitted to be in the presence of native animals while in any kind of care. So what does this mean for the infamous Peggy and Molly Instagram account, now with nearly 1 million followers?

In order to align in absolutes with a Queensland wildlife carers permit, like that provided by Queensland based group Wildcare, Molly needs a large free-flight aviary with suitable enrichment and must not be allowed to socialise with the couple’s pet dogs — including Peggy, who is famously “bonded” with the magpie.

It is unclear if DESI or the premier have strictly forbidden the couple from continuing to engage in this behaviour with the magpie, or whether Wildcare can or will permit the couple into the organisation due to this. However, a rule against socialising the magpie with their pet dogs was not specified in the media release from DESI, renewing concerns about the long-term suitability of allowing the Yatala couple to keep Molly in their care.

Wildlife carers receiving training in Queensland are firmly advised to keep animals in their care away from their domestic pets — a far cry from the content shared on Peggy and Molly’s Instagram account, which shows the pair sunbaking together on a dog bed and playing in the family lounge room.

In the absence of the enforcement of such a rule, it must be said that returning Molly to a home where his carers will continue to socialise him with their pets can and will breach carer guidelines, and may be grounds for removing the magpie a second time.

This sentiment is mirrored by environment and wildlife professionals, many of whom have taken to social media to express worry over the decision to return the magpie to the suburban address under DESI’s new rules. A tenured Professor of Science and Science Ethics, who did not wish to be named due to the ongoing harassment of those opposed to the magpie’s return, said he could only support the arrangement if the couple “shut down their social media account and cancelled paid partnerships”.

Recall that, on the social media platform Instagram, creators can receive income through paid posts, tips, and subscriptions.

What if this had played out away from the social media glare?

The premier’s decision comes as a devastating blow to wildlife carers and wildlife advocates who had hoped Molly could be “de-printed” (slowly removed from human dependency) and given an opportunity for some semblance of life in the wild at a sanctuary, perhaps alongside other magpies with various degrees of dependency. Sadly, due to his improper handling as a young bird, this can never happen.

It is unclear what DESI’s intentions might have been if it weren’t for the month’s long community fight to return Molly to his “home” — much of it spearheaded by the couple themselves, citing Molly as a family member. In ordinary cases, such as where the animal and “carer” are not high profile, confiscated animals deemed unsuitable for release can be euthanised in accordance with carer guidelines.

But any hopes of seeing Molly off to a wildlife sanctuary have now been dashed by the Queensland premier. Time will tell if Molly is the worse for it.

If you find sick or injured wildlife, please call 1300 ANIMAL or contact your local wildlife rescue group, such was Wildcare Australia or WIRES.

Ellie Sursara is a wildlife scientist and a higher degree research student at the University of Queensland’s School of Environment, where she studies the human relationship with nature and humans’ effects on Australian biodiversity.