The RSCPA’s explosive, secret report into Molly the Magpie is LEAKED – and the findings about the beloved Instagram-famous bird are damning: ‘Too humanised to fly’

EXCLUSIVE 

A leaked copy of an RSPCA veterinary examination report about Molly the Magpie revealed the bird was unable or unwilling to fly more than about 2m and could never be released into the wild. 

Molly has been living with Gold Coast couple Juliette Wells and Reece Mortensen along with their Staffordshire Terrier pets Peggy and Ruby but those arrangements could soon be over.

The magpie was removed from the home in March when authorities learnt Ms Wells and Mr Mortensen had no permit to care for native wildlife, but the bird was returned six weeks later after a public outcry.

On Monday, a Queensland Supreme Court judge overturned the granting of a specialised wildlife carer’s licence to the couple, who have turned Molly and her canine companions Peggy and Ruby into social media stars.   

It the wake of that decision, Queensland’s Department of Environment, Science and Innovation (DESI) conceded it should not have given Ms Wells and Mr Mortensen the licence.

Daily Mail Australia can reveal RSPCA Queensland’s wildlife veterinary director examined Molly – who is actually male – after the bird was first seized and found him to be unable to live in the wild.

The physical evaluation was conducted on March 5 in an ‘outside flight aviary’ where Molly seemed at first appearance to be ‘bright, alert and responsive’.

‘The bird exhibited human behaviour consistent with human habituation seeking to repeatedly climb up or land on my shoulder and/or head, despite the availability of multiple perches in the aviary,’ the vet wrote. 

‘The bird seemed reluctant to fly, but when pressed was observed to fly short distances, up to two metres, with no significant height gained when doing so.

‘Whilst perched the bird intermittently carried both wings in a lower-than-normal position.’

The examination found Molly was ‘in good general body condition with appropriate plumage’ but X-rays detected abnormalities in some of his wing bones.

‘Radiographic changes to several bones on both wings were observed,’ the vet reported. 

‘The cause of these changes was not evident on clinical examination but may relate to an inappropriate diet as a juvenile bird.’

The vet concluded Molly, whose fate remained unclear, should not be released into the wild.

‘The bird appeared to be very humanised and failed to exhibit behaviours consistent with those expected of a normal free-ranging magpie,’ he found.

‘The bird was not observed to fly any great distance, although it could not be determined if this was because the bird was unwilling or unable to do so. 

X-rays detected abnormalities in some of Molly’s wing bones. ‘The cause of these changes was not evident on clinical examination but may relate to an inappropriate diet as a juvenile bird.’

‘Given the behaviour exhibited by the bird and the radiographic changes that were evident, attempted release of this bird back into the wild would not be considered appropriate… ‘.  

Legal action was launched against DESI by XD Law & Advocacy after the department granted Ms Wells and Mr Mortensen a specialised licence.

The firm was acting on behalf of an unnamed wildlife rescue volunteer who had the support of dozens of other animal carers, many of whom had been targeted by online trolls over the row.

The volunteer who took court action previously told Daily Mail Australia that magpies were not suitable pets and suffered when kept in domestic captivity and that Molly – who is male – would likely not survive.

That was also DESI’s original position when it first removed Molly from Ms Wells and Mr Mortensen’s home.

‘It is alleged that the bird was taken from the wild and kept unlawfully, with no permit, licence or authority being issued by DESI,’ a departmental spokesman said at the time.

DESI had independent advice that because Molly could never be returned to the wild, he would need to be sent to a sanctuary or euthanised.

The public backlash to Molly being removed from Ms Wells and Mr Mortensen’s home led to an extraordinary intervention by Queensland’s then-premier, Steven Miles.

‘The bird seemed reluctant to fly, but when pressed was observed to fly short distances, up to two metres, with no significant height gained when doing so,’ the vet reported

Mr Miles dismissed criticism he had caved in to social media pressure by allowing Ms Wells and Mortensen to keep the bird, and said granting them a permit was the ‘common sense’ approach.

DESI granted Ms Wells a permit to keep Molly after they agreed to conditions including not profiting from the magpie or its image, undertaking the appropriate training and advocating for wildlife.

XD Law & Advocacy argued that decision was made on political grounds due to media pressure and set a precedent for anyone to keep a wild animal.

‘We became involved when we saw volunteer wildlife carers being pilloried and abused for sticking up for the laws of Queensland preventing wildlife being turned into pets,’ lawyer Jack Vaughan said.

‘These are the people who arrive in the middle of the night when you find an injured animal by the road. They do it for nothing. More often than not they pay for the medicines and food needed as well.

‘They represent the best of Australia and yet some of them were receiving death threats for suggesting that the department’s actions were illegal. We agreed with them and it seems the court does too.’

‘The bird appeared to be very humanised and failed to exhibit behaviours consistent with those expected of a normal free-ranging magpie,’ the vet found

Mr Vaughan said DESI had been ‘given the opportunity to show it followed the proper processes and standards in granting the carer’s licence’.

‘To show that it was not just giving a compliant nod to a premier who wanted photos of himself with a magpie on his head and a couple of social media influencers,’ he added.

‘They failed to show proper reasoning for the licence according to their governing legislation.’

The volunteer who took action said she was grateful to the Supreme Court and ‘proud of all the wildlife carers who stood up for the law when the department and the former premier failed to do so’.

‘We are the ones who deal with the wreckage of the social media fad of capturing baby magpies and training them to do cute tricks,’ she said.

‘There is nothing cute about wings and legs bitten off by family pets. There is nothing cute about seeing a domesticated magpie ferociously attacked by a wild flock when they first interact.

‘To see the former premier encouraging this idiocy in a desperate attempt to gain votes and a social media following was pathetic.

‘To see the Department of Environment go along with the circus and start issuing licences was a step too far.’

Ms Wells and Mr Mortensen issued a statement about the court decision through their Instagram account on Tuesday night.  

‘A big thank you for the outpouring of support and love as we face yet another bump in the road,’ they wrote. 

‘Some anonymous people challenged DESI’s decision to grant us a specialised licence so Molly could come back to a family who love him in the Supreme Court.’

Ms Wells and Mr Mortensen awaited DESI’s next move, after the department said it was reviewing the court’s decision and ‘currently considering next steps’ in the saga.

‘In the meantime, let’s live in the moment and enjoy the time we have together and let everything else go,’ the couple wrote.