Major breakthrough as Molly’s ultimate fate is finally revealed – and someone WON’T be happy

EXCLUSIVE

The keepers of Molly the Magpie claim they were told the bird could remain in their care, despite a court ruling that they should not have been granted a specialist wildlife license.

The magpie lived with Gold Coast couple Juliette Wells and Reece Mortensen, along with their Staffordshire Terrier pets Peggy and Ruby.

Molly was removed from the home in March when authorities learned the couple did not have a permit to care for native wildlife, but the bird was returned six weeks later after public outcry.

On Monday, a Queensland Supreme Court judge quashed the award of a specialist wildlife handler license to the couple who turned Molly and her canine companions into social media stars.

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

On Thursday, Ms Wells and Mr Mortensen assured Molly’s fans that the magpie was ‘happy, safe and enjoying life, nothing changes’.

“Legal issues take a long time to resolve, so we ask that you do NOT email the Ministry of Environment Science and Innovation or set up petitions,” they wrote on social media.

“From yesterday’s conversations we understand that they have absolutely no intention of removing Molly from his/our family.”

“We understand that you would like to help in some way, but just the fact that you are here every day to support, comment and be part of this community is more than enough to keep us going and keep going. If anything changes, we will let you know.

“In the meantime, let’s focus on the message these besties are bringing to the world about love, kindness and acceptance.”

DESI confirmed on Thursday evening that the Molly would remain with the couple for the time being because this determines the bird’s future.

“Our top priority remains the continued welfare of the magpie,” a spokeswoman told Daily Mail Australia.

‘We are currently undertaking a process that will determine the magpie’s future care arrangements.

“Our officials have spoken to the permit applicant and advised that the current care arrangement can continue while these processes are ongoing.”

A spokesperson told Daily Mail Australia earlier this week that “the department is currently reviewing the court decision.”

“In trying to protect the bird’s welfare – which has always been our top priority – we made a mistake and we are currently considering next steps,” he said.

Daily Mail Australia revealed on Wednesday that RSPCA Queensland’s veterinary director examined Molly – who is actually male – after the bird was first seized and discovered it could not live in the wild.

“The bird appeared reluctant to fly, but when pressed it was observed to fly short distances, up to two meters, without gaining significant height,” the vet reported.

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

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

“X-ray changes were observed in several bones on both wings,” the vet reported.

‘The cause of these changes was not clear on clinical examination, but may be related to an inappropriate diet as a young bird.’

The magpie was seized in March after authorities learned Ms Wells and Mr Mortensen were not licensed to care for native wildlife, but the bird was returned six weeks later following public outcry.

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

In September, legal action was taken against DESI by XD Law & Advocacy after the department granted Ms Wells and Mr Mortensen specialist licences.

The company acted on behalf of an unnamed wildlife rescue volunteer, who received the support of dozens of other zookeepers, many of whom were targeted by online trolls.

The volunteer who took legal action previously told Daily Mail Australia that magpies were not suitable pets and that they suffered if kept in domestic captivity, and that Molly was unlikely to survive.

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

“It is alleged that the bird was taken from the wild and unlawfully kept without a permit or authority issued by DESI,” a department spokesperson said at the time.

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

Daily Mail Australia revealed on Wednesday that the RSPCA Queensland veterinary director investigated Moll after the bird was first seized and discovered it could not live in the wild.

Public opposition to Molly’s removal from Ms Wells and Mr Mortensen led to an extraordinary intervention from then Queensland Premier Steven Miles.

Mr Miles rejected criticism that he had bowed to social media pressure by allowing Ms Wells and Mortensen to keep the bird, saying granting a permit was the “common sense” approach.

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

XD Law & Advocacy argued that the 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 workers being pilloried and abused for standing up for Queensland laws that prevented wild animals from being turned into pets,” says lawyer Jack Vaughan.

‘These are the people who arrive in the middle of the night when you find an injured animal on the side of the road. They do it for nothing. They often also pay for the medicines and food needed.

“They represent the best of Australia, and yet some of them received death threats for suggesting the department’s actions were illegal. We agreed with them and it appears the court does too.”

Mr Vaughan said DESI had been “given the opportunity to demonstrate that it followed the correct processes and standards in licensing the healthcare provider”.

On Thursday, Ms Wells and Mr Mortensen assured Molly’s fans that their pet was ‘happy, safe and enjoying life, nothing changes’

Under Queensland law, native animals may only be kept and cared for by a licensed caretaker.

“These qualified professionals have the expertise to give the animal the best chance of recovery and return to the wild,” according to a government website.

‘Without this skilled care, wildlife may not recover or may lose the natural behaviors they need to live a healthy life in the wild.

‘The law requires anyone who finds sick, injured or orphaned wildlife to hand them over to a licensed wildlife officer or veterinarian within 72 hours. There are fines for those who don’t.”

“To show that it wasn’t just an accommodating nod to a Prime Minister who wanted pictures of himself with a magpie on his head and a few social media influencers,” he added.

“They failed to demonstrate proper reasoning for the permit under their applicable laws.”

The volunteer who took action said she was grateful to the Supreme Court and “proud of all the conservationists who stood up for the law when the department and the former prime minister failed to do so.”

“We’re the ones dealing with the mess of the social media craze of catching baby magpies and training them to do cute tricks,” she said.

‘There’s nothing cute about wings and legs being bitten off by pets. There is nothing cute about seeing a domesticated magpie being ferociously attacked by a wild flock when they first come into contact with each other.

“It was pathetic to see the former Prime Minister encouraging this idiocy in a desperate bid to gain votes and followers on social media.

‘It was a step too far to see the Ministry of the Environment joining in the circus and issuing permits.’