The article is about the senators suggestion for native animals to replace domestic cats and that's what I see as impractical.
"Crossbench senator David Leyonhjelm has declared the quoll should replace the domestic cat in an effort to preserve native mammal populations." ...
This quote you have used as the basis for determining what the article was supposedly about, is an incorrectly paraphrased statement and is also taken out of context.
While this attention-grabbing first paragraph states that the Senator declared the quoll should replace the domestic cat, a later verbatim quote from his senate speech reveals what he actually said was: ?The quoll may replace domestic cats?. Please note use of the word ?may?. This direct excerpt confirms that the first paragraph (which is what you quoted) is nothing more than sensationalistic journalese.
To put your quote into context, here are the next four paragraphs which immediately followed it...
?In a speech to Parliament the Liberal Democratic Party senator argued making it legal to domesticate native animals like the quoll and bilby would ensure their survival.
"Certain kinds of wallabies make great pets. The quoll may replace domestic cats," he told the Senate.
"The bilby is often nominated as a great candidate for domestication.
"In the right circumstances, possums, Tasmanian devils, wombats, native rats, antechinus and bandicoots would also be great pets."
Clearly, the point of the article is not solely about ?native animals replacing cats?.
The range of native mammals available as potential pets is very broad. Person?s involved with wildlife (wildlife parks and other tourist attractions. rehabilitator?s and members of groups such as the Marsupial Society) have shown that many, but certainly not all, are readily amenable to captivity, without requiring undue effort or changes to personal life styles. In contrast, hand-rearing parrots and the like can be considerably more demanding than raising many of our marsupials and native mammals. Yet there are many enthusiasts prepared to take on difficult birds as pets. The point I am trying to make is that it seems apparent that the negatives are being repeatedly over-stated. Something not helped by limiting the focus to quolls. Surely the success with animals like the Sugar Gliders or Mitchell?s Hopping Mice is indicative that it is not always difficult.
The perceived benefits to conservation of keeping native animals as pets are clearly articulated by Professor Archer in the interview article referred to earlier.