Who's "we"?

This facile piece of intellectual flummery invalidate's the author's essay, as does identifying society with the State, a proposition or rather mere assumption which the author does not even identify, let alone offer any reason or justification for.

The author is also incorrect generalising about

"It wasn't so long ago that Australia, like other countries such as the United States, had a whaling industry that employed many people, yet no one now calls for that trade to be revived."

The Japanese whaling industry calls for whaling to be revived, continued and also expanded.

Modern whaling is also conducted by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling#Whaling_by_country :

- Some in Indonesia

- The Canadian Inuit

- Greenland Inuit

- Iceland

- Norway

- Some in the Philippines

- Some in Russia

And in other countries.

Many of the above want a revival or expansion in whaling.

There seems to be no mention of hostages having their throats cut without being stunned.

Animals should be treated decently, but they are not human beings. Live animal exporting is questionable, but banning greyhound racing is absurd. Greyhounds are the only animals doing what dogs, pack animals, are meant to doing: chasing things with other dogs.

If you want to see real animal cruelty? Go to the Bunya Mountains and look at the results of placing a ban on feeding wild birds.

Ignored is, generations of tourists flocked there just to hand feed wild birds, with the result that the wild bird population exploded and since the ban have virtually starved as the very first foreseeable consequence.

Another example of this green ideology occurred on Fraser Island where the only remaining anywhere pureblood asian wolf (dingo) is to be found!

There was a time when wild horses roamed and provided food for the last remaining, pureblood Asian wolf. In their wisdom, animal activists removed the horses to protect the woodlands!?

Locals took pity and replaced the natural food with bowls of dog food, thus virtually domesticating these fearsome creatures.

Again animal activists got into the act, banned the feeding and then stood back until a child was mauled, then decided they should cull the animals! Why? because it was cruel to let them starve!

Even so starving animals continued to impact negatively on the tourist trade, with dogs taking beached fish of the hook!

What did they expect?

As for the mauled child? The first rule is never run. The second is never try to stare down a dog, but avoid sustained eye contact. The third is, grab something in each hand and point at the sky with them to increase your height in the animal's eye.

Even works on the wild hunting dogs of south africa.

Last but not least, never kneel to put your face level with that of the animal then parody it with growling sounds.

And then we wonder why our pets suddenly turn on a child and chew their face off?

That said, the very worst example of animal cruelty has to be aggressively assertive tails that just want to wag dogs?

Stop it, we've had as much of this diabolically disingenuous activism and folks who give themselves trespass rights no other law abiding citizen has! No wonder this group, to a virtual person, want our guns gone?
Alan B.

The forceful prohibition of unwholesome practices, undermines the ability of individuals to repent and conscientiously avoid those practices.

Prohibition just leaves us in a dull society of latent whale-killers, latent dog-race-watchers, latent cock-fight-watchers, latent slaughterers, latent gamblers, latent druggies. Those tendencies are bound to find new and unforeseen ugly avenues to express themselves through.

Nobody can choose for us to be better persons. Only through our own conscious decision to do good and abstain from evil can our inherent goodness and virtue shine.

Alan B.,
Dingoes were semidomesticated by the Aboriginal population. And anyway, they're descended from dogs in Asia rather than directly from Asian wolves.

Dingoes on Fraser Island used to eat stranded sea snakes and fish prior to marine life becoming devastated.
Even today on this OLO site there are people oblivious to alongshore current transporting nutrient overload that is proliferating algae that is killing seagrass food web nurseries and coral in Australian waters.

Major media is gagging and suppressing information including photographic and scientific evidence indicating whales are starving to death and that it is nutrient that is killing seagrass and GBR coral.
Ignorance is no excuse, especially ignorance with intent.
It's time to wake up and get the blinkers off.

Scientific researchers best be honest and include government dumped sewage in the TOTAL nutrient loading. Otherwise solutions will not be found and put in place.
Nutrient overload pollution is now increasingly feeding algae that is killing ocean and river food web nursery ecosystems.
More algae, why, they ask. E.g.
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/26/why-are-there-so-many-toxic-algae-blooms-this-year.html

Mass starvation and death of fish dependent seabirds has been occurring for years now but the get up and collect money for political purposes mob say nothing about that mass starvation and animal misery.
Nor do the get up mob or major media address the now chronic fish depletion-linked protein deficiency under-nutrition – malnutrition and associated NCD among SW Pacific Islands seafood dependent people.

This is not just about the occasional dead dog or hammer that glances off the head of a moving beast as meatworkers endeavour to slaughter it to feed people.
This is not just about an indigenous man that prods a turtle with a knife to see if nerves indicate it is not yet dead and may bump a sharp knife that could seriously cut the man gathering his food..
Get up and look closely and carefully. The ABC should tell the true story.

5,000 dead babies and 1,500 dead mothers in one year in PNG is generally linked to anaemia that coincides with river and ocean fish stock devastation and under-nutrition (in humans and animals), and the situation should be truthfully and fully reported or should be subject of a Royal Commission.

“Certain politicians and figures in the media rejected the Baird government's ban on greyhound racing outright.”

So they should. It was a (some would say typical) Baird knee-jerk reaction. It is pertinent that governments of the other main greyhound racing states, Victoria and Queensland, do not agree with the ban.

It should be remembered that the McHugh inquiry was set up because of alleged live baiting in the greyhound industry, that was exposed on ABC Four Corners.

Thanks to the animal righters’ highly alarmist claims, McHugh accepted them at face value, was distracted away from the main issue, and concluded that the number of greyhounds being culled by the industry was grossly excessive.

Ironically, the RSPCA, the largest euthaniser of unwanted dogs of all breeds in the state, agreed.

Given that many, if not most, of the claims were unsubstantiated, the veracity of McHugh’s report is open to question, to say the least. It should have been issued as a draft report for discussion.

Surprisingly, what has been overlooked by Baird and his ‘yes-men’ parliamentary colleagues and faithful supporters, is that the government’s regulation of the industry has failed or else is ineffective.

To add insult to injury, Baird now proposes that the dogs enforceably made surplus as a result of the ban, should be supported for life by taxpayer-funded welfare. This is political correctness gone mad.

“In the meantime, the Baird decision to ban greyhound racing will need approval by the parliament in order to have the force of law.”

Banning of greyhound racing in NSW is considered to be unjustified on the ‘evidence’ tendered to date. However, there is certainly urgent need for government regulation of the industry to be reviewed.

Spent a lot of time on the reef have you JF Aus? No I thought not. The natural habitat of fools who could produce a post like yours is in the inner city high rise concrete jungle.

You obviously do a lot of reading of garbage produced by others of your inner city tribe, to come up with such garbage. The sort of rubbish this article represents, written by another of those theory people. Bet he has never been to an isolated Coral Sea reef, put down an injured roo, or a much loved horse.

I have spent years on the reef, & on reefs in very isolated parts of the Pacific, the type of places you can only get to with your own yacht, or millions to charter one.

Not good for the productivity of freelance writers. They specialise in reproducing the type of garbage they have read somewhere, & taken as fact.

Yes Adian, I know that the dingo (asian wolf) was semi domesticated by aboriginal people, and even brought them here around 12-14 thousand years ago, where they were employed as hunting companions.

Which were turned on the original previous inhabitants, now known as Tasmanian aborigines, who apparently has more in common with the original chatham Islanders than mainland aborigines?

Who used these dogs (semi domesticated Asian wolves) to drive the original inhabitants island hopping all the way south to Tasmania.

This is supported by the oral history of both groups. And the relocation (10-12 thousand years ago)n was accompanied by the most horrendous and primitive genocide and hostage taking, where children would be held to ensure their mother would be cooperative and compliant in all things; including the sharing of traditional knowledge of bush tucker and bush medicine. And something I learned at my Grandmother's knee.

Simply put, as usual you don't have a clue, given simple DNA comparisons, well and truly proves that our dingos are the prodigy of the Asian wolf. And that the very last purebreed examples now reside as just a tiny Fraser Island example.

We could have tranquilised unwanted numbers and sent them to the welcoming arms of various zoos? instead we euthanised them with long arm firearms!

And these incredibly rare dogs (Asian wolves) are amongst the most intelligent dogs on the planet!

Huskies were once American wolves and as usual semi domesticated by native women (the method) wet nursing orphaned pups!

In future please ensure brain is operating before putting furiously flapping mouth into gear.
Alan B.

As far as I know, McHugh didn't say anything about banning greyhound racing? Isn't this just another example of a useless politician (Baird) knee-jerking to a minority instead of getting off his bum and ensuring that the sport is contolled?. The ICC and the AFL seem to have no trouble policing clubs and players, right down to petty things.

Alan B.,

Simply put, as usual you don't have a clue, given simple DNA comparisons, well and truly proves that ALL DOGS are the prodigy of the grey wolf (of which the Asian wolf is a type).

Dingoes are not more closely related to wolves than other dogs.

The ancestors of Tasmania's Aboriginal population walked there from the mainland in the ice age when sea levels were lower. Any similarities with Chatham Islanders are either just coincidental or the result of environmental similarities.

Where are you getting all these weird ideas about ancestry?

Adian: Where are you getting these weird ideas that you can challenge and or refute traditional and published knowledge?
It must be such a comfort to know you're always right!
Alan B.

//Dingoes are not more closely related to wolves than other dogs.//

Turns out they may be less closely related. A paper published in 2014 lends support to the old taxonomic designation of Canis dingo, rather than Canis lupus dingo. Watch this space.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jzo.12134/abstract

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2014/03/dingo-special-enough-save

Far too many of our decisions are made from the heart, and not from the head. I mean, how would the lion survive if they all of a sudden grew a conscience and felt sorry for the gazelle.

All the animal lovers trying desperately to save the abandoned animals, and find them a loving home, yet these same people often walk past homeless people and think little of it. What should be done is to look after the homeless, and put the abandoned animals down.

We as a society are becoming far too soft and it will be our ultimate downfall because like it or not, we live in a society that runs on money, not sympathy for animals. Don't get me wrong, I love animals myself, but we no longer have the luxury of a balanced budget and jobs at every corner.

It's nice to feel all warm and fuzzy, but we would be a far better place if all that sympathy were better deployed.

Hasbeen.

What exactly do you say is garbage?
Inner city?
Hell I am standing on coral in Western Solomon Islands as I read and reply to your apparently pointless criticism.
And I have skippered numerous cruisers from Sydney and Brisbane to the GBR stopping at Fraser Island on the way.

What are you getting at anyway?
Really I don't understand the apparent spite in your post.

Animal welfare, and kindness to animals, are both white western concepts, Simon. As the numbers of white western people decline, so cruelty to animals will increase.

Not for one moment do I believe that greyhound "racing" is a threat leading to the mistreatment of animals.
What is being revealed is the mistreatment of coursing dogs off the field. That focus reduces any accusation of cruelty considerably.

And reducing the problem further: Out of all the coursing dog handlers, most I could only imagine, treat their dogs humanly. That normal exercise of animal husbandry would include food, shelter and veterinary attention when necessary...(the ideal world).

Then we move outwards in the circle of coursing dogs, and inspect the down side. Bordering on the unacceptable is the offer of "blooding" the hound. This practice has pay-offs: for in the next circle outwards is the betting industry. Wagering is the ultimate driver of the Greyhound coursing industry itself.

Observing all the above layers of Greyhound racing, and its alleged negative side, the mistreatment of animals; which part of this industry would it become obvious to amend, in order to improve the welfare of animals?

We could remove the dogs from the track, (crude fix). We could remove the illegal blooding of Greyhounds, (already illegal), or we could ban wagering on coursing dogs, (impossible)!

So now we may study the reason behind the ban on greyhound racing in NSW.
What is obvious, is the simplicity of the problem. A simple problem that was given a sledge hammer fix, where a simple jigging of its working mechanism would suffice.

Prosecute the individuals responsible for mistreatment of animals.
If a dog is given the tag of unwanted and euthanised. There is nothing criminal about that decision.
It is "how" the dog is euthanised which may lead to a charge of mistreatment.
(The kindest way to euthanise a dog is with a bullet. It is very swift if done correctly and with compassion, is not an event of cruelty)

Cont.,

Cont...

Euthanising unwanted dogs appears to be the area which, in some power circles, is the most obnoxious. Dogs are more often trailed on private tracks to sort out the under performing animals for culling; outside the official gaze. This is an area to intercept cruelty, at the culling stage, and explains mass greyhound graves!

The dictatorial Gillardesque approach taken by the Baird Government is really bazar, and should be subject to close inspection. Banning a complete industry overnight, is reason for concern and anxiety about the sanity of the Baird Government and its willingness to a acquiesce with minority groups with a foot in the door of parliament. What is their hold on this State Government?

Why doesn't this article include one of our most commonplace forms of animal cruelty - battery hen farming?

For decades, this horrifically inhumane industry keeps defying any attempts to close it down, despite the fact that humane and cost-effective free-range alternatives are available.

Progress on this issue is excruciatingly slow. Even though free-range hen farming still has its problems - i.e. enclosing thousands of hens into small areas where they have limited opportunity to roam free - it's at least a step in the right direction.

The EU has placed limited bans on the practice, simply insisting on 'larger' cages, while some countries such as Switzerland have banned it outright, with no ill economic effects. Other than dubious claims to profit, there is no practical reason for continuing this horror.

Killarney, how can it have no economic effect.

If a farmer were to make 50 cents per dozen for eggs (just a number) and, it costs say $1,000 per square meter to build a shed, then an increase in the shed size means an increase in costs, which leads to less profits. Its simple math.

Just because the price of something doesn't go up for the consumer does not automatically mean no one is worse off.

People have to get their noses out of other peoples business. If you want cage free eggs, then buy them, but don't try to force everyone else to do the same.

Some people may wish to buy cheaper eggs and pay more for veggies or meat. What right do we have to take that away from them.

We have an economy that is heading south very quickly and unless we do something constructive about it, and fast, the last thing future generations are going to be concerned about is caged chooks.

People have to stop thinking with their hearts and start thinking with their minds. We are headed for big trouble, and fast.

As for unwanted greyhounds, send them off to the fertilizer plants. We do it with unwanted race horses. Its a business and if any tool of business under performs, you replace it. Thousands of jobs are at stake with this ban, people have to understand that.

For a detailed insight into the shortcomings of how the McHugh inquiry was conducted -- misconducted actually -- refer to Hedley Thomas article, "Greyhound racing industry dogged to its death by ‘social licence’", The Australian, 30 July 2016

rehctub

'People have to get their noses out of other peoples business. If you want cage free eggs, then buy them, but don't try to force everyone else to do the same.'

No. Callous and cruel people need government noses to be firmly stuck into their business. People who make a profit from cruelty should be treated with zero tolerance.

As for the economic argument, the price of free range eggs has been kept artificially high by the battery-biased poultry industries in several countries worldwide. Since legislation against battery farming has become more aggressive, especially in the EU (instead of leaving it to consumer supply-demand), the profitability gap between battery v. free range has closed considerably. One US study now puts it at only 15c per dozen.

Your argument that any legislative move against battery farming will send the economy off the edge is ludicrous. Rampant global speculation, US-led financial deregulation and neoliberal austerity economics are the leading causes of Australia's economic woes - not the humble hen

Killarney, I hen per cage instead of four amounts to a huge rise in infrastructure and maintenance costs. The only reason free rage eggs are getting cheaper is because the farmers are being squeezed.

Squeezing our farmers will ultimately come at a huge cost one day.

My article did not mention official action that has been taken in relation to the Four Corners report on the sledgehammer slaughter of Australian live export cattle in Vietnam. Here is a link to an announcement:
http://www.agriculture.gov.au/about/media-centre/media-releases/allegations-animal-cruelty-vietnam-15-july-16

Maybe humpback whales (at 10% increase yearly) which feed in Antarctica are surviving better than right whales which feed in coastal waters and swallow plastic rubbish. This also affects sea-birds and seals etc. But at 6% growth yearly maybe..
" Early colonists observed large numbers of southern right whales (Eubalaena australis) in the bays and inlets along the coast during their annual migration north from Antarctica. In July 1804 Knopwood claimed that in crossing the River Derwent, 'we passed so many whales that it was dangerous for the boat to go up the river unless you kept very near the shore'."