paddy, with all due respect, you haven't explained why it's silly at all.

If you're going to call it 'silly' then perhaps you need to explain more reasoning, as to why you believe an animal that has conventionally been farmed in a european climate and requires a much higher amount of grass and water, is more practical than one that has been grazing on Australian soil for hundreds of years.

Until then, I may as well just shoot the word 'silly' right back atcha.

some responses to points made on this forum:

Paddy, i have much respect for a farmer who has never killed a kangaroo and was successful. however, the arguement between cattle or roos for meat should not happen. The ONLY environmentally friendly option is veganism. The only living species that requires meat belong to the feline family. For survival in other species meat may be required. however, for man today veganism is a viable option. man can maintain balanced diets without meat and continue to thrive intellectually.

turnrightturnleft, kangaroo numbers are declining rapidily ... if you believe governement figures then i will ask you to consider the fact that australia has the worst record of extinct species in the world. Maybe believing the organisations that work with the animals is they way to go?

JD Deland, you clearly have no respect for life, life of any kind.

finally, kangaroos are not a pest. they should have the right to fulfil thier life on their native land. it is man that is the pest by not considering how to live harmonously with native animals.

Kangaroo meat is not a substitute for other meat. Besides the ethical objections to the large-scale killing of native animals and the cruelty involved in killing kangaroos (and especially the joeys), the small amount of usable meat on an individual means that kangaroos can never be a significant source of meat. Kangaroos cannot be farmed.

Hunting kills the largest and best-adapted individuals and causes negative selection of the species. Killing large numbers of kangaroos destroys the social structure of the group. Humans have shown that they cannot hunt animals sustainably as is seen by the overfishing of world oceans. Although the human population of Australia appears to be relatively low, how is it that so much forests have been destroyed in little over 200 years?

Australia (and America) have the worst record in the world when it comes to the extermination of species, logging of forests, oppression of indigenous people, consumption of fossil fuels and (per capita) generation of waste. Since I refuse to live in such a country, I returned to my country of origin, Croatia, in 1992 and encourage others to do the same.

The issue that Aboriginals killed kangaroos is no excuse since the present human population of Australia is about 100 times its number before the white colonization of Australia. A lot of Aboriginals are against the killing of kangaroos as was shown by those that protested at Belconnen.

Less low-density housing and greater reliance on public transport would eliminate the need to expand into natural ecosystems. It takes much less land to produce vegan food than meat (per capita). The issue that plant agriculture destroys ecosystems more than animal farming can be solved by growing organic crops and smaller, more diverse farms. A lot of vegan foods (with common exceptions being potatoes, onions and leafy greens) do not involve killing the plant!

Hopefully, high fuel prices will make commercial hunting and fishing less economic, and high grain prices will make animal farming less economic; and European countries will ban the import of kangaroo meat and skin just as they banned seal products from Canada.

Coms “for man today veganism is a viable option. man can maintain balanced diets without meat and continue to thrive intellectually.”

What may be a “viable option” may not be adopted because it is not a preferred choice.

The difference between “Life” and “Existence” –
Existence is defined by the viable options available but “Life” is defined by the choices we make.

As for viable options, because I earn the money I use to buy my groceries I can afford to buy the meat I eat, that is a viable option and it is also a choice I have decided to make.

Coms I challenged your previous post but yoyu have conveniently failed to respond – were the issues too confronting for you to consider? Maybe the dietary consequences of veganism have already started to negatively effect your reasoning prowess?

Simon Validzic “Besides the ethical objections large-scale killing of native animals and the cruelty involved in killing kangaroos”

I have no ethical objection to killing kangaroos or farming them for meat and if you want to see cruelty, just look at nature, lots of what you would call “cruelty”, without restraint.

I would note “Sentimentality” is no substitute for reason or ethics, it is just the warm cuddly feeling some feeble minded people like to use as a security blanket between them and the practical realities of the real world.

The nature of man is to manage his surroundings.

Man was endowed with a creative mind and free will.

Vegans are free to follow the edicts of their mind but they are not free to impose the resolutions of what are extremist views upon other free minds and people who understand how real life really works.

Paddy – I commend you, from your post you read as a person who has lived his life with respect and caring for the things which fall within your realm and responsibilities.

Firstly Col Rouge, from your last post all that you have portrayed is your greed and supersized ego ... both of which are catalysts for violence and destruction. I must say with your hard earned money maybe you could move beyond yourself and look at what you could do to end pain and suffering somewhere for someone or something.

Col Rouge, in response to your original comment re: decline in kangaroo numbers … Government figures show that between 2001 and 2006 populations crashed across the country by 50-70%1. The Murray Darling Report talks about kangaroo density in relation to extinction where populations below 2 kangaroos per sq.km are quasi-extinct. However IN MOST OF S.A. AND N.S.W. WHERE THE COMMERCIAL INDUSTRY EXISTS, KANGAROOS HAVE ALREADY BEEN DECIMATED TO DANGEROUS LEVELS OF JUST 2 OR LESS KANGAROOS PER SQ. KM PUTTING THEM AT GREAT RISK OF EXTINCTION IF THE KILLING CONTINUES, which it is2. Killing 10-15% of a declining population during a severe drought is catapulting macropod species into an irreversible crisis. Kangaroos are regionally extinct in areas of WA, SA, Western NSW and Vic. The average age of a red kangaroo is 2 years in New South Wales when they could live to an average age of 25. There were an estimated 200 million at the time of the first settlers. The official 2007 estimate is 24 million kangaroos. In 2007, 3.8 million were killed commercially (combining non-commercial killing, recreational hunting, government “culls,” road kills, illegal killing and uncounted joey deaths the total is closer to 7 million).
See
1.http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/trade-use/wild-harvest/kangaroo/population/index.html
2. AAT Submission, General Administration Division, NSW District Registry, No. 535 of 2007 (exhibit 13).

Col Rouge you said that ‘Vegans … are not free to impose the resolutions of what are extremist views upon other free minds and people who understand how real life really works’. How closed minded! To understand how real life really works … well real life is our environment, the world that we live in, it is mans delusion of the ‘real world’ that has caused destruction of the planet. No planet, no mankind.

Let us get something straight:

Kangaroos are NOT domesticated animals, bred for hundreds of years to be passive victims of man like sheep, goats and cattle.

They can NOT be farmed, and I really wish the silly people (TurnRightThenLeft) advocating roo farming would find out some facts. Kangaroos simply can not cope with the imprisonment, herding and handling that domesticated animals can. They quickly suffer from stress-related conditions, if they have not already died from broken limbs or capture myopathy, an agonising death.
They can not be farmed, only hunted. So please, no more of this ridiculous 'argument'.

The arguments so far seem to fall into two broad groups: those advocating roo slaughter say that they choose to eat meat and it is their right to eat whatever meat they like. A purely personal argument. Also that cruelty happens in life, so accept it; and interestingly that man has the right to 'manage' his surroundings, which seems to mean removing anything that is not of use.

The others talk about the broader issues like: wildlife conservation, the intolerable and inherent cruelty, the rights of wild things to live without the threats of exploitation, Australia's appalling record, and vegetarianism as an alternative.

I would like to ask those who say we have the right to 'manage' (read: exploit) our surroundings: where does this right come from? What authority do we have to 'manage' wild creatures like whales, seals or kangaroos for our own profit? These do not belong to any person or country as sheep do. Aren't there enough examples of population crashes in over-exploited wild populations to indicate that this is a very dangerous road? What happened to the Thylacine, Toolache Wallaby, Paradise Parrot, and almost the Blue Whale?