Hi all

Col Rouge, I'm happy to respond to you, because your comments, in your eyes at least, make some sense. I don't think anyone has condemned horse riding here, have they? Horse racing and trotting place unreasonable distress on the animals concerned so cannot be condoned, fox hunting is simply about allowing an animal to be ripped to bits by a pack of dogs for fun. But rodeo events such as bull riding and in particular calf roping are indefensible. And so, I'm afraid, are circuses featuring wild animals, who spend their lives in cages, being transported.

Just because duck shooting is "historic" doesn't mean it is acceptable in contemporary society - that's why all state governments have either banned it or placed moratoria on it this year (except Tasmania, I believe). But really - what makes you WANT do see caged animals, and shoot and otherwise torment defenceless ones? What sort of people are you?

Australia has a ban on the importation of dog and cat fur - why do you think that is? Because 90%+ of the world's fur comes from China, where animals are routinely beaten to death/skinned alive. Dog and cat fur is often labelled something else because there are no "truth in labelling" laws in China.

Finally, please watch the video at the link Dickie has posted. Please also read the AQIS (yes, written by AQIS) mortality reports which can be found at that site or at Animals Australia's site. It will all give you a good picture of exactly how well regulated the live export industry is. And I have seen how well regulated it is, attending feedlots and ship loadings. That's only IN Australia, too.

Nicky

Irrelevant dickie, you're evading the question.

I've said on a number of threads (I can provide links if need be) that I have sympathy for the live exports cause and I don't agree with it in the slightest.

I've also said that I have sympathy for this cause, *despite* the efforts of certain posters on OLO whose methods I disagree with.

And I still think that none of the animal liberationists have answered my questions regarding things like wild dog control. I view it as an evil, yes, but a necessary one that must be done.

I think that those who can't explain the alternatives, are blatantly misleading themselves. Instead of compromising and going for the best outcomes, they're refusing to budge in the slightest, which ultimately doesn't help animals.

Take the roo issue. There's a very persuasive article on the front page of OLO, though granted, it is from an industry figure. But his facts appear to be sound.

Now, I'd say that harvesting kangaroos for meat is a far more practical option than livestock. Ultimately, it would be better for Australian native wildlife to have a native species bred in Australia for food (or harvested) especially given the necessity of culling roos anyway.

And I do believe the realistic, best option for the environment is the roo cull. Again, the lesser of two evils.

Cont'd.

This approach would lead to a better outcome for animals, and result in less cruelty - but it is violently opposed by many animal liberationists, which digusts me, because they're putting their self righteousness ahead of what can be reasonably achieved.

But oh no. There's no compromise - it's be vegetarian or nothing.

I eat meat. I'm not the least bit ashamed of that. I've no plans to turn vegetarian, and I'm not going to be guilted into doing so. I put it to you that the things I put forward are a more reasonable way.

It comes back to things like the wild dog baiting. All the options are unpleasant.

Pick one:

a) Use control methods such as 1080
b) don't use control methods such as 1080 and watch them decimate wildlife
c) Use another method, that is actually practical.

This is the brutal reality. To continue to preach self righteousness and refuse to accept this, I think if anything just makes things worse. But I wouldn't want to get in the way of a good ole fashioned simplistic rant about the bad men who shoot the cute animals.

Hi all

TRTL, I thought I had commented on the wild dog issue but it may have been on another thread. Wild dogs, feral cats, foxes, rabbits etc are out there because of human neglect. negligence, ignorance and/or indifference. I believe that it therefore behoves us, if control measures MUST be implemented, to ensure that those measures are humane.

If poisons are to be used, why can a barbiturate component not be incorporated into them so that the animal is unconscious when the poisons take effect?

I am not an expert on macropods, but my understanding from various sources is that they have an innate capacity for their own population control. Dickie may be able to shed some light on that; if not, I'll try and find the information. This is what one person sent me on it:

"kangaroos and wallabies have a unique ability to adjust their numbers to changes in the ability of the environment to support them. That suggests, I think, that the starvation issue is irrelevant (unless, of course, the animals have been confined in areas too small to allow for normal population expansion and control)".

That was in response to a plan by the Tasmanian government to undertake a cull of rare pademelons and Forrester wallabies on Maria Island, which, ironically the Tasmanian government promotes as a fauna-rich tourism attraction.

Cheers
Nicky

"I've said on a number of threads (I can provide links if need be) that I have sympathy for the live exports cause and I don't agree with it in the slightest."

TRTL. While you accuse others of "simplistic rants," you are guilty of similar. You have asked me for my solutions but offer none on the above issue.

Furthermore, whilst you et al manipulate our written objections to animal cruelty you refuse to acknowledge that we have said many times that we are not opposed to surgical procedures on animals providing anaesthesia and analgesics are used to prevent pain.

My views on feral cats and dogs are officially documented. I have for many years lobbied to prevent ownership to all and sundry. I have lobbied for a short term course on animal welfare at a tertiary institute for prospective owners, a significant increase in licensing fees, inspections of the potential address for animals and mandatory sterilisation of all pets at sixth months (with very specific exemptions)and a mandatory reporting system forthwith to verify adherence to those council by-laws. Breaches should incur very stiff penalities and/or seizure of the animal without delay.

All these obligations cost money for the potental owner but will enhance the coffers of local government in conjunction with teaching facilities, even before animal ownership is permitted, which will also discourage half wits and hoons, who shrink from close inspection, and who obtain dogs merely to make them savage, beat and starve them, allow them to breed indiscriminately, lock them in backyards where they can't see out and even more abominable, for organised dog fights or to rip a cat to pieces.

These obligations would also prevent ownership to indigenous fringe dwelling folk who come to town with 4,5 or 6 dogs trailing behind. I have witnessed these severely neglected dogs heading for the bush on several occasions. Rangers are eager to prosecute town dwellers if they find a dog at large. I've yet to hear of a fringe dweller being prosecuted - no chance of increasing the revenue there mate!

contd....

Nicky – “I thought I had commented on the wild dog issue but it may have been on another thread. Wild dogs, feral cats, foxes, rabbits etc are out there because of human neglect. Negligence, ignorance and/or indifference. I believe that it therefore behoves us, if control measures MUST be implemented, to ensure that those measures are humane. If poisons are to be used, why can a barbiturate component not be incorporated into them so that the animal is unconscious when the poisons take effect?”

It is totally irrelevant that foxes and rabbits were introduced to Australia and it is a worthless exercise laying blame on anyone because it happened in the 1800’s. What is relevant is how to control or exterminate the problem.

I find it absolutely mind boggling that nicky states that “if control measures MUST be implemented.” This once again shows her total inexperience or knowledge of the damage that foxes, rabbits, feral cats and wild dogs do.

I have seen the extensive damage that both foxes and rabbits can inflict on farms and the environment of the bush. I won’t go into the descriptions of what I have seen foxes do to lambs and chooks etc.

Under the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. Some of these endangered and vulnerable species that the fox poses a threat to include:

the malleefowl (Leipoaocellata)
Hastings River mouse (Pseudomys oralis)
mountain pygmy-possum (Burramys parvus)
broadtoothed rat (Mastacomys fuscus)
long-footed potoroo (Potorous longipes)
little tern (Sterna albifrons)
yellow-footed rock-wallaby (Petrogale xanthorpus)
brush-tailed rock-wallaby (Petrogale penicillata)
southern brown bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus)

I have read that in some circumstances foxes can kill up to 30% of newly born lambs.

I don’t entirely agree with this as it would be relevant to the size of the flock and other circumstances. This is no doubt that foxes will kill, particularly in pairs for ‘sport’.

The Department of Environment and Conservation in W.A. that foxes and cats have contributed to the extinction of ten native mammals. Twenty-eight more species are threatened.