The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Trivial penalties for animal cruelty offences

Trivial penalties for animal cruelty offences

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 7
  7. 8
  8. 9
  9. Page 10
  10. 11
  11. All
PF, that's a really good website - and it is informative without "bagging" anyone. Is that website any relation to what PALE is doing, or seeking to do? And I apologize, it was not my intention to offend you. I just can't see how anyone could possible believe that keeping these sensitive, curious, intelligent animals under the conditions they do, barricaded into such small spaces, forcing them to live in their own excreta could be humane. I guess they don't really want to know about animal physiology otherwise they would find out the degree of suffering they are inflicting on them in their in their short, miserable lives.

PALE, I will try and find what information I can on court cases - I know I found some media releases at a website called www.liveexportshame.com about the cases Jenna mentioned in Tasmania. I'll see what I can search out in NSW. That website contains media reports about animal issues other than live exports in a separate section so there would be some material there. But it is huge!

PF, and anyone who feels similarly, you are tending to label anyone who disagrees with SOME farming methods as "mad animal libbers", when my experience has been that most simply want the cruelty to stop. You pointed out yourself that AA and AL support free-range farming. What I would like to see stop is the way egg-laying hens are forced to live (I have some that I bought from a battery farm, and how tragic they were!), meat chickens, battery-farmed rabbits and intensively farmed pigs - all of those suffer terribly, away from the public gaze. Feedlotted cattle and "shedded sheep" are not much better off, and some of the long-haul transports are atrocious.
I know that groups that I've had dealings with have a majority of members who eat meat, wear wool and leather and have "pets" but they despise the cruelty.
Nicky.
Posted by Nicky, Tuesday, 27 February 2007 7:06:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
PF Excellent!

Could you enquire please if we could put it up on-
Our web site and RSPCA QLD web site.

Free Ranger would like it also.
If it’s no that’s ok ...

Please take another look at this one which we wanted to pass over to somebody with more time to help complete.
http://www.freerangefarmers.com/freerange/

We would like to feature the one you put up on our Free Ranger Farmers Support Group. You are the only Free Range Pork Farmer in Australia that has put in a real effort.
You are the the animals best friend.
This should be on every site In Australia. Tell me without taking this the wrong way.

Is it up on AA AL V sites? It should be.

Nicky yes we are trying to do the same thing.
The Free Range Farmers support group is sadly in need of a leader.
Its Australians first and very necessary to try to work with farmers and not against them. I don’t suppose you would be interested to take it over and we would support you in every way possible all expenses paid.

PF could give you lots of information. {Far more than us

She’s really got the knowledge Nicky and it would be good to have her traveling doing lectures on totally wild Bindi Erwin etc.
PF willing of course.

Nicky yes the Shame web site is Dawn. The knowledge and what she’s done is amazing. She also knows Trish and many others who are not extreme which is why they have branched out on their own.
Getting the briefs is huge you are correct. At the end of the day it’s quicker if we put intensive farmers and live exporters out of biz.

We can do it IF we can get the farmers onside and a bit more help.

Nicky I want to ask your thought on this please. Today I was speaking to Peter Costello’s office.
What would you think about passing a bill making it law that public funds raised by Animal Welfare groups had to go back into improving conditions

[After costs].

.
Posted by People Against Live Exports & Intensive Farming, Tuesday, 27 February 2007 10:11:22 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hello All
I have been out of the office for a week and about to leave again
I was interested to see the response but not surprised when there was none. Dissapointed for the animals but not surprised,
I rest my case
Posted by People Against Live Exports & Intensive Farming, Saturday, 3 March 2007 4:54:11 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I have been away and out of communication as well. Sorry about that, more later.
Nicky.
Posted by Nicky, Saturday, 3 March 2007 7:15:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi all
PALE, firstly, I wouldn't be in a position to run with this, with my current commitments, and I would also have some 'in principle" issues with it. It is also not that simple, for example, the person you seek would need to have web design training, and be far better informed than I am about the matters you talk about.
I do, however, think that it is an OUTRAGEOUS suggestion that the government should EVER be able to determine or direct the expenditure of animal advocacy groups - this government in particular. However, the RSPCA, which does receive government funding in some form or other in all states and territories, should be more accountable, and be directed in how it spends that government funding rather than tying it up in investments.
Other groups do not receive the same government largesse and work very hard to raise the limited funds they have. My experience with those groups is that individual members mostly fund their participation in activities themselves.
Farmers, on the other hand, receive more than generous funding from the taxpayer, and the bottom line is simple - if you cannot afford to properly care for the animals you have, then you should not have them. And perhaps you are not very good at what you do. There is no excuse - ever - for animals being allowed to starve in paddocks as in the cases described earlier by Jenna, for example (and those occurred before the drought). PF, I do not firect any of this in your direction because clearly you DO care for your animalsd, and far better than most.
Nicky
Posted by Nicky, Sunday, 4 March 2007 8:33:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Nicky

Well That sorts the men from the boys. Yes I know all about self funding.

I do this work it because I care and not because its a paid job.

When I said ALL money raised by ALL Animal Welfare groups[above outlays] it included RSPCA. 'Actually especially'.

I also think that NFP should be ALL non paid staff .

Many spend most of their time raising funds to pay themselves.


The intensive piggerys who say they cant afford the improvements is surely something all Australians who have dontated to would like to see their money going into.

The Red cross Appeal didnt give one cent when it should have to farmers to get feed to animals. Nor is the Salavation Army Farmers appeal thats running at the moment.

If I donate fifty or a few hundred dollars I for one want to have a say where its going.

I think most people feel its their right. I want my fifty to go direct to getting water and hay to stock not funding some trip to india to research elephants- Whatever

It SHOULD be going either into A Court cases B TV and Radio Newspaper advertising BUT after that and costs it should go straight to improve conditions for animals.

They could arrange to pay the builders and arrange to supply the wire matting , materials, food ,vetinary and the list is endless.
BUT the Fee world travel and paying themselves wages should NOT be allowed.

I notice the free range link PF put up is NOT on V or AL or AA. See what I mean? They should be thanking their lucky stars.
The Babe thingy is great but lets face it this has been going on now for years and many more years.
Until we open more Free Range Farms its stupid telling everybody to take any pledge.
The fact IS the Free Range Farmers need a lot more support than just- buy free range written on a web page.

But what the hell!- Its a good fund raiser turning the public against the farmers.
Posted by People Against Live Exports & Intensive Farming, Sunday, 4 March 2007 9:31:40 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 7
  7. 8
  8. 9
  9. Page 10
  10. 11
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy