The Forum > General Discussion > Working for the betterment of native animals
Working for the betterment of native animals
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Page 5
- 6
-
- All
Posted by onthebeach, Friday, 26 September 2014 11:01:53 AM
| |
Beach, how about giving your parties view on this, does Jim have a view? You seem to know it all about The Greens, did our Bob Brown tell you that, or was it your Bob Brown.
Always amazing how those from the ultra right like to present themselves as the "moderates" and tell us how they present the "balance view". Beach, here is your opportunity to present that "balanced view" of yours on 'Working for the betterment of native animals' in 350 words or less. Posted by Paul1405, Friday, 26 September 2014 11:20:36 AM
| |
Paul,
Statistics based on a minuscule sample are meaningless, there is a partial solution however, removing the NP overseers will save some cash. Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 26 September 2014 11:29:22 AM
| |
Is Mise, you can't be serious, are you proposing Parks and Wildlife Officers should not be overseeing the action of this lunatic fringe? Akin to putting the crazies in charge of the asylum!
Beach, this tread was inactive for a week, then the story broke in the SMH a couple of days ago about the "shooting trial" in NSW National Parks and the absurdity of it all. All relevant to this topic. I make a post about it, a bit colorful, but on topic, no sooner have I posted, than you chime in with something about Gillard and The Greens, noting to do with the subject at hand. I asked you to come up with something better, but what did you come back with an attack on The Greens Federal Senators, again nothing what so ever to do with the topic. If I didn't know better I would think you are stalking me on this forum, and acting like a troll, much in the same way you acted towards Belly. If you are, then all I can say is "welcome aboard" follow me where you will, post whatever you like. And just to help you out, to answer your last question. Yes. Posted by Paul1405, Friday, 26 September 2014 12:05:12 PM
| |
Paul,
Of course I'm serious, these hunters are allowed to hunt unsupervised on private land and in State forests, why are National Parks any different? The only difference that I can see is that NPs have more feral animals due to years of mismanagement. Reference to the Greens is quite relevant as they are the main ones who keep raising the issue of banning hunting, which is racist and culturally insensitive. Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 26 September 2014 2:00:50 PM
| |
Paul1405,
The NSW 'Watermelon' Greens are frivolous, superficial headline hunters. That is evidenced by your support for NSW Parks and Wildlife officers to control feral animals. What would be the cost of that and where is the sense and ethics in extending the aircraft drops of 1080 poison? http://tinyurl.com/1080-poison 1080 should be the treatment of last resort, in very difficult terrain. Of course it makes sense for NSW to draw upon the specially trained, certified, licensed and government directed recreational marksmen (they are certified) to cull and use as many feral animals as possible. Venison for the table is one deer culled and not left to die in agony in the bush somewhere, left to rot for the wild dogs and to breed flies. Of course Julia Gillard who had been in the very best (worst for her and Labor?!) situation to talk about the Greens was right to say that the Greens is just headline grabbing protest party. Hurling criticism of the major parties is easy where the Greens don't feel at all obliged to come up with workable, coherent, integrated policies to cover all of government as is required of the major parties. Posted by onthebeach, Friday, 26 September 2014 2:17:11 PM
|
The Greens Senators have produced nothing in the federal parliament. Yet they put their hands out for handsome CEO remuneration and benefits.
The NSW 'Watermelon' Greens were a constant embarrassment to previous Greens leader, Bob Brown and remain a splinter group to the current leadership. One of the common elements seems to be Lee Rhiannon, a buddy and confidant of yours you say?