The Forum > General Discussion > Wallaby Cull, where are the Greens on this?
Wallaby Cull, where are the Greens on this?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- Page 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
-
- All
Posted by Paul1405, Saturday, 9 April 2016 6:19:02 PM
| |
thinkabit,
Go into the real world for a while! Paul, You haven't answered my question yet; when you do I'll answer your's The great hunter that you mention, well, it truth I have never heard of him. Posted by Is Mise, Sunday, 10 April 2016 12:45:32 AM
| |
Is Mise, I think you and I may have discussed this topic once or twice before. With you coming off second best each time.
As for Tony Azzi the well known hunter in NSW, I gave you a link to the abysmal allegations that Mr Azzi slaughtered defenseless and protected wombats on his property. For all I know Mr Azzi might have given you a fellow hunter a good deal on a used car. When he's not killing wombats he's flogging cars. I wouldn't rely on the dropkick Hasbeen to back me up on this topic, or any topic for that matter, his contributions are less than worthless. Come come Is Mise, thinkabit has put up a very solid argument and all you can offer in reply is the dismissive phrase "Go into the real world for a while! Posted by Paul1405, Sunday, 10 April 2016 8:13:40 AM
| |
Dream on Paul and some day you might just answer a question.
Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 11 April 2016 2:25:33 AM
| |
Is Mise, I have answers all your question as usual.
The Final Report by Professor Tony Norton and Nick Johannshon June 2010 and what they had to say about shooting as a long term control measure on King Island. THE GREENS CONTINUE TO SUPPORT DETAILED EXPERT OPINION AND FACTS ON THIS MATTER. Not over the top nonsense from the gun happy brigade! From the report; "However, the usefulness of shooting as a viable, long-term wildlife control measure on King Island appears uncertain. In the absence of careful planning, the use of shooting of native wildlife as a method of control can be problematic. Ad-hoc or inefficient use of shooting in an area can make the effective use of this control option more difficult as animals become particularly sensitive to disturbance. In terms of wildlife management at a landscape level, localised shooting may have only limited or no lasting benefit since the local area may be rapidly occupied by animals moving in from neighbouring, uncontrolled areas where the wildlife population remains high. There are concerns within the local community about the apparently large number of animals that are shot and may be left in farm paddocks." Read complete report, if you wish: http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/Documents/Implications-of-Native-Wildlife-Browsing-on-King-Island-Final-Report-4-August-2010.pdf Posted by Paul1405, Monday, 11 April 2016 7:31:58 AM
| |
Paul1405: From the report;
Obviously written by a Greenie. Not worth the paper it's written on. Posted by Jayb, Monday, 11 April 2016 7:37:46 AM
|
Can you please come up with something better than continually referring to me as a dill, its so hackneyed. If I was referring to your good self, given your outstanding intellect, I would use the more descriptive term nincompoop!
thinkabit, you waste your time posting logical argument to Is Mise.
He will come back with another one of his what if's.
What if... the Great White Hunter employed a 100 black fellas to act as drum beaters, and then later they could form an ant like line and carry the dead wallabies out of the bush on their heads. Just watch any old 'Tarzan' movie
If Is Mise doesn't apply a what if, then he simply avoids the question all together.