Here's a solution which should satisfy the righties and the lefties: feed the crocodiles boat people, homosexuals and the poor. That way the crocs will get a good feed and won't go after tourists so we won't have to shoot them, which will keep the hippies happy. At the same time, we get rid of some boat people, homosexuals and poor people, which will keep the tories happy. A win-win, unless you're one of the people being fed to the crocs.

G'day there PAUL1405...

I'm not here to defend MR BORSAK shooting an Elephant, but I would have to remind most of the environmentalists herein, the weapon Mr BORSAK has ostensibly used (as pictured in your link) to take the Elephant is what's known as a 'double rifle' or 'express rifle' possibly built by an English gunmaker, like Purdy & Sons; Rigby & Sons, or Holland & Holland etc.

Though of a particularly heavy calibres (.458 Win.Magnum, 470 Nitro Express, .500 Jeffery or similar) it takes a great deal of courage to stand your ground and confront one of 'the big four' dangerous animals in the world. I'm sure our mutual colleague IS MISE would also readily agree, as a retired government armourer ! Two barrels, thus two shots, if you don't take him, you're in big trouble with an often mortally wounded, pain enraged animal at full charge !

While it's true, you generally have a 'safety shooter' close by who can end 'the charge', nevertheless there are dozens of experienced big game hunters down through the years who've perished at the horn, tusk or jaws' of wounded, dangerous big game.

For the record, I don't hunt, never have and never will. I do however enjoy the 'engineering component' of quality firearms.

So Toni, do we wait until they are married so the survivor can claim a widow/widowers pension. Not sure which it would be, I know, lets just find another word.

Hi o sung wu, I take your point as I always do, seriously. I am sure Mr Borsak was well protected as he faced mortal danger from the elephant. To say Borsak was acting as a conservationists when he shot the animal is ridiculous. The man paid big money to kill the elephant, and for no other reason than to satisfy his perverse pleasure.
Borsak claimed in parliament he only shot animals to eat, when questioned about the elephant, he said he ate it. If he did not, then he mislead parliament and should resign.
On a score of numbers killed the big game, including crocodiles and great white sharks, are not doing terribly well.

Since your here, I as you know am a pacifists, anti killing, anti war, and was very much so in my younger days with the Vietnam War. I am pleased by the news that the remains of 33 Australian who died in that terrible war have been finally returned to Australia where they belong, and can finally rest in peace.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-02/repatriation-ceremony-vietnam-malaysia-service-personnel/7469362

Paul,

The money that Borsak paid helps fund animal conservation.
The Greens would prefer to see 1080 used for culling; probably get some kicks out of thinking of the horrible deaths that it causes.

Last Sunday I shot four foxes, the stomach of one contained the remains of two White Tail Water Rats, contents of the others had bird and what we think, were lizard bones.
That's four foxes that won't prey on our native wildlife again.

How many Australian native animals have the Greens actively saved lately?

Is Mise, all I can say to that is...GOOD!