It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Australia to shoot 6,000 kangaroos

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 8 2009 @ 12:19 PM
link   
This does need to be done, you cant run a farm in drought conditions with very little growth as it is with litterally swarms of kangaroos invading, eating your crops, your cattle feed, drinking what little precious water there is. Really this is just another case of the international community not understanding the problems in a country they know nothing about. Its not as if Kangaroos are endangered, they are a pest and do more damage than rabbits, but rabbit hunting isnt frowned upon.
I agree with IRM though its a pity they cant do something with the corpses. They are tasty, even though im in Belgium now i still enjoy eating Kangaroo once a week.




posted on May, 8 2009 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by cautiouslypessimistic
Another great example of military being above the law. If a civilian does this, it's poaching. But it's cool if the military does.


The military is an extension of the King. God forbid a lowly serf take one of the King's beasts from the King's land without paying proper tribute to the King. In the U.S. it's with permits and tags.

Things havent changed much in the past 400 or so years. They almost changed in the U.S. but then we got neo-feudalism.

It's a crime for me to take property from my neighbor and give it to someone else yet the King does it everyday. And if you refuse to allow the King to steal from you it's prison or death depending on the King's mood.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 12:36 PM
link   
This reminds me of movies where advanced extraterrestrials are set to destroy humanity because we are destroying the earth and a lonely human convinces them not to. But that is just silly, because humans are much more important than everything else.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by pazcat
 


That's a completely irrelevant point

What's with aussies man? (kidding)

But seriously man, do you guys think you live on Mars and we earthlings are incapable of understanding your surroundings?



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by RetinoidReceptor
This reminds me of movies where advanced extraterrestrials are set to destroy humanity because we are destroying the earth and a lonely human convinces them not to. But that is just silly, because humans are much more important than everything else.

I can't tell if you are being serious or not-if you are, can you give me ONE SINGLE REASON why humans are more important?



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic
 


I think he was being sarcastic after the many callous & barbaric posts about this situation ONLY being bad because roos are tasty.

I hope one day Dinosaurs come back and eat these people with that type of thinking, just for Karma. Because humans might be tasty too.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 12:46 PM
link   
maybe they were worried also about a possible "Roo Flu" outbreak.
Seriously, Roo's are actually pretty destructive if they swarm.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 12:47 PM
link   
What is an irrelevant point?

I mean you said what is right is right, well what exactly is just right? Why do you think they should be spared? Because they are cute, or are you a vegetarian who thinks the killing of all things is wrong, that i can live with you made your choice fair enough. But if not then why what else is there.
I am saying it is harder for non Australians, even Aussie city folk to fully comprehend what its like to live and work on farms and what challenges are faced. I think the main argument here is this is senseless killing, but its not senseless to those it effects. Do people not trap a mouse when they enter their home and eat their cornflakes. Its no different to that.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Australia to shoot 6,000 kangaroos


www.msnbc.msn.com

CANBERRA, Australia - Australia's army has started shooting 6,000 kangaroos to thin their population on an army training ground near the capital, an official said Friday, outraging conservationists who have vowed to protest.




Thinning out nature on an army training ground -
This is target practice.
Disgusting.

[edit on 8-5-2009 by spinkyboo]



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by pazcat
 


dude, as mentioned
people need to get off their behinds
sit in a conference room and figure it out

the most impulsive stupid decision is NOT the only one!

It doesn't matter where you live

Are you telling me that if a bunch of think tanks got together, killing 6000 roos would end up being their ONLY option?

I seriously doubt that



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by spinkyboo

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Australia to shoot 6,000 kangaroos


www.msnbc.msn.com

CANBERRA, Australia - Australia's army has started shooting 6,000 kangaroos to thin their population on an army training ground near the capital, an official said Friday, outraging conservationists who have vowed to protest.




Thinning out nature on an army training ground -
This is target practice.
Disgusting.

[edit on 8-5-2009 by spinkyboo]

I agree. Roos are similar in size and shape to humans. They are swift movers. They are agile.

Seems to me this reeks of a cheap for of training.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
Are you telling me that if a bunch of think tanks got together, killing 6000 roos would end up being their ONLY option?

I seriously doubt that


Amen to this! We have lost all respect for life.
Let's just kill 'em.
No wonder we are in such trouble on this planet.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
reply to post by pazcat
 


That's a completely irrelevant point

What's with aussies man? (kidding)

But seriously man, do you guys think you live on Mars and we earthlings are incapable of understanding your surroundings?


Did you miss the post of how thousands are starving to death?

Is it better to let it run around half dead for months suffering?

And how many zoos are there in the world? Would you like each to take 100 Kangaroos?



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Originally posted by InfaRedMan
It's obvious you do not come from Australia, you do not know anything about our country and you do not have a shred of understanding about how kangaroo populations decimate the environment. Educate yourself!

You're way out of your depth!


Sorry bro but your argument is void

People can't understand anything that is not in their country?
what kind of comment is that?

So nobody here should comment about Iraq, China, Israel, Iran???????
What kind of thinking is that?

What is right remains right regardless of location.
Come on man, what is this?


I think you have completely missed his point.

From how I read it, the most important point was that kangaroo populations decimate the environment. And I certainly agree that if you lived here in Australia then you would better understand the situation. (Just like if I lived in any of the nations that you mentioned then I would better understand any situation/s they are currently in)

These are the choices: Let the roo's starve to death (not a pleasant way for any living creature to go, obviously), while they destroy countless other animals' food resources and habitats, and create a dangerous environment for us to live in.

I myself have witnessed many car accidents caused by roo's jumping across roads, I have read the news articles about roo's attacking dogs and people while walking.

Or, they can be culled. As inhumane as it may seem, the alternative is even worse, I believe.

The main concern is the habitat destruction and countless roo's starving to death. Humans are (arguably) smart, so we should be able to avoid any "conflicts" that arise with roo's. But the fact is that threat remains. I lived in Canberra (the roo's are all over the suburban areas in Canberra, not sure about areas in Australia) for the majority of my life and I guarantee you that crossing the path of a kangaroo is a very dangerous thing to do.

Relocation would not work. Where would they be moved to? A nature reserve or wildlife park? Again, they would just over-populate and the same problems would be there.

Then what? The desert? Where they would just starve to death anyway?

If there is any zoo out there in the world that is willing to take thousands of kangaroos then I'm sure they're more than welcome to them.

It is most definitely sad that the kangaroo, a symbol of our nation, has become such a problem that they need to be culled, but such is life.

I have faith that a group of people smarter than you or I have come up with this solution after much, much deliberation. I do not believe this was a decision that was made lightly.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   
I have missed no points, however many of you have missed mine.
I didn't miss the point of the threat roos present.
I never said do nothing

I said do something, just not mass slaugther
what am I not conveying properly here?

the guy above me listed a few things that he thought of in.... a 10 second timeframe?

That's all that 6000 roos get? 10 seconds of your time, if nothing positive comes out of those 10 seconds then too bad for them?

If you really want to make an argument, how about you actually devote some time and think of a solution without going in thinking it's futile. Otherwise you will surely just run into the same brick wall. Even I would.

And how would roos create the same problem in a controlled environment like a zoo?

I'm 100% positive that there's a better solution, if I wasn't at work I would myself think of one.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 01:42 PM
link   
I've shot many roo's over the years. Imagine a sheep, that can move up to 80kmh! They can cover a lot of ground, and forget farmers fencing, they decimate one paddock, they just jump over and start on the next one.

Sure they are cute and all that, but when they get to large numbers, they can leave entire areas barren. Imagine super fast sheep. Not only that, they have pretty fierce claws, made mostly for digging. So unlike sheep who attack the top level grass and shrubs, roo's dig and absolutely destroy root systems, leaving barren paddocks and land.

Its a shame it comes to this, often its the farmers who have to sneek out and shoot them illegally to try and keep the numbers down. Of coarse they risk serious fines and jail, so the majority of them leave them be. Pretty soon the Govt wakes up and we have this situation where 6000 of them are put down.

Another problem not mentioned is the drought we are currently having. The worst drought in the nations history. This is causing roo's to come in closer to the cities, closer to farming land on the outskirts. Food production has to be protected.

And forget rounding up 6000 roo's. You'd have a hard enough time rounding up 10, let alone a 100 of them.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 02:03 PM
link   
For what its worth, as I noted in my other post this isn't a new problem. It seems to be more one that has gotten worse due to inaction.

However, back in '08 it appears several AU kangaroo experts (professors, etc) weighed in with their views on the problem and the possible alternatives.

Australian Science Media Center - Kangaroo Cull

You can scroll down through the article linked above to get their views.

Here is an excerpt of one Dr's thoughts..


Dr Greg Baxter is a Senior lecturer in Natural and Rural Systems Management at the University of Queensland.

“A cull – that is reducing the density of kangaroo’s on that land - seems to be the only rational way to proceed. It will be humane if done correctly. I have reservations about darting them then injecting them because darting them is much more likely to go wrong and cause injury and maim animals rather than a lethal shot from a trained marksman. We know that kangaroo’s can be humanly shot, for example the RSPCA has no welfare issues with the commercial kangaroo harvesting.

There are not any animal welfare issues with a cull but there are issues if we leave them, it is a long lingering death by starvation and will take weeks for them to die. This seems like a very painful and unpleasant way to die and they have the capacity to severely degrade the environment as they are wild animals trying to eke out a living.

The only other way to control the problem is to translocate them but to do that you must take them to somewhere that is suitable kangaroo habitat not already occupied by kangaroo’s – these places do not exist. If you put them somewhere where there already are kangaroo’s you either displace the kangaroos that are already there or the animals you moved end up displaced themselves and will again face a lingering and prolonged death. On top of this the translocation process is likely to be very traumatic. I think the option of some lethal reduction in numbers is the only way to go and it is not qualitatively different from the commercial kangaroo harvest which kills several million kangaroo’s a year.”


Keep in mind this is from last year. Point being - it would appear that this in not a knee jerk reaction and that some thought has been given to possible alternatives by various experts for some time.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 02:14 PM
link   
here's an idea
dart them with a sleeping dart
and ship them to one of the zillions of unhabitated islands on earth

whatever happens while they are there, let nature take it's course



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


That won't work either. Roo's are nothing more that really big RATS. nasty ones too. They are not the perfect animal to put on other places. Where are all those uninhabited places you speak of? Why would someone be so foolish as to put the very same problem somewhere else. Its you that don't get it. These animals are a pest. Always have been and always will be. They decimate any and all plant life they come in contact with when their numbers reach this plateau. It's only by chance that mother nature hasn't culled the herd on her own. Maybe this drought is the way she's working to do just that. Starving and destroying whats left of vegetation doesn't seem to be the smartest solution to the problem but culling the herd using the military is just one way to accomplish what must be done. To continue to ignore or try to export them to another area does nothing to fix the situation!

Zindo



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Sorry but what is it with Americans and ranting about royalty. Lots of you clearly still think that the monarchy still acts like it did in the middle ages. Dude wake up.

Anyway as for the subject this is to the OP. I have thought about this. I have spent quite a while thinking about it. And I still think this is the best course of action. Not only that but I am getting rather bored of you repeating yourself. Face it. The idea of rounding them all up is just illogical. There isn't anywhere to put them. It is the roos that are causing the need for the culling. Put them elsewhere and they will cause the same problem again. You can't just start shipping them off to other parts of the world. That IS a logistical nightmare. BTW yeh that was me who said it first and I stand by what I said.

-Cauch1



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join