Hunting Season 3 mths / year ?

[<<Genesis93>>]

where will it end

Its like Tobacco..... you can buy it, they'll swear you'll die from it (possibly eventually)... as such - to save you from yourself theyve imposed a ridiculous excise tax on fags....they proclaim to dissuade you from smoking, whatever.

Yet if you want to do the homegrown organic thing and grow your OWN... then you'll need a licence, not from the health department, but from the Tax department. Goto ATO and it says YES you'll require a licence to grow your own product for personal consumption, follow this link.......link followed - you can NOT have a licence to produce your own for personal consumption... make sense of that......kinda like roos, there are so many that theyre perishing in the paddocks, as well as the urban roads.... yet you cant eat them...go buy your food from colesworths, be a good consumer ok!

[Die Judicii]

Out of curiosity does anyone know the ramifications of taking 'no-take' roo?

Not sending them to the local butcher of course but for personal consumption? personal pet food?

Well here you go Sender,,,
I have finally made contact with a pro shooter in my area.
I asked the question that you posed (as above)

His reply was, "There are no exceptions. Unless you have a professional harvester licence for Macropods, if you get caught shooting roo/s, the penalty can be as high as $30,000 per roo.
Added to that, a landowner can also face the possibility of forfeiting his property to the crown."

Bear in mind that this pro is obviously quoting Qld law.
However, it wouldn't be all that much different in other states I would imagine.

Probly a better idea for you to buy Fido's tucker at the supermarkets shelf full of Skippy.

[Title_II]

Totally disagree with that last statement/sentence.

Native wildlife should be protected for countless reasons. It would be easy enough for anyone wanting to hunt a particular species to acquire a permit under controlled conditions. Wholesale and free reign destruction of species is how many are driven to the brink of extinction before any protective measures can be put in place for threatened species.

"Oh, crap... there's only 5 breeding pairs of them left.... we better put them on the list... oops... Joe Blogs just shot two!"

It is much easier and safer to have a blanket "no take" policy with limited exceptions than to do it the other way around, as suggested above.

99% of animals that have walked the Earth are extinct, and it had nothing to do with human behavior. We will also be extinct (if Jesus doesn't come back), as will roos. As an Aussie, you should know that more animals are threatened due to invasive species than every day human behavior, which is responsible for almost none in the grand scheme of things.

I completely agree with proper wildlife management, but I do not agree with the idea that people are the cause of all ills in the world. It's a very dangerous idea, and it's untrue.

[Gwion]

..............

Native wildlife should be protected for countless reasons. .............

99% of animals that have walked the Earth are extinct, and it had nothing to do with human behavior.....

I completely agree with proper wildlife management, but I do not agree with the idea that people are the cause of all ills in the world. It's a very dangerous idea, and it's untrue.

Human expansion contribute significantly to species extinction at a significant rate. As for hunting pressure not contributing to extinction, that is a completely bogus statement. Yes, habitat destruction is the primary drive in modern human driven extinctions but hunting pressure has contributed to many extinctions in recent years: thylocene and white rhino are two glaring examples, as are a unique species of bat in Papua New Guinea. Look at NZ over the last 800 years and you will see countless more examples.

Your opening statement (underlined) is equivalent to saying "99.999% of all the people who ever lived are dead and it had nothing to do with Charles Manson or Ivan Milat". It may be a truism but it is supporting a completely false logic. Yes extinction is naturally occurring phenomenon but does that excuse us from knowingly contributing to it?

Also, introduced species are part of everyday human activity; by very definition. Therefore, as extension, it can be said that all extinctions caused by introduced species are, in fact, caused by human activity.

[wrenchman]

your coat of arms has been turned into vermin class animal

[Gwion]

your coat of arms has been turned into vermin class animal

That is a completely different kettle of fish caused by the human artificial expansion of what is effectively ideal habitat for those animals.

Just to balance the discussion, a lack of hunting pressure (with animals that evolved with a given level of pressure) can cause significant trickle on effects. An example is the brush-tail possum. There is a report as far back as the late 1800s of eucalypti die back in Victoria. When an interested party noted the impact over a [nominal]10 year period and enquired with the local aboriginals, the traditional inhabitants of the area attributed it to the population explosion of the brush-tail. Since their traditional hunting practices where replaced with store bought food and a move from living off the land. The possums had comprised a significant portion of the traditional winter food supply. As this hunting pressure was reduced there were consequently exponentially more possums feeding on the new eucalyptus growth each year, thereby stressing the trees and causing die back. This is isolated anecdotal evidence but illustrates well how the balance of populations within an eco-system can be easily and relatively quickly skewed by changes in human activity. Key word here being BALANCE, which is why careful and intelligent management is important.

[wrenchman]

i agree gwion careful and intelligent there is nothing intelligent about shooting any thing that can feed some one to rot.
i dont want to sound like i am judgeing any one if thats what the law is its just the way it is done when we kill like that here we pick them up and donate them to soup kitchens and food banks to feed the poor for most hunters here it is almost sacrilegious.

[Gwion]

I tend to agree. However there are other issues like hydatids etc. that the unaware may pick up. I don't know all the reasoning behind it. Some may be sound, some is likely to be as ridiculous as industry protection for the commercial game meat industry. If it is killed and cooked for personal consumption, i see no issue with it.

[gazza]

I see no issue.

[Die Judicii]

Extinction ?????????
The reverse problem is happening with the roos.
The only two ?natural predators of the roo have been removed by the white fellas.
1) Dingoes > hunted almost to extinction.
2) Indigenous food supply that is now nowhere near as staple as once was.

Thus a population explosion of roos.
Aided by stupid greenies, stupid no take laws, increased water, improved pastures and what I already mentioned,,,,, a lack of natural predators.

The biggest predator of roos now is "Trucks and Cars", but even they can't keep up with the population explosion of the roo.

The kangaroo = Multi million dollar industry. "Crash repair businesses."

[<<Genesis93>>]

Evolution.
Survival of the fittest.
Humans are the apex predator....and we are our biggest threat - that concerns me, that legions of hypnotised enviro warriors are devoting all their energies to changing and restricting human activities on account of a huge fraud (human induced climate change)....

When did the white rhino go extinct ? ?

[Gwion]

Sorry. A Correction. The Southern white rhino was brought back from near extinction, it is the Northern White Rhino that is now extinct.

Excerpt from : http://www.worldwildlife.org/species/rhino

........today very few rhinos survive outside national parks and reserves. A subspecies of the Javan rhino was declared extinct in Vietnam in 2011. A small population of the Javan rhino still clings for survival on the Indonesian island of Java........

In Africa, Southern white rhinos, once thought to be extinct, now thrive in protected sanctuaries and are classified as Near Threatened. But the Northern white rhino subspecies is believed to be extinct in the wild and only a few captive individuals remain in a sanctuary in Kenya........

[Gwion]

Humans are the apex predator....and we are our biggest threat - ........

So, your argument is that because we are part of nature and it is the nature of things to create their own extinction; through either depletion of critical resources or a failure to adapt to change; that we should just happily go along the same old path and wander aimlessly and and knowingly toward the precipice of our own destruction as a species?

Isn't the defining attribute that makes us the apex animal intelligence? As we are of and from nature and rely on resources not only for our survival but owe it for our very existence; shouldn't we use this supposed intelligence to manage and maintain not only natural resources but the natural environment for the very fact that it is there and we are part of it? Where is the intelligence in destroying the very thing from which we evolved?

Don't get me wrong. We could destroy our own long term survival and the world would reset and re-evolve to a new set of environmental paradigms. However, if you look at ethnological histories a civilisations and correlate it to our own current trajectory, we are in fact hastening our own demise in our hurry to repeat the human pattern.