scientists are academically lobotomised idiots

[flutch]

f***

it never ceases to amaze me in this short news clips how dense and f***ing unadulterated the complete weapons grade idiocy is with these city living, university brainwashed morons, scientists my ass

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TcYHpGfXkI

In that clip the "scientists" claim that because foxes are territorial they should just be left alone because if you kill one another just takes its place...

number 1 - if they are so territorial why do I always find about 10+ in a paddock when lambing is taking place??

number 2 - so what if another takes its place? shoot that one too

number 3 - if one takes the place of another, it had to come from somewhere, and that area now has less foxes, its pretty simple, they don't just respawn like in unreal tournament or some s**t, f*** me.

number 4 - they keep spruiking baiting as the only solution (whats the bet these same assholes are anti gunners) only problem there numb nuts, if baiting worked, we wouldn't have any old foxes around, which we have plenty of, in fact our farm is lousy with baits and we never find them eaten/taken unless it was back when we still had strychnine, baiting does jack s**t as far as I am concerned, what does work is making our farm a no go zone by regularly shooting the bastards.

number 5 - they outright call a farmers empirical evidence "anecdotal" so f*** them anyway.

rant over.

[TassieTiger]

Cool. That means we should be allowed to introduce them in to Tassie with very limited impact.

[flutch]

lol

[straightshooter]

Not so much "lobotomised scientists" but agenda driven reporters using selected factoids to feed to a possibly sympathetic but totally ignorant audience.
You can tell the video clip is not recent - no mention of "climate change", not once that I noticed.
This year ABC mentions of "climate change" seem to have been turned up to 11, like as if it's the last roll of the dice to convince their lobotomised audience to stay on track for the "save the planet" agenda.

[Bill]

Flitch foxes are territorial and when the main btich is taken out she will be replaced by another breeder.

Successful baiting negates the need to shoot most of the year except around lambing, by successful that mean you and all your neighbours baiting.

When I grew up baiting was well coordinated and we were lucky that all surrounding neighbours were keen baiters, unfortunately a few cattle guys who moved in didn't see the need and the only place you'd see a fox was when they'd travel thru the cattle property to get to your place.

Shooting and baiting is still the best way to control em

[Stix]

Flitch foxes are territorial and when the main btich is taken out she will be replaced by another breeder.

Successful baiting negates the need to shoot most of the year except around lambing, by successful that mean you and all your neighbours baiting.

When I grew up baiting was well coordinated and we were lucky that all surrounding neighbours were keen baiters, unfortunately a few cattle guys who moved in didn't see the need and the only place you'd see a fox was when they'd travel thru the cattle property to get to your place.

Shooting and baiting is still the best way to control em

Yep...spot on there Bill...

And if you like shooting them...dont tell the farmer how many you got, & most certainly dont hang your kill on the fence as a bragging testerone public trophy house to advertise how good a foxer you are...

I did that in an area where there were "a few foxes getting around" & the area was pretty much "under controll" with only a bit of baiting going on...

Well...i hung them all on edge of a dirt road thoroughfare all locals used...

After starting my "trophy fence hanging" in Jan & visiting once a month, By March the first dozen of the "few" foxes had decomposed & many had fallen down...
But that was ok because of another dozen of "the few foxes getting around" got the display back up to a respectable looking visual ...

Well by the time they were bedding down for the winter, id thinned them right down to only the couple of elusive smart ones & the odd lucky one...

Well guess what...that prompted every farmer in the area to think--if he's shooting that many, there must be millions out there...lol...
And so come the next lamb-popping April, ALL surrounding farmers were involved in a dedicated baiting regime leading up to lambing & i had nothing to shoot...

Good outcome...but a bad one too...

Baiting does work for sure, but im not a fan of how it kills...

[Bill]

If you want good lambing rates then baiting is a must

[flutch]

Flitch foxes are territorial and when the main btich is taken out she will be replaced by another breeder.

Successful baiting negates the need to shoot most of the year except around lambing, by successful that mean you and all your neighbours baiting.

When I grew up baiting was well coordinated and we were lucky that all surrounding neighbours were keen baiters, unfortunately a few cattle guys who moved in didn't see the need and the only place you'd see a fox was when they'd travel thru the cattle property to get to your place.

Shooting and baiting is still the best way to control em

mate I know whole districts where baiting takes place, doesn't/hasn't affected the population of foxes and numbers shot ever at all, lambing percentages continue to fall due to foxes. and as I said, we bait more than regularly, they are NEVER eaten, not even ONE 1080 bait has been eaten, yet we shoot foxes almost weekly. When we used to bait with strychnine that was a totally different story.

as for the territorial bs, maybe you guys have bitchy foxes, I can walk down the creeks near home during breeding and find occupied dens regularly within meters of each other. no territorial pissings taking place there (slipped in a nirvana titbit there), and as I said before, the other one that does move in afterwards (not in any way negating that) has to come from somewhere and that area now has one, or as many as have moved, less to worry about, they dont magically respawn or something.

[Angel]

Not a hunter, but i would think that a bullet is a much more efficent/cheaper/quicker/less gruesome on the animal than 1080. Having said that using both is win/win.

[flutch]

personally yeah, agree, 1080 is terrible, but from what I can see all the foxes who were instinctually/prone to take baits must have long since been weeded out... leaving only breeders that dont touch them, that and why would they when there is food all over the place thats fresh and clean and able to be hunted

[StraightWhiteMale]

Scientists work for whoever pays them and project their “evidence” to for their bosses narrative.

[Stix]

If you want good lambing rates then baiting is a must

Bill...if i am left alone as the sole fox ridder'er...i will do at least as good a job as bait...

If you know the animal & dont terrorise them as far too many do, a shooter can be very effective & far more humane that any baiting program...

The area i talk about above now has neighbouring landowners doing some shooting--i see the diff in the behaviour of the foxes...they just teach them...

I had another guy in a car with me a while back--im bringing foxes in & watching their behaviour to see which order to pop them all off...
He in all his "shooter wisdom" decided the situation would be better served for him to lob a random shot at the fox the most infront of him...
He missed & all 4 did a runner...

[Stix]

And thats not to argue with you Bill...

There are obvious logistical barriers to a good shooter being the sole feral controller...
So over-all, i largely agree with you...

It is a shame the fox furs are worth squat...

[RoginaJack]

Interesting video.

Several properties I've worked on baiting is just not possible, also some landowners are dead set against it.
Also, no mention of trapping.
I note that the usual objectors speak out against the bounty but put up no suggestions/solutions and I don't follow the Invasive Species Council spokesperson remark about training up staff. No grant money there, eh?
None of the experts mentioned that for every fox shot, how many wildlife was spared.

[Stix]

Well i only just watched that clip...and watched it again as i first missed the claims from scientists in regards to a bounty only perpetuates the cycle of a new fox moving into the territory of a fox after the initial territory holding fox has been eradicated.

Flutch...
I rekon youve been sucked into the gutter style of reporting that is ever so popular these days...the sort that makes claims with no backing & that creates controversy, division & distrust amongst the community from nothing...

Firstly...the clip is from 2011...

Secondly, the reporter is making the claims ive stated above ...or to quote the reporter precisely.....
"foxes are territorial animals meaning that when one is killed its quickly replaced by another...scientists say that a bounty system merely perpetuates this cycle, and whats needed is a coordinated approach, which includes baiting..."...

Then, he goes on to say that the invasive species expert claims that "the bounty is a politacally motivated, easy answer..."...
The clip then clearly shows him saying and i quote..."well its partly that.."

This is nothing more than utter rubbish gutless bullsh!t journalism that creates division by suggesting people are saying things that they are NOT actually saying...

Sorry Flutch Ol'mate--but youve been reeled in by low level divisive trouble making journalist, who couldnt care who's reputation he destroys in getting some "politically motivated & self righteous" career advancement...

Watch it again...you'll see that just before it cuts to the invasive species expert, the reporter has infact asked him the leading question, that is more than likely..."do you think this bounty is just a politacally motivated vote getter..."...to which as i said above, he answers "well its part that"---and goes on to sprook how its a simple way, as compared to training people to actually go out & get hands on & work with the community...

So infact, no one has stated what the report suggests, & everyone is clearly in favour of it, with the then Agriculture minister clearly stating it is not a bounty in its own right...rather its a bounty as part of an over-all fox controll program, which has to be good for farmers...

So the reporter claims scientists are at odds with this bounty, and a coordinated approach is whats needed...as well as says "But not everybody is convinced"...
Not convinced of what exactly...?????

And...this clearly IS a coordinated approach...so what the fuk is this idiots problem & where is the controversy...??
What he claims scientists are up in arms about is actually happening & ALL stakeholders are happy...along with it being an clearly effective program...

So...

Flutch, there are no "scientists involved in this....just a low level fukwit with his editors trying to create division on what i personally think is a great, productive & very cost efficient program to combat one of our top two invasive & environmentally destructive species...
This reporter is literally stating claims of people that both are non-viable, & dont exist...not to mention make no sense...

So i think you owe these imaginary scientists that arent in this report, an apology...



As for trapping...trapping foxes is time consuming & i believe inefficient when compared to other means of pest destruction, such as baiting & ground shooting...
It may be ok on a individual territory basis where high populations exist, or used to get the evasive ones--but then the return on the investment is severly dwindled...but even then having a couple of good doggers &/or shooters go through will be more efficient.

[flutch]

well it gave me the s**ts after a 5 hour drive so yeah, there are other clips from channel 10 and 7 showing this same bs I mentioned being spruiked by the exact same "scientist", so no, no apology.

I know its old, but I just wanted to unwind watching some clips and that crap came on...

[Wapiti]

Just want to correct the myth that poison doesnt work controlling foxes.

Here, up to 5years ago, we used to have a huge issue, every farm had lambs hammered, chooks at the house slaughtered, you could go out any night with a whistle and shoot them in the yard. A torch around the house yard showed them up as very bold and comfortable around farm buildings.
Spotlighting started in the house yard. No matter how many I shot, or hunters who came out took them out with whistles or spotlights, it never dented them and was quite worrying.

But the council asked us all on board with a baiting program that included wild dogs also a few years ago. Us I mean, is a large area of graziers all participating together on the same days, accepting baits in meat from the council pest guys. The result of this, which is done every few months and hasn't ceased for years, is that we never ever see foxes anymore. If someone sees one, it's a big surprise.
Odd ones do appear, but don't last long. It hasn't been as successful on the wild dogs, which are nothing like the easy to shoot types east of the Great Divide range we see stories about in hunting magazines.

Poison does work very well, in coordinated areas where all are on board. It takes them out so as you mightn't see one in a year in sheep country. It can work, where shooting never has made a dent in them, that we ever saw.
Shooting is useful, but will not get the same results if done this way.

[Bruiser64]

Whilst I do believe in evidence based decision making, I am no fan of cherry picking academics seeking to promote their ideology. My experience with foxes is not extensive but as recently as Sunday evening witnessed foxes clearly not disturbed by the close proximity of each other. I was out doing some pest control and spotted in excess of thirty foxes on this property. In some of the paddocks we saw up to five foxes in there at the same time. I have never seen so many foxes ever in the same evening.

My understanding is for baiting to be successful it is only part of a fox control strategy. It also requires all the farmers in an area to participate. One of the farmers I know actively goes out and shoots foxes to seek to control their numbers. Particularly at lambing time. So I am not convinced shooting is ineffective. In fact I have secured a new property to shoot on where the landholder expressed considerable frustration at his difficulty getting people to come out and do pest control by shooting. He is a fair way out of town and there are a lot of properties and not that many shooters.

[flutch]

Just want to correct the myth that poison doesnt work controlling foxes.

Here, up to 5years ago, we used to have a huge issue, every farm had lambs hammered, chooks at the house slaughtered, you could go out any night with a whistle and shoot them in the yard. A torch around the house yard showed them up as very bold and comfortable around farm buildings.
Spotlighting started in the house yard. No matter how many I shot, or hunters who came out took them out with whistles or spotlights, it never dented them and was quite worrying.

But the council asked us all on board with a baiting program that included wild dogs also a few years ago. Us I mean, is a large area of graziers all participating together on the same days, accepting baits in meat from the council pest guys. The result of this, which is done every few months and hasn't ceased for years, is that we never ever see foxes anymore. If someone sees one, it's a big surprise.
Odd ones do appear, but don't last long. It hasn't been as successful on the wild dogs, which are nothing like the easy to shoot types east of the Great Divide range we see stories about in hunting magazines.

Poison does work very well, in coordinated areas where all are on board. It takes them out so as you mightn't see one in a year in sheep country. It can work, where shooting never has made a dent in them, that we ever saw.
Shooting is useful, but will not get the same results if done this way.

Well coming from another Grazier, sounds a lot like horses for courses to me, baiting has always played a role in control in our practices as well as that of our neighbours also, but to little effect, perhaps you have less reserve and natural pathways/waterways than we do, perhaps your foxes are less likely to ignore a bait in lieu of fresher or live food sources, perhaps you've been very lucky for it to be so efficient. here where I am hasn't been remotely that lucky, two years ago an area heavily involved in both baiting and trapping (entire shire) by the DER still saw a return of 750+ foxes and 70+ pigs and a couple dozen cats and dogs after a one night shooting event. This area had been targeted for aerial baiting of government controlled lands as well as landowners participating in thorough baiting at the expense and supervision of DER and even then the population of foxes was insurmountable for a small shire. the neighbouring shire that wasn't participating in the baiting and has 3 times the land area had only 400 foxes shot that same night, no pigs and a few cats at best.

so whilst its great that your stock were safe from them due to baiting, saying it definitely works and doesn't fail is nothing more than a subjective thing. I know your comment was designed to try and make people look like naysayers or fools given the opening line, but unfortunately for you I can tell you first hand that its not always a viable or effective means of control.

Another interesting fact about baiting is its responsible for a massive amount of damage to native carnivores, the Quoll in particular, and also native birds and other things that are affected by it. so much so the Western Quoll is now trapped and re-released where baiting has killed off the Eastern Quoll, so its far from a perfect solution.

but again I'm glad it has controlled foxes in your area, for now.

[flutch]

Whilst I do believe in evidence based decision making, I am no fan of cherry picking academics seeking to promote their ideology. My experience with foxes is not extensive but as recently as Sunday evening witnessed foxes clearly not disturbed by the close proximity of each other. I was out doing some pest control and spotted in excess of thirty foxes on this property. In some of the paddocks we saw up to five foxes in there at the same time. I have never seen so many foxes ever in the same evening.

My understanding is for baiting to be successful it is only part of a fox control strategy. It also requires all the farmers in an area to participate. One of the farmers I know actively goes out and shoots foxes to seek to control their numbers. Particularly at lambing time. So I am not convinced shooting is ineffective. In fact I have secured a new property to shoot on where the landholder expressed considerable frustration at his difficulty getting people to come out and do pest control by shooting. He is a fair way out of town and there are a lot of properties and not that many shooters.

I'll come with ya and snag the furry bastards haha, pm me lol

[Sergeant Hartman]

just agree that excessive alcohol consumption temporarly lobotomized your brain. And move on.

Its ok i have done the same thing on this forum, except not having drunk alcohol, i don't even have an excuse. Don't have to keep arguing.


Now what are the chances fluffy will argue with me

[RoginaJack]

"Trapping is time consuming...". ALL pest management programs are "time consuming". It's just another tool that's available.

[Wapiti]

Gee Flutch, why the immediate insinuation that my opening line was designed to make anyone else a naysayer or a fool? That's ridiculous. Does this social media world always react to everything someone else with a different opinion or experience by dragging someone down to get another step up the ladder? Is it because you got a different result?
I keep hearing, and reading, that poison is bad for lots of reasons and ineffective, hence my first line, and I never said I even think it's the righteous way to go. Merely saying that it works very well when done in a concentrated, coordinated way. Personally, I am against poison and have an open mind about the unintended species issues.
I was sceptical at first, but participate in the program because it's pointless to have other graziers sporadically, occasionally baiting, it needs to be done in a coordinated way with everyone on board,
I am a part of the community and hence are part of the solution.
You say my result is a subjective thing, yes true, in our case, forget about spotlighting for foxes here during this program, because they have mysteriously disappeared, after the baiting program.
I have a 7km back boundary with a NP, that breeds not only fuel for fires, but every feral animal that's found down our way. So I have plenty of natural pathway and an undisturbed breeding ground for foxes. We don't bait anywhere near there by the way. I do not have stock that generally gets pressure from foxes, my deer breeding paddocks are completely fox proof, and our calves never got hassles from them even when they were everywhere because all our neighbours have sheep they have an easier time chewing on.

Funny thing, 5 years ago and earlier, it was very common to see many dead foxes on the roads here, having been struck by vehicles whilst they eat the roadkill that is everywhere. I never saw quolls, although they were supposed to be about. the story was, they were terribly endangered by the fox population and I'd not seen one for 10 years.
Now the foxes are never seen on roadkill. What has happened now is that this year on the dirt road from our front gate up to the top of the hill, three quolls have been killed on roadkill. They are exploding around here, the farmyard chickens of neighbours are being hammered by them now. Not foxes. Local people talk about shooting quolls now, which is ironic.
But the fox baits should've killed them all too, apparently, if that's what you are insinuating. I'm told that the LD rate of the 1080 in the baits is dosed for the target species, not the natives, for which it is not fatal. That comes from the pest inspectors, and isn't intended to push a certain political narrative. I'm not interested in getting my info from google.

My post was a contribution to the site, not an attack on you or anyone else.

[flutch]

well google itself doesnt have "infomation" aside from your metadata and person information which it onsells obviously. using a search engine is not a bad way to do anything, done correctly you can access all that mankind knows.

yes baits are dosed according to species, but what if a non target species eats not one but two? what if the non target species body mass is less than the target species? aerial baiting is all but ceased here as Quoll numbers were seen to be falling substantially. as for a resurgence in them in your area, thats a good thing, shows that the competition for not only food but territory is down for them in that area. congrats.

again, baiting is merely a part of a solution, not close to the whole solution and as mentioned before, if baiting worked as efficiently as its supporters claim there would be no old foxes on grounds where baiting is taking place, and that simply isn't the case.

[Stix]

"Trapping is time consuming...". ALL pest management programs are "time consuming". It's just another tool that's available.

Its like you've quoted in the same spirit as the initial report that sparked this thread RJ...
Used a select few words from a broader statement to insinuate a finite claim & give a false impression of what was actually said....

I thought the initial quote was easy enough to understand, & im sure the person who made the initial statement, meant it in the context he or she had originally stated--which was, out of the most common forms of fox control such as baiting trapping and ground shooting, trapping is the least efficient...
But then maybe your experience is different and your traps move faster & more direct than your bullets & have a better hit rate than your bait...

This is a cracker of a thread hey ...you'd think a few of us boys were wearing high heels & others in thongs the way some of us are acting as if our toes are being trodden on...

Rastafari Cool Peace Sign - 590.jpg (37.2 KiB) Viewed 4779 times

[flutch]

Im triggered by rastas