bigpete wrote:So...what it basically boils down is that there is NO written legislation at all that actually contradicts the national code of conduct. Which is actually a code you can be prosecuted by if you're not doing the right thing by it and get caught. My understanding of it anyway.
Faedy wrote:^^^ - had to be Collie or Manjimup....
flutch wrote:Faedy wrote:^^^ - had to be Collie or Manjimup....
we in WA can thank the inbred hillbillies and drug f***ed morons of collie and allison and bunbury and surrounds for us not getting public lands shooting access here in WA. My old cheese was chairperson for a committee asked to evaluate and vote on findings and submissions from stakeholders and despite her voting in favour of offering hunting licenses and setting up a game management wing of the government for WA the majority in multiple committees and eventually government all turned it down thanks to the vandalism and ecological damage caused by both these in-breeders and the bros from across the tasman and their penchant for dogging on land not their own and spreading feral pigs to areas that were previously unaffected. as well as damaging, stealing and causing untold damage to public and private assets as well as further ecological damage and vandalism. so cheers to the meat heads from nz and thanks a bunch to the meth capital of WA for the morons and dipshits that we all now have to be penalised for.
duncan61 wrote:Between Harvey and Waroona.Another fun thing these locals did was to disconnect the brakes on an old car tow it to the top of the hill at Logues brook dam then pile in it and roll down the hill with no control and fly across the Southwest hwy and roll in to Cookernup.They had a death wish and for a few it came true before they were 20.2 thought it would be fun to play chicken with the goods trains,they lost
Bruiser64 wrote:bigpete wrote:So...what it basically boils down is that there is NO written legislation at all that actually contradicts the national code of conduct. Which is actually a code you can be prosecuted by if you're not doing the right thing by it and get caught. My understanding of it anyway.
Yes. The codes must be complied with. The only time a heart shot is permissible is to euthanise an injured roo (or wallaby where the jurisdiction permits shooting them). The codes are very explicit that if a safe head shot is doubtful, then it MUST NOT be taken.
bigpete wrote:Bruiser64 wrote:bigpete wrote:So...what it basically boils down is that there is NO written legislation at all that actually contradicts the national code of conduct. Which is actually a code you can be prosecuted by if you're not doing the right thing by it and get caught. My understanding of it anyway.
Yes. The codes must be complied with. The only time a heart shot is permissible is to euthanise an injured roo (or wallaby where the jurisdiction permits shooting them). The codes are very explicit that if a safe head shot is doubtful, then it MUST NOT be taken.
At least someone here knows how to read as well. Are you from wa?
Bruiser64 wrote:bigpete wrote:Bruiser64 wrote:bigpete wrote:So...what it basically boils down is that there is NO written legislation at all that actually contradicts the national code of conduct. Which is actually a code you can be prosecuted by if you're not doing the right thing by it and get caught. My understanding of it anyway.
Yes. The codes must be complied with. The only time a heart shot is permissible is to euthanise an injured roo (or wallaby where the jurisdiction permits shooting them). The codes are very explicit that if a safe head shot is doubtful, then it MUST NOT be taken.
At least someone here knows how to read as well. Are you from wa?
I certainly am. I live on the South Coast. The laws about macropod shooting vary across the different jurisdictions. In WA you only need tags if you are shooting Roos commercially. Farmers or their agent can cull Roos in the shires that have a declared open season. No need to apply for tags to do that. DPAW do regular aerial surveys and the roo numbers here in WA have significantly increased in recent years.
bigpete wrote:So...from your perspective...old mate was breaking the code by chest shooting roos,and there's nothing at all to say that the code of practice can be ignored ?
bigpete wrote:I thought that would be the case. Otherwise why in hell would there be a NATIONAL code of practice?
bigpete wrote:And yet people will argue till they're blue in the face that the code of practice doesn't apply to THEM....
Blr243 wrote:Sometimes , actually a lot of the time people think differently, and are unable to process and follow the norm , Sometimes they wake up and listen if they get told off , other times they need a fine to pull them into line .... on the net , in relation to hunting from organisations I have seen written suggestions , recommendations and guidelines eg minimum suitable caliber, Other times NATIONAL CODE OF PRACTICE FOR COMMMERCIAL SHOOTING OF KANGAROOS .....it’s clearly the law and prosecution is a real possibility.....and if prosecution does not occur posting chest shot Roos online is still irresponsible and taints the reputation of the shooting community......we need positive media not otherwise
Bruiser64 wrote:
Hi Pete. Sorry for the delay in responding. I have done some further research so everyone on this forum can be in no doubt that abiding by the codes of practise are mandated by law in WA. It is not optional. As I stated in an earlier post, the Codes stipulate a chest shot must only be used to euthanise an already injured animal.
The Biodiversity and Conservation Act (see link below):
https://www.legislation.wa.gov.au/legis ... penElement
And the Biodiversity and Conservation Regulations (see link below) are what you need to look at.
https://www.legislation.wa.gov.au/legis ... penElement
These are where we find our legal responsibilities in respect of shooting kangaroos in WA. The Act and Regulations now refer to “managed fauna”. The section that is relevant here is Section 104 of the Regulations. If you follow the link above and read the regulation it is absolutely crystal clear you must abide by the codes of practise. The bloke you spoke to is just plain wrong. He needs to make himself aware of the rules and make sure he follows them. If he doesn’t he is risking a fine of $10,000. Posting evidence online that you are clearly breaking the law certainly makes the job of the police and prosecution much simpler. Probably not the smartest thing a person can do though.
Please note I am not a lawyer and I am not giving legal advice. If someone wants legal advice they should seek the services of a licensed legal practitioner.
duncan61 wrote:I went to a wedding in collie and 2 girls turned up at the photo shoot with high vis mine clothing and an esky full of beer between them
Faedy wrote:I had the fine task of being stationed there as a Forest Officer back in the early 90's - had a couple of locals place a few .22 rounds into trees next to me as i stumbled across their pot plot... Was a tense time and had local coppers involved. It was obvious that they were trying to scare me, but man I legged it outta their fast.. straight past their 4x4 with no plates on it .....
It was feral as back then and coal was making big $$$$
Rules mean nothing to them at all