Ah, I think you should maybe edit your clip more carefully. Don't say "In the searing heat they were deprived adequate access to shade and water" then show kangaroos with trees in the background, standing in tall green grass and then standing by a waterway.Step outside of Canberra and see how many roo's there are. See what they do to farming land. See how they can eat paddocks bare while cattle starve.
Get rid of the problem already. cull the numbers down to a safe number again.
and relocate to where? there Everywhere ya dills. any where is a kangaroo environment they have already taken up residence by the thousands. Cull em down. desex em. DO SOMETHIN!!
HAHAHA stupid greenies. The government spends thousands on this bullshit. Me and my mates could clean that number up in a night! and only cost $50! Bob brown you are a fuck wit.
well i guess it beats hitting them in your car and watching it suffocate in its own blood from a punctured lung. then walk home and rebuild "hopefully" my car.... Hmmmmm culling may be needed. but not this way
what they should have done is rolled the shooters in that way decent men are making money it is quick and painless the money goes into tax which goes into the govvernment which can go to help other animals(not that i really care) and it was only 400 lol have a cry theres still 69,999,600 LEFT OF THEM IN AUSTRALIA SHIT DONT FRET THERE NOT GOING EXINCT
Population management, including culling, is the most environmentally protective option in SOME cases. No point demonstrating against culling on the (sometimes) basis of blind, non-critical, principle.
How long have you been stuck in the London tower? Roos are a pest. The last time the greens had their way in having a pest species protected (foxes) they ended up destroying native fauna. It is the only sensible and economical option.
i disagree it would be better logic to spend 1k eradicating roos to BALANCE the ecosystem than 500k to move them. the only bright bunnies i've seen have been through the scope of my rifle with a spotlight posted on them.
Funny how the arguments of 'pests' (they are natives of 16 million years - they belong here) come into play, whenever humanoids or developers want to build, concrete or kill off another species! Humans are the 'pests'. There are too many, but do you see humans being 'culled' to protect other species????????????????????????????????????
hmmm so your volunteering to be culled? don't we do enough already of our own... WW1 and 2 not mention countless others wars/genocides. So why are animals more important than us? For me human life should respected on a competely different level to animal life... why? well just that, we are uniquely different and more valuable!
Look at these wankers thinking that a study entitles them to believe that culling roos is a good thing. Studies are never perfectly accurate, and at best 50/50 over a given amount of time. You aussies are sick bastards killing roos. The Brits should have culled your ancestors instead of sending them to a penal colony. How much did it cost them to ship you brutes in today dollars? Move the damn roos instead of shooting them, you savages.
These roos were jeopardising the existence of other species (not just individuals, the entire species). We could have moved them, but that would have moved the problem and cost 3.5mill to do it. Just because an animal is native, does not mean it can't become a pest. As the race which has destroyed so much of the world we are responsible for limiting our future impact, and if that means culling, then so be it. Before you suggest culling ourselves, please stay in reality
How much would it have cost the Brits to move you guys to Australia, in today's dollars? They could have just culled you, and you your ancestors were much worse than just pests. Yes, this race has destroyed much of the world, and you're all for keeping the destruction on a roll. Bet you couldn't squeeze the trigger yourself, right?
Heard of ecology?? There is a limited carrying capacity on any given part of land, when this is met, competition within a population and between species occurs, killing the weak. In this case, roos became over populated and were decimating the grassland, threatening the existence of other species which depend on it (inc. the grassland itself). Culling was to stop more damage and to protect the other species. Good theory, once you work out how to go back in time, you can suggest that to George.
You know how you go back in time? You LEARN your history, and use this learning to make intelligent decisions in the future.
You say in your little ecology lesson that the weak get killed....ureeeekkkka, you got it!!! Well those other species that depend on the grasslands better learn to survive better and get their greedy faces into that coveted native grassland, I kid you not! You're only killing the roos because they're less useful to humans....yes, you got it now! Urrreeeeekaaaaaaa
We are learning from our history, and in this case it means culling roos. The concept of sustainable management is maintaining an environment for all species. These at risk species are there because we change the environment, and the roos are making a bad situation worse. A fact of life is that for one thing to live, something else must die, in this case the existence of a species is viewed above some individuals. Roos are also culled because they are useful to people for meat and leather.
Funny how the arguments of 'pests' (they are natives of 16 million years - they belong here) come into play, whenever humanoids or developers want to build, concrete or kill off another species! Humans are the 'pests'. There are too many, but do you see humans being 'culled' to protect other species????????????????????????????????????
Of course reducing the human population would be the optimal solution to most environmental problems; however, it is unrealistic, as it turning to a pure plant based diet. The intensive agriculture needed to support the population of our size on plant based products would be worse than grazing. I agree, we should eat less meat and avoid feedlots. Ideally, we could eat more roos, and less cattle/sheep.
While some aim for utopia, others prefer to be more realistic. Natives need management too.
well they are a pest, look up the definition... they have exceeded their natural bounds, and have increased to a population where the damage to the ecosystem may be irreversible,
that is very cruel but people don't understand it will come back to them naturally, plus...bugs get killed everyday casually and people don't say anything, the average human is not conscious which makes them suffer anyway
I don't expect you to condemn other beliefs, just support your own. Where are the reports saying that they are not likely to starve over winter and damage the ecosystem? Where are the reports on where they would be relocated to and the studies that show the new land can support another 400 roos? Why are they not public? Where is the justification for your "argument"?
It would have been perfect if not for the fact that any plans for a proposed 'trial' relocation were scrapped pretty much a day before they went ahead with the cull. cleverly stifling any chance for alternative solutions.
Also I believe the Department of Defence with the help of Wildcare actually carried out a study supporting relocation, which was discarded by the government...and completely ignored by the media...
Of course, they do not help matters by acting the way they do. In their desperation to be heard, logical and reasoned arguments seem to be ignored in favour of big, over the top, almost theatrical gestures.
In fact, when any opposition at all, no matter how reasoned can be casually dismissed by labling it the 'high moral ground', then something is wrong with the way WE function.
JJRCS, you don't pose any arguments, "Possibly bullshit" does not committee you to particular stance, so there is nothing to casually dismiss. However, you do ask good questions, I believe you downfall is that to seem to dismiss any information from the pro-cull side implying that anybody who supports this doesn't know fact from fiction, thus any information presented is untruthful or heavily biased. What you deem as "almost theatrical gestures", I see as responses to your baited questions.
'Casually dismiss' was directed at FF1983's comment about taking the high moral ground. The 'almost threatrical gestures' comment was directed at those AGAINST the cull. So rethink your statement about my hesitance to condemn those who share my core opinion.
Also it must be said that I have no special attachment to either party. I began this simply as a favor to an aquaintance.
However, after making it a priority to listen to all arguments, what angers me most by this whole debacle is what something like this brings out in our society.
It seems to encourage either a kneejerk apathy, or an almost vehement 'hatred' of the minority which is almost always made out to be 'crazy'.
Oh and as for the cows grazing on farming land. The issue is, apparently, the impact of grazing on the environment. So if its inside a fence, does that mean it isn't part of the same damn environment?
This case is bigger than just a few kangaroos. This is about something much greater. The need to question what you hear before you passively swallow facts and take the side of least resistance. Thats how wars get started...
Haven't they been culling roos there for the past 30 years?
If or when they develop the land what would happen to the roos then, Roadkill?
Where do you guys draw the line, insects? Are they OK to kill?
If you had intestinal worms, would you poison those poor defenseless worms?
They may have feelings too!
Fact is, the aboriginies had been killing roos for thousands of years and when the Europeans turned up and started their clearing & farming, the roo population exploded.
Aboriginals only hunted what they needed; they were not 22 million in number wanting 'more, more, more' like modern folk; and when did 'clearing and felling' become more honourable than living simply? Defending archaic European farming habits is not quality reason enough 2 slaughter native animals (16 million years they've lived here, to white fella's 200 years) by way of lethal injection! There is NO comparison btween aboriginal habits and European habits! Evolve to a plant based diet.
There is no argument there are too many roos. Even the Animal Libs say there are. To cull or relocated is the question. Maybe you should question what you hear before you passively swallow facts and argue moral high ground. This is about understanding that we can sustainably utilise roos to reduce our dependence on ruminant animals. All farming land in the A.C.T is lease hold (some 3 months at a time), if owners overgraze they risk losing their farm. So yes, a fence does make a difference.
The first being that the Kangaroos are destroying the natural environment, and the second is that they are themselves starving. I argue that both those assertions are possibly bullshit (the second one I am sure of), to justify the 'real' motivations which are kept from public view.
The RSPCA is represented by one man and one opinion. Unfortunatly due to limited nature of the media we either don't hear about those, or they are represented as 'crazy'.
Where's the evidence of these animals starving? Walk around the area. There is more grass and water than in most parts of Australia.
Oh wait, is it because the very people that want them gone tell you so?
Is it at all possible that the 'powers that be' are wanting to develop on this land? When, and if they do, I have a sneaking suspicion that any issue about the Golden Sun Moth will disappear...
The only reason this tiny pocket or roos are such an issue is because of the media coverage and the involvement of the Gov. Why are the animal lib groups so up in arms about this, it makes no sense. Focus on the endangered animals and animals that actually require real attention. What are we going to do next, use tax payers money to erect fencing along all Aust roadways to prevent road kill!?
Just a few comments. I am from Canberra, I have lived in the Belconnen area all my life. I support animals and I support plants. The Kangaroos are being harvested for many reasons but the main one is that the Kangaroos are over grazing and destroying the endangered native grasslands.
A few points about your Video. The harvest started in May, not March. There was no searing heat, it's winter. Where are you facts for and against relocation? The cows are grazing on farm land, not native grass.
Then put your money where your mouth is, $3.5 million can be put to better use than moving kangaroos from one area to another. The $600 from the 10 people who have donated to the "cause" will not cut it I am afraid, and if 6,000 people signed the petition then over 20 million didn't. Maybe people believe it is worth saving the threatened species at danger because of the kangaroos. This cull will have no impact on the viability of kangaroo populations.
Cows are destroying the planet. Kangaroos are beloved native mammals that belong in Australial. They are being treated as 'pests' and worth nothing more than easy money for boot leather or feeding dogs. This is an utterly shameful attitude. Humans show themselves to only love... themselves! Have compassion, leave these animals to live in peace.
Animals have the right to exist - they are creations like us, and we are meant to look after all Life. Yes, we MUST evolve past killing living creatures - we are eating our way thru all animal kingdoms. As I'm a human and despite that I abhore human cruelty, I must also seek the 'good' in humans.. so, I celebrate the following humanoids: David Attenborough, David Suzuki, Saverne Suzuki, Steve Irwin (RIP), and all Conservationists past & present!
Ah, I think you should maybe edit your clip more carefully. Don't say "In the searing heat they were deprived adequate access to shade and water" then show kangaroos with trees in the background, standing in tall green grass and then standing by a waterway.Step outside of Canberra and see how many roo's there are. See what they do to farming land. See how they can eat paddocks bare while cattle starve.
Jro1805 2 weeks ago
Get rid of the problem already. cull the numbers down to a safe number again.
and relocate to where? there Everywhere ya dills. any where is a kangaroo environment they have already taken up residence by the thousands. Cull em down. desex em. DO SOMETHIN!!
bigboy3620 9 months ago
yea ur right don't cull them...........like that let us roo shooters go in there and have some fun
3006winch 1 year ago
HAHAHA stupid greenies. The government spends thousands on this bullshit. Me and my mates could clean that number up in a night! and only cost $50! Bob brown you are a fuck wit.
sexyseanful 2 years ago
Australian is hated in the world.
They are unnecessary !!
die
pakukimd 2 years ago
well i guess it beats hitting them in your car and watching it suffocate in its own blood from a punctured lung. then walk home and rebuild "hopefully" my car.... Hmmmmm culling may be needed. but not this way
mrjas35 2 years ago
save the kangaroos for later. round up all the tree hugging hippies and shoot them 1st.
isiah006 3 years ago
what they should have done is rolled the shooters in that way decent men are making money it is quick and painless the money goes into tax which goes into the govvernment which can go to help other animals(not that i really care) and it was only 400 lol have a cry theres still 69,999,600 LEFT OF THEM IN AUSTRALIA SHIT DONT FRET THERE NOT GOING EXINCT
stgeorgedragons08 3 years ago
Population management, including culling, is the most environmentally protective option in SOME cases. No point demonstrating against culling on the (sometimes) basis of blind, non-critical, principle.
Lukelongbow 3 years ago
KILL ALL THOSE FUCKING ROOS!!!
gorymedic 3 years ago
Kangaroos taste good i hope they ate them.
14skippy88 3 years ago
Kangaroo is the symbol of Quantas
Kangaroo is the Symbol of Australian T-Shirt
Kangaroo is loved by everyone
Kangaroo is National Symbol of Australia
Kangaroo only exists in Australia
orange2578 3 years ago
orange2578 you are incorrect Kangaroos also exist in Paupua New Guinee, not everyone loves them and the symbol on my Aussie shirt is tits and beer.
HARTLEYHUNTER 3 years ago
Australia can export Kangaroo!
orange2578 3 years ago 2
How long have you been stuck in the London tower? Roos are a pest. The last time the greens had their way in having a pest species protected (foxes) they ended up destroying native fauna. It is the only sensible and economical option.
brookieagles86 3 years ago
So to save native fauna, you cull other native fauna....you're not a very bright bunny if you think there is logic in that.
juzu4me 3 years ago
i disagree it would be better logic to spend 1k eradicating roos to BALANCE the ecosystem than 500k to move them. the only bright bunnies i've seen have been through the scope of my rifle with a spotlight posted on them.
brookieagles86 3 years ago
Funny how the arguments of 'pests' (they are natives of 16 million years - they belong here) come into play, whenever humanoids or developers want to build, concrete or kill off another species! Humans are the 'pests'. There are too many, but do you see humans being 'culled' to protect other species????????????????????????????????????
jayalewis 3 years ago
hmmm so your volunteering to be culled? don't we do enough already of our own... WW1 and 2 not mention countless others wars/genocides. So why are animals more important than us? For me human life should respected on a competely different level to animal life... why? well just that, we are uniquely different and more valuable!
brookieagles86 3 years ago
Look at these wankers thinking that a study entitles them to believe that culling roos is a good thing. Studies are never perfectly accurate, and at best 50/50 over a given amount of time. You aussies are sick bastards killing roos. The Brits should have culled your ancestors instead of sending them to a penal colony. How much did it cost them to ship you brutes in today dollars? Move the damn roos instead of shooting them, you savages.
juzu4me 3 years ago
These roos were jeopardising the existence of other species (not just individuals, the entire species). We could have moved them, but that would have moved the problem and cost 3.5mill to do it. Just because an animal is native, does not mean it can't become a pest. As the race which has destroyed so much of the world we are responsible for limiting our future impact, and if that means culling, then so be it. Before you suggest culling ourselves, please stay in reality
FF19833891 3 years ago
How much would it have cost the Brits to move you guys to Australia, in today's dollars? They could have just culled you, and you your ancestors were much worse than just pests. Yes, this race has destroyed much of the world, and you're all for keeping the destruction on a roll. Bet you couldn't squeeze the trigger yourself, right?
juzu4me 3 years ago
Heard of ecology?? There is a limited carrying capacity on any given part of land, when this is met, competition within a population and between species occurs, killing the weak. In this case, roos became over populated and were decimating the grassland, threatening the existence of other species which depend on it (inc. the grassland itself). Culling was to stop more damage and to protect the other species. Good theory, once you work out how to go back in time, you can suggest that to George.
FF19833891 3 years ago
You know how you go back in time? You LEARN your history, and use this learning to make intelligent decisions in the future.
You say in your little ecology lesson that the weak get killed....ureeeekkkka, you got it!!! Well those other species that depend on the grasslands better learn to survive better and get their greedy faces into that coveted native grassland, I kid you not! You're only killing the roos because they're less useful to humans....yes, you got it now! Urrreeeeekaaaaaaa
juzu4me 3 years ago
We are learning from our history, and in this case it means culling roos. The concept of sustainable management is maintaining an environment for all species. These at risk species are there because we change the environment, and the roos are making a bad situation worse. A fact of life is that for one thing to live, something else must die, in this case the existence of a species is viewed above some individuals. Roos are also culled because they are useful to people for meat and leather.
FF19833891 3 years ago
Funny how the arguments of 'pests' (they are natives of 16 million years - they belong here) come into play, whenever humanoids or developers want to build, concrete or kill off another species! Humans are the 'pests'. There are too many, but do you see humans being 'culled' to protect other species????????????????????????????????????
jayalewis 3 years ago
Of course reducing the human population would be the optimal solution to most environmental problems; however, it is unrealistic, as it turning to a pure plant based diet. The intensive agriculture needed to support the population of our size on plant based products would be worse than grazing. I agree, we should eat less meat and avoid feedlots. Ideally, we could eat more roos, and less cattle/sheep.
While some aim for utopia, others prefer to be more realistic. Natives need management too.
FF19833891 3 years ago
well they are a pest, look up the definition... they have exceeded their natural bounds, and have increased to a population where the damage to the ecosystem may be irreversible,
continue the cull.
georgecarmody89 3 years ago
that is very cruel but people don't understand it will come back to them naturally, plus...bugs get killed everyday casually and people don't say anything, the average human is not conscious which makes them suffer anyway
lennyfloss 3 years ago
LOL i know what to do with these roos
how about you fucking greenies get them and take them to your backyard and let them stalf to death
rocky7632 3 years ago
JJRCS - you are ranting!
nomes707 3 years ago
You try adequetely supporting an argument in 500 characters or less!
JJRCS 3 years ago
I don't expect you to condemn other beliefs, just support your own. Where are the reports saying that they are not likely to starve over winter and damage the ecosystem? Where are the reports on where they would be relocated to and the studies that show the new land can support another 400 roos? Why are they not public? Where is the justification for your "argument"?
FF19833891 3 years ago
That's a brilliant idea.
It would have been perfect if not for the fact that any plans for a proposed 'trial' relocation were scrapped pretty much a day before they went ahead with the cull. cleverly stifling any chance for alternative solutions.
Also I believe the Department of Defence with the help of Wildcare actually carried out a study supporting relocation, which was discarded by the government...and completely ignored by the media...
JJRCS 3 years ago
Of course, they do not help matters by acting the way they do. In their desperation to be heard, logical and reasoned arguments seem to be ignored in favour of big, over the top, almost theatrical gestures.
In fact, when any opposition at all, no matter how reasoned can be casually dismissed by labling it the 'high moral ground', then something is wrong with the way WE function.
JJRCS 3 years ago
JJRCS, you don't pose any arguments, "Possibly bullshit" does not committee you to particular stance, so there is nothing to casually dismiss. However, you do ask good questions, I believe you downfall is that to seem to dismiss any information from the pro-cull side implying that anybody who supports this doesn't know fact from fiction, thus any information presented is untruthful or heavily biased. What you deem as "almost theatrical gestures", I see as responses to your baited questions.
FF19833891 3 years ago
'Casually dismiss' was directed at FF1983's comment about taking the high moral ground. The 'almost threatrical gestures' comment was directed at those AGAINST the cull. So rethink your statement about my hesitance to condemn those who share my core opinion.
JJRCS 3 years ago
Also it must be said that I have no special attachment to either party. I began this simply as a favor to an aquaintance.
However, after making it a priority to listen to all arguments, what angers me most by this whole debacle is what something like this brings out in our society.
It seems to encourage either a kneejerk apathy, or an almost vehement 'hatred' of the minority which is almost always made out to be 'crazy'.
JJRCS 3 years ago
Oh and as for the cows grazing on farming land. The issue is, apparently, the impact of grazing on the environment. So if its inside a fence, does that mean it isn't part of the same damn environment?
This case is bigger than just a few kangaroos. This is about something much greater. The need to question what you hear before you passively swallow facts and take the side of least resistance. Thats how wars get started...
JJRCS 3 years ago
Haven't they been culling roos there for the past 30 years?
If or when they develop the land what would happen to the roos then, Roadkill?
Where do you guys draw the line, insects? Are they OK to kill?
If you had intestinal worms, would you poison those poor defenseless worms?
They may have feelings too!
Fact is, the aboriginies had been killing roos for thousands of years and when the Europeans turned up and started their clearing & farming, the roo population exploded.
Zebbidi8 3 years ago
Aboriginals only hunted what they needed; they were not 22 million in number wanting 'more, more, more' like modern folk; and when did 'clearing and felling' become more honourable than living simply? Defending archaic European farming habits is not quality reason enough 2 slaughter native animals (16 million years they've lived here, to white fella's 200 years) by way of lethal injection! There is NO comparison btween aboriginal habits and European habits! Evolve to a plant based diet.
jayalewis 3 years ago
There is no argument there are too many roos. Even the Animal Libs say there are. To cull or relocated is the question. Maybe you should question what you hear before you passively swallow facts and argue moral high ground. This is about understanding that we can sustainably utilise roos to reduce our dependence on ruminant animals. All farming land in the A.C.T is lease hold (some 3 months at a time), if owners overgraze they risk losing their farm. So yes, a fence does make a difference.
FF19833891 3 years ago
The arguments are quite simply, two.
The first being that the Kangaroos are destroying the natural environment, and the second is that they are themselves starving. I argue that both those assertions are possibly bullshit (the second one I am sure of), to justify the 'real' motivations which are kept from public view.
The RSPCA is represented by one man and one opinion. Unfortunatly due to limited nature of the media we either don't hear about those, or they are represented as 'crazy'.
JJRCS 3 years ago
Where do you get YOUR information from?
Where's the evidence of these animals starving? Walk around the area. There is more grass and water than in most parts of Australia.
Oh wait, is it because the very people that want them gone tell you so?
Is it at all possible that the 'powers that be' are wanting to develop on this land? When, and if they do, I have a sneaking suspicion that any issue about the Golden Sun Moth will disappear...
JJRCS 3 years ago
Yet another pack of lies from people with nothing better to do.
Fact: There are too many Kangaroos for the area to support & they are STARVING.
Fact: The RSPCA support the cull as the MOST HUMANE option
netsurfau 3 years ago
owned.
SKAFFCA 3 years ago
The only reason this tiny pocket or roos are such an issue is because of the media coverage and the involvement of the Gov. Why are the animal lib groups so up in arms about this, it makes no sense. Focus on the endangered animals and animals that actually require real attention. What are we going to do next, use tax payers money to erect fencing along all Aust roadways to prevent road kill!?
pdslt 3 years ago
Just a few comments. I am from Canberra, I have lived in the Belconnen area all my life. I support animals and I support plants. The Kangaroos are being harvested for many reasons but the main one is that the Kangaroos are over grazing and destroying the endangered native grasslands.
A few points about your Video. The harvest started in May, not March. There was no searing heat, it's winter. Where are you facts for and against relocation? The cows are grazing on farm land, not native grass.
nomes707 3 years ago
Then put your money where your mouth is, $3.5 million can be put to better use than moving kangaroos from one area to another. The $600 from the 10 people who have donated to the "cause" will not cut it I am afraid, and if 6,000 people signed the petition then over 20 million didn't. Maybe people believe it is worth saving the threatened species at danger because of the kangaroos. This cull will have no impact on the viability of kangaroo populations.
FF19833891 3 years ago
Cows are destroying the planet. Kangaroos are beloved native mammals that belong in Australial. They are being treated as 'pests' and worth nothing more than easy money for boot leather or feeding dogs. This is an utterly shameful attitude. Humans show themselves to only love... themselves! Have compassion, leave these animals to live in peace.
jayalewis 3 years ago
Humans are destroying the planet... the cows are sadly the powerless subjects of our forced breeding programs for which the planet cannot support.
Evolve to a plant based diet...
veganblue 3 years ago
Animals have the right to exist - they are creations like us, and we are meant to look after all Life. Yes, we MUST evolve past killing living creatures - we are eating our way thru all animal kingdoms. As I'm a human and despite that I abhore human cruelty, I must also seek the 'good' in humans.. so, I celebrate the following humanoids: David Attenborough, David Suzuki, Saverne Suzuki, Steve Irwin (RIP), and all Conservationists past & present!
Evolve to a plant based diet...
jayalewis 3 years ago