11 July 2013

An Open Letter to The Australian Society for Kangaroos

| MOCS
Join the conversation
63

Hi Guys,

Just a quick note to let you know what’s happening here in Canberra at the moment.

Being a Canberran born and bred I have grown up with kangaroos and have become pretty adept at spotting them near the road when driving. In fact until recently I had only ever clipped one which blindsided me back in the80’s. Even during the mass influx of roos during the drought a few years back, I had a few close calls but managed to avoid hitting any. That was until two weeks ago. I’d just finished a night shift and as it was just before dawn on a cool crisp still morning I was well aware that these were perfect conditions for kangaroos. In fact I was probably more alert than usual as though it was some sort of premonition. I was less than five kilometres from home when I saw it, a good sized Eastern Grey bounding along parallel with my car so I immediately hit the brakes. The roo then chose this point to change direction and somehow managed to leap in front of the car and I went straight over the top of it before being able to come to a complete stop. To my surprise the roo sprung from the rear of the car and bounded off into the distance apparently without injury but I did spend the next few days wondering if it was alright or suffering a slow painful death under a bush somewhere. Even though there was little damage to my car my neighbour wasn’t so lucky as two days later his encounter with a wayward roo cost him a new bumper grill and radiator which was a better result than a work colleague who only a month or so before wrote off his four wheel drive when an impact with a roo actually snapped the engine block off its mounts, luckily both kangaroos died instantly from these accidents.

Now I say luckily as a week to the day from my first incident I had picked up my little girl from school and was heading home. It was around 3:15 in the afternoon and I was in a line of traffic when out of nowhere another decent sized Eastern Grey bounded from the right hand side of the road managing to pick the gap between the oncoming traffic, me and the car in front , clip my bonnet and slam straight into the windscreen. I actually have no real memory of how but somehow I managed to get the car to the side of the road without being able to see anything and more amazingly without the car following rear-ending me after my panic stricken locking of the brakes. In fact all I can remember was my little girl screaming and probably me screaming as well. After double checking we were out of harm’s way and finally settling my daughter down I got out to inspect the damage and was amazed at how the windscreen managed to hold so well and not slam into my or my daughters face. Several other cars had stopped to see if we were alright and they too seemed pretty impressed with our luck but unfortunately the kangaroo hadn’t faired quite as well as its thigh bone was protruding from the skin. None of us knew what to do as if anyone approached the roo it would try to stand which was quite obviously causing it more distress and seeing it thrashing around in agony only had me more thankful it hadn’t come through the windscreen into the cabin . At some point someone came up to me, as I’d returned to my daughter, and said they’d called the rangers and they’d be here shortly.

I honestly don’t know how long shortly was but my wife had driven half an hour from work to pick up our daughter to take her home while I waited for the tow truck. By the time the ranger arrived I was alone on the side of the road still trying to work out how to comfort the roo while being too scared to go to close. I’d even tried to cover it with an old picnic rug we had in the boot but it would try to stand as soon as I approached it and it was making some pretty horrific noises. I’ll spare you the details but when the ranger arrived he was forced to put the roo down and I queried him on what a difficult job it must be. He said it was but it has become part of life in Canberra. Although he wasn’t aware of the exact figures he estimated that they would euthanize approximately eight kangaroos a day in the ACT that had been hit by cars. This figure didn’t include the kangaroos they remove from the road that were already dead or those that had been hit and they couldn’t find them nor those that had been hit but not reported. A conservative estimation would have to lean towards at least twenty kangaroos a day are being hit by cars in the ACT region. The ranger himself admitted to hitting one on the way to work one morning.

Now I know you guys believe you’re doing the right thing by stopping this cull in Canberra but the kangaroo problem is getting ridiculous and very very dangerous. After this experience I truly believe that a cull would have to be far more humane than the scene I witnessed. A scene where an injured animal writhed and grunted in complete agony for almost an hour. A scene that is potentially replicated 20 times a day in Canberra, 140 times a week, 500 time a month, 6,000 time a year! But even worse, what if that roo was a few pounds heavier or I was travelling a few kilometres faster? What would have happened to my little girl? Thankfully she’s alright but still a little traumatised by the incident as most kids would be. In the mean time when I get the quote from the panel beaters should I send it to your organisation?

For your consideration

Steve Daniel

Join the conversation

63
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

I used to have an old car jack that utilised a heavy steel handle. I no longer use the jack, but I still carry the heavy steel handle in the boot. Just sayin’. Rangers can take a long time to arrive and an animal that’s too injured needs quick relief.

AussieRodney11:42 am 19 Jul 13

c_c™ said :

In case there was any doubt the people behind this so called liberation movement …. aren’t the fool quid ….

PML. Is that a deliberate typo?

IrishPete said :

LSWCHP said :

IrishPete said :

[
An my favouritely overused word sustainable (this time with an un- in front of it), along with reform (=change for changes sake) and appropriate (with or without the “in-” in front, used when someone can’t be bothered to explain, or doesn’t actually understand).

IP

Now *that* is one of the finest pieces of gibberish I’ve ever seen on this forum, and by god, I’ve seen a few. Simply outstanding!

Then I would suggest, Sir or Madam, that you are one of the Commonwealth Public Servants, or politicians or their flunkies who are responsible for creating this alternate language.

IP

Then you suggest wrong dude. Not that it’s at all relevant, but I work in the private sector, and I’ve been doing so for several decades.

And I think you generally write pretty well, but that particular para was just tragic. Seriously. If you can’t see that then you’re deluding yourself.

mos said :

Hundreds of human pedestrians are killed or involved in traffic accidents every year. Is the solution to cull humans? How about we look at other ways to reduce the number of cars hitting roos. Educate drivers to drive more slowly in hot-spots – especially between dawn and dusk. Build roo-proof fences and wildlife underpasses along the most dangerous stretches of road. Use a high-frequency device on the car to warn off roos. The first/best option should never be to kill sentient beings – especially those who probably have more right to be here than we do.

“Use a high-frequency device on the car to warn off roos” These gadget things don’t work, are just a gimmick and won’t get you an insurance discount either. Better of with a low frequency device, a 4 poster bull bar made of steel warns off roo’s every time. I don’t get a insurance discount with this product either but at least I can see it works quite well.

LSWCHP said :

IrishPete said :

[
An my favouritely overused word sustainable (this time with an un- in front of it), along with reform (=change for changes sake) and appropriate (with or without the “in-” in front, used when someone can’t be bothered to explain, or doesn’t actually understand).

IP

Now *that* is one of the finest pieces of gibberish I’ve ever seen on this forum, and by god, I’ve seen a few. Simply outstanding!

Then I would suggest, Sir or Madam, that you are one of the Commonwealth Public Servants, or politicians or their flunkies who are responsible for creating this alternate language.

IP

crappicker said :

CraigT said :

chewy14 said :

I will totally agree with you however that I think a review of the cull is needed. The options need to be reassessed to determine an appropriate long term approach to this issue.

Yes. It seems pretty obvious that the scope of the cull needs to be extended to a far greater number of animals and that the cull needs to be protected by legislation to prevent the animal rights nutters from tying up our legal system and wasting our ratepayers’ $$$ every year.

Oh Craig, you really seem to have it in for the roos.
Perhaps my current bunch of male roos my wish to interrupt their martial arts training for some words with you.

Let’s hope they remember to look both ways before crossing the road, eh?

CraigT said :

chewy14 said :

I will totally agree with you however that I think a review of the cull is needed. The options need to be reassessed to determine an appropriate long term approach to this issue.

Yes. It seems pretty obvious that the scope of the cull needs to be extended to a far greater number of animals and that the cull needs to be protected by legislation to prevent the animal rights nutters from tying up our legal system and wasting our ratepayers’ $$$ every year.

Oh Craig, you really seem to have it in for the roos.
Perhaps my current bunch of male roos my wish to interrupt their martial arts training for some words with you.

IrishPete said :

[
An my favouritely overused word sustainable (this time with an un- in front of it), along with reform (=change for changes sake) and appropriate (with or without the “in-” in front, used when someone can’t be bothered to explain, or doesn’t actually understand).

IP

Now *that* is one of the finest pieces of gibberish I’ve ever seen on this forum, and by god, I’ve seen a few. Simply outstanding!

chewy14 said :

I will totally agree with you however that I think a review of the cull is needed. The options need to be reassessed to determine an appropriate long term approach to this issue.

Yes. It seems pretty obvious that the scope of the cull needs to be extended to a far greater number of animals and that the cull needs to be protected by legislation to prevent the animal rights nutters from tying up our legal system and wasting our ratepayers’ $$$ every year.

Swaggie said :

Can’t we just cull a few of the animal rights nutters instead – it seems everyone will be happy then.

Or cull those that call for such a cull, simpler and more just surely?

Can’t we just cull a few of the animal rights nutters instead – it seems everyone will be happy then.

Well said Steve. Thanks.

Roundhead89 said :

I’ve been following this debate and I feel that a key point is not being made. That animal liberation is a form of bestiality. Animal rights activists are sexually attracted to animals and fantasise about having sex with them. These sad people have no affectionate feelings towards humans and believe humans should be eradicated from the Earth. Attempts to cure animal liberationists usually backfire and they take up pedophilia alongside bestiality. Instead of a kangaroo cull perhaps we should be looking at a cull of animal rights activists.

Dear god, it disturbs me to think sick bastards like you exist.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/environment/kangaroo-cull-protesters-lose-last-minute-legal-bid-20130712-2ptvg.html#ixzz2YoNuFSbM
So they are still not going to listen to the court and the law.
IF they dont get hit by a bullet, I really hope the fines are enforced.

IrishPete said :

chewy14 said :

EvanJames said :

But, but, but, I thought the roo cull was because the roos were STARVING. Starving! You mean to say it’s because they hop onto roads and endanger cars? Say it ain’t so.

So it’s really just a cull of convenience.

Yes, one guy’s comment on the internet totally invalidates the science showing that kangaroos are degrading the environment for other endangered species.

If anything the OP provides a sensible (although anecdotal) secondary reason why the cull should go ahead. If we could reduce the incidence of car strikes, it would simply be an added benefit.

If? You want the gubinment to spend 200k of your money on an “if”? Does anyone know the roo population in the ACT (I can’t find it in the Kangaroo Management Plan or elsewhere)? Is the cull of <2000 any more than a trim? Okay, it's a targeted cull (haha, pun intended) but the move around – so if you exterminate them in one area, won't the population drift in from another area?

A few months ago the Minister said he was waiting for an evaluation of the first 4 years of the cull http://online.districtbulletin.com.au/2013/04/minister-rattenbury-still-waiting-for-kangaroo-cull-evaluations/ , and he would release it when it was available. I don't recall it being released. So I don't know if it includes roo-strike incidents, but I doubt it.

The failure to evaluate is somewhat concerning.

IP

There’s no ‘if’, the science says the cull is needed for environmental reasons.
The possibility of lowering car strikes may be an added benefit but I don’t know if the governments even looked at it.

I will totally agree with you however that I think a review of the cull is needed. The options need to be reassessed to determine an appropriate long term approach to this issue.

IrishPete said :

Reprobate said :

wow… just wow. My head hurts now.

Anyway, see you all in a couple of years time – when the roo population is once again unsustainable, the fringe nutters again go to court to stop “the horror”, and again line up (dragging their unvaccinated, home-schooled, you-go-do-anything-you-like-little-Mully kids along for extra media angles) with their placards outside the nature reserves, not making one iota of difference inside or outside the fences.

An my favouritely overused word sustainable (this time with an un- in front of it), along with reform (=change for changes sake) and appropriate (with or without the “in-” in front, used when someone can’t be bothered to explain, or doesn’t actually understand).

So, to get to my point, now sustainability of the population has been cited as a reason for the cull. Along with road risk. But the government is only citing rare plants and little critters. Which is it folks? Make up your minds.

IP

I think that was supposed to start “Ah,” not “an”. Cold fingers (warm fart, as my mother used to say).

IP

Reprobate said :

wow… just wow. My head hurts now.

Anyway, see you all in a couple of years time – when the roo population is once again unsustainable, the fringe nutters again go to court to stop “the horror”, and again line up (dragging their unvaccinated, home-schooled, you-go-do-anything-you-like-little-Mully kids along for extra media angles) with their placards outside the nature reserves, not making one iota of difference inside or outside the fences.

An my favouritely overused word sustainable (this time with an un- in front of it), along with reform (=change for changes sake) and appropriate (with or without the “in-” in front, used when someone can’t be bothered to explain, or doesn’t actually understand).

So, to get to my point, now sustainability of the population has been cited as a reason for the cull. Along with road risk. But the government is only citing rare plants and little critters. Which is it folks? Make up your minds.

IP

chewy14 said :

EvanJames said :

But, but, but, I thought the roo cull was because the roos were STARVING. Starving! You mean to say it’s because they hop onto roads and endanger cars? Say it ain’t so.

So it’s really just a cull of convenience.

Yes, one guy’s comment on the internet totally invalidates the science showing that kangaroos are degrading the environment for other endangered species.

If anything the OP provides a sensible (although anecdotal) secondary reason why the cull should go ahead. If we could reduce the incidence of car strikes, it would simply be an added benefit.

If? You want the gubinment to spend 200k of your money on an “if”? Does anyone know the roo population in the ACT (I can’t find it in the Kangaroo Management Plan or elsewhere)? Is the cull of <2000 any more than a trim? Okay, it's a targeted cull (haha, pun intended) but the move around – so if you exterminate them in one area, won't the population drift in from another area?

A few months ago the Minister said he was waiting for an evaluation of the first 4 years of the cull http://online.districtbulletin.com.au/2013/04/minister-rattenbury-still-waiting-for-kangaroo-cull-evaluations/ , and he would release it when it was available. I don't recall it being released. So I don't know if it includes roo-strike incidents, but I doubt it.

The failure to evaluate is somewhat concerning.

IP

wow… just wow. My head hurts now.

Anyway, see you all in a couple of years time – when the roo population is once again unsustainable, the fringe nutters again go to court to stop “the horror”, and again line up (dragging their unvaccinated, home-schooled, you-go-do-anything-you-like-little-Mully kids along for extra media angles) with their placards outside the nature reserves, not making one iota of difference inside or outside the fences.

Onceler said :

And it’s not just about cars. Kangaroos and motorcycles don’t mix well at all.

Only because no-one has made a large enough blender yet…

Challenge accepted

Codders111 said :

I’m not well-informed enough to say whether or not you’re wrong, but there’s a number of clear logical fallacy here. You can’t take one isolated case and use it to justify a generally applied policy.

Also applicable: argumentam ad consequentiam, appeal to emotion, post hoc ergo propter hoc.

*logical fallacies*

I’m not well-informed enough to say whether or not you’re wrong, but there’s a number of clear logical fallacy here. You can’t take one isolated case and use it to justify a generally applied policy.

Also applicable: argumentam ad consequentiam, appeal to emotion, post hoc ergo propter hoc.

FioBla said :

Onceler said :

And it’s not just about cars. Kangaroos and motorcycles don’t mix well at all.

Puhleez. If you can’t learn it, stick to a rum and coke like a baby.

You’re making a pun on the word “mix”, as in cocktail mix? If not, then your comment has gone over my head.

Onceler said :

And it’s not just about cars. Kangaroos and motorcycles don’t mix well at all.

Puhleez. If you can’t learn it, stick to a rum and coke like a baby.

And it’s not just about cars. Kangaroos and motorcycles don’t mix well at all.

I don’t post very often but when I do I get confused…

Have people purposely missed the point of this letter as it conflicts with their point of view or are they, what they call “Trolling”? Or was the letter that ambiguous that the point was lost to those who read it?
BTW My daughter is fine thanks for asking…

EvanJames said :

But, but, but, I thought the roo cull was because the roos were STARVING. Starving! You mean to say it’s because they hop onto roads and endanger cars? Say it ain’t so.

So it’s really just a cull of convenience.

Yes, one guy’s comment on the internet totally invalidates the science showing that kangaroos are degrading the environment for other endangered species.

If anything the OP provides a sensible (although anecdotal) secondary reason why the cull should go ahead. If we could reduce the incidence of car strikes, it would simply be an added benefit.

bundah said :

If up to twenty roos are killed every day from collisions with cars then the cull can’t come quickly enough.Mind you panel beaters won’t be pleased..

I can’t see a problem. If work dries up, all they have to do is a rain dance to drum up more business…

IrishPete said :

Yet another person who doesn’t know the cull is about saving plants and little critters, not damage to cars. Sigh.

IP

You can add me to the list of people who support the cull on account of it hopefully reducing the road danger.

You must be feeling pretty lonely in your little bubble.

Coincidentally, I was thinking yesterday about the total road-related kangaroo cull that occurs, after driving a short stretch of road three days in a row and seeing at least 4 new corpses on each morning I drove that stretch. If there are 4 dead kangaroos on just one of Canberra’s roads, how many hundreds of kangaroos are suffering the thoroughly inhumane fate of dying slowly by the roadside?

The anmial rights nutters are completely and utterly stupid.

I support the other poster above who says we should cull 20,000 of them – just get rid of the pests once and for all instead of having to endure this annual circus.

But, but, but, I thought the roo cull was because the roos were STARVING. Starving! You mean to say it’s because they hop onto roads and endanger cars? Say it ain’t so.

So it’s really just a cull of convenience.

A_Cog said :

There are about 2000 crashes with roos in the ACT every year. If you think shooting them is inhumane,

Learn to read: I said nothing about shooting or inhumanity.

As for your ridiculous point about accepting the risk… Until climate change and mad max-esque gangs have ravaged the land and we’re all living inside a single jumbo-mega-plex city-state building, we will need to DRIVE around the ACT. The best way to manage that risk in the interests of HUMANS is to REMOVE it. Cull ’em.

The only way to manage a risk is to kill whatever might pose that risk? Maximum derp .. achieved!

A_Cog said :

Grrrr said :

Someone hitting an animal on the road and using that as justification for culling them is tilting at windmills. It’s not the roo’s fault you hit it, it’s yours. Drive more carefully and accept the risk.

Clown logic.

There are about 2000 crashes with roos in the ACT every year. If you think shooting them is inhumane, just watch a stricken roo struggling at the roadside, barking in pain and confusion, as it takes an hour or more to bleed out, or for the TAMS guy to turn up and put it down. Further, roos are just a more complex form of dangerous pest, like blue-green algae or European wasp. Don’t confuse a big furry rodent for a person. How many HUMAN lives is a single roo worth? They should cull 20,000 roos, not 1,200. Make us safe for a decade.

As for your ridiculous point about accepting the risk… Until climate change and mad max-esque gangs have ravaged the land and we’re all living inside a single jumbo-mega-plex city-state building, we will need to DRIVE around the ACT. The best way to manage that risk in the interests of HUMANS is to REMOVE it. Cull ’em.

Yet another person who doesn’t know the cull is about saving plants and little critters, not damage to cars. Sigh.

IP

If up to twenty roos are killed every day from collisions with cars then the cull can’t come quickly enough.Mind you panel beaters won’t be pleased..

Just remember there are lots of animal activists / greenies / environmentalists / etc who do NOT agree with the actions or arguments of this particular group of kangaroo-focused-activists, and who understand the need to cull to maintain the greater environment & threatened species. ie these people don’t represent most environmentalists or even most people interested in animal welfare or animal rights.

mos said :

Where the F in nature are there dogs? Apart from a few escapees, dogs only exist because humans have selectively bred them and used them.

African wild dog
Arctic fox
Argentine grey fox
Azara’s fox
Bat-eared fox
Black-backed jackal
Blanford’s fox
Bush dog
Cape fox
Colpeo fox
Corsac fox
Coyote
Crab-eating fox
Darwin’s fox
Dhole
Dingo
Domestic dog
Ethiopian wolf
Fennec fox
Golden jackal
Grey fox
Grey wolf
Hoary fox
Indian fox
Kit fox
Maned wolf
Pale fox
Raccoon dog
Red fox
Red wolf
Ruppell’s fox
Sechuran fox
Short-eared dog
Side-striped jackal
Swift fox
Tibetan fox

Yep, no dogs in nature.

Grrrr said :

Someone hitting an animal on the road and using that as justification for culling them is tilting at windmills. It’s not the roo’s fault you hit it, it’s yours. Drive more carefully and accept the risk.

Have a think about these statements that reflect poorly on you, Steve: “Came out of nowhere” suggests you’re not alert to your surroundings. “Amazingly without the car following rear-ending me” means they were driving a safe distance behind you – as required by law, and common sense. You being suprised by that suggests that you don’t do likewise.

It’s an interesting assertion that the kangaroo population has no relation at all to the likelihood of crashing into one. It’s not the roo’s fault it got hit, it’s Steve’s, is it? So he shouldn’t have been driving his car on the road, that scenario is somehow negligent on Steve’s part? Piss off, you can’t honestly believe the roo population has absolutely nothing to do with how many end up as road-kill, nor can you level the blame at Steve when you weren’t there to witness it.

Grrrr said :

Someone hitting an animal on the road and using that as justification for culling them is tilting at windmills. It’s not the roo’s fault you hit it, it’s yours. Drive more carefully and accept the risk.

Clown logic.

There are about 2000 crashes with roos in the ACT every year. If you think shooting them is inhumane, just watch a stricken roo struggling at the roadside, barking in pain and confusion, as it takes an hour or more to bleed out, or for the TAMS guy to turn up and put it down. Further, roos are just a more complex form of dangerous pest, like blue-green algae or European wasp. Don’t confuse a big furry rodent for a person. How many HUMAN lives is a single roo worth? They should cull 20,000 roos, not 1,200. Make us safe for a decade.

As for your ridiculous point about accepting the risk… Until climate change and mad max-esque gangs have ravaged the land and we’re all living inside a single jumbo-mega-plex city-state building, we will need to DRIVE around the ACT. The best way to manage that risk in the interests of HUMANS is to REMOVE it. Cull ’em.

mos said :

And yes, domesticated dogs can thrive on a balanced vegan diet.

And how does a dog express it’s desire to have a vegan diet? It’s not a natural diet for the species, it’s a human making a selfish choice.

Someone hitting an animal on the road and using that as justification for culling them is tilting at windmills. It’s not the roo’s fault you hit it, it’s yours. Drive more carefully and accept the risk.

Have a think about these statements that reflect poorly on you, Steve: “Came out of nowhere” suggests you’re not alert to your surroundings. “Amazingly without the car following rear-ending me” means they were driving a safe distance behind you – as required by law, and common sense. You being suprised by that suggests that you don’t do likewise.

c_c™ said :

What an uneducated response.

You’re referring to the domesticated dog (canis familiaris), I’m referring to dogs in the scientific sense, those species and subspecies belonging to the genus canis – “canis” being latin which translated into English means literally “dog”.

The domestic dog, along with wolves, coyotes, etc, are all derived from the same genus and they share common traits as a result.

No need for derision, detracts from your arguments. Yes – I was referring to the domesticated dog as that was the subject of the original comment. And yes, domesticated dogs can thrive on a balanced vegan diet. A little browsing/reading should clarify that for you. Cats, on the other hand, can have problems.

Unfortunately guys the roo cull has nothing to do with savings humans or to stop car accidents. As stated by Shane Rattenbury the cull is only for the benefit of the environment ie to save grassland and species that live there

I am unsure how roos that have been part of that environment are the culprit. They do a good job at keeping grass timmed
Also unsure how TAMS will keep the grass down to avoid fire hazards which they must do if they are serious
However they do have to cull roos at some stage

Roundhead89 said :

I’ve been following this debate and I feel that a key point is not being made. That animal liberation is a form of bestiality. Animal rights activists are sexually attracted to animals and fantasise about having sex with them. These sad people have no affectionate feelings towards humans and believe humans should be eradicated from the Earth. Attempts to cure animal liberationists usually backfire and they take up pedophilia alongside bestiality. Instead of a kangaroo cull perhaps we should be looking at a cull of animal rights activists.

Gold Sir, gold. One of the best piss-takes in many a long year. No berley required, just a little line. Well done!

mos said :

Hundreds of human pedestrians are killed or involved in traffic accidents every year. Is the solution to cull humans? How about we look at other ways to reduce the number of cars hitting roos. Educate drivers to drive more slowly in hot-spots – especially between dawn and dusk. Build roo-proof fences and wildlife underpasses along the most dangerous stretches of road. Use a high-frequency device on the car to warn off roos. The first/best option should never be to kill sentient beings – especially those who probably have more right to be here than we do.

Educate drivers to drive more slowly in hot-spots…? Hot spots? At the moment that seems to be anyway at anytime.

+1244 for Steve.

c_c™ said :

mos said :

c_c™ said :

Where the F in nature are there dogs who are of their own accord vegan?

Where the F in nature are there dogs? Apart from a few escapees, dogs only exist because humans have selectively bred them and used them.

What an uneducated response.

You’re referring to the domesticated dog (canis familiaris), I’m referring to dogs in the scientific sense, those species and subspecies belonging to the genus canis – “canis” being latin which translated into English means literally “dog”.

The domestic dog, along with wolves, coyotes, etc, are all derived from the same genus and they share common traits as a result.

Canis lupus familiaris, now. Subsumed into C. lupus sometime in the 90’s, as not considered phylogenetically distinct. Just an aside.

mos said :

c_c™ said :

Where the F in nature are there dogs who are of their own accord vegan?

Where the F in nature are there dogs? Apart from a few escapees, dogs only exist because humans have selectively bred them and used them.

What an uneducated response.

You’re referring to the domesticated dog (canis familiaris), I’m referring to dogs in the scientific sense, those species and subspecies belonging to the genus canis – “canis” being latin which translated into English means literally “dog”.

The domestic dog, along with wolves, coyotes, etc, are all derived from the same genus and they share common traits as a result.

Roundhead89 said :

I’ve been following this debate and I feel that a key point is not being made. That animal liberation is a form of bestiality. Animal rights activists are sexually attracted to animals and fantasise about having sex with them. These sad people have no affectionate feelings towards humans and believe humans should be eradicated from the Earth. Attempts to cure animal liberationists usually backfire and they take up pedophilia alongside bestiality. Instead of a kangaroo cull perhaps we should be looking at a cull of animal rights activists.

Oh FFS.

The characteristics you describe are a very small minority in the Animal Liberation group, in no way representative of the whole.

gungsuperstar4:37 pm 11 Jul 13

Zan said :

The millions they have spent on bike lanes on road for the minority could have been used to build tall fences and access paths under roads, just like they do in Europe for deer.

What’s your point? How is one related to the other?

Is it better for you to plough a cyclist with your car than a kangaroo?

You’re an idiot.

c_c™ said :

Where the F in nature are there dogs who are of their own accord vegan?

Where the F in nature are there dogs? Apart from a few escapees, dogs only exist because humans have selectively bred them and used them.

Another poster who thinks the cull is about road safety?

Does Canberra not want to be the Bush Capital any more?

IP

Zan said :

The millions they have spent on bike lanes on road for the minority could have been used to build tall fences and access paths under roads, just like they do in Europe for deer.

A million bucks might buy all that stuff, but a mere $1000 will buy enough .223 softpoints to take care of all the roos that need to be taken care of.

I went hunting in Tallaganda State Forest a couple of weeks ago. In one morning I saw one rabbit, a half a dozen feral pigs and over a hundred eastern grey kangaroos. If anybody thinks these guys are endangered, then they just don’t get out enough.

The millions they have spent on bike lanes on road for the minority could have been used to build tall fences and access paths under roads, just like they do in Europe for deer.

In case there was any doubt the people behind this so called liberation movement (which is really a political movement in disguise) aren’t the fool quid, it comes in the form of one of the members interviewed by The Canberra Times today.

Found out that they’re also a member of a group that advocates – vegan dog nutrition!

Promoting vegan diets for dogs. Where the F in nature are there dogs who are of their own accord vegan?

Roundhead89 said :

I’ve been following this debate and I feel that a key point is not being made. That animal liberation is a form of bestiality. Animal rights activists are sexually attracted to animals and fantasise about having sex with them. These sad people have no affectionate feelings towards humans and believe humans should be eradicated from the Earth. Attempts to cure animal liberationists usually backfire and they take up pedophilia alongside bestiality. Instead of a kangaroo cull perhaps we should be looking at a cull of animal rights activists.

There we go. The last shred of sanity has left this debate. Stick a fork in me, I am done.

I’ve been following this debate and I feel that a key point is not being made. That animal liberation is a form of bestiality. Animal rights activists are sexually attracted to animals and fantasise about having sex with them. These sad people have no affectionate feelings towards humans and believe humans should be eradicated from the Earth. Attempts to cure animal liberationists usually backfire and they take up pedophilia alongside bestiality. Instead of a kangaroo cull perhaps we should be looking at a cull of animal rights activists.

Northwest9 said :

sadly, these people put the lives of animals above those of humans. they just dont get it

They get it, the lives of animals are worth more than yours. The Solution? Improve yourself,

+1

Well said.

Well put, Mr. Daniel.

Hundreds of human pedestrians are killed or involved in traffic accidents every year. Is the solution to cull humans? How about we look at other ways to reduce the number of cars hitting roos. Educate drivers to drive more slowly in hot-spots – especially between dawn and dusk. Build roo-proof fences and wildlife underpasses along the most dangerous stretches of road. Use a high-frequency device on the car to warn off roos. The first/best option should never be to kill sentient beings – especially those who probably have more right to be here than we do.

Qui veut battre un chien, l’accuse de la rage

sadly, these people put the lives of animals above those of humans. they just dont get it

I am with Steve. Common sense please roo lovers.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.