Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Skilled legal advice with
accessible & personal attention

Canberra opts for skippy slaughter

By johnboy - 12 March 2009 15

The Chief Minister has announced that you all love (OK, a majority of you) ‘roo shootin’.

    Highlights of the survey include:

    — 82 per cent of respondents believed it was important to have native kangaroo populations in the ACT.
    — 75 per cent of respondents had a high awareness of places to take visitors to see kangaroos with popular destinations including Tidbinbilla, Red Hill, Government House, Weston Park and the Royal Canberra Golf Course.
    — 76 per cent of respondents supported the culling of kangaroos in appropriate circumstances. Of those who did not support culling, 19 per cent were unsure and only 6 percent were opposed to the practice.
    — 17 per cent of respondents who owned a vehicle in the ACT had been involved in a collision with a kangaroo. Of these collisions more than half – 55 per cent – resulted in an insurance claim, 44 per cent resulted in death or serious injury to the kangaroo, and two per cent resulted in an injury to the occupants of the vehicle.

More on your survey responses can be found on the TAMSwebsite.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
15 Responses to
Canberra opts for skippy slaughter
Pommy bastard 8:23 am 14 Mar 09

The Brad said :

If that was the case, I would expect to see a lot more carasses on the roads, unless they get cleaned up….which they don’t seem to.

Aren’t the carcasses left in order to mark potential “roo hazard” spots?

Furry Jesus 12:23 pm 13 Mar 09

GB said :

Farming them for sustainable meat harvest, even better./quote]

We could do with cheaper roo meat for human consumption in Canberra, and more promotion of it as a healthier alternative to the hormone/chemical-drenched beef and lamb that we’re stuck with.

harvyk1 11:43 am 13 Mar 09

chrispy said :

While I’m on the subject, what’s the deal with those roo whistles you can put on your car. Are they supposed to emit a high frequency or something. What happens if you come across an older roo that’s a bit hard of hearing, or are we just worried about not running into the healthy young ones. Jesus, if you cant hear a car coming on an open road at dusk you’re not going to hear a f*****g whistle.

The problem is that they don’t see you, it’s that they don’t know the danger of standing infront of a car. The problem is compounded at night when they get dazelled by the lights and thus distroys their night vision. They don’t quite know where they can go (as they can’t see) so they sit there.

GB 10:58 am 13 Mar 09

Greys are semi-nomadic.

chrispy said :

…I have always assumed that Kangaroos were nomadic.

Eg, see here.

Its strange, but they seem not to move to a new range, even when severely malnourished.

But they will expand their range (to include my garden) during a drought.

chrispy 8:22 am 13 Mar 09

Correct me if I’m wrong but I have always assumed that Kangaroos were nomadic. I have never seen them build a house or plant a flag or anything to indicate that they will fight humans for a particular block of land. So why would you waste money culling Kangaroos in Canberra. We have excellent nature strips that they can use to move to a different location. If you did cull your local roos is likely that other roos will move in a short time later. It’s a bit like those morons who kill all the sharks around their particular beach and assume that it’s then safe.

While I’m on the subject, what’s the deal with those roo whistles you can put on your car. Are they supposed to emit a high frequency or something. What happens if you come across an older roo that’s a bit hard of hearing, or are we just worried about not running into the healthy young ones. Jesus, if you cant hear a car coming on an open road at dusk you’re not going to hear a f*****g whistle.

GB 9:37 pm 12 Mar 09

Very appropriate to the roos, if they are dying of starvation. We fenced them out, we fed them, in some cases we have fenced them in, so we have to take responsibility. We could just let them die, or let them eat everything else out. Killing them seems more humane to me. Farming them for sustainable meat harvest, even better.

Now, just hoping a little bit of data won’t interrupt the discussion too much…

Using the technically challenging method of following the link provided by johnboy, the expanded text on the survey reads:

“76% of respondents supported kangaroo killing under certain circumstances (the most prominent reason being if the population was too great)”

So “appropriate circumstances” was not what was actually reported by the survey. The question asking “is appropriate under certain
circumstances’ was the closest actual wording to this.

On collisions:

The Brad said :

1 in 6 (rounded up) have been involved in a collision with a roo. Really?
And 1 in 3 results in a major injury to Skippy?
If that was the case, I would expect to see a lot more carasses on the roads, unless they get cleaned up….which they don’t seem to.

If you glance at the pdf TAMS provide, it is clear that this is people reporting their lifetime experience. So, for a 50-year old, they may have been involved in a collision with a roo at any time in the last 30-something years.

Regarding carcasses, using 30 seconds and a well known search engine, I found this – I’m sure there are more recent figures out there:

“2001 average = 2.07/day, 14.5/week, 63/month, 756/year
2002 average = 2.2/day, 15.4/wek, 67/month, 804/year
2003 average = 3.1day, 21.7/week, 94.3/month, 1132/year
2004 YTD (end June *) 3.1/day, 21.6/week, 93.5/month, 1122 year (est)

[Start sanctimonious mode] {sanctimony deleted} [End sanctimonious mode]

threepaws 6:47 pm 12 Mar 09

Pommy bastard said :

“In appropriate circumstances”? Appropriate to whom? Not the roos, obviously.

Perhaps appropriate if they are starving to death

TroyWilliams 6:04 pm 12 Mar 09

Of those who did not support culling, 19 per cent were unsure and only 6 percent were opposed to the practice.

Bloody noisy 6%.

The Brad 5:00 pm 12 Mar 09

>And 1 in 3 results in a major injury to Skippy?

self-correction – Maths tricky – that’s 1 in 12, isn’t it?

The Brad 4:52 pm 12 Mar 09

1 in 6 (rounded up) have been involved in a collision with a roo. Really?
And 1 in 3 results in a major injury to Skippy?
If that was the case, I would expect to see a lot more carasses on the roads, unless they get cleaned up….which they don’t seem to.

p1 4:41 pm 12 Mar 09

…well, not the reputable ones, no. But there aren’t many of those…

captainwhorebags 4:10 pm 12 Mar 09

…and for those joining us late in the class, please review the background material on opinion polls.

Pommy bastard 4:01 pm 12 Mar 09

“In appropriate circumstances”? Appropriate to whom? Not the roos, obviously.

Skidbladnir 3:50 pm 12 Mar 09

Depends.
Do we keep what we kill?

p1 3:46 pm 12 Mar 09

– 76 per cent of respondents supported the culling of kangaroos in appropriate circumstances.

Umm, so 24% support ‘roo culling in inappropriate circumstances?

I wonder what percentage of people would like to cull the ‘roos themselves?

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site