Kangaroo cull attracting misguided protesters

More on the plausability of raising the money: People from other countries view the kangaroo in a similar way to how we would view the elephant or moose, exotic and entirely rad. A campaign around the world of something along the lines of ‘Donate a dollar to save skippy from a bullet to the head’ could certainly have yielded results. I know I would donate to save gorillas from the same fate.

A quick (i mean quick) google of previous relocations showed that at least two have happened before, both successful.

el: Yep and the circles are getting quicker and quicker.

There was the option available to wait and see if the animal rights groups and other people against the culling could raise the money, or at least make up the difference between the price of this humane slaughter (yeah… emotive words, but true ones) and the relocation. Yet they just didn’t. Things were in motion towards raising the money, a month or two would have been enough to find out if the money could be raised or not. Why didn’t they let that happen? What did they have to lose?

How much is the culling costing? How much would the relocation cost? Minus the cull cost from the relocation cost and thats how much the private citizens and welfare groups would have needed to raise. I couldn’t imagine it would be that much, good ole Paul was being asked to help, and he is loaded, and I read today that the Irwin clan were involved in this too. Thats a lot of cash right there. But if we couldn’t have raised the money, then nothing would have been lost, the kangaroos wouldn’t have starved by that time. So why not wait and see?

Round and round in circles we go….

Considering that it was likely that private citizens and animal welfare groups would have paid for it

What are you basing this on? Seriously.

imarty: My real agenda, well in all truth i was rasing those kangaroos as my unholy army of the night, there were only months away being ready for a full invasion of Tasmania, basards weren’t going to be so smug with their clean water, awesome mountains and good beer after my kangaroos stomped them. Now its all gone to crap, my army is in ruins and the Tasmanians are smugger than ever and i looted none of their beer. Oh no! now my secret is out no one could possibly believe my cover story that I just don’t want a bunch of kangaroos to die when they don’t have to. Damn you and your cunning interrogation techniques!

Duke: No duke, a possible solution is to relocate, hence the trial. Maybe it would work, maybe not at all, maybe relocation plus breeding programs of predators, maybe relocation plus this fertility treatments ive heard so much about. If there is a more humane solution than culling, I want it found. Trials is how that sort of thing happens. Considering that it was likely that private citizens and animal welfare groups would have paid for it, again I ask what did the government have to lose? Why couldn’t they just wait and see if the money could be raised? That is not unreasonable.

No the ACT was not the first to attempt a relocation, as they did not attempt a relocation.

and do you honestly think the ACT was to be the first to attempt a relocation?

Once again your solution for over population is to relocate, a cull being a last resort.
The problem of over population would still eventuate even without a fence – that’s why other states cull – because even in vast expanses of open land kangaroos over populate!

Maybe so in your eyes tap but all this angst over a couple of hundred roos.
Really? How many posts now? What’s your real agenda?
Have you spent time in the bush, on the land, or close to rural industries? How closely do you really understand this situation and if so, what’s your ultimate, best case scenario solution?

Err no duke, I suggested many things mainly that this was a trial, and dependant on its success then maybe it would be used more widely. To say that a trial should not happen only because it has not happened in the past is obviously absurd. If this relocation did prove to be a more humane solution (i do mean solution) then I would want it instead of culling in all circumstances.

Lets not forget that the problem with these kangaroos was a fence. Relocation to a place where they are not boxed in, problem solved.

Over population of kangaroos is certainly a wider issue, and one that should be addressed, with culling being a very last resort, however it is not the issue at hand with these kangaroos in Lawson.

What you’re suggesting tap is that no kangaroo in Australia should ever be killed because there is always the option of relocation. Kangaroos are not just held captive by fences, but by convenience, shelter, access to water, territorial reasons.

You cannot advocate the rights of one mob while ignoring the plight of others. Over population is due mainly to a lack of predators and relocating a herd does not solve a problem, it relocates a problem.

Imarty: Lame.

Duke: Good point. Im honestly not sure they should be. This would lead me to wonder why other culls should take place, rather than why this one shouldn’t.

I can only assume that in the cases of other culls in australia the reasons are different, the overpopulation may be due to something other than a ruddy great fence keeping the poor bastards in. Maybe it is because in this particular case, the blame is so completely with the humans that makes this one different. A main reason for this cull is to protect native species, which is a little strange. I almost hope these other species are endangered, at least that would make some kind of sense. But most importantly the difference is that there really is another option available. This relocation was going to be a trial, so its fair to assume that if the trial was successful then chances are relocation might have become more widely used all around australia. Maybe the difference is no one had realistically thought about other options before.

But what really gets up my nose about this is the money. It has been decided that it would cost the federal govnernment too much (the figures about how much it would have cost are still disputed). There was the option available to wait and see if the animal rights groups and other people against the culling could raise the money, or at least make up the difference between the price of this humane slaughter (yeah… emotive words, but true ones) and the relocation. Yet they just didn’t. Things were in motion towards raising the money, a month or two would have been enough to find out if the money could be raised or not. Why didn’t they let that happen? What did they have to lose?

DMD,you are an idiot, you too tap. It is a cull. They are not killing off an entire mob. Relocation was always a poor option. The kangaroos are a pest and not just in this instance, it is harming the ecology of the area. Sure we might be ultimately responsible for this but hey, you can’t change history. Sure better planning is required for the future so efforts in this area may be a more sensible option than freezing your arse off out at Lawson or whinging here.
All other arguments here are merely superfluous and just make you feel better as some of the more level heads around here ahve stated.
We aren’t at the top of the food chain for nothing.

No, i’ve read all the comments DMD, and i’ve read the papers. They’re culling approximately 400 of the estimated 750 kangaroos. Your fondness for hyperbole does your cause no help.

So I repeat, why should ACT grey kangaroos be treated differently than the other roo mobs around Australia?

Duke, you obviously have not read any of the posts above you. This is not a cull. They are killing off an entire mob of kangaroos.

At the very least could somebody explain to me why the ACT kangaroos deserve special treatment? Both local and Federal governments seem to understand that roo culls happen all over Australia all the time, so why would they spend money saving just the Canberra ones? Suely if they were to relocate the Canberra roos they would have to apply the same moral principle to all kangaroos wherever they might be.

Special G: Make it feasiblethe government should spend the money. Therefore spend the money. Easy.

Will they disrupt another area? No, because they are being slaughtered. If they had been relocated then thats what we would have found out, the whole thing being a trial and all.

Ozhair: Im pretty sure it was Maelinar who brought the subject of japanese whaling into this. Even people who are for the culling of these roos can see that this will have an effect in australias debate with japan over their whaling.

Ozhair, I am not saying that the roos are endangered. I am also not trying to gain ‘media coverage’ by addressing how this issue will obviously arise in further debates between ourselves and the Japanese over whaling. Just wait, I’ll call my agent to confirm this…

Special G – Eastern Grays are native to this area. The local environment will be able to adapt a lot easier to a forced migration of Eastern Grays (I doubt anyone would be shipping them to Europe, where the rabbits came from, or South America, where the toads came from). Do you think Eastern Grays stick around when the area they are inhabiting comes under threat? Or do you think they might move a few kilometers to safety?

Wow, you go away for a few minutes…

Japan claims the whales are not endangered, this however flies in the face of most other statistics on the subject. Japan is a lone voice in using the “not endangered” argument.

Not even the cull protesters can make the claim that roos are endangered.

What I’m saying is that the protesters shouldn’t be the ones to draw a comparison to roos and whaling simply to garner some extra media coverage. This is weakening one argument to strengthen another. They should be pointing out to the Japanese media that the cull and whaling are two completely separate issues, and put forth their own arguments against the cull.

I think tap is trying to get his rating up by multiple posts. I have read your posts – when on topic you simply say relocation is the answer yet fail to address any ideas on how to make this a feasable option. People relocated bunnies and cane toads and we have seen how they panned out – will the Eastern Grays when relocated to another area disrupt the environmental balance in that area?

Agreed DMD, thats what i was saying.

Even if the minke whale weren’t, tap, killing a animal of that size to get at a few small parts is pretty brutal. Japan has access to many other meat sources.

They will use this culling as an argument against us and they have every right to. Australia has lost credibility on the world stage in regards to the treatment of it’s native species.

Are you guys sure that the minke whale is endangered? cause im pretty sure that the japanese are adament that they are not.

Good point DMD, and while we are it it did a firm answer (everyone agreed on) for the cost of the trial relocation ever show up?

The trolls response to being called a troll is to counter-accuse the other side of being trolls

Ummm, who did the counter accusation again?

By the way…how much money is being spent rounding up the kangaroos, dart-gunning them and moving their bodies?

Maelinar, I assume you’ll be leading to the call to arms in the great Japan/Australia whaling war? Japan still hasn’t yielded to our almighty-ness so far.

The fact that the Americans beat the Japanese (then proceeded to pound them with nuclear weapons) with Australian help has very little effect on the diplomacy between Japan and Australia regarding whaling. It’s pretty plain obvious – Australia protests against Japanese whaling, Japan tells us to f-ck off. Hardly the attitude you’d expect against the major world power you seem to think Australia is.

Thumper, you are correct, Whales are endangered, Eastern Grays are not. However, whether the kangaroos are endangered or not has never been the center of the issue here. The question is, is it justifiable to kill an entire mob of kangaroos, regardless of the overall species’ population, for the purposes of building on the land they inhabit? The further question, which in my opinion has not been satisfactorily answered, is there no feasible alternative? It should not cost $8750 per kangaroo to move them. Even if it does, why hasn’t enough time been given to allow money to be raised if the government cannot foot the bill themselves? Or even better, why an’t they look for contractors that don’t charge as much?

Until those questions answered the blood will be on the government’s hands.

The trolls response to being called a troll is to counter-accuse the other side of being trolls. How novel.

What they fail to realise, is people with a memory longer than 5 minutes will remember the last thread they serially protested on, and the one before that, and the one before that, and the one before that, and so on.

Their actions speak louder than words. Since I’m no longer feeding them, they appear to be getting hungry.

Special G, if the trial relocation did take place i would hazard a guess at … say zero protestors?

I havn’t missed the point. But im not just going to completely repeat myself again. Not worth it. You can find my answers on this post.

tap – You’re not getting the point – relocation was deemed to be too costly and as such is not being put back on the agenda. At the end of the day costs associated with an option need to be considered and people with the purse strings were not prepared to dish out $7k per roo to have them relocated. If this was the case how many people would be protesting about the needless spending of funds on an animal that in many areas is a pest. Too many skips are detrimental to the environmental sustainability of an area placing other species at risk. To a degree we created the situation and now are fixing it.

The reason the roos are being tranqed and injected is the danger trace of firearms in an urban environment being unacceptable otherwise skip would be getting shot as is the normal process.

I still reckon farming the roos is a much better option than anything else offered. They are already fenced of.

yum yum.

Neanderthalsis: So this is your style then, when you are caught out on something you just claim your opponent is a troll. There is one other person like that on here, and people are taking him less and less seriously because of it.

does having an opinion different to the majority now equated to being a troll?

Thumper: Im pretty sure the japanese argue that the whales they catch aren’t endangered either. Not that I believe the japanese on this subject, but our position of moral superiority has been badly damaged by this.

It seems it will. But ill be bitching and the protestors protesting until its done. You never know, a kangaroo or two might be spared the death penalty.

We need a big sign at the entrance that reads: DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS

Well there is a fourth option to go with the third.

The japanese will say we are hypocrits, and that is because we are.

We could just tell them it is for scientific research and paint RESEARCH on the side of the rifles to show we’re legit scientists.

No word on why hiding our immoral acts from the japanese is a good idea?? anyone? sounds like a fairly hopeless idea to me is all…

Neanderthalsis – yes.

Ok we’ll see if there needs to be another cull.

Once more: Third option you forgot: Put relocation back on the cards.

Tap, you forgot the fertility treatment that will prevent a population explosion the next time we get a healty dose of rain and a lot of green grass. With that, they would not need follow up culls.

neanderthalisis: Sustainable poopulation until the next cull right?

Third option that you forgot: Put relocation back on the cards.

Shhhh lets kill the kangaroos quick and hope the japanese don’t notice!! And then the pesky protestors go and ruin it all by making a point of it.

Possibly we could stare the japanese in the eye over our view of their whaling (they claim the whales are not endangered…) a little better if we didn’t partake in needless culls of kangaroos? Surely that would give us the moral ground we want.

Is the fact that they are culling part of the population of roos on this site to ensure the sustainability of the population in the future totally lost on some people?

The population of kangaroos is too high to be maintained in a confined urban space and it is pitting undue pressure on other species that are considered endangered i.e the Sun Moth, Gindinderra Grasses, a species of grasshopper and the Stripey Legged Lizard. This is why the cull is taking place.

Most of us did agree that the translocation option was a relatively good solution, there were concerns that the problem would just be shifted elsewhere; but with a bit of forethought it could have worked. Now that it is off the cards the options are we can cull some of the roos, or leave them all to starve.

I know that I personally would prefer a smaller, sustainable roo population with sufficient feed on site than a huge starving mob. But then again, I’m inhumane…

p1 – I can’t read japanese, so have taken this from reports about reports – but I think it’s fair to say that the JWC are doing exactly that.

Of course to us over here in Australia it sounds perfectly natural, kangaroos ain’t all kangaroos, and whales need protection at all costs, even from their own stupidity.

In the Japanese mind, they used to whale off their coastline. Then someone figured out that NZ and Australia were closer to the whales, and decimated the species. Now that they have the fishing capacity to get whales again, they find it highly empirical of us to dictate to them why we should leave whales alone.

Of course, we have beaten them once, so can tell them to do certain things, unlike Gallipoli and Vietnam, where they can say ‘come and try to take it again then’ to us.

So they use our situation re: kangaroos to their advantage. If you look beyond the ‘but this thing is a kangaroo, the other is a whale’ emotive crap that some others profess I’m wrong about, you’ll find their media is abuzz with our hypocritical stance.

Which is strengthening their position on whaling. The longer this continues, the more damage is being done, as it is under the glare of Sauron’s eye.

FC – Fair comment. As I said, I’m probably working from a jaded, more cynical viewpoint, which some may see as unfortunate. But it’s always served me in that I will never automatically fall in behind one side or the other as many seem to do. And that goes for both sides, your apathetic masses and the “radicals”. That doesn’t mean I’m a fence sitter, but that I’ll be careful about into which ring I throw my hat. (Yes, I know, I’m murdering my metaphors)

And just for the record, I fully support the fundamental right to protest. But that doesn’t mean I’m not going to question the motivations of those protesting just as much as those they’re protesting about.

Ozhair: I get what you are saying about the serial protesters – but again – it might just be that people care – and about a variety of things.
Also – Canberra isn’t exactly a big city – so people continuously being at protests would stand out more than in other places.

Not directed at you anymore Ozhair –
But I seem to get the feeling that our society is one that seems to support apathy.
In a whole lot of areas.
It really saddens me sometimes that peoples minds just shut off to anything that doesn’t fit inside there box.
I wonder if it comes down to people thinking that if you start caring about one things, thing you might have to care about another – and Oh – it might take some effort on their behalf and might even change the status quo. and this isn’t directed directly at the roo issue – but in a broader sense.
This is how change comes about.
By people (usually the minority) start caring about things, speak up about it, they might even protest about it!
they usually get vilified by the mainstream, they get frustrated, wonder with so many opposing people if its worth the fight, they continue on – then a while later the thing they are fighting for becomes normal and all the maintream that were previously completly against it and all the “radicals” carrying on about it, now seeing it as normal claim they always thought it made sense..

Care to align the Japanese media presence at the last protest with your above statement p1, or are you as full of it as Tap and WMD?

I didn’t mean say that they wouldn’t think it justifies their killing of whales, just that to think it does is fu<king stooopid. I’m sure the Japanese Whaling commission will milk it for all the propaganda it is worth.

Just like to point out that I have never actually tagged Tap as a “serial protester”. He didn’t get what Skid was talking about in reference to him in an earlier post, and I tried to explain it in terms of my own personal catch-phrase, which I then decided needed further clarification. I did in fact state that I hadn’t read enough by him to form an opinion on him personally.

Tap, in fact, is doing a reasonable job of representing his side of the argument. I still don’t agree with him, though 😉

The whole roos/whales thing really has little to do with this cull. It’s just one of those things where, as I mentioned, people are using the situation to push their own agenda. Roos number in their millions, whales are highly endangered. Whales are shot with explosive harpoons, these roos are tranqed then injected. There’s really no comparison, and I’m wondering what the protesters at the site have been saying to the Japanese news crew. Are they the ones drawing this comparison, and in so doing weakening the anti-whaling protest, giving the Japanese “if they can do it, so can we” amunition? Isn’t this self-defeating?

Maelinar: Still wondering how be against the slaughter of kangaroos is at odds with being against the slaughter of whales?? Come on little buddy, admit that you got it a litte wrong there. Comepletely backwards even. Truth is that being for the needless slaughter of kangaroos here lessens our position on being against japanese whaling.

Meaning that I think the majority, probably everyone protesting this issue really only wants the kangaroos to not be killed. Not saying they have their facts straight on every in and out of the issue. If they do feel a certain pride for standing up for what they believe, I do not believe that lessens that they do believe. The self serving purposes you describe are not enough to make me think that they are there for the wrong reasons.

“My post was my view on the “serial protester” mindset, using this particular case as an example, so as such may be slightly off-topic.”

But why do you think Tap is protesting just for the sake of protesting? As far as I can see, he has provided credible reasoning for his opposition to the cull. Also, did you actually stop and think to ask if he was actually there? I haven’t seen him say it.

Ozhair: When you say protestors self serving purposes can be to feel that they’re doing something important do you really consider that a bad thing? You do not think this issue is important, they do. And the organisers feel a power trip, well they might, most leaders do i spose, not neccassarily a bad thing of course. Also of these self serving reasons, none of them discount the protest at hand. If a protestor thinks ‘im doing something important by going and protesting this issue i feel strongly about’ What is wrong with that? Remember in your opinion this issue isn’t worth it, in theirs it is.

Cull/Slaughter just calling it like it truly is. I think that using the word culling is a way to remove emotion from whats really happening.

And yes, cynic you are. 😉

I disagree with you on your opinion on protest (and protestors overall), and in this particular issue. But yeah, that happens.

Deadmandrinking said :

I assumed that’s what you meant by ‘serial protester’. How in the hell is that a put-down anyway? Are you saying that people SHOULDN’T exercise their right to protest when an issue arises?

Of course not. I’m saying that there’s a certain mindset that protests for the sake of protesting, usually with little idea about the actual issues. And that I think there’s an element of this in this current protest.

The title of this topic is “Kangaroo Cull Attracting Misguided Protesters”. In discussing why I believe they (and some other protesters) are misguided, I believe I’m no terribly far off-topic. And certainly more on-topic than usually occurs in these forums.

Take a look at your track record, Mael. This may be the first time in years you’ve ever said something on-topic.

Umm…no, because they are rounding the kangaroos up and killing them.

Ngunnawal people tap? No, I mean the mob from the illegal camp.

Not sure if they’r worried about the natural way or life cycle. Where’d you hear that? Was it on the news?

heh – the umbilical serial protesters are now offering forum rules that they’ve broken countless times themselves.

Anyway – since the fence has been cut, isn’t it a natural conclusion that the roos will eventually disperse or is this one of those lemmings issues ?

I assumed that’s what you meant by ‘serial protester’. How in the hell is that a put-down anyway? Are you saying that people SHOULDN’T exercise their right to protest when an issue arises?

Duke: Isn’t this the federal government?

Regardless of which , no its not. This has been covered in many comments already, try this one from FC Well the money isn’t going to aid ppl in Burma now that it hasn’t been used to relocate the roos, now is it?

Also see my comment Can someone give me a link to the speech where the prime minister said something along the lines of ‘We have 3.5 million, we can either save the kangaroos in Lawson, build a youth centre, or send aid to burma. What’ll it be?’? If not, then please stop trying to argue that this is the case. That point has been well and truly answered by many of us now.

Has the ACT(??? Defense land isn’t it?) Government decided the money could be better spent on ‘human causes’. What are these human causes? All I have heard is that its just too expensive.

DMD, who’s the fool? I’ve never once mentioned China or Burma.

Tap, I did say my comments were entirely my own opinion.

And I wasn’t pushing the actual cause as much in my last post, because I know it’s pointless. I have my view on this issue, you have yours, and it’s very obvious that there will never be any way that we will come together over it. On other issues you may find we stand side by side.

My post was my view on the “serial protester” mindset, using this particular case as an example, so as such may be slightly off-topic. No, as far as I know Resistance has nothing to do with this particualr protest, but I never said they did. I was referring to “groups like Resistance, etc” as part of the mindset discussion.

What self-serving motives do these sort of people have? The need to feel that they’re doing something important, that they are the ones making a difference against the almighty Machine. In the cases of those who rally these things, it can be a power trip. Once again, my opinion, based on a number of years of observation. Sometimes they get things right and do good, a lot of times they seem to be woefully misinformed.

Once again, I believe there are causes worth standing up about. My ex was part of the People Power movement in the Philippines that ousted the Marcos regime. I know that good can come from protest.

In this instance, yes, Defence went for the cheaper option. But that’s a harsh reality you have to face; sometimes the money just ain’t there.

The people created this cause – Because I’m pro cull, not anti, I will happily say that I believe it’s the protesters who have beaten up and overinflated the importance of this issue.

Yes, some of these people are against the cull (or shall we keep on using those deliberately emotive terms like “slaughter”?) because that’s what they believe. Yay for them.

But, cynic that I am, I doubt the personal motivations of many of these people.

And point taken on my “majority of Canberrans” statement. I was guilty of the “opinion as fact” mistake I’ve accused others of. True, just because the majority go along with something doesn’t make it right. But just because a minority of self-righteous protesters make a lot of noise about something doesn’t make it right, either.

And in this particular instance, I think you’re wrong.

Cheers

Vg, rarely does culling involve killing an entire mob. Anyway, they are killing this mob because they want to build something on the land they inhabit. That is not culling, that is a poor way of dealing with the environment before you undergo construction.

Ozhair, you are a fool, I’m sorry. Tap should not be wasting his time on you. This issue has nothing to do with China, or Tibet. To post an opinion on this topic about Tibet would be going off-topic and would not be helpful to this debate. I suggest you learn how a forum works before you post. Start by learning how a conversation works.

RuffnReady said :

Freakin neo-fascists. I am proudly left-leaning, possibly even a “hippy” by your standards, but I agree with culling the roos. How does your ignorant frame deal with that?

I was commenting on the way people like to polarise things into “US v THEM” and call all people who give a damn about the environment “hippies”, “clueless tree-huggers”, etc.

Anyway, the roos need to be culled. And it needs to happen on Mt Majura too.

Tap – the references to funding for Burma, China, schools and hospitals is entirely relevant. See unbeknownst to some protesters, the ACT doesn’t have a bottomless pit of money it can throw at every needy cause – the Government must ration its money.

The ACT Government has decided the relocation money could be better spent on human causes.

Ozhair: Well the first two paragraphs are merely bashing the people who you think are behind this, not the issue at all. Quesiton though, does resistance have anything to do with this protest? Another question: What do you think the protestors have to gain out of this? what is their self serving motives? And I really hope that your answer will have more substance than ‘the protestors just want to be on tv!’.

Defense did say there is an alternative. Remember what this is about? That they changed plan from a trial relocation of the kangaroos to slaughtering them because they decided the first option was too expensive. This means defense knows there are other options, but just took the cheapest.

The people created this cause… Do you mean the people who fenced in the poor bastards in the first place? if so, then true. The protestors did not though, they are reacting to something happening that they disagree with, as is their right.

You keep mentioning this secret self serving purpose behind the protests. Don’t you think its more likely that the protestors are simply against the slaughter? And not just acting against the slaughter to… do what exactly?

Oh and I’ll take your word for it that the majority of canberrans agree with you shall I? Although what point you think that proves im not sure, just because an idea is popular (if in fact it is) does not make it right.

Barking toad: If you are talking about the ngunnawal people, perhaps they realise that this slaughter has nothing to do with the natural way, or a kangaroos life cycle. It is simply a slaughter that does not have to happen.

While we’re talking about “labels” and “serial protesters”, can anyone explain the motive of the smokers from the illegal camp?

Traditionally these “protesters” would have been chasing skippy with those pointed sticks and throwing lumps of wood that come back if you miss. But these implements didn’t get a mention in the press. And the fire didn’t get a mention for cooking purposes.

As they’re familar with the skippy life cycle I can’t imagine they’d be lining up with the neighbourly Ms Corke on the extinction bandwagon or aligning themselves with Coralie.

What’s the go I wonder?

Okay, let’s try this again.

As with anything else said on these boards, this is just my opinion. Maybe I’m getting overly cynical in my old age, but having been to a lot of protests over the years in the course of covering them for the news, I’ve formed the above-mentioned opinion on “serial protesters”. Observing from the outside, I’ve come to seriously question the motivations of a lot of people who participate in groups like “Resistance”, etc, believing them to be entirely self-serving. These people have an agenda they want to push as much as any politician.

While there are issues I do believe need to be brought to and kept in the public attention, in this particular case I personally feel that the issue has been blown way out of proportion and has been taken over by the afore-mentioned self-servers.

So, yes, I am thinking about the people, not just the cause, because it’s the people who created this cause.

YOU say there is another way, Defence says different. Just because it’s the big, bad Government doesn’t automatically mean they’re lying. The animal libbers come up with their own experts to refute what the Government says. Just because the info comes from the protest side, we’re supposed to automatically believe that their numbers are correct?

The Government may have an agenda here, but so do the protesters, and I’m not just talking about saving a few roos. My opinion in this case, and the opinion of the majority of Canberrans, sides with Defence. Just because a lot of people don’t agree with you doesn’t mean they’re “apathetic” as I believe one person described them in the video on CanberraVotes. It means that they believe you’ve got the wrong end of the stick.

Oh, and if we’re talking about wedge arguments, could the protest side please stop going on about “How could we possibly kill an animal on our national emblem!” Now THAT really has nothing to do with this cull.

Cheers

Its funny how as soon as someone is labelled a “protester” of a “hippy,” people tend to devalidate what they are protesting about. That’s what labelling does.

True. I also wonder why people are so against the general premise of protesting.

wait wait the Thoughtless, selfish, cnuts. was a quote as well.

I wonder how the dreadlocked and unwashed would respond when informed their actions are being directly beamed into Japanese households – and is affecting their international position on eating yummy whale.

Thoughtless, selfish, cnuts.

Still wondering how be against the slaughter of kangaroos is at odds with being against the slaughter of whales?? Funny though, I heard a protestor the other day saying exactly the same thing, except with the word ‘government’ instead of ‘dreadlocked and unwashed’…?

FC – I find labelling a very efficient way of labelling people.

haha Tap = serial protestor, a relevant analogy/label.

@Duke – military hardware is not for use in jest. It is inappropriate to use a sniper rifle to kill vermin. I could understand Defence purchasing the relevant firearm, and sending their staff to the police to obtain a firearms licence as a cost efficient process, however something that has been designed to kill, and if not kill, to maim, is definetly not a good choice.

Actually, there are far too many other complications that arise from using military personnel, so scrub my last – contractors are a better option.

Maybe the same people are protesting because- surprise – when you care about injustices – you tend to care about all injustices and would therefore participate in protests about various things, if they are, in your mind, wrong. does not mean that they just like protesting about anything.
Its funny how as soon as someone is labelled a “protester” of a “hippy,” people tend to devalidate what they are protesting about. That’s what labelling does.

Ozhair: Yep here we are, the second round.

Ok so we’ve got past the ‘You shouldn’t be protesting because you havn’t done enough’,

now we are at the ‘You shouldn’t be protesting because you’ve done too much’. Bah.

How about you stop thinking about the people, and just the cause. That is actually what we are discussing here. But I do wonder why you think a person can only protest one issue? Its somehow as if you think that protesting an issue means you have no right to opinions (which may lead to protesting) on other issues. Strange.

The circles are starting to happen quite frequently now, but as discussed previously the slaughter is not neccessary (there are other options), but it is unpalatable.

And no, I don’t think this issue is a left wing/right wing issue at all.

Skid’s point, tap, was I believe to point out that you (in his opinion, I haven’t read many of your posts) are what I would refer to as a “serial protester”. That if you hadn’t found the roo’s to protest about this week, then it would have been something else.

This is why a lot of the general public are wary of people who are the most vocal about issues like these, because if you watch long enough, start to see the same faces at every protest, you start to realise that the cause itself isn’t really important to these people, it’s the mere fact that they have a cause, any cause, which will let them vent their spleens, wring their hands, and go “Waily waily!” on the evening news. It’s all about them feeling important and self-fulfilled that they’re dealing with “issues”, rather than the issues themselves.

I’ve fallen into the category of a “right-winger” for my opinion on the culling here apparently. Yet in most aspects of my life I would class myself as very firmly to the left. Sometimes you just have to realise that certain things, while unpalatable, may be neccessary.

Can someone give me a link to the speech where the prime minister said something along the lines of ‘We have 3.5 million, we can either save the kangaroos in Lawson, build a youth centre, or send aid to burma. What’ll it be?’? If not, then please stop trying to argue that this is the case. That point has been well and truly answered by many of us now.

One week, Skid. Up until a little over a week ago the plan was to do a trial relocation of the kangaroos. Why are you persisting with this lie?

The set pool of funds is a fair bit larger than 3.5 million. Fact is that the relocation of the kangaroos, wouldn’t have stopped aid to burma, or whatever the next wedge is that people are trying to use.

Its clear as day they don’t ‘need’ to be killed. Another lie.

What has Tibet got to do with this? Now this is called character assasination, where skid is trying to besmirch my name in the hopes that people will not pay attention wo what im saying. But look at his logic: I havn’t mentioned tibet recently (incorrect, I protested, and have been actively posting in every thread about tibet, but that is also irrelevant) therefore I am wrong about kangaroos in Lawson. The logic is clearly flawed.

On another note I don’t see how being against the slaughter of kangaroos is at odds with being against the Japanese slaughter of whales. In fact it seems more consistant than anything else.

Unfortunately the money can’t be sent to Burma or China, or spent on schools, hospitals etc because the ‘humane’ option is likely to burn up most of the funds anyway.

It’s outrageous the government has brought in outside shooters using drugs to kill instead of bullets. It defies belief that Defence can’t rattle up a few shartp shooters from their own ranks – Our Boys being deployed overseas could have got some valuable trigger time on some moving targets and had this whole problem sorted by lunch time.

I’d argue too that a bullet is quicker and less traumatic to the animal than tranquilizers followed by lethal injection.

Re: One year,
My mistake, the first sense of an ACT Governmental no was in July ’07 (10 months ago) when Defence first started its enquiries.
Defence may have given it a go ahead after their months-long inquiry, but they still had a minor logistics problem of moving them through the ACT, who had said no in no uncertain terms.

I raise the 3.5m price issue and community uses of 3.5m in funding because governments only a have a set pool of funds from which to draw from, need to explain their use of public funds not just to the public but ANAO, and moving a herd of kangaroos at $6000/head probably shouldn’t be at the top of priorities for a Government (Federal or Local) expecting a either a majority vote or an increase in voter numbers.
Placating the small number of cuddle-the-pests voters comes at a cost of alienating a larger number of core-voters who want money spent on their issues.

After things had been delayed for so long, I’m guessing someone new showed up on the Defence side of things and decided that the time to hesitate was through, there was no time to wallow in the mire, etc…
So decided to solve the problem with a gun, and let God sort out his own.

Tap may not like people arguing that kangaroos may need to be killed, but there will be another emotive bandwagon to come along shortly, and Tap’s unfiltered enthusiasm will need to be directed at some new\lost cause.
I note he hasn’t used the word “Tibet” recently.

@Thumper, google is telling me that it might have an element of untruth in it. Ironic, when it is being used as an example of something they believed to be untrue.

Well the money isn’t going to aid ppl in Burma now that it hasn’t been used to relocate the roos, now is it?
And caring about the cull doesn’t mean people don’t care about international aid.
Nor does it mean that people aren’t actively involved in other charities, and/or donating money to international aid, or fighting for the “larger” issues.
becuase there is big shit going on out there doesn’t mean the small things aren’t worth fighting for.

Care to align the Japanese media presence at the last protest with your above statement p1, or are you as full of it as Tap and WMD ?

……and this at a time when over 100 thousand people have died in Burma and over 40 thousand in China (those numbers climbing daily btw) due to natural disasters. It really is an odd sense of priorities some people have.

I’d rather see that 3.5 million/750 thousand go to international aid.

….Australia couldn’t affect any diplomatic action against them on the subject of whaling…..

That is just plain dopey and makes about as much sense as saying that the Chinese will be able to justify eating Pandas now to.

While I think that it is sad that they feel it necessary to kill the ‘roos simply because the site (which has been essentially abandoned for some time) has had high fences and they couldn’t get out, I think both the fore and against arguments have been massive beat ups by various people hoping to forward their own agendas.

@FC – I’ve long advocated pulling down the fences, and stomping the ground with a batallion of troops to evict them into Canberra’s vaunted ‘nature corridors’ as viable alternative solutions.

Most other people, realising that this is the 15th thread on the same topic, are cognisant of these facts. Your points are only relevant to comments in this thread alone, and are thus not representative of the entire issue.

VG and Special G – and not to mention that we look like a bunch of idiots on the international circuit. The Japanese must be quite convinced by now that Australia couldn’t affect any diplomatic action against them on the subject of whaling, when we can’t even sort out animal issues in our capital city – not even 50km from the PM’s seat.

I wonder how the dreadlocked and unwashed would respond when informed their actions are being directly beamed into Japanese households – and is affecting their international position on eating yummy whale.

Thoughtless, selfish, cnuts.

Tap – Your argument seems accurate, consistant and makes sense. Most of your antagonisic posters appear to change their arguments, call names, stereotype. a whole bunch of things that prove that they have no real argument to back them up.

Kangaroo numbers in Oz to high eh.
Well.. NOTHING to do with this cull! That is not why they are getting slaughtered.
Schools, Youth Centres, starving children, etc etc.
NOTHING to do with this issue!
Does killing the kangaroos held the starving children, build more schools etc?
No, of course it doesn’t. It has NOTHING to do with it!

I think it is just easier for some to go down the easy path. It requires less thinking amnd caring.
Cos sometimes giving a shit about living creatures requires us to step out of our comfortable lifes for a bit and take some action, or it changes our simplistic view of the world – something that is not always pleasant.
I guess we can’t really blame them though. Some people will never have the capacity to think about things at that level, and they never will.
Its a shame really.

Felix the Cat said :

barking toad said :

but apparently some old boiler from Cop Shop has, along with some no-name from Neighbours or some other show.

Barge Arse??

Frack the roos. Then frack all the hippies

“Special G, there is a difference between culling and mass-slaughter. The former is done in small amounts over time. “

Bollocks

Have you ever seen or participated in a culling? They happen every year in places like Nimmitabel, near Cooma. Shooters both amateur and professional participate in the annual roo culling. A lot of roos are killed but done for a reason. It is not a slaughter but an annual culling.

A slaughter would have no rhyme nor reason, a culling quite the opposite. I see no protestors in Nimmitabel or the central-west of NSW where these things happen quite regularly with nothing more than a bullet per roo.

Some of you people really need to get a grip on reality rather than jump on some sort of moral bandwagon every time something resembling ‘violence’ comes to the fore. The roos are not an endangered species and are being culled for a legitimate reason. If you feel so strongly about it start setting up roadside flower beds for every dead skip you see on Sutton Road during summer. I bet by the end of it you’ll total over 400.

The core protestors have no credibility nor brains, clearly demonstrated by the fact they firstly brought in an unrelated joey as an ‘example’, then releasing not once, but twice roos that weren’t to be culled, only causing more issues. Bit like me bringing you an Aboriginal friend to a BBQ and using them as an example of why there shoould be an intervention in Darfur……I mean their skin colours are nearly the same aren’t they (an d no, that comment is not racist in any way, shape or form. I have close friends of both ethnic backgrounds).

Once its all over and done with the NIMBYs will find some equally piss weak agenda to launch into, the proposed gas plan southside would be my guess.

The sky isn’t falling

Speaking of pedants and trolls maelinar, please learn the difference between ‘your’ and ‘you’re’ (see example below).

Tap, I think you’re wrong about the cull but I admire your resilience and conviction.

Well personally im shocked, I guess i can no longer look to neighbours actors for the truth in all matters.

As I said, the left gets some morons. But if I say Naomi Robson, will you just accept that no-one is responsible for how attractive they look to the smaller minds? A good argument will always be clapped on by a few buffoons.

barking toad said :

Well, the ex-partner of ‘one leg’ hasn’t turned up yet but apparently some old boiler from Cop Shop has, along with some no-name from Neighbours or some other show.

The Neighbours personality is Fiona Corke who stated in an article in the Herald Sun today that “kangaroos could soon be extinct in Australia”.

Do these people actually put any thought at all into what they say?

Read other informative comments by Fiona Corke – http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23732688-662,00.html

Special G, there is a difference between culling and mass-slaughter. The former is done in small amounts over time. If the mob were ever considered a problem untill defense decided to build on the land, they wouldn’t have reached 400. This cull is purely for the purposes of construction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll – to prevent any further confusion. Note: ‘someone who posts controversial and usually irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention of baiting other users into an emotional response’ does not cover someone merely having a differing opinion.

And here’s me thinking its the trolls that do the baiting…

Special G: Im doing less insulting that you.

This isn’t about overall kangaroo numbers though. Changing the argument is another common tactic of people with very little substance to back their opinion.

Probably more killed? Ill take your word on that probability. But again that has zero to do with the issue at hand. We have covered ‘if you think a, you must think b, and b is ridiculous!’ style arguments before. Same goes for ‘if you think a, you must act on b, or else you are hypocritical!’.

Third paragraph is worthless all round.

tap and DMD out to protect the innocent again with insults and poor arguments. Facts are people that skippy has risen to greater numbers than Australia would otherwise sustain due to intervention by the white man. Land clearing and the like created greater terrain suitable for skippy sustainability – thus increase in Kanga numbers.

One of the greatest causes of car accidents in Canberra is hitting skippy, there are probably more killed each year by car collisions than will be killed in the cull yet I don’t hear any regular protests re this.

Should have gone out, knocked skippy and put on a Canberra bbq and invited everyone to try a lean source of red meat. yum yum.

Heya Skid – your not alone in your opinions. I found your descriptors reasonably accurate portrayals of the steriotypes I would expect to find, were I to drive over to the naval station.

Only a pedant would see the wires, and people to only go to punch and judy shows to look at the wires, are freaks. Nice troll baiting 🙂

Skidblanir: Didn’t you see the news? The protestors started making arrangements for funding what the government should have funded about a day before the slaughter started. That is not long enough at all, the government said it was too expensive, and that was that as far as they were concerned, weren’t interested in the relocation being privately funded.

How many people did I claim? I cant seem to find where I made a claim about numbers?

Absolutely lying about what I’ve said another useful argument tactic? You think the other people reading this post won’t see through it? Well hopefully if I point out to them the tactics you are using they might.

Hi lurkers,

You should note that he has again tried to put the same wedge in the argument. $3.5 million can buy one hell of a youth centre, 1% of a water infrastructure development, or maybe half the cost of a fairly significant local drug rehab or mental healthcare program.. This is totally true of course, but what he fails to mention is that buying a youth centre and relocating some kangaroos are not mutually exclusive. The truth of the matter: Both can be done! Further truth: If someone wants the kangaroos to be relocated that does not mean a) that person is a drug taking communist hippie faggot. b) They are against paying for youth centres c) They are against paying for water infastructure development d) They are against paying for local drug rehab or mental health programs e) They are rapists.

People use wedge tactics when they have nothing else to stand on, along with petty insulting generalisations (eg a bunch of lice-encrusted envirofreaks and dreadlocked econazis with no economic sensibilities or apparent political will of their own.) To make it appear like they argument has some substance.

Make no mistake about this, the only argument that Skid has actually put up on topic is this If there really were as many concerned people as you claim, even a few of those protestors with vague sense of organisation (although they’re likely Resistance\Socialist Alliance members, so unable to organise brewery pissups) hitting up passers by for donation of cash hsould have been able to acquire a resonable sum during the almost a year this issue has been around for. (note the tactics i pointed out above again being used) – and even that has a complete lie in it (well a few actually). When he says there has been almost a year to organise this, he tries to brush over that because he is hoping you will just take his word for it. Truth is that the decision to slaughter the animals after all was only made about a week ago. So discounting the lie in skids above statement all that is left is something along the lines of ‘you should have done it by now’. Which, considering the tiny amount of time that has been available to protestors, is an exeptionally weak argument. So we can take that argument out of his armoury.

So whats left? His opinion. He doesn’t care about what happens to the kangaroos. Simple as that. In his opinion the kangaroos should die. Not because of money, not because its either a choice between the roos or a youth centre, not because all protestors are rapists, but just because.

Bye lurkers.

Let me give you a bit of advice skid, find someone better than John Howard to model yourself off, the entire australian public finally grew to realise that he was nothing but a liar.

As I understand it, it wasn’t Paul who was going to be doing the moving.

I smell bullsh-t, on defense’s part.

It’s a per head cost for Paul to bring out the jumbo and return laden to his mull.

Includes in-flight meals and movies.

Nope.

Although whoever did decide to rip off my comment and post it in the ABC forums did point out that the eventual recipients may or may not be getting paid something (astronomic) for use of their land.

Anyone know what the deal was going to have been?

Did someone mange to explain why it costs around $8750 (please correct any bad maths) to move a single kangaroo?

Also, wedge arguments are a successful tactic, especially when arguing in front of an audience.
[points vaguely at the lurking people reading this today or sometime down the track]

Wedging might not work on you this time, but experience and history (eleven years of Howard) shows it work on them.

So the lefties have morons amongst them. A quick browse through this site will cause the moron scales to swing back to the right in full force.

tap said :

Skidblanir: Incorrect. There was not enough time given to see if the protestors could get the money themselves. And don’t try and pull wedge arguments, ‘if you are for schools, you must be aginst the relocation of kangaroos in Lawson.’, it is obvious and untrue.

I’ll bite and feed the troll…

If there really were as many concerned people as you claim, even a few of those protestors with vague sense of organisation (although they’re likely Resistance\Socialist Alliance members, so unable to organise brewery pissups) hitting up passers by for donation of cash hsould have been able to acquire a resonable sum during the almost a year this issue has been around for.
More so if the Green Left were organised and pooled their funding.
This should have been enough time to get in touch with Precious McCartney, and hit him up while he still had money instead of trying -after- One Leg the Pirate took him for a ride and coming across all desperate.

As much as you might like to tout this humane option, it still would have cost a huge amount of money, which other people have as much right to try and hit up the Government as you do.
$3.5 million can buy one hell of a youth centre, 1% of a water infrastructure development, or maybe half the cost of a fairly significant local drug rehab or mental healthcare program.

Against this backdrop of possible community gain or saving human lives, versus simply placating a bunch of lice-encrusted envirofreaks and dreadlocked econazis with no economic sensibilities or apparent political will of their own, please indicate why spending money on rescuing pests should be important.

I heard Coralie admit she is going to marry a carrot!

Soylent Coralie.

Doesn’t Coralie understand that sheep are wildlife too, albeit now domesticated.

Why doesn’t anyone think of the sheep! Way to go with lamb discrimination Coralie!

Hmmm… Sounds like the roo-burger barbie could be back on at my place across the road from the protest.

I listened to Wildcare’s spokesman, Coralie Letica, this morning and she is dumb as. In summary she said, that we would not have this problem if Canberra wasn’t put here in the first place and that we shouldn’d be farming sheep.

It’s not the roo cull that will put people off visiting Canberra it will be dumb-arse’s like Coralie Letica.

neanderhtalsis: ‘if you feel so strongly about x, then you must do y and z or else you are crap.’ We covered these poor arguments back in the tibet protest thread. But ill answer you question, no, at no time did i offer to load a dozen or so ‘roos into the back of me Trabant and drive them to a more suitable site. You got me. *round of applause*

I would have definately contributed financially for it, if enough time were given. So i would have been a part of it.

Tap, did you at any time offer to load a dozen or so ‘roos into the back of you Trabant and drive them to a more suitable site? If you feel so strongly about it, start being part of the “humane option” yourself.

Seeing as the Defence wallahs weren’t prepared (allowed?) to release the forces onto the land for live target practice then option (c) was fine with me. If the tucker got scarce the hopping ones would just move to some other paddock. The grass would grow again and the one-legged flies or whatever would increase in plague numbers to keep the greens happy.

But seeing that “something had to be done!” a cull is as good as (c). Except for hand-wringing hippies and other attention seekers it attracts.

Here’s a hippie thought!

Why not phone Paul and get him to send out the jumbo that recently delivered his new car and he could take some of the hoppers back to his place – release them onto his mull of kintyre. He can’t be too busy now that he’s given one-knee the flick. And he can take up Tim Flummery’s idea and add sulphur to the jet fuel to save the planet. It’s win-win-win-win.

Hand-wringers are happy, hippies are happy, hoppers are still hoppy, and the great unwashed get some revenge for transportation on leaky boats.

Skidblanir: Incorrect. There was not enough time given to see if the protestors could get the money themselves. And don’t try and pull wedge arguments, ‘if you are for schools, you must be aginst the relocation of kangaroos in Lawson.’, it is obvious and untrue.

Neanderthalsis: You figured out that the protestors aren’t happy because the kangaroo is native, not to mention our national symbol all by yourself? Add to that the fact that there is a far more humane option available and you might actually begin to understand.

bonfire: No, never once has there been any protests about the way animals are farmed. Remember though that this is about the fact that there is a more humane option available that isn’t being taken because of cost.

Ruff, if you agree with the need for a cull then you do not fit the targeted demographic of my rant.

you never see any protests when the urban cows that dot the ACT open spaces disappear off to become hamburger.

gross hipocrisy on behalf of animal liberationists.

Freakin neo-fascists. I am proudly left-leaning, possibly even a “hippy” by your standards, but I agree with culling the roos. How does your ignorant frame deal with that?

If it were feral goats, feral pigs, feral hippies, feral camels or feral donkeys being culled I’m certain that no-one would give a flying fcuk about the cull. But all because it is a native critter that has reach an unsustainable population level all the bleeding heart, wet behind the ears, shrub hugging, unwashed, pinko, Labor voting numpties come out and protest against it.

Yes, but people who have other, more realistic concerns, like schools, hopsitals, clean running water, and Al Grassby statues generally said “Pay for it yourself if you want it that badly”, to which the protesters have replied “Nay, for we are poor emaciated vegans who believe that the Government should obey us and our addled-brained reasoning”.

Hence, delays until they die.

Being against option b doesn’t mean they neccesarily prefer option c.

No, they want option a.

Those who resisted anything being done unless and until it was their preferred option. The brainless hippies.

Who are the people who want option c?

God created kanagaroos so that sheep would have something to look down on. This has been so silly for so long. They can be moved, at considerable public expense. They can be destroyed humanely. They can starve to death. This situation reached this pass because people didn’t act because of a pack of people who seem to think the third option preferable to either (a) paying for the first or (b) letting the second happen.

Well, the ex-partner of ‘one leg’ hasn’t turned up yet but apparently some old boiler from Cop Shop has, along with some no-name from Neighbours or some other show.

And ABC news reports that some illegal campers from old parliament house have jumped the fence, lit a fire and said sorry to the roos. It’s not clear whether they were there just to get a quick feed or because they used to be fans of Cop Shop. If the latter, they’ll feel like it’s reality TV because Mr Plod has arrested them.

Because of the extra publicity the event’s attracted, expect to see more hand-wringers arrive in the hope of being on the local TV news tonight.

Fricken hippies

Another update on action out at the roo cull site:

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23734288-29277,00.html

Misguided Cuisine:
http://www.onnetworks.com/videos/stump-the-chef/kangaroo-malt-liquor-coconut?autoplay=true