The Cull goes to Court. Delayed until at least Wednesday

LSWCHP said :

According to a report in the SMH, if the cull goes ahead Ms Drew and her mates are planning on disrupting it via dashing around in the line of fire.

I would say that no matter how much they love our native fauna, getting on the wrong end of a high powered rifle bullet would not result in a happy ending for anybody, and they shouldn’t even think of attempting such a foolish action.

She’s not foolish, it’s a noble act to martyr yourself for a cause you believe in…

c_c™ said :

Some more info comes to hand, showing links between this to an organisation called the ‘Institute for Critical Animal Studies”

The institute describes its founding as follows:

“The Institute for Critical Animal Studies (ICAS), founded in 2001, post September 11, in era of the War on Terrorism.”

They actually try linking animal welfare to the war on terror. Not surprising, elsewhere in their materials they try to work Thomas Aquinas into the mix!

It goes on:

“ICAS is a radical academic-activist research center dedicated to advancing critical animal studies by working in multiple disciplines and movements.”

This is how terrorism begins. People get involved in animal liberation then take their radical anti-human approach to the next stage and blow up people. The aim of animal rights activists is the removal of all people from the earth and to hand it over to animals. It is a proven fact that the majority of terrorists are vegetarians or vegans (like animal rights activists) and this is part of the wider left wing Agenda 21.

LSWCHP said :

According to a report in the SMH, if the cull goes ahead Ms Drew and her mates are planning on disrupting it via dashing around in the line of fire.

I would say that no matter how much they love our native fauna, getting on the wrong end of a high powered rifle bullet would not result in a happy ending for anybody, and they shouldn’t even think of attempting such a foolish action.

As a species we’d probably be better off in the long run if they did though, 2 culls for the price of 1.

According to a report in the SMH, if the cull goes ahead Ms Drew and her mates are planning on disrupting it via dashing around in the line of fire.

I would say that no matter how much they love our native fauna, getting on the wrong end of a high powered rifle bullet would not result in a happy ending for anybody, and they shouldn’t even think of attempting such a foolish action.

Some more info comes to hand, showing links between this to an organisation called the ‘Institute for Critical Animal Studies”

The institute describes its founding as follows:

“The Institute for Critical Animal Studies (ICAS), founded in 2001, post September 11, in era of the War on Terrorism.”

They actually try linking animal welfare to the war on terror. Not surprising, elsewhere in their materials they try to work Thomas Aquinas into the mix!

It goes on:

“ICAS is a radical academic-activist research center dedicated to advancing critical animal studies by working in multiple disciplines and movements.”

FreddyVegan said :

c-c , I personally know Carolyn and she is one of the most intelligent, compassionate and giving people I know. I am offended you have said these things about such an amazing woman. She dedicates her life to helping others, how dare you say such things.

Indeed, she sounds like the epitome of charm:

https://twitter.com/kangarevolution/status/316433290515070978

DrKoresh said :

c_c™ said :

On 7 Nov last year, she said “Israel – the Nazis would be proud of you”.

And she called Australia “the land of racists”.

Particularly ironic though is every time she appears on Canberra pretending to be a protector of lives and the environment, she does so with very obvious, dark red died hair, the use of such dies posing an environmental and health hazard. Fail.

I agree with you that she is a nutter, but I’ve got say that while her comment about Israel was entirely tasteless and inappropriate, it’s not that much of an exaggeration, I don’t want to distract or detract from the absolute horror of the Jewish Holocaust, but I think the modern State of Israel acts arrogantly and disgracefully on the international stage and the events of WWII in no way excuse their current behaviour.

As for racism Australia you only have to look at the success of the “Stop the Boats” mentality to know how true that statement is. Forgetting the Liberals, the current Labor government has treated the issue of asylum seekers equally disgustingly, by excluding the Australian mainland from our migration zone and setting up off-shore detention centres in countries who are unwilling or unable to provide basic human rights, because apparently (and shamefully) that’s what the majority of the nation wants. If you can defend that as something other than xenophobia and racism, I’d like to hear it.

To be fair on the issue of hair-dye, if it’s red, she may well have used henna, which is a natural red dye used by lots of people who don’t use actual dye for health/moral reasons.

I’m waiting for someone to show us a country that isn’t racist.

crappicker said :

What an obvious display of neglected maintenance by the ACT government. Wide spreads of three different weeds and, for a geologist’s eye, some worrying land erosion. Not in a far out corner of the reserve, but right along the main entrance track. It cannot be missed by anyone, let alone ACT Parks’ officials.

Such obvious neglect mocks the ACT government’s claim that prevention of ecological degradation requires culling in ACT nature reserves of resident kangaroos, which after all are a protected, unique, native, species, that has been intimately involved over the past few million years in shaping Australia’s ecological systems as they are today.

Degradation yes, …of the government’s standing.

Interesting, isn’t it, how suddenly they’ll spend what is it, $200,000k on a cull, yet those of us with eyes watch the weed situation get worse every year (oh but at least they pulled up the willows), not to mention erosion, and they let bulldozers tear up the land with impunity.

But those who are rabidly and even venomously wanting the roo hunt to go ahead can take hope from knowing that since this hunt is based on Science, it will be upheld in the court case. The court will see the Science and order that the roos are shot for their own good (or that of some plants, that have survived the weeds, the erosion and the bulldozers).

obamabinladen said :

When intelligent alien life see the earth and the plague of humans destroying this beautiful planet I wonder if they will have a human cull???

Insightful or inane? YOU decide.

When intelligent alien life see the earth and the plague of humans destroying this beautiful planet I wonder if they will have a human cull???

gooterz said :

Maybe we should start domesticating them. It worked for the Aurochs, now we have cows the world over

The garden variety anti-capitalist is notoriously difficult to domesticate, even more so than any bovinae.

Yesterday I had a quick look at the Callum Brae nature reserve. I am not familiar with this reserve. A cull of 140 kangaroos is planned by the ACT government.

Scouting to locate the main entrances off Narrabundah Lane and Mugga Lane I could not miss the extensive land clearing that is going on at the site of the Old Mugga Lane Zoo, along the Mugga Lane-Narrabundah Lane corner. Only the larger trees are untouched, anything else is bulldozed onto large heaps. So what has happened to the kangaroos that were roaming here before? Have they been pushed onto the adjacent Callum Brae reserve, to be culled with the resident kangaroos?

I entered Callum Brae through the main entrance opposite Murray’s. Following the main track, I first passed bush after bush of Blackberry weeds, extending for some fifty meters or more. For the next few hundred meters, I passed grassy slopes with field after field of St John’s Wort weeds, the monotony broken with an occasional Wild Rose weed. Beyond that, a large, badly eroded, gully.

Welcome to the Callum Brae nature reserve!

What an obvious display of neglected maintenance by the ACT government. Wide spreads of three different weeds and, for a geologist’s eye, some worrying land erosion. Not in a far out corner of the reserve, but right along the main entrance track. It cannot be missed by anyone, let alone ACT Parks’ officials.

Such obvious neglect mocks the ACT government’s claim that prevention of ecological degradation requires culling in ACT nature reserves of resident kangaroos, which after all are a protected, unique, native, species, that has been intimately involved over the past few million years in shaping Australia’s ecological systems as they are today.

Degradation yes, …of the government’s standing.

c_c™ said :

FreddyVegan said :

she is one of the most intelligent, compassionate and giving people I know.

Compassionate people don’t tend to take joy in the death of another human being. And intelligent people don’t normally deal in broad racial stereotypes, nor ignore science in favour of ideology.

Please at least make a effort to not be so offensive to freddy vegan.

FreddyVegan said :

she is one of the most intelligent, compassionate and giving people I know.

Compassionate people don’t tend to take joy in the death of another human being. And intelligent people don’t normally deal in broad racial stereotypes, nor ignore science in favour of ideology.

BimboGeek said :

I don’t see any suffering.

Not yet, anyway.
Do we wait until there is suffering before doing anything? Did you see how far we let things go before the last cull? I certainly saw it, and I for one don’t want to see kangaroos starving to death again before we intervene. These idiots against the cull would obviously much rather see emaciated kangaroos dying slowly and painfully of starvation like last time than control their numbers so it doesn’t happen again. An animal welfare organisation my arse…

FreddyVegan said :

c-c , I personally know Carolyn and she is one of the most intelligent, compassionate and giving people I know. I am offended you have said these things about such an amazing woman. She dedicates her life to helping others, how dare you say such things.

This is coming from the person who thinks that kangaroos should not be eaten based on some photos that are not verified and can’t provide an independent source for her claims.

And outside trying to save a few roos, what has this woman done that makes her amazing? (Not sarcastic, genuinely interested)

FreddyVegan said :

c-c , I personally know Carolyn and she is one of the most intelligent, compassionate and giving people I know. I am offended you have said these things about such an amazing woman. She dedicates her life to helping others, how dare you say such things.

Yes but you where highly offended because a cafe had roo burgers on the menu. You can’t really be taken seriously when you claim to be offended I’m afraid.

c-c , I personally know Carolyn and she is one of the most intelligent, compassionate and giving people I know. I am offended you have said these things about such an amazing woman. She dedicates her life to helping others, how dare you say such things.

Oh my god! That Carolyn Drew must be a real nutter – not!

Maybe we should start domesticating them. It worked for the Aurochs, now we have cows the world over

p1 said :

Kangaroos in this environment tend to have population fluctuations up and down between good years and bad. Humans introducing fixed water sources have tended to decrease the number of truly bad years, but they will still go through a boom-bust cycle when left to them selves.

The only real moral question here is the relative merits of (additional) intereferance in their population (directly, by killing some) or leave then alone and let the numbers correct themselves.

Since they share the landscape with us, there are many self serving reasons to take the first option – but it is also a good argue ment that the swift bullet is more ‘humane’ (a term I always find weird when applied to non-humans).

And some of us believe that it’s very wrong to interfere in this way.

I’m into animal rights because I feel that they should be allowed to do the best for themselves. I understand that animals compete for food, places to live. It looks like there’s plenty of food. I feel happy that there are lots of roos around.

I don’t see any suffering.

But I understand conservation is about protecting eco systems rather than controlling exact numbers. Can they perhaps explain to us non ecologists a few ways in which the eco system is threatened?

p1 said :

Kangaroos in this environment tend to have population fluctuations up and down between good years and bad. Humans introducing fixed water sources have tended to decrease the number of truly bad years, but they will still go through a boom-bust cycle when left to them selves.

The only real moral question here is the relative merits of (additional) intereferance in their population (directly, by killing some) or leave then alone and let the numbers correct themselves.

Since they share the landscape with us, there are many self serving reasons to take the first option – but it is also a good argue ment that the swift bullet is more ‘humane’ (a term I always find weird when applied to non-humans).

And some of us believe that it’s very wrong to interfere in this way.

I’m into animal rights because I feel that they should be allowed to do the best for themselves. I understand that animals compete for food, places to live. It looks like there’s plenty of food. I feel happy that there are lots of roos around.

I don’t see any suffering.

But I understand conservation is about

Kangaroos in this environment tend to have population fluctuations up and down between good years and bad. Humans introducing fixed water sources have tended to decrease the number of truly bad years, but they will still go through a boom-bust cycle when left to them selves.

The only real moral question here is the relative merits of (additional) intereferance in their population (directly, by killing some) or leave then alone and let the numbers correct themselves.

Since they share the landscape with us, there are many self serving reasons to take the first option – but it is also a good argue ment that the swift bullet is more ‘humane’ (a term I always find weird when applied to non-humans).

gungsuperstar said :

On the issue at hand – I consider myself a conservationist and an animal rights advocate myself. But the notion of stopping these culls; indeed, the very injunction itself is short sighted and stupid.

I consider myself the same, and agree totally with you.

Culling is not particularly nice, but neither is starving to death or being hit by a car. I know first hand how in depth the study is into the cull. It really is the only way, and the most humane. As much as I support animal rights groups, sometimes they really need to look outside the square a bit and realise they’re not doing themselves any favours by looking like uneducated loonies.

DrKoresh said :

c_c™ said :

On 7 Nov last year, she said “Israel – the Nazis would be proud of you”.

And she called Australia “the land of racists”.

Particularly ironic though is every time she appears on Canberra pretending to be a protector of lives and the environment, she does so with very obvious, dark red died hair, the use of such dies posing an environmental and health hazard. Fail.

I agree with you that she is a nutter, but I’ve got say that while her comment about Israel was entirely tasteless and inappropriate, it’s not that much of an exaggeration, I don’t want to distract or detract from the absolute horror of the Jewish Holocaust, but I think the modern State of Israel acts arrogantly and disgracefully on the international stage and the events of WWII in no way excuse their current behaviour.

As for racism Australia you only have to look at the success of the “Stop the Boats” mentality to know how true that statement is. Forgetting the Liberals, the current Labor government has treated the issue of asylum seekers equally disgustingly, by excluding the Australian mainland from our migration zone and setting up off-shore detention centres in countries who are unwilling or unable to provide basic human rights, because apparently (and shamefully) that’s what the majority of the nation wants. If you can defend that as something other than xenophobia and racism, I’d like to hear it.

To be fair on the issue of hair-dye, if it’s red, she may well have used henna, which is a natural red dye used by lots of people who don’t use actual dye for health/moral reasons.

I think doc k is a total bell end on most topics, but there is not a single thing I just quoted from him that I disagree with.

So let me get this straight. A handful of zealots who preach the value of one overabundant species at the expense of other (less cute) species and who demonstrate their scientific understanding with ridiculous claims there is some intention to make kangaroos extinct can waste taxpayers money with hearings like this? Makes about as much sense as it did when they cut holes in the predator proof fence protecting the bettongs last year.

c_c™ said :

The people behind this are very clearly not rational people, you need only look at the spokeswoman Carolyn Drew to realise that.

She describes herself as an ‘animal rights advocate and anti capitalist’.

Her opinions around the place make multiple references to the oppressive state, rising up against the aggressors, to wanting to get back at the rich and even taking joy in the death of Margaret Thatcher. (Looks like not all life is precious to her).

On 26 May, she described Irish people as “a land of thugs”.

On 7 Nov last year, she said “Israel – the Nazis would be proud of you”.

And she called Australia “the land of racists”.

Particularly ironic though is every time she appears on Canberra pretending to be a protector of lives and the environment, she does so with very obvious, dark red died hair, the use of such dies posing an environmental and health hazard. Fail.

You can’t reason with irrational people, and I suspect the courts will quickly kick them to the kerb, but not before they’ve cost taxpayers big bucks.

I don’t mean to get into a personal attack on someone – but of those statements, the one about Australia being a land of racists is not untrue 😉

On the issue at hand – I consider myself a conservationist and an animal rights advocate myself. But the notion of stopping these culls; indeed, the very injunction itself is short sighted and stupid.

The roos aren’t culled for sport. They’re culled because the sheer number of them is destructive to our eco-system. I can’t fathom how a group of people who consider themselves animal rights advocates oppose these cull which are conducted as humanely as they could be knowing the damage caused to other animals and to the plant life around Canberra.

Why are there so many kangeroo’s?
Extra 1455, where are they getting all that food from? its not the first time we’ve had a kangaroo cull, why not just left them overeat their pray and solve their own problem.

I’m not for or against the cull but surely there is something we can do long term, or are we just pushing them out when we go and make more developments? If so why build very far north west beconnen

c_c™ said :

On 7 Nov last year, she said “Israel – the Nazis would be proud of you”.

And she called Australia “the land of racists”.

Particularly ironic though is every time she appears on Canberra pretending to be a protector of lives and the environment, she does so with very obvious, dark red died hair, the use of such dies posing an environmental and health hazard. Fail.

I agree with you that she is a nutter, but I’ve got say that while her comment about Israel was entirely tasteless and inappropriate, it’s not that much of an exaggeration, I don’t want to distract or detract from the absolute horror of the Jewish Holocaust, but I think the modern State of Israel acts arrogantly and disgracefully on the international stage and the events of WWII in no way excuse their current behaviour.

As for racism Australia you only have to look at the success of the “Stop the Boats” mentality to know how true that statement is. Forgetting the Liberals, the current Labor government has treated the issue of asylum seekers equally disgustingly, by excluding the Australian mainland from our migration zone and setting up off-shore detention centres in countries who are unwilling or unable to provide basic human rights, because apparently (and shamefully) that’s what the majority of the nation wants. If you can defend that as something other than xenophobia and racism, I’d like to hear it.

To be fair on the issue of hair-dye, if it’s red, she may well have used henna, which is a natural red dye used by lots of people who don’t use actual dye for health/moral reasons.

*appears on television

*red dyed hair

The people behind this are very clearly not rational people, you need only look at the spokeswoman Carolyn Drew to realise that.

She describes herself as an ‘animal rights advocate and anti capitalist’.

Her opinions around the place make multiple references to the oppressive state, rising up against the aggressors, to wanting to get back at the rich and even taking joy in the death of Margaret Thatcher. (Looks like not all life is precious to her).

On 26 May, she described Irish people as “a land of thugs”.

On 7 Nov last year, she said “Israel – the Nazis would be proud of you”.

And she called Australia “the land of racists”.

Particularly ironic though is every time she appears on Canberra pretending to be a protector of lives and the environment, she does so with very obvious, dark red died hair, the use of such dies posing an environmental and health hazard. Fail.

You can’t reason with irrational people, and I suspect the courts will quickly kick them to the kerb, but not before they’ve cost taxpayers big bucks.