Bushwalk Australia

When I thought we'd scrapped the bottom of the barrel, some people keep digging... In Western Europe when poaching occurs, it's usually a matter of "we've hunted this species all our life, it's part of our tradition". Here it's just bogans covering the sky with bullets for the heck of it. But that's not the worst part, the worst part is probably being tipped off by a concerned hunter and NOT DOING ANYTHING... It's not like there are fake tip-offs all the time, so when you hear a tip-off, you check it out, especially a serious one like this... That's your *&%$#! JOB Game Victoria... Going to check out protesters instead ? They're not gonna shoot anything...

http://www.theage.com.au/environment/an ... 2jg5r.html

http://www.theage.com.au/environment/an ... 2jg5r.html
full link

Fixed.

Field and Game Australia's Rod Drew said protesters should be investigated over the incident. He said it could be more than just a coincidence that the slaughter happened on the year that duck protesters had been sitting for firearm and game licence tests. He said the protesters could have shot the ducks ''to bring the shooters into disrepute''.

So, it was a PETA crew on that grassy knoll, after all . . .

On the "year" ? First there was no protester sitting, the original article says "But compliance officers found no protesters there.". Isn't it more likely that hunters actually made up that fake sitting themselves to be left alone during their stupid act ? Duck protesters aren't exactly firearm friendly, how will they find the firepower to perform that massacre ? It's ridiculous...

Hallu wrote:On the "year" ? First there was no protester sitting, the original article says "But compliance officers found no protesters there.". Isn't it more likely that hunters actually made up that fake sitting themselves to be left alone during their stupid act ? Duck protesters aren't exactly firearm friendly, how will they find the firepower to perform that massacre ? It's ridiculous...

Do you not recall a couple of years ago when protestors were jumping in front of hunters while firing?

No, never heard that one.

Hallu wrote:No, never heard that one.

This is why human life was considered to be more important.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/duck- ... 1c1ih.html

I don't get what your remarks mean.

Hallu wrote:I don't get what your remarks mean.

Because of these past events endangering human life, rangers directed their resources to where they expected conflict between hunters and protestors.

Just imagine if someone had been killed had they all tried to save the ducks instead.

Well then rangers are stupid. In a situation with 2 warnings, one about hunters at one place, and one about protesters at another, it's a safer bet to go where the hunters are, because they have the guns. Protesters don't.

Hallu wrote:Well then rangers are stupid. In a situation with 2 warnings, one about hunters at one place, and one about protesters at another, it's a safer bet to go where the hunters are, because they have the guns. Protesters don't.

Why are you assuming the protesters would be somewhere separate to the hunters? What would be the point?

They went to where they expected protestors AND hunters to be, so that they would be able to defuse any conflict situation that might have arose. A few dead birds don't matter much when peoples lives are potentially at risk!

You've never seen protesters NOT looking for conflict ? Well that's what they mostly do though, pacific protests... So no, they're not looking for hunters and trouble... And why are they at risk ? Because hunters like the ones doing this massacre are just a bunch of inbred morons (not talking about ALL the hunters, to be clear...), not the protesters... Anyway, in many Asian and African countries poachers are sentenced to death. In Australia, it's also exaggerated, but in the other way. Australian law enforcement is more on the "let's make sure these hippies behave" side than on the "let's focus on stopping the poaching" side. They don't even realise that by stopping poaching, you make the protesters disappear as well... Fight the cause, not the consequences.

Hallu wrote:You've never seen protesters NOT looking for conflict ? Well that's what they mostly do though, pacific protests... So no, they're not looking for hunters and trouble... And why are they at risk ? Because hunters like the ones doing this massacre are just a bunch of inbred morons (not talking about ALL the hunters, to be clear...), not the protesters... Anyway, in many Asian and African countries poachers are sentenced to death. In Australia, it's also exaggerated, but in the other way. Australian law enforcement is more on the "let's make sure these hippies behave" side than on the "let's focus on stopping the poaching" side. They don't even realise that by stopping poaching, you make the protesters disappear as well... Fight the cause, not the consequences.

This is not poaching. Ducks are taken legally and within the season defined to do so.

There was concern of protestors being at risk because, as was proven in 2010, a number of deranged individuals decided to throw themselves in front of live fire.

You seem completely unable to take an objective point of view on this one - which, usually, is yourself greatest trait in contributing to this forum.

I'm with Strider on this one.
The Authorities focused there resources where they though hunters "and" protestors would be.

Hallu wrote:You've never seen protesters NOT looking for conflict ? Well that's what they mostly do though, pacific protests... So no, they're not looking for hunters and trouble... And why are they at risk ?

They are at risk because they break the law and place themselves in a swamp full of ducks that happens to be surrounded by hunters wanting to shot the ducks.
Don't get me wrong, I don't support duck hunting but I'm more strongly against the law breaking protestors.

What happend in the swamp in question where all the birds were shot is terrible. So I'm not defending anyone there.

But on a more logical note, What does any of this have to do with a "BUSHWALKING" FORUM ????
It clearly doesn't affect bushwalkers or add anything to the forums main aim.

lol that's why it's in the "between bushwalks" forum...

While we are clearly off topic - I saw an interesting comment online today.

The news item was:
"CONVERSE COUNTY, Wyo. (AP) — It happens about once a month here, on the barren foothills of one of America’s green-energy boomtowns: A soaring golden eagle slams into a wind farm’s spinning turbine and falls, mangled and lifeless, to the ground.

Killing these iconic birds is not just an irreplaceable loss for a vulnerable species. It’s also a federal crime, a charge that the Obama administration has used to prosecute oil companies when birds drown in their waste pits, and power companies when birds are electrocuted by their power lines.

But the administration has never fined or prosecuted a wind-energy company, even those that flout the law repeatedly. Instead, the government is shielding the industry from liability and helping keep the scope of the deaths secret."

And the comment was:
"Broadly speaking, there are two types of environmental groups.

1. Those who value nature, habitat, animals, views, mountains, etc. — call them conservationists.
2. Big Money environmentalists, whose interests are mostly pollution, and especially climate change. The Sierra Club was already very well endowed with $, even before Aubrey McClendon (then CEO of Chesapeake Energy) gave then $25 million for their campaign to end coal use.

Wind energy is backed by the second type of environmental group. The environmentalist groups with lots of money for politics has just bested the the environmental groups with far less money for politics and politicians.

That is how we came to a place where in the name of saving the planet (from climate change) we kill off wildlife — eagles and raptors in this case, California Condors in an earlier post (these are the rarest birds in the US), and perhaps even the iconic Whooping Cranes, who after 70 years of attempts to bring them back, still number less than 300 in the wild.

The Endangered Species Act? The environmental community really DOES care about the act, and the animals whose numbers are preserved, except when they don’t, when the monied environmentalists run roughshod over the conservation minded environmentalists. The Sierra Club has blood on its greedy hands."

Interesting