Mon 11 Feb, 2013 8:25 pm
maddog wrote:Refer to material on the Invasive Species Council site for more information.
http://www.invasives.org.au
Cheers
Mon 11 Feb, 2013 8:39 pm
True Green wrote:They are not an impartial organisation. Some of their members ear their living from the sale of poison baits. They are just another group with an opinion, who use an official type name to give them some credibility.
Mon 11 Feb, 2013 9:14 pm
maddog wrote:True Green wrote:They are not an impartial organisation. Some of their members ear their living from the sale of poison baits. They are just another group with an opinion, who use an official type name to give them some credibility.
Demonstrate the flaws in their work. Until you do your argument is ad hom - and of no value.
Cheers
Mon 11 Feb, 2013 9:36 pm
forest wrote:They have an official sounding name and website but they are NOT government based nor run.
forest wrote: Maddog you seem pretty set on dragging this into the don't kill animals period realm. I could be wrong though.
Tue 12 Feb, 2013 7:52 am
True Green wrote:hey are not an impartial organisation. Some of their members ear their living from the sale of poison baits. They are just another group with an opinion, who use an official type name to give them some credibility.
True Green wrote:
In Victoria hunters kill 40,000 Sambar Deer a year, many of those in the Alpine National park. You can not say that does not have an impact.
Tue 12 Feb, 2013 10:10 am
Tony wrote:if you know that this accusation is true and have the relevant information then please post your sources.
True Green wrote:In Victoria hunters kill 40,000 Sambar Deer a year, many of those in the Alpine National park. You can not say that does not have an impact.
Tue 12 Feb, 2013 11:50 am
wildwalks wrote:"Conservation hunting" is about conserving the sport/hobby of hunting - not protecting native ecosystems and is therefore not compatible with the NSW National Parks system.
Tue 12 Feb, 2013 12:29 pm
Tue 12 Feb, 2013 12:49 pm
Tue 12 Feb, 2013 1:26 pm
Nuts wrote:If it was a group of park users interested in pulling weeds would you have the same concern?
Tue 12 Feb, 2013 2:20 pm
Tue 12 Feb, 2013 4:21 pm
Tony wrote:if you know that this accusation is true and have the relevant information then please post your sources.
wildwalks wrote: ... send you[r] evidence to the NSW Police "Crime stoppers unit". They can then forward the investigation on to the relevant bodies.
wildwalks wrote:"Conservation hunting" is about conserving the sport/hobby of hunting - not protecting native ecosystems and is therefore not compatible with the NSW National Parks system.
Nuts wrote:it seems to do a dis-service to conservation... to make much of the hazy reliance on the conservation argument...
Tue 12 Feb, 2013 4:47 pm
Nuts wrote:Given that seeding parks with ferals would be illegal (and therefore not related to a discussion of the regulations.. illegal is illegal) at best the control exerted over hunters by the GC (limiting numbers) could only be less hunting, not more![]()
Nuts wrote:Your right that a co-ordinated approach is the only really useful management option for these things but (ime) the outcome would be similar.. a token effort at conservation. I doubt anyone (on the ground) really believes much can be done other than 'being seen to try' and manage weeds (and ferals).
Nuts wrote:From what iv'e seen the effect of bushwalkers (over/above any other park user) doesn't have much net benefit for conservation of ecosystems within parks![]()
Nuts wrote:I'm just not convinced that there is very much other than a perceived social impact, it seems to do a dis-service to conservation (as apart from just being 'green') to make much of the hazy reliance on the conservation argument (to me) (along similar lines of what the GC make of it).
Tue 12 Feb, 2013 6:15 pm
wildwalks wrote:Hunting groups actively fight against the use of very effective culling methods to protect their stock. The Game Council and the S&F party recently passed legislation to prevent a very effective professional deer culling program south of Sydney. There is nothing wishywashy about this - this is a powerful group who want to ensure the long term viability of their sport. They are welcome to their sport - but not in land that has been set aside for protection from such things.
Tue 12 Feb, 2013 7:05 pm
maddog wrote:They may have a plan but they are not a powerful group yet.
Cheers
Tue 12 Feb, 2013 7:10 pm
forest wrote:Powerful enough to influence some stupid decisions within the NSW government...........
Tue 12 Feb, 2013 7:14 pm
maddog wrote:Consider the comparative position of 'green' groups:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nationa ... 6023735955
Tue 12 Feb, 2013 7:17 pm
colinm wrote:LOL. Last line in the article "Source: governments"
Lacking: journalistic integrity.
Tue 12 Feb, 2013 7:35 pm
Tue 12 Feb, 2013 7:48 pm
Nuts wrote:Iv'e seen a dog die from 1080 poisoning. I can honestly say that I would much have preferred any recreational hunter
Tue 12 Feb, 2013 8:13 pm
Tue 12 Feb, 2013 10:43 pm
Thu 14 Feb, 2013 1:47 pm
wildwalks wrote:The Game Council and the S&F party recently passed legislation to prevent a very effective professional deer culling program south of Sydney.
Matt
Thu 14 Feb, 2013 3:25 pm
Thu 14 Feb, 2013 7:13 pm
Thu 14 Feb, 2013 9:53 pm
Thu 14 Feb, 2013 10:16 pm
Fri 15 Feb, 2013 3:58 am
Lindsay wrote:"ADA’s members are dedicated to the retention of habitat for deer and other wildlife, the preservation and extension of access to public land for hunting and recreation, the sustainable management of deer as a resource and the management of deer hunting to perpetuity"
Now they are out in the open - it's not about the eradication of feral animals at all. But we all knew that already.
Fri 15 Feb, 2013 7:27 am
Fri 15 Feb, 2013 7:46 am
© Bushwalk Australia and contributors 2007-2013.