Cruel Kangaroo Cull COMBO-BREAKER.

#1 most destructive animal = Humans.

It's very hypocritical to say that any other animal is destructive when it always comes back to being humanity's fault.

only because we take responsibility for upholding a standard of living WE define AS EQUILIBRIUM.. there is no natural entity dictating to us that equilibrium is what WE should be upholding or even aiming for.

so humans are allowed to criticise their own processes for maintaining their own ideals, standards and insights into how an environment 'should run'...

because... before us, who is to say anything was orderly and species didn't have domineering characteristics, we aren't a shark that says hello with its' teeth... or a spider that waits to meet you so patiently and alert for every sense of you.

we are caring about how we exist and the impact it has...

thus anthropomorphising 'mother nature' based on MAMMAL mechanisms of existing, as we know cuteness... maybe a human smile is THE MOST TERRIFYING thing to another creature... imaging a wolf bearing its teeth at you.. and you may say "well it is just showing asserting the emotional and social mechanisms that must exist for a successful clan to intimidate other clan territories by how the omega and other respond to their dominant members, showing maybe that they ARE something to be scared of and the same fear which makes another mammal give in and lay down... instead of kicking and 'being a threat' to the 'inevitable' result." is insight by being able to relate... even through humanities closeness to that species over time.

human smiles and everything we know to be so cuddly and kind... could be a world away from anything we believe in another's eyes...so don't assume mother nature is a child's picture book.

this doesn't mean I don't have faith in the ideas of equilibrium and/or homoeostasis being co-existent like a black hole that anchors the galaxy into form which it 'feeds off'...

it is just to say debating comes to no solution... when people debate to progress their own stance, considering it should never BECOME or be a stance, then always aiming for that you can see what i'm saying... being caring and open to ideas is fine, but don't take them all so literally.. and understand how we want the same thing and merely go about things differently... lead by example and what not.

so set the right example and make it the best one you can open your mind to.

Oh I know, I know.  We are the single most destructive animal ( behind the roo in our neck of the woods !! ) but we are here to stay so our only road should be one of balance.  We are also top of the food chain with a brain so very much more advanced than any animal.  That of course does not mean that there aren't many humans world wide who are total creeps with regard to everything, animal welfare, care of their fellow humans etc etc. AA needs to concentrate on the care of animals not the continuous and at times irrational criticism of anyone who has anything to do with livestock production.  For above all you will NEVER achieve a world's population of vegans/vegetarians so why beat your heads up against a brick wall, why not aspire to a reaslistic achievement such as the care of animals regardless of whether they are for food or amusement.....

If our road should be one of balance, do you agree on the one child policy to help bring down the population - For example, the need to "cull" babies if a family produces more than one?

I'm not trying to turn people vegan/vegetarian, this would be naive. I myself am trying to cause as little harm to the environment as possible and also due care to animals because... Want to hear something crazy? THEY DON'T BELONG TO ME. You know what else, I DON'T BELIEVE SOMEONE SHOULD HAVE THEIR WELFARE OVERLOOKED BECAUSE THEY LOOK DIFFERENT TO ME OR ARE NOT AS "INTELLIGENT" AS ME. Especially considering the scale of "intelligence" is based on how well an animal of a different species is based on how well they take human commands. I have a friend who has a severe case of Autism, sometimes, he will disregard instruction. He has an intelligence level akin to a twelve year old even though he is twenty. Should I have the right over him to cull him for population and environmental benefits? No way! You know what he does have? An appointed legal guardian for his WELFARE.  

I do however, believe that people considering animal welfare and not just being speciesist and selfish IS possible. Look at indigenous Australian history from the aspect of an 80 year old... They've seen English invaders "cull" the indigenous Australians, take away their children so that they fit into "White society" (don't you dare say "Oh, but that's ancient history"... NO. Babies were still stolen up to 1969!), They've seen the laws ABOLISHED, they've seen our PM at the time apologise for the crimes, now, they are respected as citizens, regardless of skin color or past heritage.

There are still racists, of course, but they're a MINORITY. The system changes regardless. The system WILL change regardless in terms of animal welfare. HISTORY is on our side.

I also liked how you totally skipped the bulk of my statement, which was that animal welfare groups and celebs alike have volunteered to put their money where their mouth is and simply pay to relocate the animals... and the defense force not exploring other avenues citing money as the issue.

Also, the fact that they're simply shooting the animals without tranquilizers...

We have similar culls... They're called "Drive-by shootings" and they're condemned because they take away someone's right to live.

I'm not trying to "bring down" livestock producers, I get that you feel marginalized because you produce beef and you're not getting our money because eating corpses is a bizarre indoctrination that our society participates in, but this topic is nothing to do with animals being produced for food... The incident happened at a TAFE, a learning institute. It says so in the second paragraph.

Whoa there Operator.  Please don't accuse me of condoning the White Australia policy.  I don't condone children being forcibly removed from their parents ever unless there are due reasons for that to happen.   And please don't be so foolish to think that the roos can be relocated.  I will wait for the bigwigs to come to our property and start the relocation process.  I'll bet you London to a brick I will still be waiting for their grand arrival until the cows come home.  They are full of hot air.  Never ever put their money where their mouths are.  Say all of the right things to keep you happy and stroke their egos.  You maybe able to encourage people in this country to refrain from prolific breeding but good luck internationally.  Just be realistic else you will suffer from apoplexy and that will do the cause of the animals no good at all..

This is such a great story. Good on them. All the kangaroo "culls" (slaughters) is disgusting. Then you have the horrible kangaroo industry, that kills the biggest most impressive animals and thousands of joeys, as they are considered a 'by-product'

Humans always looking for something else to blame (in this case, kangaroos) rather than themselves. In the book Kangaroos Myths and Realities it states that there could have been many more kangaroos at the time of European settlement. Up to 200 million.

Up to 200 million at the time of European settlement, I don't think so, the biggest myth of all.  You can rant and rave as much as you wish but we out here on 'the ground' see the evidence on a daily basis.  Accept it or not the roos are in plague proportions.  Simple.  Curse humans as much as you like, it will do you no good.  Be proactive and you may get an ear.  Sit in the ivory tower and back people into a corner with unbalanced argument is not good politics.  Cheers

Firstly. You don't know what I do when it comes to this issue. And there's no need to speak like that.

Secondly. How do you know if there were 200 million here or not? I never said that that's true or not because I wouldn't know. And neither would you. I just hate that people are so quick to state kangaroos are in 'plague' proportions.

I don't think you're experience is enough to conclude that kangroos are in plague proportions across all of Australia. What do you consider a plague?

Humans are always so quick to use guns to solve problems. There has to be another way.

I'm not accusing you of that at all, I'm using it comparatively. I'm saying that once people thought it was ok and it only took ONE LIFETIME to turn it around. I was using this example to show that people actually caring about animals is completely possible. I'm using humans as an example because HUMANS ARE ANIMALS, you seem to be unwilling to kill our babies yet there's more of them than kangaroos.

Why can they not be relocated? You seem to show much doubt and pessimism with little to no factual basis.

As stated: They said they would FUND the relocation, not physically help. The defense force would still move them, but like I've said several times now and you're STILL OVERLOOKING or perhaps refusing to address, is that they're citing MONEY as their issue, not physical labor.

You're also still not answering my point on shooting without tranquilizers.  

I've also never heard of someone suffering a stroke/internal bleeding due to CARING. (You realize that's what apoplexy is, right? If you were using it in the pejorative context, you wouldn't say "will suffer from" as rage is an emotional state, not a condition... Just sayin')

Caring is what is going to save the animals. I'm not going to condone murder just because some people will "never agree with me" - That's ridiculous. Can you imagine if the US did that in WW2? "Oh, there are people in those gas chambers? Don't worry about it, Nazi Germany are just too set in their ways." Roflno. Not going to happen.

I loved that story! Shared it on fb straight away! Thanks for sharing! Makes me feel like there are a whole bunch of kind beautiful people out there who care for our fellow earthlings