Battle against wild dogs (dingoes) how appalling?!

Can I just say that this has been the most entertaining thing that has happened all year. ;P

Sounds like a remarkably similar degree of suffering to that inflicted through slaughterhouse practices.

Mitch, do you REALLY care about how the cows suffer when mauled by wild dogs? I think that as you are a meat-eater, I can safely assume that's not the case, and you are simply addressing that factor in an attempt to add weight to your argument which, let's face it, is purely about the profits and livelihoods of the farmers.

Now, given that most of us here are vegan, vegetarian or aiming to be, it is clear that we have chosen to prioritise the animals' interests over the animal farmers' interests (no, this does not mean we are anti-people!), so you can argue all you like, but that is entrenched in our moral fibre and no amount of your profit-driven arguments will be able to change that.

Whether the animal is native, part-native or introduced, I think you will find that most, if not all of us here, are opposed to the cruel culling methods of ANY "pest" animal.

How did all the native wildlife survive for so many thousands of years before the white man came along to "defend" them from their predators??

Give it time, it's only been 4 days hehe

Well other people get fired up and react in different ways. If only life was a keyboard and monitor.. oh wait, virtual reality isn't reality.

Have you been educated in the philosophical notion of, "if a tree falls down and no-one around is to see or hear it falling down, does it really fall down"?

Mmm.. ridiculous as it is, the term implies people who "colour" in reality.. refer to above comment about virtual existence..

You negated your point.. a waste of time and effort really.

Actually, dingoes are a "medium" sized dog. German Shepherds, Rottweilers, Malamutes, Labradors, Pointers are all generally bigger then your average dingo and in regards to aggression, watch a documentary on wildlife documentaries and see how many hours it takes to get footage. Wild animals only resort to aggression as a last resort for defence of self, territory and mating rights. You have a bigger chance of a maltese terrier biting you then you do with a dingo as the dingo will try all tactics to remain unseen.

So I won't call you a fool, but I would suggest a search engine is a good start on animal science.

Some would suggest that calling some a brat, as an example, leans itself towards verbal abuse, or violence. You don't have to agree on the methods in which the management of these "wild" dogs is carried out, you just need to agree on the management. All animals that come into contact with humans need some form of management, be it relocation of culling.

I would hate to see what you do at BBQs with insects landing on your food. Do you realise that an insect doesn't think you are shooing it from your food but actually making an attempt on its life? HOW TRAUMATISING for the animal! I thought vegans loved animals before themselves?

Remember the saying about glass houses.. You call him a brat before..Tut-tut.. Hypocrisy..

So it only matters how long you have been here? Hmm, thats an interesting point.. Do you think thats what the boat people are hoping for?

For starters, electricity. Generators, whether they are green or not, take up alot of land that could be used by wild animals to romp and play in the grass. The house you live in. The cement you walk on. The tarmac you catch a bus along. MMM. Your computer. Your phone. Your clothes. The only truly green clothing is an animals skin (or leaves, wont last long though.. now theres a spin for your night.

I respect your stance on being a vegan but deriding things without providing solutions is hot air and in green terms, thats increasing your carbon footprint.

Ah, this is a forum isn't it?

Are you trying to deflect the fact you don't have anything to input into the conversation?

I was wondering how vegan nail polish is? Is it organic?

I'm not bored or ridiculous, I just enjoy highlighting the shortcomings of people who like to point out the flaws of others without accepting their own.

If you wan't people to accept your points, too bad. You can only tolerate. Its really simple. If we tolerate each other, we have a discussion.

This is an animal rights forum. We believe animals deserve good lives and we are commited highly to these values. We get emotional and sympathetic when animal rights are violated, and as this is an animal rights forum thats a given.
Your breaking the rules by insulting us. Please behave or leave.

Callum, fair call. I am not questioning your personal belief system, however, it is a forum. Thats life. You have to deal with a whole variety of people with different ideas and backgrounds and beliefs. Life is a forum and improvement in all things that humans do have come about because of this. Are you suggesting that as an animals rights forum, you're not open to having opposing views published?

In regards to the insulting and for credibility, perhaps educate your fellow forum members on the same then and please highlight where I have insulted "you" all, beyond the same behaviour as I have read from "your" fellow members (I might be wrong, but I registered, doesn't that make me a member? oh.. duh!) so I can correct my ways and publicly apologise to those who have been offended.

Fish scales aren't uncommon in nail polish making it unsuitable for vegans. A lot of cosmetic companies also test on animals. However as cosmetic companies evolve, they are realising the demand toward cruelty free products .
Organic? Yeah, with all the formaldehydes, phthalates and solvents and nitrocellulose...

Oh, were you being serious?...

I'm not entirely certain what you're trying to say here. "Other people get fired up and react in different ways"... no shit. What's your point? I'm fully aware life is not a keyboard and monitor. I do have a life outside of the Internet. The fact I'm expressing my opinions on the Internet does not mean I would behave any differently outside of it.
Yes, I am aware of that notion. By not acknowledging its presence I am simply refusing to allow it to affect me.
You too are on the Internet, engaged in a debate. This must mean that you also live solely in the Internet and have no real life.
How did that in any way negate my point? The fact that a farmer's occupation causes great suffering does not mean that he or she is essentially an evil man (or woman). It means he or she  has been raised with the notion that causing this suffering is justified, and he or she is most likely numbed to it.
I will admit that calling him a brat was a mistake, however I hardly believe that in the scope of insults, "brat" would be the one to lean itself towards verbal abuse.
So you're suggesting that we should relocate or cull any animal species that comes into contact with humans? I hardly think that is necessary. The bushland property I live on is full of animals, yet it is not necessary for me to cull or relocate them. I can see no situation in which culling is necessary. If a species is out of control, there are other methods of controlling it: starting with desexing, as one example.
And I suppose tht you at a BBQ would spray any insect that twitched in your general direction with poison, would you? I wonder which is more traumatising?
See previous acknowledgement of an error on my part.
Nice demeaning touch with the "tut-tut" by the way.
If you go on to read the rest of my point, you'll understand that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that from a biological perspective, these animals have been here for long enough to have established themselves in the ecosystem. They no longer disrupt it. "Boat people" are human beings- human beings have already colonised the country, meaning that "boat people" are not, in fact, a new, introduced species. Just more of the same.
Here I assume that you can read "Mitch"'s mind and thus know what point he was trying to make? Certainly it is impossible for me to live a "truly green" life, however I do not believe that means I ought to give up on everything. It simply means that I ought to work as hard as I possibly can to be as eco-friendly as I possibly can.

Your final attempt at wit failed when you forgot the apostrophe in "that's". I'm not providing solutions because I acknowledge that I am in no way perfect and I do not hold the answers to the universe. I am simply saying that it would be advisable to work together in order to come up with a better solution.