Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by goingbush
Probably just as bemused as some of us are about some people that are arguing for out dated kill methods.
As for the rabbit traps its not illegal to trap a Rabbit in NSW I dont know whether it is in your state or not...even so its not efficient way to go about it anyway if your wanting to reduce big numbers.
Please mate do not call them greenies, the majority of us here care for nature and in that sense we are genuine greens. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco Muppet
That fellows that you are referring to are just plain stupid, ignorant and feral nobs.
Call them greenies does not do justice to the name. ;)
Please correct me if Iam wrongQuote:
Originally Posted by dullbird
State Trapping Legislation.
New South Wales
Padded-jaw traps are permitted - Jake trap, Victor Soft Catch #3 & #1 1/2, Duke Soft Catch #3 & #1 1/2.
Legislation: Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1979 s 23.
Use of steel-jaw traps is prohibited.
yes thats correct so trapping a rabbit is not prohibted if using a soft jaw trap...only steel jaw traps are prohibited in most states if not all I believe. ell with the possible excpetion for large traps used for dingos etc in one of the states but cant remember which
Things change. Crucifixions, beheadings and burning witches at the stake are all way down as well. The damn namby pamby greeny knobs have been at it with people as well as animals. The world is going to pot for sure even if the crime rate is now lower than it has ever been and dropping (with the exception of computer and white collar fraud of course).
For a start, I fail to see how a single fatal gunshot is more sick than drowning.Quote:
Originally Posted by goingbush
Messy, sure. Sick? That's open to opinion.
Second, all the cats that I come into contact with besides the odd feral on the property are properly controlled and desexed animals that are far too lazy to do anything except have the odd swipe at a curtain, as they're kept inside.
How then, do you think we should deal with the off spring of the animals we hunt?
I know a bloke who swings joeys by the tail into his tow ball.
That's sick in the head IMHO, I'd have just shot it.
I used to have 3 rifles in my gun safe and the 3 were used in the range.
I bought them to go hunting for feral pigs and other games but never have the guts to destroy or terminate a life.
Call me soft or any other name but it is hard to kill just for sport. :(
At the end ballistics become a very expensive sport at a cost of over $1.50 for a 6 BR bullet and I sold my gear.
Not I am shooting with my Nikon cameras and it is much nicer :)
It's never something I relish, taking the life of anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucaro
I don't regret it as I only shoot for pest control, but still, not always nice.
perhaps could have used better wording, but it seems so often that no matter how it's explained the "bleeding hearts or greenies" for want of a better description oppose every option but the most impractical one.Quote:
Originally Posted by dullbird
By god if I could get a bottle of whatever the stuff is that puts animals to sleep I'd use it. But I can't, and often that isn't enough for the opposing party. They could use Moreteen on cockroaches and think nothing of it as it desperately dies; however stand stead fast about best practice for their argument. I have been to animal cruelty rallies and stood next to people wearing leather belts and shoes as the yell down trucks that hall cows. This is my point, often greenies can't see their own actions, only others. BTW, I would consider myself more pro environment and pro animal than any other facet of the debate.
If I have more time I'm apply, purchase, and do what is required for a fire arm.
But the show that inspired me was only on a month ago, and I noticed the cats last year but didn't realise the volume.
4500 people cross the desert every year, and that was couple years ago now. If half of them could catch 10 cats per trip, and dispose of them quickly, safely, and humanly then that's not bad. There seems plenty of interest from this thread. The Government is happy for some of us to collect it's tax, but thinks we are incapable to deal with a problem they cant deal with. They say do it humanly, but ban the tools to do so, so........
Biological is the only way, and until all domestic cats are de-sexed, then a biological virus is let loose on non de-sexed cats the problem will exist and grow until the cats plateau. By then our wildlife will severely depleted and well on the way to extinction.
But instead we have governments who don't even make desexing cats mandatory.
Can you see why now I say 2 of 5 blows isn't that big a deal in the big picture. We are talking 1 to 1.5 seconds difference in best and worst case. But the Government couldn't give a flying ****. Only the greenies standing stead fast.
From memory, nobody has opposed smacking them on the back of the head a few times, there's nothing sadistic or cruel about that.
Personally I'd be looking at bows.
Perfectly legal, ammunition is completely re-usable.
Probably a bit more difficult than a gun, but you can stuff up just as easy a rifle shot than a bow shot.
Hell, catch them and put an arrow through their head. Doesn't bother me none.
I just oppose things like drownings.