I don't think anyone ever suggested that bow fishing would be a control method for ridding carp. It is just the greenies view that every creature is sacred and therefore cannot be dispatched to its maker.
As a recreational pursuit, it is no different from any other form of fishing and it performs some small task of getting a carp than potentially produce 1 million eggs out of the system. The spin-off from those persons spending their hard earned travelling to and supporting the rural businesses in towns along the Murray Darling Basin is also a positive.
A win win all round I would have thought
Chenz
I do not wish to be a member of any club that would have me as a member
Former Owner of The Red Terror - 1992 Defender 200Tdi
Edjitmobile - 2008 130 Defender
Hi Chenz
I suggest you go back to the original article linked in the first post to see what the differences are between bow-fishing and hook and line fishing.
You say "I don't think anyone ever suggested that bow fishing would be a control method for ridding carp" then you say "... performs some small task of getting a carp than potentially produce 1 million eggs out of the system". Do you not see the inconsistency in these two statements? You are justifying bow-fishing on the grounds that it would contribute to carp control even if only in a small way. It wouldn't.
As for 'greenies', the original article largely cites Dr Tom Grant who is a world authority on the Platypus and has worked on the species for nearly 50 years. Similarly, Prof. David Goldney is well respected by the scientific community for his knowledge of inland aquatic systems. You can label these scientists 'greenies' if you like. I am sure neither would dispute the significance of carp as a pest and indeed would be more aware of their impacts than you and me. Both would want to rid our waterways of the carp scourge.
To my mind, the issue comes down to:
- By-catch where a species other than carp are taken accidentally;
- Intentional targeting of non-carp species by frustrated bow-fishers or purposeful wrong-doers; and
- No significant impact of the activity on carp numbers or distribution in our natural waterways.
Biological control of carp using a herpes type virus has been in the news the last few days. The following provides a good summary of this: [ame]http://www.pestsmart.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/CPFS7.pdf[/ame]
And to end on a lighter note:
We're killing off carp with herpes. What other pests should we eradicate? | First Dog on the Moon | Opinion | The Guardian
Cheers
KarlB
First Dog on the Moons take on the issue
We're killing off carp with herpes. What other pests should we eradicate? | First Dog on the Moon | Opinion | The Guardian
You won't find me on: faceplant; Scipe; Infragam; LumpedIn; ShapCnat or Twitting. I'm just not that interesting.
Has already been done with turtles and other fresh water aquatic pests. Plenty of streams contain mosquito fish , guppies etc. Have heard of areas near Kedron Brook with wild populations of Amazon Sword plants.
Interesting though , no negative feedback on another introduced species of fish , Brown Trout. They surely must be taking the niche place of a native critter ?
There are 43 exotic fish species established in Australia (see attachment Ferals_Exotic_Fish).
An even larger number of native fishes (79 species) have been translocated to places in which they do not naturally occur. These 'native' species can be as problematic as the exotic introductions (see attachment Ferals_Native_Fish).
Cheers
KarlB
![]()
Well that post and link was highly political and challenged all thought/opinion contrary to one political ideology, whilst resorting to personal attacks as a common attempt to mask what is clearly just another anti-hunting save all the animals (pests included) from the scary hunters - demonstrated by the irrelevant reference to guns in the attachment. What's next - stop farming because we don't need to eat or sell meat and vegetables?
An obvious breach of the forum rules?
But in the tone of the derogatory personal attacks in the linked article, it would seem a method likely to remain as the basis for responding to anyone not a supporter of this ideology...
https://tasmps.greens.org.au/content...entient-beings
What is a sentient being? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentie...%28Buddhism%29
Definition
Getz (2004: p. 760) provides a generalist Western Buddhist encyclopedic definition:
Sentient beings is a term used to designate the totality of living, conscious beings that constitute the object and audience of Buddhist teaching. Translating various Sanskrit terms (jantu, bahu jana, jagat, sattva), sentient beings conventionally refers to the mass of living things subject to illusion, suffering, and rebirth (Saṃsāra). Less frequently, sentient beings as a class broadly encompasses all beings possessing consciousness, including Buddhas and Bodhisattvas.[1]
Classification
Early scriptures in the Pāli Canon and the conventions of the Tibetan Bhavacakra classify sentient beings into five categories'divinities, humans, animals, tormented spirits, and denizens of hell?although sometimes the classification adds another category of beings called devas between divinities and humans.[1]
See also
Animal consciousness
Buddhist vegetarianism
Human beings in Buddhism
It seems that as this 'party' can't accept that the 'majority' won't vote for their 'alternative' lifestyle, they will attempt to gain recognition of all registered pets as 'voters' and claim those votes for their party. A new image of the old phrase 'gone to the dogs'. A valuable contribution to the senate?![]()
| Search AULRO.com ONLY! |
Search All the Web! |
|---|
|
|
|
Bookmarks