Thread: Dogs in national parks

Originally Posted by rangieman

Take them out of town a shoot them in the cage job done

Isn't that bad for the cage?

Originally Posted by Strangerover

Isn't that bad for the cage?

Not at all, a well placed .22 in the cats scull won't exit the body and damage the mesh

Originally Posted by ramblingboy42

Prince Charles wore a fox hat to Alice Springs in hot weather on one his visits a few years ago.

Hi,
You would think Mummy would have known where it was.
Cheers

We have quite a large family of resident roo's that often graze on the only green grass in the area during summer that is our back lawn, We also have heaps of various birds that love the sprinklers and our old dog doesn't even bark at them let alone attack them.
Some dogs should Never be allowed to roam about anywhere let alone in a NP But dogs like our docile/lazy little spoilt brat pose No problem whatsoever.

NPWS perform annual 1080 baiting in the RNP and illawarra escarpment to reduce the number of ferals (not species-specific).

Also an annual deer cull - however it doesn't appear that either of these practices have any effect on feral populations or the deer.

We have an annual migrant buck, who literally lives across the road on the tiny thread of escarpment, from autumn to spring. He first arrived in 2011. He's now quite a sizeable chap and would make a nice prize.

We've notified NPWS, and they can't catch him, he's wayyy to smart. Good on him though.... he's a bit of a local icon, although on winter mornings when the fog's rolling in, he's a bit of a problem for the early risers... standing in the middle of the road, or keeping the locals lawns mowed...

I keep my dogs (registered) on leads, yet other locals seem to ignore this requirement. I tell them off. Don't care - if it's good enough for me to obey the law, so can you. Cats? well, if they end up in the 1080 baited zone, I'm all for it.

Insofar as keeping a dog out of a national park..... It's a blanket law which protects wildlife from domestic canine abuse. And while my two blind, insulin-dependent canines wouldn't harm any native wildlife, I understand why the law is in place and respect that. Does it cause issues for me? well - yes and no. I don't go to national parks with my dogs, nor do I stop in national park campsites. I go and stop in places where I can arrange for pet-friendly accommodation. My fur kids are indoor animals primarily, and are house trained. They're also old, blind, insulin dependent and would suffer from anxiety if placed in unfamiliar surroundings. Years ago when I could have taken them with me, I would have loved to. I think for certain species the law is completely inept, however, like everything in this Nanny state we live in, the law is placed to protect the majority of sensible owners from a minority of abusive ignorant owners.... the hunting dogs and the irresponsible owners.

We could take some time out to mention Fraser Island - the reputedly "most pure dingo" in 'STRAYA. I call bull**** on that. My ancestors ran the lighthouses on hook point, sandy cape and inskip pt, and back in the day the only food supply was a government ship every 3 months. Dingoes were shot, the local natives were kept away with saltpetre in a 12 gauge, and the loggers brought dogs with them, all of which puts paid to the purity claim of fraser island dingoes.

But the law's there to protect what is left of the population. I just find the claims to the alleged purity a heap of lies.
The attitude of QNPWS is to "return" the fauna populations. It will eventually lead to Dingo species overpopulation. There is no thought about preserving or restricting 4x4 use on the island - just like there were no restrictions on logging back in the day. Just like the whole areas been fished out in the last 30 years.

I'm not one to bitch and moan, but there are times when you have to look at the reasons as to why people are locked out of places. There are reasons (unfounded bull**** ones) and then there are legitimate reasons.

Neither of which have been well implemented in the past, and many will continue to be poorly implemented. Just like fire management of national parks, and green zones around large populations.

If people actually took notice of how our Aboriginal owners take care of the land, we'd all be better off. Dogs, cats, pigs, foxes, deer, cane toads, invasive plant species..... if we all were allowed to actually get in there and do our bit to remove the problem, without some beauracrat trying to make a big scene about it or some uniformed authoritarian yelling without logical reason, then we would be able to responsibly use these places without issues of access and canine companions.

Across the road from me, I have a problem with an invasive plant species - the land is owned by the crown and maintained by NSW NPWS. Neighbours of mine routinely go in to areas nearby and remove vegetation, I've left it alone for the entire period I have lived here. The difference is obvious.

However when it comes to asking NPWS to remove the invasive species - nope. Can I remove it for you?? not allowed. no I cannot. Literally cannot remove a known legislated invasive species from a national park controlled land.

Ask yourselves who the bigger dickhead idiots are.... NPWS or the government

What is required is a 44 gallon drum of glyphosate 360 and a tractor with a spray arm now, when 10 years ago it could have easily been controlled by one person.

Of course, I have to thank NSW Roads & Maritime Services for this - because they owned and controlled this parcel of land and it was a designated fire break - and maintained as such until 2008, when it was handed to NPWS who sat on their collective arse and done nothing. No fire break maintenance, no control of invasive species. No maintenance on the lookout, and no willingness to cooperate with local residents.

And yet we all wonder why people end up in heated dispute with civil servants in uniform..... I've seen it a number of times here.... and yet still nothing is done to maintain the firebreak or control the invasive species. Just the usual BS excuses.... budget doesn't allow, low-priority area etc, yet it's on one of the busiest nsw tourist routes in southern nsw - and we still have to deal with and cop the tourist rubbish, the beer swilling yokel parking up with the radio on full-bore and the dope smoking car full of teens...

Dogs are the least of the problems for national parks. Dickheads are the biggest problem.

Why aren't cane toads banned from NPs?

I shoot on a property where the owner locks his dogs up at night he says if I see any dogs,cats or any other form of feral shoot it even if has a collar on as he is feed up with loosing stock.

Originally Posted by trout1105

Cats do Not require a licence so if any one of them is being "Problematic" even in suburbia then they are fair game and as long as the trapping and disposal is done "Discreetly" who is to know?

Well right or wrong, and I dont disagree with your view, you will soon find yourself with a hefty fine or gaol doing it in the big smoke.