Hi Mantra.

I have no idea who these "cross-bow hunters" that frequent this Forum are but they must be very exotic beasts.

In Australia, with the exception of South Australia and the Northern Territory, cross-bows have been subject to as stringent and in some jurisdictions even more restrictive legislation than even firearms.

In New South Wales cross-bows were banned in 1973, and only limited ownership was later tolerated for target archery and Historical Re-Creationism only.

The incident involving the two injured kangaroos describes an act of mindless vandalism.

Are you unable to make a distinction between hunting and criminality?

OR.

Are you so biased that you simply don't want to make room for ANY such distinction?

You write:

Quote.

"Unfortunately too many of our national parks are being opened up to hunting and it's open slather."

End Quote.

From all that I have seen of the proposed game management details only feral animals will be culled on crown land and National Parks Land.

Such culling is to be restricted to hunters who hold the appropriate licenses.

Hardly "open slather" Mantra.


You write:

Quote.

"Beware if you're a visitor taking in the sights."

End Quote.


Now why would you say that Mantra?

Are you seriously saying that people who legally hunt are in some way a danger to their fellow citizens?

If so. - Then I must ask you to provide credible evidence to support that remarkable assertion.


Finally:

Quote.

"Duck hunting is pointless and just another blood sport."

End Quote.

We have plenty of non-native waterfowl in Australia.

Why is duck hunting pointless?

The only serious conservation problem related to duck hunting that I could ever find and which was scientificaly validated was the issue of lead poisoning caused by birds eating spent shotgun pellets.

This matter could easily be addressed by obligating ammunition manufacturers to make shotgun pellets from non-toxic bismouth.

(Iron shot was attempted years back, but as it lacks sufficient weight to be ballisticaly efficient, its use could hardly be described as ethical much less humane, so bismouth looks like the most realistic alternative to lead shot).

The Warrigal: What sort of regulation of shooting in national/state parks would you say is appropriate? Should all hunters be members of some approved body? Or are they anyway? We flag the idea in http://www.newaustralia.net/enviro_parks.html of having different days for different activities...not sure how practical that is! I confess ignorance in this area which is not one of our key points.

Skippy: We have no religious affiliation, but do not seek to exclude people of faith.

I occasionally attend a Baptist church in St. Kilda. The 'Respecting Faith' section of http://www.newaustralia.net/society.html is a reaction to the Greens and Democrats that we felt were anti-faith. Faith is a very rich tapestry and includes a whole universe of beliefs. Personally I have faith, believe in evolution & climate change and accept abortion & homosexuality. Others have faith, reject evolution but passionately agree with the need to save 'gods creation'. Then there are others of faith who say God gave us all this so its our duty to exploit it to the max right now and kill all gays. (Luckily I don't know any of them.)

Note that in http://www.newaustralia.net/education.html we oppose teaching of intelligent design in schools. So sort of a bob each way really.

Re drugs see http://www.newaustralia.net/health_drugs.html. What do you think?

I notice you support GET UP!  A radical progressive left group of nutbags if ever there was...  2 words...  Mamdouh Habib.

Nothing constructive to say as usual Skippy just flaming as usual.

You trying to create a flame war on someone elses topic squippo?
How about just trying to refute the facts for a change...  get your wife to help.

freediver you raise excellent points here and expose an inconsistency between different parts of the NewAustralia agenda. On the one hand we talk about only hunting feral animals and yet on http://www.newaustralia.net/rural.html we support commercial kangaroo harvesting.

While this is not a central part of our agenda we will need to do some more thinking about this and try and fix it up. I will let you know when we have.

My current thoughts on the matter would be that terrestrial parks should be like marine 'no take' zones for native fauna unless scientific data recommended a cull. Native animals could and should be used commercially outside of parks. Comments please!!

The whale harvesting idea is interesting and what you say makes some sense. At a practical level we can't stop the 'scientific' program anyway so continued posturing about it just pointlessly erodes our relationship with Japan. Perhaps a better conservation deal can be reached by agreeing to convert the scientific whaling into commercial whaling. I will need to see what the the reaction of the other NewAustralia members is to this before adding this as policy. At the moment we are silent on the issue -  it just hasn't been discussed yet.

Alan.

Thank you for your reply and also for your patience!

The only opinion that I represent at Ozpolitic is my own, so rather then regale you with my own views at this juncture, I thought it would be more productive if I sought out and provided links to the some of the most respected of conservation hunting orgs.

Here are a few which I would regard as essential to anyone seeking clear insight into the hunting community's point of view:

http://www.fga.net.au/www/251/1001127/displayarticle/hunting--1001226.html
     
http://www.bowhunters.org.au/phpBB3/portal.php

http://www.ssaa.org.au/hunting/hunting-and-conservation-branches.html

www.forest.nsw.gov.au/recreation/hunting/pdf/conservation-hunting.pdf

http://www.aushunt.com.au/main/mainarticle2.php?articleid=08712d59b1

The economic as well as ecological benifits of sport hunting are well articulated in the articles contained within the above mentioned sites.

While I shall chime in a bit more regarding my own personal thoughts a little later, for the time being I shall confine myself to one of your questions.

You ask wether it should be mandatory for hunters to belong to an approved hunting association and if so which one should it be.

I am inclined to think that this is not only unneccessary but also unwieldly and liable to be an expensive administrative nightmare.

Freediver has pointed out some of the difficulties of trying to do this.

As it happens most of the hunters I know join one or more sporting bodies which revolve around their hobby.

Hunting covers a lot of territory so there are several categories of firearm hunters along with the bowhunters and the "primitive hunting" enthusiasts.

All of these seem to be represented by at least one reputable club or association

I think that it would be very unfair, not to mention counter productive for anyone to arbitrarily declare that association "A" is the ONLY fit and proper body to represent hunters.

Regards,

Warrigal