# Croc trophy hunts



## Fuscus (Jan 12, 2004)

In todays SMH
http://smh.com.au/articles/2004/01/12/1073877754342.html

Basically it says that 25 crocs per year may be available for some bozos to shoot. Crocs must be over 4 meters and will be part of the legal yearly quota of 600 crocs per year.


----------



## Lunar_Psycho (Jan 12, 2004)

That sucks!!! I hope they keep the ban. Notice they mention "man-eating reptiles". It sounds like a ploy to make people care less. If its not cuddly and soft it doesnt matter in the media's opinion. I still dont know why people enjoy hunting animals. It doesnt make you any stronger or superior. If they wanna go ahead with this stupid plan then the hunters should be allowed no weapons whatsoever, then itd be a fair fight.

Cheers, Jay


----------



## Fuscus (Jan 12, 2004)

ABC has more
http://news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,8370622%5E421,00.html

Its not really hunting, the guy is transported to the spot, someone points at the animal, the hunter shots (and there are backup marksman) then is taken back for 10 oclock drinkies happy that he has made the world safer.
Still, if the animal is going to be culled anyway ....


----------



## Lunar_Psycho (Jan 12, 2004)

Ow ok. I thought they got to go out and freely shoot at whichever long croc they wanted to.


----------



## Fuscus (Jan 12, 2004)

I'm assuming that this is how it would be done.
I have no factual evidence 
But it fits in with my world view.


----------



## wattso (Jan 13, 2004)

Tasmanian Tiger, crocs,[........?]............etc etc :cry: first its 600 crocs per year, then its so well regarded that its a tourism bringer, then the numbers go up,["because culling is nessesary"] then its endangered,...........then.........well, you know how it goes.


----------



## marc (Jan 13, 2004)

what is the point of shooting them .....none....bloody red necks


----------



## Farkurnell (Jan 13, 2004)

What a great idea!!
Where do I sign up?
Do I have to supply my own rifle or do they?

Why not make a bit of sport out of it? There should be more of it.


----------



## Robert (Jan 13, 2004)

Humans kill more innocent lives than animals put together letalone reptiles,should we go around with guns kulling all the big humans.(I reckon we kull the ppl who carry on with this crap).
This really s*#ts me.
As Marc said what is the point in shooting them???
Halfwit red-neck wankers.


----------



## Greebo (Jan 13, 2004)

> should we go around with guns kulling all the big humans


 It wouldn't hurt to weed out a few of the dumb ones.
(I've seen too many episodes of Jerry Springer.)

Ppl don't like roos being culled either but it has to be done.


----------



## Magpie (Jan 13, 2004)

The whole idea of this plan is to make a bit of money out of something that is already happening. Currently the NT govt shoots up to 600 crocs a year. The plan is simply to allow rich people to pay a few thou to shoot 25 of these 600 crocs instead of paying rangers to do it. They are NOT increasing the numbers to be shot each year. Unfortunately, animals die and we humans cause lots and lots of animal deaths each day. And don't tell me it's the money you object to cause every cow, sheep, goat and chook who ends up at a butcher or supermarket died to make someone some money.


----------



## africancichlidau (Jan 13, 2004)

Well I totally agree with Maggie on this one. Don't get me wrong, I am normally against all kinds of animal killing but this really doesn't seem to be such a big deal to me when you consider these animals are being culled anyway.


----------



## wattso (Jan 13, 2004)

Id pay to join a politician cull. how bout 6oo high security crims per year? 6oo junkies? where do i sign?


----------



## africancichlidau (Jan 13, 2004)

On the dotted line Wattso old boy


----------



## Slateman (Jan 13, 2004)

I think that people who handle this, do know better then we here on APS. Dark ages when people hunted species to distingstion here in australia are long time gone.
I would trust judgement of experts on this one. Hunters should be curefull to make sure that steve is not sitting on that crock they are about to shoot . :lol:


----------



## africancichlidau (Jan 13, 2004)

Nah Slatey, that would just give them extra points


----------



## Fuscus (Jan 13, 2004)

Oh, slatey - you said the S word.

I also think I should clarify where I stand on this issue as it might be a bit hard to work out from my previous posts. If the animals are going to be culled anyhow then there is no real difference who does it as long as it is done clean. And if the local community benifits then so much the better. THe same model is currently used in parts of Africa to control animals.

I still think very little about the people who kill animals for pure sport, hunting and eating the catch is acceptable to me ( even in a non survial situation) but spending heaps to go to some remote part of the world and then shooting an animal that then sinks does not strike me as sane.


----------



## Fuscus (Jan 14, 2004)

more in todays paper
http://news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,8387418%5E421,00.html


----------



## wattso (Jan 14, 2004)

LOL, slatey. Extinctions themselves however are still very much going on, slowly but surely. hunting isnt nessesary to do that. now its land clearing, deforestation, habitat destruction. Imo there is little enough room for wild crocs inthe natural world, what with humans, boating, swimming , p*ssing around in and polluting waterways, without "culling" aswell. People "trusted the judgement of experts" before. This is how we got cane toads. "experts" dont always know best. Leave the natural world alone please.


----------



## Slateman (Jan 14, 2004)

I know all that watso. We are talking about shooting here. Population number control by humen.
I do not understand what the cane toads have to do with it, that is different story all together.


----------



## wattso (Jan 14, 2004)

Intresting points in that article Fuscus. Best idea, let the aboriginies "cull" them. they been doing it for few thousand years, if anyone is "expert" its them. They could also do with the money being paid to cull them. I've seen some very poor aboriginal communitys in the top end, better use of the money to provide health/basics/education there . wonder how Aboriginies hunted them for so long without "over doing it"? Imo they know more about conservation than the "crikey" types. lol


----------



## africancichlidau (Jan 14, 2004)

I see where ya coming from Wattso, but, when it was left to natural causes to control their population they had far more room to do it in. If you want to go back to those ways then you have to return the land to the state it was in then. And I don't mean sending the soil around your Qld Palm back to Queensland


----------



## wattso (Jan 14, 2004)

Slateman said:


> I know all that watso. We are talking about shooting here. Population number control by humen.
> I do not understand what the cane toads have to do with it, that is different story all together.



Slatey, i meant canetoads were touted by the "experts" as population control of beetles affecting cane crops. every one[whos vote counted] agreed with the "experts". thats what it has to do with it. now people will agree with the "experts" again about how best to control croc numbers. next step, some "experts" may decide commercial culling will work better, for export of meat/skins O>S. if gov agrees with "experts" about so called "sustainable resources" [crocs] as means of controlling numbers, then we are taking first steps down the road to croc eradication . Greed does it, same as tassy tiger. more deman for meat/skins, more shooting.
how fast do crocs breed to keep up demand? keeping in mind that habitat destruction will continue, along with humans moving into croc territory. together this could endanger crocs sooner than expected.
does this explain how im thinking better?


----------



## Slateman (Jan 14, 2004)

I just feel sory for Abalone. They are left to be colected by Aboriginals and some tribes using comercial metods to do that now. If crock hunting will be profit earning industry, ab. people will have no mercy same like any private enterprice.
We will se what local expert will find as answer. Mabe good, mabe bad. But I would not leave decision just on aboriginals. Modern abo is same as anybody else this days.


----------



## africancichlidau (Jan 14, 2004)

But his tastes in alcohol are a little different


----------



## wattso (Jan 14, 2004)

LOL Africa, think it boils down to deciding how many crocs/how much croc territory to retain for their conservation and how much to destroy for ever expanding human populations. Us or them!  seems to me that without alotting a certain proportion of the crocs natural habitat [wherever they are found] permantly to crocs, [not for future human habitation] and getting a real idea how many there are, how many those areas can sustain etc, that random culling, even 600 a year is irresponsible. btw, are they talking about 600 females or males or either over a certain size. can shooters tell the difference, is a shooters estimation of size good enough. whats the effect of killing a populationd dominant male etc. how much thought and scientific study has really been done beyond, someone saying, "folks is gettin ate, thars too many pa, lets kill some!"?


----------



## wattso (Jan 14, 2004)

I wasnt refering to your "down in the park, slugging a bottle of plonk or cask wine variety" slatey lol Those who havent been ruined by white mans firewater in outback who still hunt by traditional methods i meant.  they know what conservation means, if they kill em all theres none for tucker another day! :lol:


----------



## africancichlidau (Jan 14, 2004)

Of course it does Wattso, but when the time comes to decide between the croc and the man who do you think is gonna win?


----------



## Fuscus (Jan 14, 2004)

Slatey, Amateur collection of Abolone is legal in Victoria and SA. There are strict size and bag limits and Victoria seem to be doing a good job. Over Xmas I went to some old spots in bass strait after an absence of 10 years and found that the abolone population was pretty much the same. Absolutely thousands of the little blighters and properly 99.98% just undersize. I was able to get my bag limit of legal size after quite a bit of work. 
We can manage wild resources properly providing we are careful, habitat loss, fragmentation of habitat, pollution (including greenhouse) and exotic species are all greater threats.
We do have an advantage with crocs, their greatest predator is larger crocs so that their survial rate is a lot higher in the absence of larger animals, the other is pigs (which goes against the list above). They provided a ready source of food for crocs after they were protected and their numbers started expanding again.


----------



## wattso (Jan 14, 2004)

africancichlidau said:


> Of course it does Wattso, but when the time comes to decide between the croc and the man who do you think is gonna win?



win or lose?, thats subjective imo, have we won or lost when we've driven something to extinction? :idea:


----------



## africancichlidau (Jan 14, 2004)

That depends, are we still alive?


----------



## wattso (Jan 14, 2004)

not if we drive enough species to extinction no. fairwell homo sapiens stupidii :lol:


----------



## africancichlidau (Jan 14, 2004)

As long as we still got cows and sheep we'll be right  And I hate to be picky but shouldn't that be Homo Sapiens StupidUS


----------



## wattso (Jan 15, 2004)

LOL..........man doth not live on lamb chops and topside steak alone!
:lol: :lol: :lol: ...........eventually you wouldnt have cows or sheep either.


----------



## Amy (Jan 15, 2004)

Yet another idea from our so called "experts" What happens when 25 crocs per year becomes 50 crocs per year and then 100 and then 200. This doesn't include those that get shot for being "man eating predators" or those who are taken from the nests as eggs and sold on the black market. Or those who die because of habitat loss. Or those who die as a result of a few drunkards going out with riffles and taking pot shots at anything that moved in the water. Or those who die of polution from us. Or those who die simply from natural causes like age. 

It's all good and well people want to make a little money from something that happens anyway. But what happens when the almighty dollar takes hold? I just think that ALOT more research should be done before anyone decides to do anything or impose any new laws/regulations. I for one have an utmost respect for the crocodile. I want to see them in the wild in 10 years time not just in some crocodile park or even worse, stuffed in a museum as another tribute to what man can do once the idea of a quick buck takes hold.

_Also, what happens if more females are shot than males? This would bring the breeding numbers down dramactically. And what happens when all of those who are considered "size" are killed? Will the tourist attraction stop? Or will they simply lower the legal so that they can continue to make some $$ _


----------



## Greebo (Jan 15, 2004)

I think it's time to put the soap-box away.

Opinions are like ar$eholes...everyone has one.


----------



## Slateman (Jan 15, 2004)

lol


----------



## wattso (Jan 15, 2004)

Well put Amy, some people here, dont like a debate when certain people make a valid point against their own opinion! If they dont have a valid counter point they belittle the person, change the subject, or try to put the whole thing to bed by saying something patronising like "leave it to the experts". :x You said exactly what I meant, however far more clearly and eloquently, must be the lawyer in you. lol .............Yes Greebo, everybody has an opinion, thats why its called a debate, everybody is allowed to express their opinion,thats why its called freedom of speech, everybody has an arsehole as you say and everybody knows one too! :lol:


----------



## Greebo (Jan 15, 2004)

> , thats why its called a debate


 I'm sorry but a debate requires that each side listens to the other side of argument.All I see on this thread is people stating what their personal beliefs are.It looks more like a bunch of letters to the editor than a debate.
That's just my opinion of course.


----------



## wattso (Jan 15, 2004)

Bingo!........ and your most welcome to it greebo.


----------



## Slateman (Jan 16, 2004)

Wow Grebo That is the way to patronise. You have to go to school with experts on this one. LOL You should learn from Mr nowhow. 
Lets blame grebo again, Bad bad grebo. Thanks got we have you here mate.


----------



## Amy (Jan 16, 2004)

Greebo~ Thats ok sweetheart, you are allowed to have your opinion


> That's just my opinion of course


But what you said earlier about opinions being like a$$holes, does this also include yours or are you above your own cynicism and sarcasm?

Also, we have read the other side's arguments, however, since they are not here to defend/rebut we really can only put our views on the table. If you disagree with us Greebo, I (and Wattso I am sure) would be more than happy to debate with you. Unfortunatly, it may cause a little more disruption than what Slatey would like.

Wattso~ I knew being a lawyer would have to come in handy for something lol


----------



## Greebo (Jan 16, 2004)

> But what you said earlier about opinions being like a$$holes, does this also include yours or are you above your own cynicism and sarcasm?


Perhaps you should look up the definition of everyone.
A person who can't laugh at themselves is a rather boring individual.
I have no desire to continue this debate.Nor did I offer my opinion one way or the other on the original topic so just which side of the argument am I supposed to be debating anyway.


----------



## wattso (Jan 16, 2004)

I have no desire to continue this debate~ greebo

I thought you said it wasnt a debate?

I'm sorry but a debate requires that each side listens to the other side of argument.All I see on this thread is people stating what their personal beliefs are.It looks more like a bunch of letters to the editor than a debate. 
That's just my opinion of course~ greebo

Make up your bloody mind mate!


----------



## Greebo (Jan 16, 2004)

Damn you and your technical mumbo jumbo!

here's a quote...

"Greebo, why do you have to pick apart everyone's posts? Are you a frustrated english teacher or a (forget the rest...)"

I remember that was one of Wattso's first posts.
And now it seems that I am out of a job.
Oh well...times change.


----------



## Amy (Jan 16, 2004)

I am always entertained by this forum. 

Greebo, if you dont want to debate, thats ok. But I wasn't saying anything about you being on either side of the original topic. I meant your views on whether or not this was a debate. I simply offering you the chance to have one which more closely resembled your idea of a debate.


----------



## Slateman (Jan 16, 2004)

You people love typing. LOL


----------



## wattso (Jan 17, 2004)

Greebo said:


> Damn you and your technical mumbo jumbo!
> 
> here's a quote...
> 
> ...



 If i recall, that was in reply to a post in which you were patronising people [not slatey of course] for incorrect spelling!  
The only instance of my ever coming close was 1. asking Slatey how it was that that his english got better or worse from occasion to occasion [and out of freindly curiosity, not to be a smartass] and 2.....
having a bit of freindly fun with young Brenden regards apostrophies [e.g]["here, and here, see"] I do contribute, i dont just pop up from time to time like the gopher on "caddyshack" to offer sarcasm and "witty" one liners!


----------



## Greebo (Jan 17, 2004)

> some people here, dont like a debate when certain people make a valid point against their own opinion! If they dont have a valid counter point they belittle the person


 I guess comparing me to the gopher from caddyshack would constitute an attempt at belittling.So going by your own logic, I think you've snookered yourself.


----------



## wattso (Jan 17, 2004)

Oh you clever lad! like a bit of your own? Im just giving some back now, glad you recognise your own brand of sarcasm/humour.


----------



## Slateman (Jan 17, 2004)

UUUH me not saying not to very verry much here. 
At least they are polite to each other.
I still think that Grebs have no chance. Watso with his debate skills win. It is the gift from GOT to have answer for everything. Only one person was good like watso, and he is no longer with us. 
I think you all know who I am thinking of. He was able to talk him self ewer time to be right.
*Look who is stirring the pot now. Me.* But I can do that in this instance, because this 2 persons involved are true gentleman and will not abuse each other in bad way.


----------



## wattso (Jan 17, 2004)

Nothing wrong with having an answer for everything Slatey, they call it COMMUNICATION  I can see its a difficult concept for some and even more difficult in practical terms.  Another concept widley mistaken for communication is SARCASM, very subltle differences, easy for the uneducated to mistake.


----------



## Slateman (Jan 17, 2004)

ouch


----------



## wattso (Jan 17, 2004)

:lol:


----------



## Amy (Jan 17, 2004)

Wattso sweetheart! Didn't think you had it in you. Retract your claws gentlemen!


----------



## Greebo (Jan 17, 2004)

I don't think I gave Wattso enough credit for the gopher analogy.
Now that I think about it, Bill Murray never did get that gopher, no matter how hard he tried.


ps.I have nothing against Wattso. At least he has a sense of humour.


----------



## wattso (Jan 17, 2004)

Your welcome greebo :wink:


----------

