# Man fined $10,000 for killing 'iconic' croc



## alichamp (Feb 16, 2018)

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-16/man-fined-10k-over-croc-shooting/9454758


----------



## Stompsy (Feb 16, 2018)

Ugh. What a tool.


----------



## Murph_BTK (Feb 16, 2018)

Stompsy said:


> Ugh. What a tool.


I would like to clarify the bell end version THIS guy is..not the legendary band TOOL [emoji869]



Instagram: murph_BTK


----------



## Foozil (Feb 16, 2018)

I'm by no means all for what he did, its terrible, but what else could he have done? just put up with it I guess...


----------



## Stompsy (Feb 16, 2018)

Murph_BTK said:


> I would like to clarify the bell end version THIS guy is..not the legendary band TOOL [emoji869]
> 
> 
> 
> Instagram: murph_BTK


I hesitated because tools are useful and this guy ain’t that.
[doublepost=1518767505,1518767445][/doublepost]


Foozil said:


> I'm by no means all for what he did, its terrible, but what else could he have done? just put up with it I guess...


didnt the article state that he could have gone through the authorised channels?

And he said he was aware of them. He’s a tool.


----------



## Scutellatus (Feb 16, 2018)

Foozil said:


> I'm by no means all for what he did, its terrible, but what else could he have done? just put up with it I guess...


Ring the Department of Environment and Heritage Protection and they would of organised for it to be trapped and moved to another area.
[doublepost=1518767670,1518767512][/doublepost]Also for it to come back to the bank and sit after being shot, means it died a slow and possibly agonising death.


----------



## Foozil (Feb 16, 2018)

That just makes it even more frustrating


----------



## Flaviemys purvisi (Feb 16, 2018)

Scutellatus said:


> It doesnt make it right no matter how much money was saved!
> There are processes in place that deal with these type of situations. Hopefully he has lost his gun license as well as the gun they took.


Yeah processes take time and time is $$. He took the CHEAPEST option whether you agree with it or not. Also he will not lose his weapons licence for that, didn't even have a conviction recorded.

People on the land do this sort of thing daily, mainly snakes though.


----------



## Scutellatus (Feb 16, 2018)

He hadn't seen the croc take any cattle, "he believed it had been".
Also he wasn't even the owner of the cattle, he was a stationhand. I hope he doesn't get support from the station owner and has to pay the $10,000 out of his own pocket.

Would you feel the same @Aussiepride83 if this was a turtle taking fish from a fish farm and someone took it upon themselves to kill it instead of going through the proper channels?


----------



## Flaviemys purvisi (Feb 16, 2018)

Scutellatus said:


> He hadn't even seen the croc take any cattle, "he believed it had been".
> Also he wasn't even the owner of the cattle, he was a stationhand. I hope he doesn't get support from the station owner and has to pay the $10,000 out of his own pocket.
> 
> Would you feel the same Kev if this was a turtle taking fish from a fish farm and someone took it upon themselves to kill it instead of going through the proper channels?


I know of this that's happened in yabby breeding dams. Turtles shot with a .22 rifle. Your opinion is just that, your opinion. Not everyone in the world is an earth muffin, producers shoot wildlife to protect their interests. Fact of life. He did what he did, life goes on.


----------



## Flaviemys purvisi (Feb 16, 2018)

Doesn't matter what you think or think I think or what I think.. it's easy to sit back and criticise someone else's actions and have a "in hindsight" approach. It's done.... a croc dies today, meanwhile another 50,000 hatched in croc farms and another 50,000 hatched in the wild. The bloke was looking after his bread and butter and no jury will convict someone for that. Simple. Life goes on. Relax.


----------



## Stompsy (Feb 16, 2018)

Aussiepride83 said:


> I know of this that's happened in yabby breeding dams. Turtles shot with a .22 rifle. Your opinion is just that, your opinion. Not everyone in the world is an earth muffin, producers shoot wildlife to protect their interests. Fact of life. He did what he did, life goes on.


Not the crocs life. 

If only we humans didn’t hold our lives (or that of our livestock) so highly above these creatures that have been here longer than we have.


----------



## Scutellatus (Feb 16, 2018)

Aussiepride83 said:


> Doesn't matter what you think or think I think or what I think.. it's easy to sit back and criticise someone else's actions and have a "in hindsight" approach. It's done.... a croc dies today, meanwhile another 50,000 hatched in croc farms and another 50,000 hatched in the wild. The bloke was looking after his bread and butter and no jury will convict someone for that. Simple. Life goes on. Relax.


It wasn't his bread and butter, he is/was a stationhand.

How many of those 100,000 will reach 100 years old, none from the croc farms will and maybe 5% of the wild ones at best.

He WAS convicted, there wasn't a conviction recorded is all.
If he isn't going to lose his gun license why did they take the weapons involved?


----------



## Foozil (Feb 16, 2018)

This isn't opinion based, there is a right and wrong in this situation whether you like it or not...


----------



## Foozil (Feb 16, 2018)

Aussiepride83 said:


> Wasn't his bread and butter... yet he's a stationhand for the producer who was losing out... makes a lot of sense... So it WAS ultimately his liveihood.


Even though there is no evidence that this croc killed any livestock?


----------



## Flaviemys purvisi (Feb 16, 2018)

Foozil said:


> Even though there is no evidence that this croc killed any livestock?


There's also no evidence to suggest it hasn't. UFO's could have taken the cattle though...


----------



## vampstorso (Feb 16, 2018)

Most unfortunate the croc is gone.
Things like this have an impact on natural selection. That croc obviously had good genes that are now removed.


----------



## cris (Feb 16, 2018)

Foozil said:


> Same logic could be applied to the extinction of tassie tigers to a lesser extent. Doesn't make it any less excusable.


Not at all, crocs are not endangered or extinct. They should be regulated in the same way roos are, although both should have less red tape. As mentioned the fine will not go close to the losses a big crocs can cause. If you are interested in learning about the situation I would suggest reading some of Grahame Webb's work. He is a conservationist of higher calibre than any popular phony celebrity conservationist.


----------



## Flaviemys purvisi (Feb 16, 2018)

cris said:


> Not at all, crocs are not endangered or extinct. They should be regulated in the same way roos are, although both should have less red tape. As mentioned the fine will not go close to the losses a big crocs can cause. If you are interested in learning about the situation I would suggest reading some of Grahame Webb's work. He is a conservationist of higher calibre than any popular phony celebrity conservationist.


Half the crocs in the Proserpine river should be culled outright.


----------



## Scutellatus (Feb 16, 2018)

Aussiepride83 said:


> Half the crocs in the Proserpine river should be culled outright.


So should half of the humans but neither are going to happen.

People need to learn to work with the land not against it, just like the Aboriginals of Australia did for thousands of years.


----------



## Flaviemys purvisi (Feb 16, 2018)

Scutellatus said:


> So should half of the humans but neither are going to happen.
> 
> People need to learn to work with the land not against it, just like the Aboriginals of Australia did for thousands of years.


There were never 25 million aboriginals with croc farms in Australia. That is not a valid comparison.


----------



## cris (Feb 16, 2018)

Aussiepride83 said:


> The weapons will just be temporarily impounded pending verification that they're all legit. That's all.




It is possible for them to be taken and the licence voided as it is arguably not a legal use of a firearm, it is the type of thing they may need a lawyer for. There have been a few cases recently in eastern states where people have used guns for lawful selfdefence and ended up in legal trouble as the firearm is was used out of the capacity it is permited to be used.


----------



## Flaviemys purvisi (Feb 16, 2018)

cris said:


> It is possible for them to be taken and the licence voided as it is arguably not a legal use of a firearm, it is the type of thing they may need a lawyer for. There have been a few cases recently in eastern states where people have used guns for lawful selfdefence and ended up in legal trouble as the firearm is was used out of the capacity it is permited to be used.


I honestly can't see that happening, over this incident.


----------



## Scutellatus (Feb 16, 2018)

Aussiepride83 said:


> There were never 25 million aboriginals in Australia. That is not a valid comparison.


It doesn't matter how many there were or how many we are now. People have no thought of what they are doing to the land and with a little planning and preparation these type of things can be avoided. 
The croc was here before the shooter and the station owner. In reality it is his land and if someone wants to build a cattle station on it then they should work around it. Fences work wonders for keeping cattle where people want them. Fence the river and make fenced drinking stations. Problem solved.


----------



## Foozil (Feb 16, 2018)

Aussiepride83 said:


> This is why you're not a cattle producer. But anyway.


Any reasons why what Scutellatus said couldn't be done? Just a fence...


----------



## Flaviemys purvisi (Feb 16, 2018)

Foozil said:


> Any reasons why what Scutellatus said couldn't be done? Just a fence...


Just a fence isn't just a fence when it comes to a cattle property... The more fences there are the more work and more dramas. You confine cattle to feed in a particular area then they constantly have to be moved and then there's the muster. Bikes, quads, horses, choppers... you don't want to be effing about with fences and gates... cattle are very easily spooked and the way they move is by following the leader. Short of working on a station or feedlot first hand and being experienced in cattle husbandry, you just wouldn't understand fully. There's cattle stations you can drive on for 2 days and not see a fence.


----------



## cris (Feb 16, 2018)

Foozil said:


> Any reasons why what Scutellatus said couldn't be done? Just a fence...



Billions of dollars, not cost effective and would make more problems than it would fix.


----------



## Scutellatus (Feb 16, 2018)

Aussiepride83 said:


> There's also no evidence to suggest it hasn't. UFO's could have taken the cattle though...


Based on that statement I could be convicted of any number of crimes because there is no evidence to say I didn't commit them.

C'mon Kev instead of taking everything as YOU see it, which it seems you do, maybe broaden your mindset away from your killing fields work life.
I eat meat by the way so please don't misconstrue my statement.

This guy could have easily reported the loss of livestock to the department, let them deal with it and a grand old man would still be alive, even if it took a little longer than a bullet and cost them more in losses.

The station owner would be richer than five of us put together and can't absorb some losses? The sad reality of some of the human race.


----------



## Flaviemys purvisi (Feb 16, 2018)

Scutellatus said:


> Based on that statement I could be convicted of any number of crimes because there is no evidence to say I didn't commit them.
> 
> C'mon Kev instead of taking everything as YOU see it, which it seems you do, maybe broaden your mindset away from your killing fields work life.
> I eat meat by the way so please don't misconstrue my statement.
> ...


Shoulda coulda woulda... means nothing. He took the CHEAPEST option available simple. 10c bullet, even with the fine it's still cheaper.


----------



## cris (Feb 16, 2018)

Scutellatus said:


> The croc was here before the shooter and the station owner.



Copper and lead was here before the croc. Some farmers and the government do some really bad stuff, but killing one pest croc is not a significant issue. The real problem is the failure in developing good wildife policies...


----------



## Scutellatus (Feb 16, 2018)

cris said:


> Billions of dollars, not cost effective and would make more problems than it would fix.


Billions to run a fence for thirteen kilometres? I think not. 


Aussiepride83 said:


> Just a fence isn't just a fence when it comes to a cattle property... The more fences there are the more work and more dramas. You confine cattle to feed in a particular area then they constantly have to be moved and then there's the muster. Bikes, quads, horses, choppers... you don't want to be effing about with fences and gates... cattle are very easily spooked and the way they move is by following the leader. Short of working on a station or feedlot first hand and being experienced in cattle husbandry, you just wouldn't understand fully. There's cattle stations you can drive on for 2 days and not see a fence.


I am talking a fence along a river not across their property. A fence that wouldn't have gates unless they need to cross the river for muster, so what if someone has to go ahead and open gates, that's what jack/jillaroos are for.


----------



## cris (Feb 16, 2018)

Scutellatus said:


> Billions to run a fence for thirteen kilometres? I think not.
> 
> I am talking a fence along a river not across their property. A fence that wouldn't have gates unless they need to cross the river for muster, so what if someone has to go ahead and open gates, that's what jack/jillaroos are for.



Well you would have to fence all water ways in the croc distribution, it would actually cost trillions of dollars if it was even possible. The massive negative ecological impact would be beyond what most people could grasp. Not to mention problems like rain and flooding.


----------



## Flaviemys purvisi (Feb 16, 2018)

Cattle also graze through fences because the grass is always greener... this causes ear tags to get caught and expensive RFID's to be torn out... nope...sorry but won't work. Without RFID tags cattle can't be legally slaughtered. Massive cost to the producer.


----------



## Scutellatus (Feb 16, 2018)

I've spent some time on a sheep station out at Winton and can assure you they have fences. The value of the livestock dictates that you need boundary fences or you lose animals.

I am leaving it at that before this thread gets shut down like the others have.


----------



## Foozil (Feb 16, 2018)

Scutellatus said:


> I'v spent some time on a sheep station out at Winton and can assure you they have fences. The value of the livestock dictates that you need boundary fences or you lose animals.
> 
> I am leaving it at that before this thread gets shut down like the others have.


I second that, I spend lots of time of cattle and sheep farmer's properties. Fences as far as the eye can see.


----------



## Flaviemys purvisi (Feb 16, 2018)

Scutellatus said:


> I'v spent some time on a sheep station out at Winton and can assure you they have fences. The value of the livestock dictates that you need boundary fences or you lose animals.
> 
> I am leaving it at that before this thread gets shut down like the others have.


Boundary fences are the bare minimum required. Anything other than that is a nuisance and unnecessary hassle. Not all stations have boundary fences, many are bordered by natural features/barriers like rivers, escarpments, etc.


----------



## pinefamily (Feb 17, 2018)

The reason we are having this debate is we are over populated for our resources, and cattle stations have expanded into new areas to help feed our population. That, and the greed of cattle station owners wanting to make mega dollars exporting the beef to China.
While it does look bad, the shooting of the crocodile is something that rightly or wrongly occurs in the country on a semi-regular basis. Having said that, the man caught does need to be charged under the law. Ignore the law, and we become a third world country.


----------



## Pauls_Pythons (Feb 17, 2018)

The guy got prosecuted and rightly so.
No matter what anyone says in his defence the animal was protected by LAW and for a change the law stood up and actually did something to send a message.
Like the rules or not, they are the rules and the rules (law) is what separates us from the dark ages, end of story.


----------



## Flaviemys purvisi (Feb 17, 2018)

Pauls_Pythons said:


> The guy got prosecuted and rightly so.
> No matter what anyone says in his defence the animal was protected by LAW and for a change the law stood up and actually did something to send a message.
> Like the rules or not, they are the rules and the rules (law) is what separates us from the dark ages, end of story.


And as the old saying goes, there's always exceptions to the "rules." The rogue croc is gone now, end of story.


----------



## pinefamily (Feb 17, 2018)

Based on your logic, Kev, I could shoot your dog if I found it on my property. It might have, was planning to, attack my chickens.


----------



## SpottedPythons (Feb 17, 2018)

Crocs or cows? There are solutions other then pumping the natives full of lead. They were here first - we're not _entitled _to an exception to the rules just because the crocodile is eating cows, which, by the way, we have no evidence of. I remember your recent thread on blueys - what if everyone whipped out their .22 and starting blasting the blueys for eating dog food on the verandah?


----------



## Flaviemys purvisi (Feb 17, 2018)

pinefamily said:


> Based on your logic, Kev, I could shoot your dog if I found it on my property. It might have, was planning to, attack my chickens.


Of course you could and rightully so. I've a mate who shot his neighbour's 3 dogs for killing lambs on his property.


----------



## SpottedPythons (Feb 17, 2018)

Aussiepride83 said:


> And as the old saying goes, there's always exceptions to the "rules." The rogue croc is gone now, end of story.


Rouge - "a wild animal having savage or destructive tendencies." Is *eating* savage or destructive? You put cows in croc country, you're basically serving it up to them on a plate. I'm not a rouge human because I had one of those hot roast chickens from Woolies on Friday.


----------



## Bl69aze (Feb 17, 2018)

Crocodiles can climb a sturdy fence now?? Sounds like they didn’t have a perimeter fence set up and croc just strolled on in


----------



## cris (Feb 17, 2018)

pinefamily said:


> Based on your logic, Kev, I could shoot your dog if I found it on my property. It might have, was planning to, attack my chickens.



This happens pretty often outside the city, getting killed by 1080 is probably more common than getting shot though. Even in the city tresspassing cats are not safe in many yards.


----------



## Yellowtail (Feb 17, 2018)

I can't believe all the crap in defence of an illegal act killing a beautiful native animal that had survived for decades, he should have been fined $200,000 and spent gaol time and that would be a deterrent to his redneck mates at the local. If you choose to farm animals or grow crops in an environment that has native animals you must take that into account as a natural risk like drought, bushfire etc and budget for expected losses or mitigate them with fences and safe watering areas and there are legal ways to relocate rogue crocs. I chose to buy a property with lots of trees and wildlife and that does not give me the right to cut down trees because I am worried about fires or exterminate snakes because someone may get bitten and I can't cop the "protecting my kids" argument, children can be educated to respect the danger, I grew up in an environment full of venomous snakes and I was taught how to not get bitten. I even rake long grass to chase away any lizards and snakes before I cut the grass to avoid injuring them. Non-native feral animals like pigs, dogs, foxes etc are fair game and should be exterminated but thats a different argument.


----------



## cris (Feb 17, 2018)

Yellowtail said:


> Non-native feral animals like pigs, dogs, foxes etc are fair game and should be exterminated but thats a different argument.



Native or not, some animals are pests in some situations, our laws are extrmely backward and the myth that native animals cannot be pests is completely baseless. Humans are the only effective predator of many animals in Australia. People had been killing animals for many thousands of years, sure some driven to extinction, but these days it is possible to manage the control and use of wildlife without any significant risk to their survival. It is actually benifical to the ecosystem to kill animals as part of a well thought out management plan.

I have no issue with the guy being fined, as it is the current law. That said wildlife laws in this country are founded on emotion with very little consideration of reality. There should be practical ways to legally manage wildlife, that is not the case at the moment.


----------



## Yellowtail (Feb 17, 2018)

It's OK to exterminate because there are lots of them was no doubt the same argument used to justify the slaughter of millions of koalas for their pelts, or the slaughter and resulting extinction of the Tassie Tiger to save a few lambs and what about the destruction of most of the SW WA forests that has resulted in local climate change and massive areas rendered useless by salinity. This madness is still destroying habitat and species in other countries to feed the un-natural over population of people but I like to think we are educated enough in this country to know better.


----------



## cris (Feb 17, 2018)

Yellowtail said:


> It's OK to exterminate because there are lots of them was no doubt the same argument used to justify the slaughter of millions of koalas for their pelts, or the slaughter and resulting extinction of the Tassie Tiger to save a few lambs and what about the destruction of most of the SW WA forests that has resulted in local climate change and massive areas rendered useless by salinity. This madness is still destroying habitat and species in other countries to feed the un-natural over population of people but I like to think we are educated enough in this country to know better.



Yeah, in some places they should be shooting koalas and selling their skins etc. There is a massive difference between controling pests and/or sustainable use with modern science and people in the past wiping stuff out. I'm considering setting up a breeding program for spotted tailed quolls, the amount of red tape and BS I will have to go through to do something that is clearly beneficial is absurd, that is if it is even possible.

Our wildife laws in genreal are not based on modern science or rational thought. They are based primarily on emotion and ignorance, and are highly detrimental to the ecosystem and conservation.


----------



## Pauls_Pythons (Feb 17, 2018)

Yellowtail said:


> It's OK to exterminate because there are lots of them was no doubt the same argument used to justify the slaughter of millions of koalas for their pelts, or the slaughter and resulting extinction of the Tassie Tiger to save a few lambs and what about the destruction of most of the SW WA forests that has resulted in local climate change and massive areas rendered useless by salinity. This madness is still destroying habitat and species in other countries to feed the un-natural over population of people but I like to think we are educated enough in this country to know better.



And lets not forget the fact that Australia has more species of animals on the critically endangered list than any other country in the world including Africa. And our animals are not slaughtered to feed the needs of a crazy race who think rhino horn or Tiger penis is going to make then a super human. Here wildlife is just killed for fun or because the animal is in the way such as in this instance. Humans are the scourge of the planet and continue to kill it off bit by bit in the name of progress.


----------



## Flaviemys purvisi (Feb 17, 2018)

Pauls_Pythons said:


> And lets not forget the fact that Australia has more species of animals on the critically endangered list than any other country in the world including Africa. And our animals are not slaughtered to feed the needs of a crazy race who think rhino horn or Tiger penis is going to make then a super human. Here wildlife is just killed for fun or because the animal is in the way such as in this instance. Humans are the scourge of the planet and continue to kill it off bit by bit in the name of progress.


Ours are on the endangered list thanks to A - cats, B - Cane toads, C- foxes. Not because of the senseless slaughter for "fun, mythical medical marvels or progress." Seriously...


----------



## Nero Egernia (Feb 17, 2018)

Aussiepride83 said:


> Ours are on the endangered list thanks to A - cats, B - Cane toads, C- foxes. Not because of the senseless slaughter for "fun, mythical medical marvels or progress." Seriously...



And how did these animals get into Australia? 

You guessed it. Humans.


----------



## Flaviemys purvisi (Feb 17, 2018)

Nero Egernia said:


> And how did these animals get into Australia?
> 
> You guessed it. Humans.


Yeah... that was never debated... We are INDIRECTLY responsible for the mass extinction of many, shooting a croc isn't comparable to 23 million feral cats destroying 75 million native animals across the continent every single night. Apples and oranges.

We cannot control that...


----------



## Yellowtail (Feb 17, 2018)

cris said:


> Native or not, some animals are pests in some situations, our laws are extrmely backward and the myth that native animals cannot be pests is completely baseless. Humans are the only effective predator of many animals in Australia. People had been killing animals for many thousands of years, sure some driven to extinction, but these days it is possible to manage the control and use of wildlife without any significant risk to their survival. It is actually benifical to the ecosystem to kill animals as part of a well thought out management plan.
> 
> I have no issue with the guy being fined, as it is the current law. That said wildlife laws in this country are founded on emotion with very little consideration of reality. There should be practical ways to legally manage wildlife, that is not the case at the moment.


Yes humans are the dominant predator but unlike natural wildlife predators humans have the ability to wipe out whole species, often justified to support un-natural excessive human population. Is it ok to cut down vast forests in Indonesia to grow palm oil? I remember being taught at school about WA's valuable whaling industry and the "Miracle Material" blue asbestos. Do we know the long term effect of what we are doing now? The best thing that could happen to the world is to reduce the human population by about 50%, and I don't mean culling.


----------



## vampstorso (Feb 17, 2018)

Holy moly we've really reached a state of beating a dead horse into oblivion on every single thread, haven't we.

It goes beyond debating almost every time now, and just ends up outright arguing and stubbornness. 
We don't all agree. Woohoo. 


I mean, no one changes their opinion through having someone else's forced upon them. 
You catch more flies with honey, my friends. 

Infact all the outright arguing we've all been getting into undeniably makes the other parties less likely to reconsider their stance.


----------



## Pauls_Pythons (Feb 17, 2018)

Yellowtail said:


> The best thing that could happen to the world is to reduce the human population by about 50%, and I don't mean culling.



I wouldn't be completely against the idea


----------



## Pauls_Pythons (Feb 17, 2018)

vampstorso said:


> Holy moly we've really reached a state of beating a dead horse into oblivion on every single thread, haven't we.



There are some rather over opinionated people amongst the group who seem to have a wealth of knowledge on every subject and fail to listen to any other opinion than their own Vamps.
Unfortunately I don't see the forum getting back to any position where logic and sense is employed any time soon.


----------



## Imported_tuatara (Feb 17, 2018)

I'm quite neutral on the subject, But the fact that we count ourselves as any better than other animals because of our advancements and therefor justify the slaughter of such animals for little reason is disgusting. We are just animals also, *homo sapiens sapiens* (us) are just another species of primate like gorillas, chimp, etc. Better start some human farms eh? And no, i'm not saying the slaughter of such animals for food is bad, we are naturally omnivores and the killing of other animals for survival is natural. We are a parasitic species that the only reason we kill such animals is for materialistic items or to take even more of the land from the species that have been there for thousands, if not millions of years. If someone shot another human for money they're called a sociopath, even if quick. If someone shot a macaw for materials(most) people would be fine with it though.. No, i'm not saying that killing a macaw is the exact same as killing another human, we're very interactive and social animals and so naturally find the killing of the same species to be different than killing a different species, What i'm saying is that (some)people lessen other animals for very little reason, and are fine with getting rid of such animals whenever they feel the animal is a nuisance.


----------



## cris (Feb 17, 2018)

Imported_tuatara said:


> I'm quite neutral on the subject, But the fact that we count ourselves as any better than other animals because of our advancements and therefor justify the slaughter of such animals for little reason is disgusting. We are just animals also, *homo sapiens sapiens* (us) are just another species of primate like gorillas, chimp, etc. Better start some human farms eh? And no, i'm not saying the slaughter of such animals for food is bad, we are naturally omnivores and the killing of other animals for survival is natural. We are a parasitic species that the only reason we kill such animals is for materialistic items or to take even more of the land from the species that have been there for thousands, if not millions of years. If someone shot another human for money they're called a sociopath, even if quick. If someone shot a macaw for materials(most) people would be fine with it though.. No, i'm not saying that killing a macaw is the exact same as killing another human, we're very interactive and social animals and so naturally find the killing of the same species to be different than killing a different species, What i'm saying is that (some)people lessen other animals for very little reason, and are fine with getting rid of such animals whenever they feel the animal is a nuisance.



It is natural for humans and other animals to kill and compete with other animals, even those of the same species. I cannot pretend to think it is unethical. People who get payed to kill others are called soldiers, they are often highly respectable people. If you describe humans as parasites the same could be applied to all other life forms. Parasites are not a bad thing in many cases anwyay. Some people here would support shooting macaws on the basis that they are not native.

When dealing with topics like this people should use science as the core foundation to develop the best practical solutions. Being neutral and thinking about the topic is what I would hope most people do as a starting point.


----------



## Stompsy (Feb 17, 2018)

Pauls_Pythons said:


> And lets not forget the fact that Australia has more species of animals on the critically endangered list than any other country in the world including Africa. And our animals are not slaughtered to feed the needs of a crazy race who think rhino horn or Tiger penis is going to make then a super human. Here wildlife is just killed for fun or because the animal is in the way such as in this instance. Humans are the scourge of the planet and continue to kill it off bit by bit in the name of progress.


This is what it’s all about. We are rapidly destroying this planet! And the mindset of ‘killing of one croc will make no difference’ is one of the reasons our country is in this predicament.


----------



## Stompsy (Feb 17, 2018)

Aussiepride83 said:


> Ours are on the endangered list thanks to A - cats, B - Cane toads, C- foxes. Not because of the senseless slaughter for "fun, mythical medical marvels or progress." Seriously...


So how would you describe the slaughter of the Tasmanian Tiger? Because I’m fairly sure it was a competition between farmers to see how many could be killed.


----------



## Flaviemys purvisi (Feb 17, 2018)

Stompsy said:


> So how would you describe the slaughter of the Tasmanian Tiger? Because I’m fairly sure it was a competition between farmers to see how many could be killed.


That's 1 species. How many have cats foxes and toads eradicated and just about eradicated?? More than 1?? Or less? Are we ever going to be able to effectively control that?

We are so effective as a species at eradicating other species yet we can't even eradicate the 3 biggest threats to our native animals... hmm


----------



## cris (Feb 17, 2018)

Stompsy said:


> So how would you describe the slaughter of the Tasmanian Tiger? Because I’m fairly sure it was a competition between farmers to see how many could be killed.



They had been wiped out on the mainland before any real farmers got here. While obviously not helpful, I do not believe white people killing them is the primary reason for their extinction. There are plenty of examples where farmers have caused massive environmental destruction and contributed to extinctions. Back on the topic crocs were probably on the way to becoming extinct in Australia, it made sense to stop harvesting them at that point. However these days they are thriving and we are the only natural predator that exists for large crocs.


----------



## Stuart (Feb 18, 2018)

Threads back. It will not be reopened.


----------

