Incentive to cull ferals
I have just recently read an article of a positive nature regarding hands-on conservation by licensed hunters. The Victorian government introduced a fox bounty incentive in 2011 and since that time has paid a bounty of $10 per fox taken, paying out over $6million dollars in bounties.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
During this period a total of 13,631 individual hunters had participated in the scheme culling 607,835 foxes giving an average of 45 foxes per hunter. The average yearly total was 98,000 with the best year at 106,918. The article discussed how successful it had been in reducing the fox numbers, so much in fact they have decided to continue with the scheme.
The figures represent the largely underrated role that conservation hunting plays in the actual protection of our native flora and fauna and the Victorian government should be applauded for its insight and foresight in recognising this fact.
When you consider that each fox kills at least five small native species every 24 hours, the figure equates to in excess of three million native species every day. If those foxes had lived for just another year they would have potentially exterminated over one billion native animals in that time.
Following a successful pilot program, the Queensland shire of McKinlay has continued with a $10 scalp bounty on feral cats and $5 for feral cat kittens in response to an escalation in their numbers across the shire.
These financial incentives are among the best environmental investments that our governing bodies have made when you consider over one billion native animals were saved in one year for a cost of only $6million dollars. Bravo, the Victorian government and McKinlay Shire for leading the way.
Clyde Thomas, Kiah, Australian Conservation Hunters Association president
Blind eye on facts
The proponents of having the date of Australia Day changed are conveniently turning a blind eye to many of the facts.
Call it Australia Day, or call the 26th of January invasion day, whatever butters your toast, however the question should be asked, are so-called Aboriginals better off now than they would have been had not this continent been settled by the British?
Of course many will argue they are worse off. It would appear the proponents for this case would not only have the handful of full blooded Aboriginals, but all Australians to go back to the days prior to the arrival of the First Fleet when the native people were, by today's standards surviving under extremely primitive conditions.
By far the majority of so-called “Indigenous” activists who appear on the media are not full blooded Aboriginal people, in fact it is very doubtful if a lot of them have any Aboriginal blood in their veins at all. I have a little Aboriginal blood in me yet I do not claim to be Indigenous.
It is somewhat amusing to hear some of these white pretenders claim Australia was invaded and to listen to their sob stories. May I remind these wannabes that in the majority of cases they would not be here if it hadn't been for British and European settlement. I wonder if they consider the light colouring of their skin as an invasion?
Tom Griffin, Pambula
Fluoride farce
The newly created Tricka Valley Shire Council has released the results of the latest survey on public water fluoridation.
The question was: “Do you agree with adding toxic chemical residue to the public drinking water supply in order to slow brain decay”. Only four responses were received, all from the local lunatic asylum. The shire brain development officer could not say whether the answers were negative, positive or neutral.
The Water Fluoridation Lobby Group will hold a public meeting in the next few months where volunteers will be selected to test and verify the benefits of the toxic chemical addition to public drinking water.