(Australia) URGENT: NSW trying to legalise hunting with bows, dogs etc

[Guest guest]

Hi All,

 

Remember the massacre of the brumbies (wild horses) shot from the air

in New South Wales (a state of Australia) and the goats shot on Lord Howe

Island?

Apparently, the NSW authorities have NOT decided to adopt a

more compassionate and humane approach to wild animals despite all the

protests they received about past atrocities.

 

A hunting bill has been introduced in NSW

which will legalise the use of hunting with dogs, bows, etc inflicting

unimaginable

pain on the hunted animals. The bill recommends the whole process be

governed by the hunters! Please read the information below and write

to Premier Robert Carr voicing your concerns.

 

Targeted animals will be those unwanted by humans (and often the very

animals

humans deliberately introduced into Australia which are now part of our

ecosystem).

This could include rabbits, foxes, deer, cats, pigs, wild dogs and any other

deemed

" pest animal " .

 

Kind regards,

 

Marguerite

 

 

 

An email to rs of the Animal Liberation NSW mailing list

____

 

The NSW Government has introduced a Bill to allow the use of any firearm,

bow, animal or other hunting device to capture kill or harm animals

designated as 'game' or 'pest' animals. Furthermore, the Game Council

will be managed by a majority of hunters.

 

Please write to the Premier of NSW and the Agriculture Minister to

oppose the introduction of this unethical and biased Bill. Further

details can be found within the copy of our sample letter below.

 

The Hon. Richard Amery

Minister for Agriculture NSW

mountdruitt

 

The Hon. Robert Carr

Premier of NSW

bob.carr

 

***

 

Please use this letter as a sample. Use details to create your own letter.

 

 

Dear Minister/Premier Carr,

 

I am very disappointed that you have introduced a Bill (Game Bill 2001)

that will not only allow the infliction of suffering on wild-living animals

(classified as game, animals or pest animals, but which is likely

to increase the number of animals subjected to suffering at the hands

of both recreational hunters and misguided farmers.

I urge you to withdraw the Bill immediately.

 

This Bill is unethical and biased in its nature in a number of ways:

 

1) Hunt is defined as to use any firearm, bow, animal or

other hunting device to capture kill or harm the animals,

but does not include laying or using poison for that purpose (page 2).

 

This is just totally unacceptable. Licensed hunters under the Bill will be

able to inflict terrible suffering. An animal struck by an arrow, is likely

to suffer great injury, but may run for miles and take days to die of

those injuries. And yet again we have the terrible reality of legally

permitting dogs to be used against other animals.

While the dogs may themselves be injured

(e.g. as is almost inevitable in a fight with a wild pig),

any of the animals pursued by dogs will be mauled before a

hunter could catch up and perhaps then kill the animal.

Stray pursuit dogs that are not retrieved will also add to the

wild dog population.

 

2) Game Council membership (page 6): the Bill dictates that 7 of the

14 members of the Game Council must be nominees of hunting organisations;

that the Chairperson must be one of those nominees; that the Chairperson has

both

a deliberative vote if an equity of votes and then a second or casting vote

on the Council; and that a quorum is just 8 members present

(pgs 35 & 36 & 40).

 

The proposed membership and operating procedures of the Game Council

ensures that the hunting organisations are in total charge of the Council.

Their interests in a virtual open season on game and designated

pest animals will take precedence over both the suffering of sentient

target animals and over even any possible long-term reduction in

damage to the environment or agricultural interests.

 

It is interesting that those who drafted the Bill found it necessary to

also specifically exempt this clear bias under the Disclosure of pecuniary

interests (page 39) where being a member of a hunting club or

organisation is stated as not qualifying as a pecuniary interest

of Game Council members for the purposes of the Bill.

 

It is unethical and totally unacceptable to allow the hunting organisations

to manage a process which will cause great suffering to an even larger num

ber of animals, and it will be purely for their own amusement and

recreation.

 

3) The Bill indicates that the Game Council is to issue a Code of

Practice (page 19) and may make it a condition of license.

 

Again, notwithstanding my total opposition to the Game Bill, it seems

amazing that the Game Council, with no animal welfare representation

and total domination by the hunting organisations, is to be the arbiter

of a code of practice for the hunters own behaviour towards the

game and pest animals.

 

There are currently two reviews taking place in NSW - the Inquiry into

Feral Animals by the Legislative Council General Purpose Standing

Committee No.5; and the Inquiry into Vertebrate Pest Management in National

Parks in NSW being conducted by Assoc. Prof. Tony English at the

request of your colleague Bob Debus. Both reviews were seen as

necessary after the brutal killing of goats on Lord Howe Island and wild

horses

in the Guy Fawkes National Park, the later of which is still the subject

of cruelty charges brought by the RSPCA.

Neither review has been completed, and it seems

premature to propose the Game Bill at this time.

 

This Game Bill makes a mockery of the NSW Prevention of

Cruelty to Animals Act and to the established principles of

humane and effective management of mislocated and unwanted

introduced animals. The hunting organisations seem to be

trying desperately to hang on to practices that are outdated

and unacceptable to a caring and humane society.

 

It is regrettable that such a Bill could even be drafted, but I urge you to

now simply withdraw it before the NSW Parliament moves to debate

the issue . The Game Bill is based on flawed and outdated principles

and would cause the unnecessary and brutal suffering of many millions

of hapless animals in your State.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

QUOTE

 

" The word 'vegetarian' comes not from 'vegetable' but from the Latin 'veget

us', which means 'lively, full of life' ... a good fact to share with thos

e who think vegetarians live on salads and vegetables.

 

-- Leigh Everett