Bushwalk Australia

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-01/p ... on/7373634

A plan to almost wipe out the Snowy Mountain brumby population over the next two decades has been released by the New South Wales Government today.
The draft Wild Horse Management plan for Kosciusko National Park aims to reduce the current number of wild horses in the national park area from 6,000 to approximately 3,000 in the next five to 10 years.
It then proposes to cut that figure to only 600 over the next 20 years.
Environment Minister Mark Speakman said the horses were damaging the park's fragile alpine and sub-alpine environment.
He said a range of humane control methods including trapping, mustering, fertility control and ground shooting would be used to carry out the cull.
Aerial shooting, brumby running and roping have been ruled out, he said.

Next question: If they are prepared to wipe out 90% of brumbies, what are they going to do with the deer?

Or the pigs...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So are you proposing to leave them all alone?

And how long does it take for the numbers to build up again?
They need to bite the bullet (so to speak) and aim at total eradication.

GPSGuided wrote:So are you proposing to leave them all alone?

Nope. But it would be pointless to only wipe out one foreign species and leave the rest.

AFAIK deer are a bigger problem than horses.

Would be interesting to read the actual document and understand their rationale. With all these, one step at a time. Waiting for a plan that is perfect before action will just push the first step to eternity.

All hoofed animals are a major issue. Severe reduction in brumby numbers is a good start, but it needs to go a lot further. Despite the ignorant sooks who will scream *&%$#! murder over it.

No aerial culling is a big win for the heritage horse people.

Lots of talk about volunteers – it will be interesting to see whether ‘conservation hunters’ are given a part to play or if they shrink from a meaningful role in such a controversial scheme.

GPS, Here’s the draft MP

Submissions can be made through this website:
https://engage.environment.nsw.gov.au/w ... ement-plan

The online form is offline atm though. Submissions close on the 8th July.

north-north-west wrote:And how long does it take for the numbers to build up again?
They need to bite the bullet (so to speak) and aim at total eradication.

Complete removal of the wild horses from the high country is really the only solution; leaving populations in the park just saddles NPWS with a difficult and expensive problem to manage in perpetuity.

Your call for a final solution is naïve and demonstrates an ignorance of history. A plan for the complete removal of horses would be difficult to achieve without aerial culling. Implementing such a measure would create bigger problems for the NPWS than a few stray horses.

I know culling of animals that are a pest or harmful to the environment is necessary but am I the only one that feels sorry for defenceless animals? I eat meat but I couldn't kill an animal to do it. Call me a hypocrite of you like but just saying.

I have friends who love hunting, whether it be with a cross bow, rifle or whatever, that like to show their 'trophy' on social media, which I understand wild dogs/cats/pigs etc need culling but it doesn't make it any easier to look at.

There must be 1000's of horse people that could take these wild horses and train them and love them so they can live instead of being killed surely?? Or am I delusional?

DanShell wrote:There must be 1000's of horse people that could take these wild horses and train them and love them so they can live instead of being killed surely?? Or am I delusional?

Horses are taken every year and domesticated and sold on. However, there isn't the demand to make the slightest dent in the population, nor are there sufficient people capable of taking taming/training/domesticating them. Not all horse lovers have the skills necessary. Nice idea but not practical.

also, the simple solution to finding friends photo posts difficult to look at is, don't look.

gayet wrote:also, the simple solution to finding friends photo posts difficult to look at is, don't look.

I don't generally dwell on it, as soon as I know what it is I move on very quickly.

Being a "horse lover" doesn't mean you have the skills to break/train/keep a horse. Or the means and available land - keeping a horse needs more acreage & money than most people realise.

More to the point - cane toads, rabbits, foxes can all be culled or die off in periods of drought. Why is it the larger the feral pest, the more the outcry?

It’s a beauty contest. Pigs and camels are large. Nobody cares about them.

People should also be reminded of how horses and dogs are treated in the racing industry.

maddog wrote:Your call for a final solution is naïve and demonstrates an ignorance of history. A plan for the complete removal of horses would be difficult to achieve without aerial culling. Implementing such a measure would create bigger problems for the NPWS than a few stray horses.

Maddog, I don't see what's naive about suggesting the eradication of a feral pest while it's still possible? IMO, a campaign to completely remove feral horses from the alps would be far cheaper that perpetually managing the population and ameliorating its impact. Plus, the draft plan indicates that once the population is stabilised, it is intended for the very expensive and unsuccessful method of trapping and rehoming will be a core part of the management of the population. It is absurd that this strategy, which NPWS acknowledges in the draft plan was a failure, will remain a core part of the management of feral horses in the alps.
Aerial culling would be the ideal solution, but it was sadly ruled out by the NSW government for political reasons.

There's also a plan afoot to de-Carp the Murray. A once mighty, healthy river. Carp and VIC/NSW farmers have turned it into a slow, stagnant, muddy, brown mess.

It was the headline that got my attention - "Barnaby Joyce and Christopher Pyne to give Murray herpes".

South_Aussie_Hiker wrote: "Barnaby Joyce and Christopher Pyne to give Murray herpes".

Pyne in particular gives me the mental equivalent of herpes.
Of course, there are polticians who are worse. Dutton is more like syphillis . . .

north-north-west wrote:Pyne in particular gives me the mental equivalent of herpes.
Of course, there are polticians who are worse. Dutton is more like syphillis . . .

The trouble is that people are willingly catching their disease.

G’day Lachlan,

I have no in principle objection to the removal of horses per se.

Complete eradication, in a cost effective manner, would be unlikely without aerial culling. Aerial culling has very sensibly been ruled out for political and humanitarian reasons.

Drastically reducing a slowly growing population is more than enough to ameliorate any perceived environmental damage into the foreseeable future. It also allows stakeholders with other perspectives to entertain such a plan – heritage horse groups are concerned with maintaining a free-living species they consider noble. If people believe it is necessary to get something done compromise between stakeholders is necessary.

If you really believe that leaving a few horses, remnants of a greatly reduced population, roaming the park would cause such great damage perhaps you could quantify this. Of course, if honest and informed, you are more likely to conclude that such a reduced population is somewhat benign, or may even do some good.

Cheers,

Maddog.

maddog wrote:... and humanitarian reasons.

Humanitarian? Can't be serious on this can you? How humanitarian is humanitarian enough or not enough when culling and eradication are the objectives?

G’day GPS,

Quite serious. There is broad support for the proposition that unnecessary pain and suffering should be avoided when dealing with such majestic animals. A quick death is usually considered the most humane one.

The current problems the NPWS face in regards to wild-horse management owe a lot to them overlooking humanitarian concerns in the past. Leaving dying horses to be found alive several days after the event turned out to be quite an expensive oversight.

Cheers,

Maddog.

It's a split proposition. If it's a 'pest', then treat it as a pest and do the best one can, and efficiently. To be truly humanitarian, then better apply the same standard to all the bombs and missiles we use elsewhere on this planet.

As stated above, ignoring the welfare issues is what got the NPWS into this position in the first place. And in regards to bombs and missiles, I find myself in complete agreement.

If they were slimy fish nobody would much care, we're an odd animal:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-02/c ... ms/7374658

"We're going to either turn them into fertiliser, or pet food maybe, or dig enormous holes and put them in there," Mr Pyne said.

"But the decision's been made, the herpes virus can be released, and we'll get rid of these noxious pests."

maddog wrote:Aerial culling has very sensibly been ruled out for political and humanitarian reasons.

(my italics)

And yet aerial culling would cause far less distress to the targeted animals than roping, trapping and transporting them would.

NNW,

From the OP:

Environment Minister Mark Speakman... said a range of humane control methods including trapping, mustering, fertility control and ground shooting would be used to carry out the cull. Aerial shooting, brumby running and roping have been ruled out, he said.

Cheers,

Maddog

Trapping and mustering are incredibly stressful for the brumbies. (Not too pleasant for the stock horses, either.) And then they get trucked off - mostly to the abattoir as the vast majority will not be breakable.
Oh yeah, that's really humane compared to a quick bullet from a chopper.

maddog wrote:As stated above, ignoring the welfare issues is what got the NPWS into this position in the first place.

Unfortunately social views aren't always consistent, often hypocritical. So we live with a plan, at least there's action in the right direction.