Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 31

Thread: Australia sucks **warning -> rant inside**

  1. #11

    Default

    Baiting might be necessary in some areas but where I live there are no feral cats or mongrel wild dogs, we do get foxes but they don't seem to have any interest in the baits they're too busy going after everyone's poultry. The rangers seem to think that feral dogs are killing sheep 3km away even though the sheep are usually being killed on weekends as far as I know dogs can't tell what day it is and I'm pretty sure any reasonable person would stop and think well maybe when the hobby farmers down the road come out on weekends and let there dogs go they end up in the neighbors sheep paddock. But instead they assume there must be feral dogs regardless of the fact that people who have lived here for generations have never seen, heard or dealt with one. Using baits where you are Kalacreek seems perfectly understandable but here it just doesn't make any sense if they actually talked to people to find out what was going on they might be able to come up with a solution that will work.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Rural Western Australia
    Posts
    2,634

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gem View Post
    Baiting might be necessary in some areas but where I live there are no feral cats or mongrel wild dogs, we do get foxes but they don't seem to have any interest in the baits they're too busy going after everyone's poultry. The rangers seem to think that feral dogs are killing sheep 3km away even though the sheep are usually being killed on weekends as far as I know dogs can't tell what day it is and I'm pretty sure any reasonable person would stop and think well maybe when the hobby farmers down the road come out on weekends and let there dogs go they end up in the neighbors sheep paddock. But instead they assume there must be feral dogs regardless of the fact that people who have lived here for generations have never seen, heard or dealt with one. Using baits where you are Kalacreek seems perfectly understandable but here it just doesn't make any sense if they actually talked to people to find out what was going on they might be able to come up with a solution that will work.
    Yes, I can understand what you are saying. Unfortunately east of where I live, many farmers no longer have the option of sheep. Not talking hobby famers or areas where hobby farmers would want to hobby, but 10-20,000 ha operations. The need for full time doggers, baiting and an increase in dog fence construction is all to apparent. Wild dogs are a huge problem and some farmer friends have lost 40% of their flocks to dogs. Most of them have sold their flocks and concentrate on cropping, but it severly limits their enterprise options in these tough times for low rainfall agriculture.

    I have feral cats in my bush, my dogs have treed them, I cant lay baits because of the dogs so we have to trap them or shoot them and the smell of fox and their weird mating calls are common. We also use hidden cameras triggered when life passes by and they are inevitably cats or foxes which is always dissapointing.

    Unfortunately with the rise of weekend properties west of me, some people coming out to properties and camping do let their dogs go wild on the weekends, which sometimes ends in chasing sheep, which can be devastating especially to heavily pregnant ewes and young lambs. We got that happening close to where I am for awhile untill the shire rangers really cracked down, which has made life more difficult for responsible owners. So untill most people can behave with their dogs, rules are going to be increased unfortunately. It only takes a few.

    Baiting is done here only where it is neccessary, nobody likes throwing baits around unless they have to. We have several high conservation areas and unfortunately they are definitely required there. The farms abutting those areas have lost sheepdogs, so it is not done lightly.
    Last edited by Kalacreek; 01-07-2013 at 06:22 PM.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Western Sydney
    Posts
    809

    Default

    Yes BSL does suck, but it's worse in Germany.

    Kennel Club anger over Germany's anti-dog laws - Telegraph

    This news is old but I don't think anything has changed.
    Chloe & Zorro
    Rottweilers and German Shepherds are Family

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Lilydale, Melbourne, Victoria
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Australia has a lot of endemic flora and fauna, that I think everyone should be more grateful for. A minor inconvenience for us, and our dogs, may mean that an endangered species of snake or possum or insect or anything can live to breath another day because a dog hasnt attacked/trampled/eaten the creature or its food source.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    90

    Default

    Lots of great points here, sincerely.

    Here is a good link from a government source that tries to answer the question as to why dogs are not allowed in national parks.
    Parks & Wildlife Service - Dogs and other pets in national parks and reserves

    Its all just fear based with no real science behind it basically.

    If you read into it, there is no hard evidence and only theory.

    I mean if you read that article I just linked to, they basically contradict themselves by saying that A) assistance dogs are allowed and B) that they try to protect from scents and things. Well im pretty sure humans walking, shouting, talking, eating, smoking and relieving themselves in the bush has a similar effect to a dog walking in the bush does it not?

    And im fairly certain that wild bush fires take out more flora and fauna than any dog ever would or ever will. Its just stupid and its just another dumb rule that has no real scientific basis.

    Someone mentioned dogs being an introduced species... really? Dogs an introduced species into Australia? If by introduced we mean, dingos over 4 thousand years ago, then yes we can say "introduced" But lets be realistic about it please. Dingos have have been here for between 4 thousand and 10 thousand years, no one really knows.

    People keep mentioning and referencing stories and experiences from farms. Farms and properties that are used to produce is different from a national park. National parks do not raise cattle and national parks have rangers and other opportunities that farmers dont.

    I am not saying lets let our dogs to go wild in national parks, but I am saying we need to consider making a smart move in the right direction like for instance having a goal of having one park in each state that is dog friendly and with appropriate rules like off leash safe zones, otherwise the dog is leashed and fines for breaking rules like not picking up after muttley (much to my disgust, lol).
    Last edited by goindeep; 01-08-2013 at 12:56 AM.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Rural Western Australia
    Posts
    2,634

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by goindeep View Post
    Lots of great points here, sincerely.

    Here is a good link from a government source that tries to answer the question as to why dogs are not allowed in national parks.
    Parks & Wildlife Service - Dogs and other pets in national parks and reserves

    Its all just fear based with no real science behind it basically.

    If you read into it, there is no hard evidence and only theory.

    I mean if you read that article I just linked to, they basically contradict themselves by saying that A) assistance dogs are allowed and B) that they try to protect from scents and things. Well im pretty sure humans walking, shouting, talking, eating, smoking and relieving themselves in the bush has a similar effect to a dog walking in the bush does it not?

    And im fairly certain that wild bush fires take out more flora and fauna than any dog ever would or ever will. Its just stupid and its just another dumb rule that has no real scientific basis.

    Someone mentioned dogs being an introduced species... really? Dogs an introduced species into Australia? If by introduced we mean, dingos over 4 thousand years ago, then yes we can say "introduced" But lets be realistic about it please. Dingos have have been here for between 4 thousand and 10 thousand years, no one really knows.

    People keep mentioning and referencing stories and experiences from farms. Farms and properties that are used to produce is different from a national park. National parks do not raise cattle and national parks have rangers and other opportunities that farmers dont.

    I am not saying lets let our dogs to go wild in national parks, but I am saying we need to consider making a smart move in the right direction like for instance having a goal of having one park in each state that is dog friendly and with appropriate rules like off leash safe zones, otherwise the dog is leashed and fines for breaking rules like not picking up after muttley (much to my disgust, lol).
    The farm referencing started when talking about bait laying and wild dogs. Many national parks over here are heavily baited at times for feral cats and foxes and are not really safe to take dogs. Given the way that people sometimes visiting rural blocks on their weekends allow their dogs to run at will and chase anything, I think that loads of dogs running through national parks could be considered more of a risk that humans.

    Dogs are extremely efficient at tracking other smaller animals down through heavy undergrowth. I watch mine when I take them for walks through my bush and they can track down and be on a bobtail instantly if I let them, they have treed feral cats I never noticed and I am sure if there were any small marsupials to chase they would. At certain times of the year I have to watch them in case they discover a ground nesting plover or quail, which they are very adept at. They are so tuned in to stuff that we as humans are not.

    Not that I let them do any of this but have had a few losses before I realised what were vulnerable periods for certain ground nesting birds, small reptiles etc. I exercise control over them and that is on my farm. I wont have them running at will through my bush chasing critters. I have walked through areas where dogs are allowed and there were plenty running free and having a fine time chasing scents and small critters if they come across them, with their owners oblivious to what they were doing.

    I certainly dont disagree that there should be more areas set aside but I can understand why many national parks are closed to dogs which is a shame. Many people do the right thing but there are also others who dont. You just have to visit a local dog park to see how little control some people have over their dogs. The resources needed to enforce good behaviour is probably limited. I have seen many areas that I used to walk my dogs eventually closed to pets as the volume of visitors increased.

    It would be nice if they could set aside at least one park area though and use it as an opportunity to educate as well.
    Last edited by Kalacreek; 01-08-2013 at 01:36 AM.

  7. #17

    Default

    I would be happy to accept massive fines should my dog cause any problems to anyone. I mean I for one would be very stressed if my dog just ran off into the bush and I didn't know where he was and/or what he was doing. Between snakes, kangaroos, bait, cliffs etc that could be extremely dangerous for both the bush and the dog.
    But I have just moved to Brisbane, and so far, I haven't been able to find a single place that I can go for a bush walk with my dog. Neither I nor my dog want to spend hours in some fenced oval crowded by other dogs. My dog is also entire which means that although I can train him that engaging aggressively with other dogs is unacceptable, desexed dogs often want to go him and spending the whole time 'claiming' my dog from the others in the park again is just not fun at all. I like to do things with my dog that I want to do also, things that we can both enjoy. I don't get any exercise from sitting on a bench in a fenced dog park. And yet I would never be able to physically satisfy him if all I can do is walk him on lead. This dog has accompanied me on 15km bike rides with an average speed of about 30km/h though of course by law I'm not even supposed to have my dog with me whilst I'm on a bike.

    If it were me, if I were somehow in control of dog control laws, I would completely overhaul everything. I would use the money spent on creating fenced dog parks on training and education for both dogs and their handlers. I would dramatically increase the fines for dogs behaving badly. I would also create a recognition program - training awards that you could win with your dog that meant your dog was allowed in more places. Like I would have zones. All dogs could go in blue zones, dogs that had passed their level 1 test could go in blue and green zones and so on until you have dogs at the highest level that can do what guide dogs can do. These dogs would have recall under distraction, passed temperament testing and basically be a dog you didn't have to worry about because they always obeyed their owners commands. If they completed a certain number of hours of training each year their registration costs would be decreased and to maintain their top level status, they would have to pass a test every year. Registration tags would be colour coded so that you could tell instantly what sort of dog you were looking at.

    My dog shouldn't be the exception, it should be poorly trained dogs that are the exception. I'm not saying that all breeds are as trainable and that's fine, if you admire a less trainable breed and are happy with adjusting your lifestyle to suit your breed of choice there's nothing wrong with that. You know for example I don't see many huskies making it to the top levels. But if you have a trainable and biddable breed and you put the effort in, I don't see what harm that does to society to let them accompany you more often than what is allowed now. I don't think there should just be punishments for bad behaviour, there needs to be rewards for doing the right thing as well. I think these days most dog owners don't even know what's possible and I'm not saying that everyone should have to go out and spend hours training their dogs. But if they want to, and they have good results, these dogs shouldn't be in the same category as those with no training.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Rural Western Australia
    Posts
    2,634

    Default

    Yes I agree with you but unfortunately it is simply just easier for the authorities to ban dogs from national parks.

    I have been lucky with my dogs because I have always lived in areas where there was plenty of space and dog friendly coastline and now my farm to exercise my dogs. However I have been on holidays with my dogs in areas that would definitely be very restrictive if I lived there. I wondered how on earth you would be able to do anything meaningful or fun with your dog at all.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    se qld
    Posts
    836

    Default

    What suburb are you in 99 bottles.?
    I know a lady who lives in Moggill, (or near there) there is a creek where she takes her two for
    off lead runs and swimming.

  10. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chubbsecurity View Post
    What suburb are you in 99 bottles.?
    I know a lady who lives in Moggill, (or near there) there is a creek where she takes her two for
    off lead runs and swimming.
    Ohh I'm in Morningside - I've only been in Brisbane for a week to be fair and I would love to hear of any nice off-lead areas

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •