freediver wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2008 at 2:05pm:


I have answered it. Also it was you who first made the comparison between commercial whaling and pig hunting. Don't blame me for the fact that there are huge inherent differences between the two practices. Whales numbers have been devastated in their natural habital. Pigs on the other hand are feral animals in this country.  They destroy crops, devastate livestock, damage fences, pollute the environment and carry diseases. According to Landline: "In some areas, the feral pig is the No. 1 pest threat to farmers. One of those regions is Far North Queensland, where there's been an explosion in pig numbers. The pests are wiping out sugarcane and banana crops and even encroaching upon urban areas".

Obviously these animals need to be culled. To not do so will result in considerable economic and evironmental cost. Rec shooters can play a helpful role. To point out the obvious yet again whales are a natural part of the marine environment. There is no recreational hunting of whales. Traditional hunting by indigenous peoples is allowed to go on and no doubt this is a reasonable compromise.
 

freediver wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2008 at 2:05pm:


Well I'd just argue what I have been arguing, ie the vast differences between the two practices and species. Their economic importance and or detriment and the environmental concerns. Your argument is the dogy one and a gross over simplifiction of these issues.

Whales numbers have been devastated in their natural habital.

You have already stated that numbers or sustainability is not in your argument so why that point?

Pigs on the other hand are feral animals in this country.

We don't hunt whales in this country

When they come for your fishing rod you will only have yourself to blame for your stupid actions.

'we have banned whaling so why not angling'.  

The reason why you haven't heard it yet is because Australia banned whaling because of sustainability issues...not because of some green tinged, feel good, abstract association that they are sentient beings...which is what you advocating now.

Walter Starck is no greenie! 

You seem to have an unhealthy obsession with Dr Starck

Surely its only matter of time now that the precedent is set that they will be extended so as to ban fishing.

You've never heard of the National Animal Welfare Bill 2005? If that little piece of legislation was passed you can be sure all your green bed buddies would have turned on you quicker than a Great white on a seal- in fact they would have forgotten all about whales because legally there is little they can do except to appeal to emotion and ignorance. With the law on their side they are capable of a lot more ....

3 Purposes of Act
The purposes of this Act are to do the following: 12
(a) promote the responsible care and use of animals; 13
(b) provide standards for the care and use of animals that: 14
(i) where it is deemed necessary to capture and kill 15
wildlife, only those devices and techniques should be 16
used which do not inflict unnecessary cruelty, harm 17
non-target animals or damage natural habitat; 18
(ii) prohibit the capture and killing of wild animals for 19
the purpose of entertainment or sport; 20
(iii) ensure that, in the implementation of the matters 21
contained in paragraphs (i) and (ii), all necessary 22
measures shall be taken to protect habitat and 23
ecosystems; 24
(c) protect animals from unjustifiable, unnecessary or 25
unreasonable pain; 26
(d) ensure the use of animals for scientific purposes is 27
accountable, open and responsible. 28

Do what you like on your bandwagon pjb, just remember who is at the steering wheel and once your exhilaration from all the hype and motherhood statements dies down, take note of the general direction they are taking you.

I agree with some of what Walter Starck says but I don't fawn and hang off his every word

I've read your opinion pieces and I disagree with them.

Then why don't we abolish our animal cruelty laws as they could also be extented to ban fishing.

What do you think they tried to do in 2005? The reason it was knocked on the head was because some of it was based on an emotional argument. Animal cruelty laws pertain to the treatment of animals not the non-hunting of animals for consumption.

Its illegal to treat some animals the way we do fish.
Is your next campaign against C&R fishing? If it isn't then you are a hypocrit

Until a rational measure of sentience can be established, you are risking the sport I love for an emotional attachment to charismatic megafauna

There is no whaling in Australia - I haven't heard this used a justification to ban angling.

That is not what we are saying. You have no doubt heard the argument that fishing should be banned because it is cruel though. Now you are saying that it is a reasonable justification to ban the harvest of an entire group of species. You draw the line at whales and dolphins (including great apes) but you have no objective argument why other people should not draw the line somewhere else. It is not thw whaling ban that is the problem it is the justification on animal cruelty grounds. That is the problem.

Walter Starck is no greenie!

He is making the same noises as the PETA people who say fishing should be banned because it is cruel. They are indistinguishable. Walter is very good at telling his target audience what they want to hear and then selecting and bending the science to fit that message.

So using you argument why don't we abolish all our animal cruelty laws?

Like I said already, animal cruelty laws have never been used to ban wild harvest.

Also, what about kangaroos and pigs in their native habitats? Your feral species argument does not get you very far. It just helps you put off coming up with an objective justification for where you draw the line, which you seem to be avoiding like the plague.

There are plenty of ways they can measure it as well as assess the ability to sense pain

No there isn't. It is impossible to measure pain directly. Even in humans, the only way is to ask people to rank it from 1 to 10. The article you gave as evidence above even said it does not actually deal with pain at all.

No I'm not going to campaign against C&R fishing just because I don't favour whaling or cruel treatment of higher animals.

I'm not saying you will, but your own argument will render you impotent against those that do.

Your saying all creatures (except humans) must be on an equal footing because of some uncertainties in measuring sentinece or pain perception.

No, I'm saying there is no way at all to measure pain. It is all based on unreasonable assumptions. Nor am I saying that all animals are on an equal footing. What I am saying is that you have no objective way to support where you, as opposed to PETA, draw the line.

Then using your logic we must abolish our animal cruelty laws or be guilty of hypocracy.

I believe I have addressed this point at least three times already.

Walter also mentioned in his article the fact that Whaling is heavily subsidised and not an economically or culturally important product.

Farming is heavily subsidised in Australia. Is that an argument for banning farming, or is it just a red herring?

Did you know that scientists in Australia are required to treat all animals humanely, including invertebrates like abalone? They have guidelines on how to kill an abolone in what they hope is the least painful way (on ice). Does this suggest to you that scientsists believe they feel no pain?

---

These are the people Walter Starck is in bed with. Where do you think they will stop?

Vic protest urges end to whale slaughter

http://news.smh.com.au/vic-protest-urges-end-to-whale-slaughter/20080103-1k1m.html

Animal liberationists have staged a anti-whaling protest outside the Japanese consulate in Melbourne.

Protesters used a giant Japanese flag, containing a woman with her body painted red lying in a circle of blood, to symbolise the hundreds of whales Japan plans to kill.

Animal Liberation Victoria campaigner Noah Hannibal vowed to continue to protest until Japan stopped slaughtering whales.

"This is bloody, senseless murder," Mr Hannibal said.

---

Labor must step up whale action: Greens

http://news.smh.com.au/labor-must-step-up-whale-action-greens/20080104-1k63.html

The new federal Labor government is doing little more than its predecessor to prevent whales being killed in the Antarctic, the Australian Greens say.

Greens senator Rachel Siewert is angry the Customs ship - Oceanic Viking - the government promised to send to the Antarctic to monitor Japanese whaling ships has still not left Fremantle in Western Australia.

A spokesman for Japan's Institute for Cetacean Research, which contracts the whalers, told AAP this year's whale research program was "mid-way through".

Greenpeace ship the Esperanza is in the iceberg zone but at last report had not found the Japanese fleet.

pjb05 wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2008 at 11:15am:



Fish dont feel pain pjb05?  So thats goes for all fish then, including whales?

Please tell me how one measures this?[the pain factor in fish]

Because I believe otherwise.