Pig Hunts May Get The Bullet Over Use Of Dogs

[merijigs]

I guess I just find the minds of anyone who hunts animals for sport/ fun/ hobby incomprehensible to me. That includes fishing too. At least we eat fish but not feral pigs usually. I guess we're far enough away from having to catch and butcher our own meat...but sport?????? I don't think so.

My 2c worth

[Aidan3]

I guess we're far enough away from having to catch and butcher our own meat...but sport?????? I don't think so.

My 2c worth

It's inevitable that people will want to hunt, we've evolved that way and we're built for it. Our brains light up when we do it, some more than others. It's the same with gathering. I take my daughter walking with the dogs and she spends the whole time finding interesting rocks, shells and wildflowers. No-one taught her that. She gets bored quickly when we go fishing though.

[shortstep]

The Greens seem to favour poisoning - a terribly cruel form of death in anybodies language and they seem to want to twist the facts and outright lie to persecute a group of people who give their time to help control a feral pest.

Do you have a reference for this? I couln't find any when checking out Greens policy on feral animals.

The article says they prefer a single dog trained to flush the pig, then return so the hunter can take a safe shot. Greens have a very strong stance against the use of 1080.

I have never flushed pigs with dogs nor seem it done, but I have been around pigs. I am not sure one dogs could flush a wild pig that did not want to go. I think to get an adult pig moving and not trying to fight back you would need at least a few dogs and I bet 5 is about right. Pigs are very big, can be very mean and not afraid to fight.

[geo]

I guess I just find the minds of anyone who hunts animals for sport/ fun/ hobby incomprehensible to me. That includes fishing too. At least we eat fish but not feral pigs usually. I guess we're far enough away from having to catch and butcher our own meat...but sport?????? I don't think so.

My 2c worth

People eat feral pigs up here, my neighbour was a proffessional pigger and the meat he caught was sent overseas for human consumption, that's how he made his living.

My dogs would love to go pig hunting and i'm sure they'd be good at it but i wouldn't want them to get lost or hurt.

I'm not that into hunting but don't disagree with it as long as it's done properly.

[Kirty]

I guess we're far enough away from having to catch and butcher our own meat...

So having it processed commercially is OK though? Having animals rounded up, crammed into over-crowded trucks, driven for 100's of kms in any weather (including 40 degree + days) and then slaughtered, sometimes on the first go, is OK? Get real. Bulk meat production is no more humane than hunting, its just that we don't have to see it.

[geo]

The Greens seem to favour poisoning - a terribly cruel form of death in anybodies language and they seem to want to twist the facts and outright lie to persecute a group of people who give their time to help control a feral pest.

Do you have a reference for this? I couln't find any when checking out Greens policy on feral animals.

The article says they prefer a single dog trained to flush the pig, then return so the hunter can take a safe shot. Greens have a very strong stance against the use of 1080.

I have never flushed pigs with dogs nor seem it done, but I have been around pigs. I am not sure one dogs could flush a wild pig that did not want to go. I think to get an adult pig moving and not trying to fight back you would need at least a few dogs and I bet 5 is about right. Pigs are very big, can be very mean and not afraid to fight.

My friends say a bailer and a couple of lugging dogs is sufficient, many larger dogs will hold a pig one out. Sadly dogs do die in this sport mainly due to owner ignorance and under preparation which is why it's best left to the people who do it seriously who care and look after their dogs properly.

[Aidan3]

The Greens seem to favour poisoning - a terribly cruel form of death in anybodies language and they seem to want to twist the facts and outright lie to persecute a group of people who give their time to help control a feral pest.

Do you have a reference for this? I couln't find any when checking out Greens policy on feral animals.

The article says they prefer a single dog trained to flush the pig, then return so the hunter can take a safe shot. Greens have a very strong stance against the use of 1080.

I have never flushed pigs with dogs nor seem it done, but I have been around pigs. I am not sure one dogs could flush a wild pig that did not want to go. I think to get an adult pig moving and not trying to fight back you would need at least a few dogs and I bet 5 is about right. Pigs are very big, can be very mean and not afraid to fight.

Yes, I thought it sounded an unlikely strategy, more like wallaby hunting. But still, the Greens do not favour poisoning and in fact have suggested hunting with a dog as the preferred option.

[KatrinaM]

Yes, I thought it sounded an unlikely strategy, more like wallaby hunting. But still, the Greens do not favour poisoning and in fact have suggested hunting with a dog as the preferred option.

The Tasmanian Greens are certainly do not favour poisoning and are seeking to ban 1080 being used in their state. The NSW branch do not seem to feel the same and have no policy that I can find in this matter. If they are against hunting then there is no other real option to try and control feral pigs but baiting. You cant have it both ways. If they honestly did think that dogging was prefered they would have found out the facts about the Game Council hunts in state forests and this wouldnt have made the news and we wouldnt be discussing it here.

The meat is just a byproduct of hunting. The primary focus is the control of numbers, erradication is probably an impossibility. The spread of disease and weed species, the potential as a vector for exotic disease, damage to land, native plant species, pasture, crops and infrastructure and the killing of native species and livestock are the primary reasons for the need to control numbers.

Many hunters use the meat they catch - either to sell for human consumption or pet food, to eat themselves or to feed their pets. Kirty is right, it is much more humane to hunt animals like this than it is to have them commercially processed, its just that it it is far less confronting to see cows in a paddock miss out on all the middle bits and then see your rump steak in a cryvac pack at Woolworths.

[Aidan3]

If they are against hunting then there is no other real option to try and control feral pigs but baiting. You cant have it both ways. If they honestly did think that dogging was prefered they would have found out the facts about the Game Council hunts in state forests and this wouldnt have made the news and we wouldnt be discussing it here.

I think firstly we have to recognise that it was the DPI that raised the concerns. What the Game Council were proposing went against DPI guidelines. I don't think anyone is disputing the facts about Game Council hunts. The Greens were just supporting the current DPI guidelines.

We're only discussing baiting because people have bought it up here when in fact it was not suggested as an alternative, hunting with a dog was suggested as an alternative by both the DPI and the Greens. They are only objecting to the deliberate holding of the pigs, not the use of dogs or rifles in reducing feral pig numbers.

[Curlybert]

[

The Tasmanian Greens are certainly do not favour poisoning and are seeking to ban 1080 being used in their state. The NSW branch do not seem to feel the same and have no policy that I can find in this matter. If they are against hunting then there is no other real option to try and control feral pigs but baiting. You cant have it both ways.

The NSW Greens website says "the control of feral animals ...must be carried out with minimal suffering". This is somewhat at odds with your claim that "The Greens seem to favour poisoning - a terribly cruel form of death in anybodies language and they seem to want to twist the facts and outright lie to persecute a group of people who give their time to help control a feral pest."

[KatrinaM]

Sorry Aidan2, it was the NSW Greens, not the DPI that raised concerns. The only reference to the DPI is an article that apparently speaks "It is unacceptable to set a dog on to a feral pig with the intention of bringing it down, holding or attacking it,'' say feral pig guidelines produced for the NSW Department of Primary Industries. Notice nobody from the DPI was interviewed, only a Game Coucil spokesperson, a representive from Animals Australia and Greens MP David Shoebridge. Funny nobody from any hunting orgainisations or hunters were interviewed, makes it a little bit of biased reporting.

The Greens are currently waging a media campaign against hunters, shooters and fishers, this is just political pointscoring and has nothing to do with hunting pigs.

What the Game Council is proposing may very well have not be against the DPI guidelines, it is only the NSW Greens who propose that it is. Again without experiance hunting with dogs they are jumping to conclusions.

I agree Curlybert, the Greens are contradicting themselves. It is a shame they seem to refuse to become educated on a subject they feel so strongly about pushing legislation and making public comment about. If they truely understood and were exposed to ethical hunters they would not have such a problem. Honestly how can you compare a dog holding a pig to faccillitate humane dispatch to the up to three weeks of suffering that can be caused by baiting. If this party were truely interested in the suffering of a feral species they would be drawing the attention of the public to baiting and the prolonged suffering they endure when baited or the suffering that a pig, a social herd animal endures when it is trapped.

[Aidan3]

What the Game Council is proposing may very well have not be against the DPI guidelines, it is only the NSW Greens who propose that it is.

The wording isn't exactly open to interpretation - "In the event that a dog latches on to a pig, the dog must be called off". The DPI are not controlled by the Greens, and at the end of the day this is their ruling made after consultation with a broad range of interests.

I agree Curlybert, the Greens are contradicting themselves. It is a shame they seem to refuse to become educated on a subject they feel so strongly about pushing legislation and making public comment about. If they truely understood and were exposed to ethical hunters they would not have such a problem. Honestly how can you compare a dog holding a pig to faccillitate humane dispatch to the up to three weeks of suffering that can be caused by baiting.

So far you've not directed us to any Greens policy in support of baiting of feral pigs, and the only comment from a Greens MP was in support of hunting with dog and rifle. I'm not denying the Greens push policy which erodes the rights of hunters, but I don't think your comments are in any way accurate or even a reasonable reflection of their policies or ideals.

[Curlybert]

I agree Curlybert, the Greens are contradicting themselves.

Nice try, KatrinaM but I said no such thing. It was you who asserted the Greens supported baiting, yet you could produce no evidence to support your claim. Perhaps you should heed your own advice about twisting facts.

[Beatrice]

Pig hunting (if government endorsed or not) is cruel! Pigs are sentinent beings just like your beloved doggies.

And regarding pests, as far as I can see the biggest threat to the environment and native animals in this country (and most likely the rest of this planet) walk on two legs. Maybe we should have all our jaws bitten off by your pig dogs and our guts ripped out while being still alive ...

Edited April 16, 2011 by Beatrice

[Remarkabull]

Pig hunting (if government endorsed or not) is cruel! Pigs are sentinent beings just like your beloved doggies.

And regarding pests, as far as I can see the biggest threat to the environment and native animals in this country (and most likely the rest of this planet) walk on two legs. Maybe we should have all our jaws bitten off by your pig dogs and our guts ripped out while being still alive ...

Have you ever actually been pig hunting? I have, and not once in the 10 years I went hunting with my ex and his brother (and numerous other people) did I ever see such a thing happen.

Where they are from you get paid by the kg for a pig so there is no way they would use a dog that would do any more than hold a pig by the ears. If a pig was ripped up then it would be rejected and they wouldn't get paid for it. Not only that, all dogs had to be stock proof. There is no way a farmer would let someone on his property if the dogs were going to attack cows or sheep (the dog would get shot and you would be lucky if the farmer didn't shoot you as well).

I'm not saying that there are not horrible p0eople out there that enjoy seeing 2 animals 'go at it' with each other but do you think that banning pig hunting is going to stop those kind of people? It certainly hasn't stopped illegal dog fights.

[KatrinaM]

The wording isn't exactly open to interpretation - "In the event that a dog latches on to a pig, the dog must be called off". The DPI are not controlled by the Greens, and at the end of the day this is their ruling made after consultation with a broad range of interests.

Again I stand by my comment. A huge number of hunters run bailing dogs. I am yet to see the Game Council release a directive telling hunters that they must only use poorly trained holding dogs in this organised hunt. It is not a ruling, it is taken from a SOP, not from a Code of Practice or an Act. It is a recomendation, not law. I am not sure this was drafted with the imput of a broad range of interest groups.

Curlybert, I cant provide evidence from the NSW Greens that they support baiting any more than you can provide evidence that they dont. Fundamentally no political party would support animal cruelty yet all over Australia poisoning and biological control methods funded by our Governement are being used that make me physically sick.

Either the Greens are holding out on us and have an awesome way of controlling the feral pig population (without dogging, baiting, archers, trapping or heli shooting) hidden up their sleeve and they do not support the culling of feral pigs with current methods (save perfect and clean field shots) or dont support control of feral pig populations at all (which I doubt) or as their current capaign leads me to believe, support or are blind to all other methods except dogging. There is currently a large govt funded baiting campaign taking place for another pest species, yet no comment, heli shooting of another pest species, no public comment, archers hunting state forests in NSW, no public comment, trapping in National Parks, no public comment. Or maybe this is just politics and has nothing to do with what happens in the field.

When done right dogging, even with holding dogs and even though it is politically incorrect is far more humane than most other methods of control. I only wish that those who do not support animal cruelty yet see the need for the feral pig population to be controlled would educate themselves and gain an understanding before they comment publicly or try to enact legislation. It feels like i am bashing the poor Greens which I guess I am, I think they get it right on other issues but on this one I feel they are dead wrong.

Beatrice, pig hunting dogs do not bite the jaws off pigs or rip there guts out. They dont kill pigs or savage them either.

Edited to fix spelling and hopefully make more sense.

Edited April 16, 2011 by KatrinaM

[Souff]

Perhaps when we learn to care more for our wildlife we may begin to care more for each other.

John, I agree with you 100%. We SHOULD learn to care more for our wildlife.

But there is a problem.

The wild piggies don't want to live with our wildlife, they want to kill them and eat them. A hungry sow with 14 little piglets to feed will eat almost anything, including you if you were to stumble into her path. After she, or the boar, had ripped you open.

Yes, I agree, we need to care more for our wildlife, but NOT for FERAL PIGs that were introduced here from other countries and do not belong in the Australian eco system and do a hell of a lot of damage to the environment.

Souff

[raz]

If you believe them psychologists tell us those involved in such barbarity are tomorrows serial killers and spousal abusers.

What school of psychology did they go to? I have two psychologists and a professor of Psychiatry in the family - I must remember to ask them about this.

[Aidan3]

I cant provide evidence from the NSW Greens that they support baiting any more than you can provide evidence that they dont.

So they are guilty until proven innocent and you can make whatever outlandish comment you want about them? Sorry, I happen to think it's this sort of attitude amongst the hunting community that is pushing hunters further into the fringes in the public eye.

Either the Greens are holding out on us and have an awesome way of controlling the feral pig population (without dogging, baiting, archers, trapping or heli shooting) hidden up their sleeve and they do not support the culling of feral pigs with current methods (save perfect and clean field shots) or dont support control of feral pig populations at all (which I doubt) or as their current capaign leads me to believe, support or are blind to all other methods except dogging. There is currently a large govt funded baiting campaign taking place for another pest species, yet no comment, heli shooting of another pest species, no public comment, archers hunting state forests in NSW, no public comment, trapping in National Parks, no public comment.

The issue here is the welfare of dogs and pigs in controlling feral pig populations, and they are supporting the DPIs position on this. I'm not sure where the other issues come into this? The issue at hand is something that can be avoided while still reducing pig populations. If you are referring to fox baiting, do you have a better idea? Maybe the Greens don't either. I don't have a problem with archers taking pigs so long as they take a clean shot, and I don't see the Game Council suggesting that archers go and take shots that don't meet DPI standards of practice.

[shortstep]

So they are guilty until proven innocent and you can make whatever outlandish comment you want about them? Sorry, I happen to think it's this sort of attitude amongst the hunting community that is pushing hunters further into the fringes in the public eye.

Hum, I think it is this (see video below) sort of thinking that is pushing anyone who disagrees with it into the so called fringes of society.

BTW I hope this fellow takes his own advice.

Warning lots of bad lanauge and should be rated not for children.

Edited April 16, 2011 by shortstep