Duck side
I’M tired of The Nationals referring to science and ideology in the duck hunting debate.
There is a whole other side that is being totally ignored.
Last Friday, the Gippsland Times reported Member for Eastern Victoria Region, Melina Bath welcoming ‘the survival of duck hunting’.
What about the issues that many regional landowners and residents near wetlands have with the activity, none of what I would consider is science or ideology, or has been addressed in the proposed reforms announced recently?
These are serious issues and include trespass (reports cannot be followed up because the perpetrators cannot be identified), theft of firewood (most often habitat timber), the very loud and disturbing noise at all times of day and night that scares animals (causing fleeing) and children (often sleeping), not to mention when you are working from home (as is the nature of farming) and trying to conduct a Zoom meeting.
Then there is the litter left behind – bottles, human excreta, plastic shot gun cartridges and wads contaminating what are often food producing farms (some organic) as well as dead and injured birds washing up on the foreshore that property owners then have to deal with.
Regional Victorians have been ignored in this decision to continue the killing of native birdlife for recreation.
Regardless of numerous invites, no MP has ever cared to come and visit these landowners to experience this for themselves. If they did, while they are there they can see the wonderful work these landowners are doing for environmental regeneration on their properties using their own money.
This leaves regional people feeling helpless, undervalued and discarded.
If we want to bring mental health into the argument, the mental health of these landowners, who cannot simply pack up and move on, (whereas shooters have the choice to move on to many other recreational activities), is the real mental health issue that hasn’t been considered.
It’s their livelihood, their safety, their homes and their peace that are under attack for the quarter of the year.
Can you put yourself in their position for a moment?
In a time when we have a serious issue with farmer suicide rates, we are deeply concerned for the worsening mental health crisis in the bush.
As for economical benefit the shooters bring to regional areas, I am wondering where this data comes from – perhaps it’s ideology.
Elizabeth McCann
Newmerella
Where on Earth
REGARDING Loretta-Anne Jackson’s letter (‘Who fines the council?’ 23/01/24).
The Country Fire Authority (CFA) Act document stipulates each council must have a Municipal Fire Prevention Officer (MFPO) to oversee the maintaining of fire safety within council boundaries. This includes all properties (including council) roads and other government identities.
The MFPO has the Statuary Powers of the CFA Act to issue clean up notices within the shire.
The MFPO is under the direction of the CFA and the Act to carry out his duties. Every council must employ but not direct the duties of the MFPO.
Maurie Killeen
Stratford
Lazy term
IN reply to this paper’s correspondent’s letter (‘Perplexed’ Gippsland Times Letters 30/01/24) regarding the replacement of council-supplied rubbish bins, I noticed the use of the pejorative term ‘woke’.
Could this correspondent expand on the word woke? What does it exactly mean?
Does woke mean caring about the natural world (the environment), caring about the welfare of the least well off, caring about the dispossessed. If so, does not caring about these issues make me “unwoke”?
When you stoop to using woke in an argument you have lost any authority in prosecuting you case, it is a lazy word for when you have nothing else.
Stephen Rawson
Sale
More isn’t better
TOTALLY agree Michael Baron (‘Perplexed’ letters 30/01/24).
Nothing wrong with my bins at Buckley Street, yet two unnecessary new bins arrived.
That was last week. Like most, now I have four and two so called out-dated bins.
Yes there are more pressing issues for our ratepayer’s money, I would have thought.
Hayden Nichol
Sale
Look wider
I ENJOYED the story ‘Protecting the southern brown bandicoot’ (Gippsland Times 30/01/24), however, here’s some food for thought.
We must stop rewarding those who see it their duty to slaughter our dingoes. Our only Indigenous apex animal, and which, by the way, is supposed to be a protected species, our dingo is also the only natural way forward to reduce the number of all unwanted feral species in the environment.
Scrap the Wild Dog Bounty, and replace it with a meaningful Feral Fox only Bounty. The reward becoming (at least) $110 for each feral fox scalp.
Escalate fines to cat owners who flaunt the law and allow their cats to roam freely at night. Hand in glove with this law, there must be greater emphasis on actively policing this obligation.
Levied fines to be added to the cat owners, annual cat registration fee. Immediately mandate the deployment – by all Australian Shire Councils’ – of at least three Felixer feral cat control devices within every shire. Stop the use of 1080 poisoning programs given the associated, inhumane and huge secondary kill rates of non-targeted species.
I’m all for protecting our bandicoot, in fact, for protecting all of our Indigenous creatures, and our flora. But, unless the forgoing actions are implemented with determination and proper funding, I’m afraid we will still be discussing this same topic again and again.
Trevor Tucker
Sale
