You are here

'Kangaroo Mob' - propaganda for wildlife trade and sadistic deviants?

The ABC is to screen a documentary about kangaroos. It is scheduled for television on ABC1 channel will this coming Tuesday evening 21st February 2012 at 8:30pm
It is set in Canberra, Australian Capital Territroy, alias the 'Taijin' of kangaroo slaughter.

The programme is entitled 'Kangaroo Mob'

But the prior promotional trailer includes snippets of interviews with those seeking to sell their sick desire for mass slaughter of Australia's native kangaroos.
Is this documentary really disguised propaganda by a locally struggling trade in Australian wildlife?

The ABC is to screen a documentary about kangaroos. It is scheduled for television on ABC1 channel will this coming Tuesday evening 21st February 2012 at 8:30pm
It is set in Canberra, Australian Capital Territroy, alias the 'Taijin' of kangaroo slaughter.

The programme is entitled Kangaroo Mob'

The ABC promotional trailer reads:
'In the second of our new strand of Wild Ones natural history documentaries, we meet the mob of 'street smart' kangaroos moving into Australia's capital city and the ecologists following their every move.

Over the course of one drought-stricken year we follow mob leader Black Spot and kangaroo mum Madge with her two young joeys - mischievous Sonny and tiny pouch-bound Alice.
Learning to be an urban 'roo is tough for little Sonny, who must negotiate busy roads, and avoid cars and dogs in order to find food. When the city announces a kangaroo cull, his life is in serious danger.
Thanks to the latest scientific technology we uncover surprising new animal behaviour whilst delving into the controversial issues that arise when sharing your backyard with a large wild creature

Kangaroo Mob is a warm and entertaining look at what happens when human development encroaches on wildlife habitat and two very different species are forced to co-exist.'

The ABC promotional trailer also disturbingly includes snippets of an interview with those seeking to sell their sick desire for mass slaughter of Australia's native kangaroos.

Is this documentary really disguised propaganda by a locally struggling trade in Australian wildlife?
We shall be watching the programme with animal rights scrutiny.

This programme is recommended viewing for anyone concerned about the plight of wildlife everywhere.

Background reading:

1. 2011...Another Very Bad Year for Canberra's Kangaroos!

2. Canberra Kangaroos

AttachmentSize
Image icon Kangaroo persecution in 2012.jpg24.75 KB

Comments

I think it's really sad that kangaroos are marooned in the outer suburbs of ever expanding capital cities. Frequently I hear radio reports that a kangaroo is on a busy road usually in the northern outer suburbs of Melbourne during peak hour traffic. Presenters appear to find this amusing but I was relieved that the other day someone asked where kangaroos were supposed to go when the suburbs keep expanding outwards. Eventually of course they will die off as the outer suburbs get denser and what passes as habitat now will no longer be so. The land the kangaroos live on is considered terra nullius when it is wanted for a new suburb

Kangaroo meat involves live castration. Would you like red wine, pear juice and cranberry jelly with that?

The following video confirms Australia's rural culture encouraging a psycho-sadistical and brutal hate towards wildlife.
It could be of elephants or rhinos in Africa, it could be Nazi Germany or Poland, or Rwanda or Serbia, but it is rural Australia and its precious wildlife. It is 19th Century debauchery and kangaroo slaughter is condoned by Julia Gillard's Australian Government . It is akin to the teenage deviantism of Martin Bryant and straight out of the film Wolf Creek.

WARNING: This video is extremely disturbing and not suitable for children.
But it needs to be made public! In 2012 it reflects the callous reality of rural Australia. No wonder urban Australia turns its back on rural Australians and starves them of funding - such sadists only deserve an eye for an eye.

Honesty, I could not inflict such on any sentient being, but if sure of the culpability of such a monster, wildlife thereafter would have no fear.

'Kangaroo slaughter for fur'

Tigerquoll
Suggan Buggan
Snowy River Region
Victoria 3885
Australia

I'm a grown up and I know the video on cruelty to kangaroos which is not suitable for children will not be suitable for me either. I can't watch it. Somebody who can change things needs to though, obviously.

Well, after the trailer on the documentary 'Kangaroo Mob' I was very skeptical, but having watched the film last night on ABC, I felt it was reasonably objective, although depressing in outcome.

The monitoring, research and problem solving for Australia wildlife needs to be a nation-wide ongoing task of our National Parks, not just a one off programme for the government's public relations and image. It is wrong that wildlife are protected in National Parks or on one side of a fence, yet can be culled, attacked by pet dogs, and mown down by traffic on the other side of the fence.

In this programme, clearly the El Nino 15 year drought cycle drove the native local kangaroos into the encroaching Canberra suburbia. It needs to be pointed out that the kangaroos were bloody there first and have more rights than profiteering developers pursuing single bottom line land profiteering.
Why are dogs allowed to venture into the kangaroo reserve without policing?
Why aren't wildlife corridors (not concrete drains) built to facilitate wildife to pass under deadly highways?
Why is kangaroo proof fencing not constructed to keep them off the known high 'black spot' highway?
Why are barbed wire fences permitted to exist in and around the kangaroo reserve?

Answer: Politicians, and their Canberran electorate who vote for them, couldn't give a shit about wildlife!

The programme demonstrated that tranquilising and relocation is a viable option. It would cost money. Indeed wildlife reserves should be supplemented by water storage dams so that the reserves can be made more drought resistant, providing for rich native grasses during drought, thus ensuring that next El Nino the kangaroos do not need to stray into the dangerous suburbia. Once again charities have to support wildlife. It is the job of the National Parks and Wildlife Service that these days spend more money on maximising tourism - walking tracks, websites, tourist facilities and glossy reports.

The ACT Government should have no involvement in wildlife or environmental issues. The entire wildlife conservation management task needs to be nationalised - not hard, as the Feds are situated in the same city.

Tigerquoll
Suggan Buggan
Snowy River Region
Victoria 3885
Australia

The fertility of human populations needs to be controlled, not the kangaroos. How can Canberra's urban sprawl continue indefinitely without a cap, and kangaroos be expected to exist on smaller and smaller parcels of land? With human invasion and encroachments onto habitats, they are assumed to have the decency to just wither away and become extinct.
Dr Warren M. Hern wrote a paper titled “Why Are There So Many of Us? Hern stated that cancers “spread by two means: extensive invasion and by metastasis, or distant colonization. Human communities, once established, tend to invade and destroy all adjacent ecosystems without limits”
Says Hern, "The human species is an example of a malignant ecotumor, an uncontrolled proliferation of a single species that threatens the existence of other species in their habitats".
Joeys face up to a 70% rate of deaths in their early lives, and their fertility levels fluctuate with the seasons. They are able to learn to avoid the biggest and heaviest traffic, but as one of Australia's slow evolving animals it means their adaption is struggling to keep up to what is demanded from them. Human expansion, chain saws, bulldozers, heavy traffic, fast cars, dogs and human enemies are a massive changes for kangaroos to learn quickly within a few generations in order to be street-smart. On the other hand, humans are finding adaption hard too! We are living during a time of multiple depletions, overpopulation and multiple threats, yet the era of growth is still continuing - fatalistically for ourselves, and other species.

Your argument is cute but ultimately hypocritical and counterproductive. The sustainable population of any species within any given environment is a variable. To allow the kangaroo to become a sacred cow would cause long term imbalance to its environment. Such damage would not some how be justified even if we were to snap our fingers and magically wipe out our environmental footprint. A romantic tit for tat solution has no place in environmental management.

You are also making several false assumptions: We cannot return our environment to some ideal pre-European invasion model, any more than we can turn back time. The life of individual animals are not important in an environmental context. Life is sacred but so too is death. Life demands death. The price of all life is death. The finality of life is what makes it so precious. That humans kill animals is not unusual or even important, what is important is why they kill and how. Human values of morality and compassion are alien to most animals. Some may be cute and furry but they are not innocent angels by our romantic ideals. What we call cruel is simply a way of life to many animals.

Should we be proactive in redressing environmental damage? Of course. Should we modify our behaviour to make it more sustainable? Of course. Should we control world wide human population growth? Of course. Should we use all means necessary to prevent localised wildlife overpopulation in a modified environment? Yes. Should our methods and targets be under constant review? Yes. Should we try to restore the past? No. We must attempt to build a new balance of nature, knowing that this will be a dynamic balance.

Dehumanising humans as a species is pure fascism. We can choose to part of the solution or the problem, but there will always be death and destructive forces at work. Sometimes it will pay to counteract these forces if the pressure on biodiversity and sustainability becomes too great. Sometimes the damage of the past will come back to haunt us. But in an idea world there should be a balance of destructive and creative forces. Having said that, humans have a LOT of damage to repair before we have the luxury of letting things run their course.

We wanted power over the planet and now we have it. Once taken, we cannot easily give it back. Life on Earth now depends on humans. It would not survive our demise because we have poisoned the planet too much. This is why we cannot drop out and turn our backs on civilisation.

Anthropocentrism is a god given right to conquer.

Humans' sense of their god given right to populate the planet and take and use animals as they choose, is no different to a whole bunch of Hutus rocking up with machettes and sorting out the Tutsis. It's ok so long as you're not a Tutsi.

Philip Mitchell Graham comes across as an extreme supremacist.
Facism is being nasty to other humans, whereas anthropocentrism is being nasty to everything else.
Look up ecocentrism and get out of the 20th Century!

Tigerquoll
Suggan Buggan
Snowy River Region
Victoria 3885
Australia

"The sustainable population of any species within any given environment is a variable". Kangaroo joeys have a very low survival rate, and their numbers expand and decline with the seasons. Their populations are thus sustainable. However, humans assume they have the right to over-ride environmental variables and simply expand at exponential rates. Infinite growth is not "sustainable" in any sense of the word.

"Human values of morality and compassion are alien to most animals". Carnivorous animals hunt and kill other animals as prey, not for the pleasure of violence, greed, and an acquired taste for flesh. The most violent and sadistic creatures on the planet are humans, many of who find suffering and violence beneficial and enjoyable. Meat is an optional food item, and can be detrimental to health - our bodies, animal welfare, the environment and to species' balance.

"Life on Earth now depends on humans". No it doesn't. On the contrary, humans devalue and destroy ecosystems and species. Humans are late arrivals on our planet, which managed very will over long periods without us.

"To allow the kangaroo to become a sacred cow would cause long term imbalance to its environment". Wrong again. Kangaroos have evolved and adapted in Australia for some 16 million years!!! They are perfectly balanced species with the vast tract record to prove it. If they caused any imbalance, our Colonial fore-fathers would not have found a rich, bio-diverse and pristine Australia.

Thanks NIMBY, I think we've weeded out the virus

Wild claims about 'Facism', 'hypocrisy', 'sacred cows', 'romanticism', 'ideal pre-European invasion models', 'cute and furriness', 'power'...

Must be a government employee being paid to surf the Internet, perhaps a disaffected wildlife officer.

Tigerquoll
Suggan Buggan
Snowy River Region
Victoria 3885
Australia

I watched it - rather depressing to view! The kangaroos don't stand a chance against human encroachment. I surely wasn't the only one thinking that the comments about supposed kangaroo overpopulation in the narrative could equally be applied to humans! (I kept envisioning some aliens coming to Earth and deciding to "hold an annual cull to 'manage' the problem by keeping [human] numbers at 'sustainable levels' "! We certainly would not like it if that were done to us.)

The documentary Kangaroo Mob shown on ABC on Tuesday night angered and upset many people. While it had some value in showing perhaps a better view of kangaroos than most television does, many viewers seemed to be disappointed. My major concern was that it showed a lot of Don Fletcher's shonky research[1], (remember him, he was involved in the Belconnen kangaroo kill).

But I was also concerned that the narrator stated that landclearing, planting crops and building dams had contributed to plagues of kangaroos, which is quite blatantly wrong. With 5 major river systems across Australia, lots of billabongs and lagoons, and enough natural grasslands to support 200 or more million kangaroos, they couldn't get anything to eat or drink till we arrived and built dams and planted crops? Pull the other leg.....

Footnotes

[1] Linked page on the Australian Wildlife Management Society web-site contains link to Don Fletcher's 18.8MB pdf presentation.

I don't know how many kangaroos there are now in Australia but I imagine it would far fewer then 200 million. That kangaroos would be advantaged by the loss of habitat from land clearing, fences criss crossing where they want to go and loss of wildlife corridors and that they would be better off with increasing numbers of humans using more and more of the land for their own purposes does not make sense.

As Judge Judy says "If it doesn't make sense it is not true.

In the UK sprawl into farmland is not permitted.
When one leaves a town along a road, one is suddenly in farm country.
It is an respect for countryside.

Developers aren't allowed to peddle their sprawl in perpetuity like in Australia.

Canberra is not ACT pending sprawl. There needs to be a dirty big circle in the ground around Canberra that sets the outer limit for housing.
Most of its inhabitants draw upon the public purse. Canberra always grows when Labor gets its pendulus turn at office.
In the 1970s it was called the green belt. What happend to that concept - too many developer donations shaped political convenience.

Australian politics is just as corrupt as in Asia.

Tigerquoll
Suggan Buggan
Snowy River Region
Victoria 3885
Australia