You are here

RSPCA Petition against Shooters Party Bill needs your support now!

Field & Game Australia is emailing all members to vote to beat the Royal Society for Protection & Care of Animals- RSPCA -petition opposing the NSW Shooters Party's bill allowing shooting in national parks.

Field and Game has put up its own petition to beat the RSPCA petition.

This is what the Field and Game petition says:
The NSW Shooters party has a Bill before the NSW parliament that proposes a number of common sense amendments to the Game and Feral Animal Control Act.
Australian Hunting Net has been running a "counter punch" petition against the RSPCA petition to oppose the Bill.
A big effort is required by hunters to see if we can "top" the RSPCA petition.
To register your support for the Shooters Party Bill, sign the online petition Click here...
(Field & Game email to all members Australia wide)

To read more about the Shooters Party Bill, go to these articles.

Here is what the RSPCA Petition says

Click here to sign the petition to protect native animals!

"Hunters in New South Wales could soon be allowed to go into national parks and kill native animals including black swans, sulphur crested cockatoos and kangaroos if the NSW Labor party supports a Bill currently before parliament.

RSPCA NSW has condemned the Shooters Party Bill saying it's a blatant attempt to disguise recreational hunting as conservation.

"There is no possible conservation benefit to be derived from letting untrained shooters loose in our national parks," said the RSPCA's Chief Scientist, Dr Bidda Jones.

"If this Bill is passed not only will duck hunting be revived in New South Wales but a host of new animals will be added to the hit list including iconic Australian birds like swans and cockatoos.

"Most concerning is the Shooters Party's proposition to amend the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act so to allow 'canned hunting' on private game reserves, where animals are captured and then released just to be shot by hunters shortly after. The potential for cruelty is enormous."

The Bill contains no measures to protect the welfare of animals shot by recreational hunters and flies in the face of the progress made in recent years to improve humaneness in wildlife and pest animal management.

CEO of RSPCA NSW, Steve Coleman, said the management of pest animals must be strategic if it's going to be effective and any strategy must be justified and humane.

"Far from improving pest animal control, this Bill would actually encourage the introduction of new pest animals into New South Wales, animals that aren't even a problem in this state, just in order to hunt them down and shoot them," Mr Coleman said.

"These ideas take us back to the dark ages and any attempt to suggest that these activities are about conservation or pest animal control is simply laughable.

"There is widespread concern about this Bill in New South Wales. The changes go against the very principles and practices that the NSW Government has been supporting in terms of promoting best practice in pest animal management.

Supporting this bill will set back the advances made in Animal Welfare by decades.
We the undersigned support the RSPCA's call for the Premier of NSW The Hon Nathan Rees MP and Environment Minister, Carmel Tebbutt to reject the proposed Shooters Party Bill in its entirety.

Supporting this Bill in any way, shape or form, will be bad for animal welfare, bad for conservation and bad for New South Wales."
Click here to sign the petition to protect native animals!

Image icon RSPCA-logo.jpg3.42 KB
Image icon Field-&-Game-Oz.jpg25.45 KB
Image icon field&game-small.jpg5.1 KB


I am dissapointed by the efforts of a once credible organisation such as the RSPCA to allow itself to be concerned with the activist element which manufactures this kind of hype.

Thankfully, the petition against the Shooters Party Bill hasn't been as successful as the petition on the same site that counteracts it.

I find it intriguing that the RSPCA's preamble to the petition makes reference to "best practice pest animal management" . What do they consider 'best practice?" Perhaps they are referring to the current best practice methods employed by the government (NPWS) such as aerial shooting , trapping , and poisoning - all of which inflict undue stress and cruelty on their target species and in the case of poisoning ,also affects other species.

Perhaps "Best Practice" is meant in an economic context which endorses the cost of the above methods - $900 of tax payer's money per feral goat eradicated Must impress them!
The Shooters Party Bill Seeks to not only Contribute to pest animal eradication through the use of Conservation Hunters while generating a revenue (now there's a concept) but by use of a trained hunter (yes , I said Trained), with an accurate sporting rifle and a conscience about the animal he hunts, employ the most humane methods available. (But of course a "professional" using an automatic weapon from a moving helicopter to blast away at a moving target is still "best practice.")

It seems the RSPCA choose to ignore the proven track record of conservation hunting worldwide. There is yet to be a native species anywhere that hasn't benefited significantly from conservation programs utilising hunting as a management tool. The most documented cases of this include the White Rhino and scores of North American and European species now managed by hunting organisations.

It's Time Australia learned from the successful wildlife management models around the world and endorsed the Shooters Party Bill.

Jeff Borg

There is no such thing as "best practice" conservation hunting. This is greenwashing on the part of the Shooters Party. Conservation hunting is a contradiction in terms, an oxymoron! Feral animals are a human-caused phenomenon and needs to be "managed" by more regulations about fencing and responsible management of introduced species. If they were all microchipped, by law, the owners could be found and the animals returned. Parks need to be scrutinised by rangers to prevent breeding and the problem spreading.

As for "management" of wildlife, our ecosystem is perfectly designed for their presence. Wildlife do not drive cars, wreck and bulldoze vegetation, concrete over rainforest and bushland areas or produce greenhouse gases. They have had millions of years of evolution and selective breeding to be able live with an extremely low carbon footprint and have a positive role on their habitats. They do not over-breed! This is the talent that human species have.

Our planet is in meltdown mode, and our wildlife are diminishing world wide. We do not need "management" of wildlife in national parks. Safari hunting and trophy collection of animal parts should be part of the ignorance and callousness of the 19th century. Our wildlife should be protected in national parks, some of the few places in Australia where they are still relatively safe from loss of habitat, pollution and human interference. It should stay that way. Non-lethal ways of pest control should be for introduced species, not killings!

"They do not overbreed?"

No-one is blaming the animal for breeding but it's apparent that your knowledge of ecology is rather limited if you cannot recognise that the practices of one species (i.e. humans) can effect the conditions and therefore population of another species. In many cases it has been to the detriment of a species however in others it has been the absolute opposite.

Yes, humans are a root cause of ecological imbalance but what are the solutions to that one? Even if we we wanted to remove humans from the equation - two hundred years have already left their mark.