this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2025
49 points (100.0% liked)

Australia

4339 readers
260 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @[email protected] who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @[email protected] and @[email protected]

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 2 points 14 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Fuck that, I love kangaroo and it's one of the few meats my cat will eat. They are a pest basically if I understand correctly.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

So basically wolves/deer in the US and dingos/roos in AUS, same same? Only difference is too few guns for hunting permits so the government has to do it? Ok then.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago

Fuck US lawmakers. Like they've got a leg to stand on when talking about things being "needlessly cruel".

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Governments have backed controls and culls of the kangaroo’s natural predator – the dingo

“The natural alternatives are being killed by a dingo or dying by starvation,” he says.

Farmers livestock might be at risk but can we not reintroduce more dingos to manage the population?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

@spiffmeister

Kangaroo populations will naturally go through "boom and bust" cycles as the amount of available feed and water varies tremendously. (Aussies often forget that this is the world's driest continent.)

Mass deaths within local kangaroo populations will always occur due to drought. That's nature, and it's a bad way to die

Having 'extra' dingos manage the 'roo population' would mean they'd suffer a similar fate, just delayed by a few months, if that.

When the 'roo population fell to low numbers, the dingos would turn on whatever is available... including, as you say, livestock.

It's a complex problem, and there are no easy answers.

However, which is worse? Letting 'roos die horrible mass deaths from inevitable droughts, or controlling their numbers via managed culls, and then tapping into that resource? Most, but not all, kangaroos that are culled will die an instant death.

In fact, for those of us who eat meat, we should avoid beef, lamb, and pork. Kangaroo is FAR more sustainable from an environmental perspective...
... even if Skippy is on our National Coat of Arms.

@Davriellelouna

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm not convinced that increasing dingo numbers wouldn't at least help control the population. Basically all predator-prey systems go though cycles afaik (we teach this model to first year maths students). Obviously I'd have to read more to form a stronger opinion though.

In fact, for those of us who eat meat, we should avoid beef, lamb, and pork. Kangaroo is FAR more sustainable from an environmental perspective...
... even if Skippy is on our National Coat of Arms.

This I agree with, I live overseas now and I miss a good roo-steak.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

@spiffmeister

Oh, increasing the dingo population (by any method) would, as you say, definitely impact the roo population. No question!

But the *location* of that roo population matters and affects whether any cull makes economic sense.

I was a spotter and offsider for a few pro roo shooters over a few seasons.

Culling roos usually only makes sense when it benefits the farmer AND value can be extracted from the roos.

Most culls I've seen were in cattle country that was still 'close to town', usually within 1-2 hrs' drive. (I'm sure that culls also occur down in sheep country, too.)

Primary producers rarely look upon dingos favourably, and there'd be little support for increasing them.

The 'predator-prey' 'boom/bust' cycles are still common, but generally where the station's size is measured in 1000's of sq. kms. In the 'back of beyond', diesel alone costs much more than can be made from any culled roos.

Edit: check out the dingo fence...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dingo/_Fence

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There are a lot of differences between how the US and how Australia do hunting. For one, there is no commercial deer/elk harvest in the US. Commercially sold venison can only be from farmed deer/elk. I think deer leather can be sold, but there are a lot of hoops to go through.

Also, in the US, most hunting regulations exist not for ethical or conservation purposes but to prevent people from being able to subsistence hunt. They wanted hunting to be a rich man's game like in the UK. The existence of hunting seasons is a good example. Another is regulations on method of take; for example, you often must use outdated equipment like bows and muzzleloaders, and the use of modern, effective rifles is severely curtailed. Compare that to Australia where you can use night vision/thermal scopes and rifles with supressors, and i believe there is no "hunting season".

The reality is that both countries have an overpopulation of large herbivores in areas, and the answer anti-hunting people give is the reintroduction of large carnivores. While we should do that in more rural areas, it's not feasible in urban/suburban areas where deer proliferate.

Many municipalities actually have to pay to have deer culled, and they do that rather than making it easier for people to hunt.

Tl;dr, i think there are some things I like better about how Australia handles hunting, but theres also things about the US's method i like.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Where do they limit hunting to only bow or black powder?

I know states in the Midwest have special seasons/times for bow/black powder hunting but the regular deer season isn't limited that way.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Here's an example: Delaware only allows shotgun, pistol/pistol caliber long guns, and muzzleloader, no true rifle.

https://www.eregulations.com/delaware/hunting/deer-seasons

Connecticut only allows rifle on private land.

https://portal.ct.gov/deep/hunting/2025-connecticut-hunting-and-trapping-guide/deer-hunting#PVSHOT

Iowa has no rifle allowed.

https://www.iowadnr.gov/things-do/hunting-trapping/iowa-hunting-seasons

Lots of states have restrictions against modern (and by modern, i mean bottlenecked) rifle rounds, and if you want to use a rifle, you have to either find a 150 year old cowboy gun, or buy a really expensive new gun using one of several specialized cartridges that cost like $2 a round.

And then when it comes down to it, if you live in a state where it is legal to hunt with a regular rifle, you end up finding that half the time any public land that you can hunt on is restricted to archery only, so unless you happen to be a large landowner, you can't hunt with a rifle.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

I wonder if those restrictions go back to the Great Depression? That's the case for the shotgun only areas in southern Minnesota.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Florida's one example.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago

oh yeah nah course we care about *checks notes* US lawmakers and their thoughts. utmost respect for em.

There is an interesting, complex conversation going on between the many different Australian advocacy groups here in the article, it's clearly got a few interesting angles to it. But if one thing is clear, the US lawmakers are not only ignorant of the discussion but incidentally hypocritical (see the Game Industry Council comment on US deer practices). They seem to mean well, in a surprising way, but that's no excuse for professional lawmakers to be so blatantly ignorant. Although, to be honest, I'd be surprised if any conservationist legislation went through their congress under this regime.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

I'm not sure what's more amusing out of the American hypocrisy or all these football boot manufacturers pretending they are ethical for returning to cow leather.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 day ago (1 children)

As the US descends into fascist hellscape this is what members of the Democrats are concerned about? I would trust our commercial kangaroo harvesters to humanely shoot kangaroos far more than the cowboys out there hunting deer and other game in the US.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

The cowboys are now hunting children in classrooms and courtrooms.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

Ah, the most dangerous game of all.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

US lawmakers think stripping people of their humanity is acceptable. Fuck them and their useless opinions.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

funny article highlighting foreigners lack of understanding with a good sprinkle of anti intellectualism