Game Bill 2001

International letters of condemnation against the NSW Game Bill 2001.
******************************************************************************

Sri Lanka
*********

9.12.01

Dear Minister/Premier Carr,

I am a veterinarian working in Sri Lanka. I know that introduction of species has destroyed some of the wild animls of your country.I met your MP Mr Richard Jones in Asia for an animals conference In Manila.I sent him a book also written by me. India is dealing with its stray dog population in a humane way. You can start a method to control these animals in a humane way. Hunting is a blood sport. As a Buddhist representing Lord Buddha's philosophy I will relate a story from the past.

When Arahath Mahinda met King Devanam Piyatissa at Mihintale he was trying to hunt deer as a sport. Arahath Mahinda`s words to King Devanampiyatissa shows Buddhists compassion towards animals. "Oh great king birds of the air and beasts have an equal right to live and move about in any part of this land as thou. The land belongs to the people and all other beings and thou art only the guardian of it". King Devanampiyatissa banned hunting from that day onward.

I am very disappointed that you have introduced a Bill (Game Bill 2001) that will not only allow the infliction of suffering on wild-living animals (classified as game, animals or pest animals, but which is likely to increase the number of animals subjected to suffering at the hands of both recreational hunters and misguided farmers. I urge you to withdraw the Bill immediately.

This Bill is unethical and biased in its nature in a number of ways:
1) Hunt is defined as to use any firearm, bow, animal or
other hunting device to capture kill or harm the animals,
but does not include laying or using poison for that purpose (page 2).

This is just totally unacceptable. Licensed hunters under the Bill will be
able to inflict terrible suffering. An animal struck by an arrow, is likely
to suffer great injury, but may run for miles and take days to die of
those injuries. And yet again we have the terrible reality of legally
permitting dogs to be used against other animals.
While the dogs may themselves be injured
(e.g. as is almost inevitable in a fight with a wild pig),
any of the animals pursued by dogs will be mauled before a
hunter could catch up and perhaps then kill the animal.
Stray pursuit dogs that are not retrieved will also add to the
wild dog population.

2) Game Council membership (page 6): the Bill dictates that 7 of the
14 members of the Game Council must be nominees of hunting organisations;
that the Chairperson must be one of those nominees; that the Chairperson has
both a deliberative vote if an equity of votes and then a second or casting vote
on the Council; and that a quorum is just 8 members present
(pgs 35 & 36 & 40).

The proposed membership and operating procedures of the Game Council
ensures that the hunting organisations are in total charge of the Council.
Their interests in a virtual open season on game and designated
pest animals will take precedence over both the suffering of sentient
target animals and over even any possible long-term reduction in
damage to the environment or agricultural interests.

It is interesting that those who drafted the Bill found it necessary to
also specifically exempt this clear bias under the Disclosure of pecuniary
interests (page 39) where being a member of a hunting club or
organisation is stated as not qualifying as a pecuniary interest
of Game Council members for the purposes of the Bill.

It is unethical and totally unacceptable to allow the hunting organisations
to manage a process which will cause great suffering to an even larger num
ber of animals, and it will be purely for their own amusement and
recreation.

3) The Bill indicates that the Game Council is to issue a Code of
Practice (page 19) and may make it a condition of license.

Again, notwithstanding my total opposition to the Game Bill, it seems
amazing that the Game Council, with no animal welfare representation
and total domination by the hunting organisations, is to be the arbiter
of a code of practice for the hunters own behaviour towards the
game and pest animals.

There are currently two reviews taking place in NSW - the Inquiry into
Feral Animals by the Legislative Council General Purpose Standing
Committee No.5; and the Inquiry into Vertebrate Pest Management in National
Parks in NSW being conducted by Assoc. Prof. Tony English at the
request of your colleague Bob Debus. Both reviews were seen as
necessary after the brutal killing of goats on Lord Howe Island and wild
horses in the Guy Fawkes National Park, the later of which is still the subject
of cruelty charges brought by the RSPCA.
Neither review has been completed, and it seems
premature to propose the Game Bill at this time.

This Game Bill makes a mockery of the NSW Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals Act and to the established principles of
humane and effective management of mislocated and unwanted
introduced animals. The hunting organisations seem to be
trying desperately to hang on to practices that are outdated
and unacceptable to a caring and humane society.

It is regrettable that such a Bill could even be drafted, but I urge you to
now simply withdraw it before the NSW Parliament moves to debate
the issue . The Game Bill is based on flawed and outdated principles
and would cause the unnecessary and brutal suffering of many millions
of hapless animals in your State.

Yours sincerely,

- -Kala Santha Bvsc(Sri Lanka) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

***********************************************

Western Australia
*****************

Premier Robert Carr,
Parliament House,
N.S.W.,
Australia
Fax: (02) 9228 3935
Email: bob.carr@www.nsw.gov.au

18th December 2001

Dear Premier Carr,

Withdraw the Game Bill 2001 (NSW) - Ban hunting.

I was recently notified that you have introduced a new Bill (Game Bill 2001) to legalise the hunting of some targeted animal species in NSW.

Apparently the Game Bill 2001 defines "hunt" as "to use any firearm, bow, animal or other hunting device to capture kill or harm the animals, but does not include laying or using poison for that purpose "(page 2).

Hunting animals is a blood sport. The pursuit and killing of animals for sport or pleasure is cruel and unacceptable in today’s enlightened society. Animals should be treated with the same compassion that we extend to our fellow humans. Animals have the same capacity to suffer as humans do. Most animals have a central nervous system and feel pain the same way as you or I do. Yet you would seek to legitimise the cruel and barbaric treatment of animals in your Game Bill 2001.

How hypocritical it is of you and your Government to speak of tolerance towards other humans with regards to a multicultural society and freedom of religion in Australia while your proposed Bill shows intolerance and cruelty towards other animals species.

While NSW aims to formalise barbaric cruelty to animals using the Game Bill 2001 many people in Britain are working towards banning the hunting of animals. Australia has shown itself to be an intolerant and cruel country both in terms of compassion to humans and animals. Australia’s poor treatment of humans has been shown in our treatment of Aboriginal Australians and more recently by our treatment of refugees ( boat people ). Australia’s long history of cruelty to animals includes aerial culling of brumbies in NSW, the ongoing massacre of kangaroos, the targeting of any wild species with no economic significance with cruel poisons such as 1080 and so forth.

Saint Francis of Assisi said "Not to hurt our humble brethren (the animals) is our first duty to them, but to stop there is not enough. We have a higher mission--to be of service to them whenever they require it... If you have men who will exclude any of God's creatures from the shelter of compassion and pity, you will have men who will deal likewise with their fellow men."

Premier Carr, please show some enlightenment and withdraw the Game Bill 2001.

Regards,

Marguerite Wegner (Ms)

Victoria, Australia
*******************

To: The Hon. Robert Carr
Premier of N.S.W
29.1.02

Dear Minister/,

It has recently come to my attention that the N.S.W Government has drafted a Bill (Game Bill 2001) to permit the killing and/or injuring of animals deemed to be game or pest species. Under the bill any animal that is unlucky enough to fit into the above mentioned categories could be targeted for indiscriminate killing by means of inhumane techniques such as bows and any firearms. Additionally, all culling activities are to be "overseen" by a Game Council represented by hunters.

Is is it just me, or does not a game council managed by hunters just seem a little bit bias to you?? This is of grave concern, how could such an issue be so easily overlooked, or more aptly speaking completely disregarded? I find the whole turn of events totally appalling. This is just an open invitation for hunters and shooters to conduct cruel and barbaric killing operations under the guise of protecting the environment. It is blatantly obvious that this blood sport will result in the prolonged suffering and death of countless numbers of animals. I demand to know who and what bodies are going to guarantee the welfare of both target and non- target species (it is widely acknowledged that many shooters have much difficulty in differentiating between various species, e.g. birds). Surely, not the "Council"with its so called code of practice!

As a nation Australia takes pride in claiming to be an enlightened society full of tolerance and compassion. Yet, we are too easily prejudiced against those that to no fault of their own do not fit neatly into our world. Increasingly, Australia is been perceived by the rest of the world as one of the worst violators for committing acts of atrocities against our fellow animal kind (e.g.. muss culling operations aimed at curbing kangaroo, possum populations etc, etc. The implementation of the Game Bill 2001 only serves to justify these views. And what of our children and their children, is this what we want to teach them about living in an enlightened society? If you think it is fun to kill an animal, or if an animal causes you any inconvenience or if you simply just don't like an animal just kill it by any means possible (oh, excluding laying baits of course) as there are no other possible alternatives?.

There is only one course of action, the right course of action which is to ensure that the bill is promptly withdrawn and to guarantee that any proposed future bills of a similar nature do not come to pass.

Thank-you for your time and consideration in such an extremely urgent and important issue.

Yours sincerely,

Helena Harrington

*******************************************

Turkey
******

30.1.02

Dear Sir,

I am very disappointed to hear that you have introduced a Bill (Game Bill 2001) that will not only allow the infliction of suffering on wild-living animals (classified as game, animals or pest animals, but which is likely to increase the number of animals subjected to suffering at the hands of both recreational hunters and misguided farmers. In the 21st century these kinds of blood sports are considered barbaric in modern countries and also while every year hundred thousand of species are disappearing, this a betrayal to both humankind and nature itself. Also the people who fight for every cruel action towards animals in developing countries are disappointed to hear such inhumane approach from the countries which we consider modern and respectful to nature also.

I'd appreciate your withdrawing the Bill before the NSW Parliament moves to debate the issue.

Regards,
Hulya Alpgiray
President
ASKOD
The Association for The Protection of Street Animals of Aliaga
TURKEY

*************************************

Germany
*****

The Hon. Robert Carr
Premier of NSW
bob.carr@www.nsw.gov.au

The Hon. Richard Amery
Minister for Agriculture NSW
mountdruitt@parliament.nsw.gov.au

30/1/02
Dear Sirs,

I learned from my Australian friends from the enactment of Game Bill 2001 and I want to add my voice to those urging you to withdraw the Bill immediately because it's unethical and biased in its nature in a number of ways:

1) Hunt is defined as to use any firearm, bow, animal or other hunting device to capture kill or harm the animals, but does not include laying or using poison for that purpose (page 2).

And yet again we have the terrible reality of legally permitting dogs to be used against other animals. While the dogs may themselves be injured (e.g. as is almost inevitable in a fight with a wild pig), any of the animals pursued by dogs will be mauled before a hunter could catch up and perhaps then kill the animal. Stray pursuit dogs that are not retrieved will also add to the wild dog population.

The proposed membership and operating procedures of the Game Council ensures that the hunting organisations are in total charge of the Council. Their interests in a virtual open season on game and designated pest animals will take precedence over both the suffering of sentient target animals and over even any possible long-term reduction in damage to the environment or agricultural interests.

It is interesting that those who drafted the Bill found it necessary to also specifically exempt this clear bias under the Disclosure of pecuniary interests (page 39) where being a member of a hunting club or organisation is stated as not qualifying as a pecuniary interest of Game Council members for the purposes of the Bill.

It is unethical and totally unacceptable to allow the hunting organisations to manage a process which will cause great suffering to an even larger number of animals, and it will be purely for their own amusement and recreation.

3) The Bill indicates that the Game Council is to issue a Code of Practice (page 19) and may make it a condition of license.

Again, notwithstanding my total opposition to the Game Bill, it seems amazing that the Game Council, with no animal welfare representation and total domination by the hunting organisations, is to be the arbiter of a code of practice for the hunters own behaviour towards the game and pest animals.

There are currently two reviews taking place in NSW - the Inquiry into Feral Animals by the Legislative Council General Purpose Standing Committee No.5; and the Inquiry into Vertebrate Pest Management in National Parks in NSW being conducted by Assoc. Prof. Tony English at the request of your colleague Bob Debus. Both reviews were seen as necessary after the brutal killing of goats on Lord Howe Island and wild horses in the Guy Fawkes National Park, the later of which is still the subject of cruelty charges brought by the RSPCA. Neither review has been completed, and it seems premature to propose the Game Bill at this time.

This Game Bill makes a mockery of the NSW Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and to the established principles of humane and effective management of mislocated and unwanted introduced animals. The hunting organisations seem to be trying desperately to hang on to practices that are outdated and unacceptable to a caring and humane society.

Yours faithfully,
Charlotte Kinnewig
- Germany -

****************************************
30/1/02

Scotland is making hunting with dogs illegal and England will probably do so in the near future.
Why are these barbarians going backward?
This sounds terribly sick and incredibly inhumane

pat volk
*****************************************

South Africa
***********

The Hon. Richard Amery
Minister for Agriculture NSW
mountdruitt@parliament.nsw.gov.au

The Hon. Robert Carr
Premier of NSW
bob.carr@www.nsw.gov.au

30/1/02

Dear Sirs,

The introduction of Game Bill 2001 which allegedly permits the killing of so-called classified "game", "pests" and other creatures, through the use of hunting dogs, handguns and other weapons, is not understood because Australia can hardly be described as a nation of hunters, but one may suggest, a nation of killers. For example, the butchery of 9 million kangaroos can not be described as "hunting", and neither can all the other mindless cruelty to life either.

What you are proposing has been done long ago in South Africa and Africa – in the Victorian era. So-called "hunting" and everything connected with it, has reduced this and other countries to ecological wastelands. The bottom line I suggest, is that the real reason behind the Bill is the fact that there is a lot of money to be made out of it – weapons, vehicles, clothing, "tourism", photographic, TV, camping equipment, medical and more. It is a multi-billion dollar business that will get you more votes from many killers and the big business supporting them.

To ask you to withdraw your Bill is not my prerogative, but it is my right to request respectfully that you note our opposition to any and all forms of hunting and cruelty to any form of life, and hence, to the introduction of "Game" Bill 2001

Your sincerely

Roger Gould-King

South Africa

************************************************

Australia
********

From: Ann Rogers
To: mountdruitt@parliament.nsw.gov.au
Sent: Thursday, 31 January 2002 8:38
Subject: hunting proposal.

Dear Sir,

Throw out this proposal now. If you don't you will make a mockery of all the work done in the past to protect animals in Australia as well as the work that Australians have been doing to protect animals from barbarism in other countries. We could even see animals purposely being released into the wild so that the "hunters' can kill them.Lets all the stray dogs roam and go out and shoot,spear,poison them.

You could save lots of money used by welfare organizations like the New South Wales Animal Welfare and the RSPCA. Man has supposed to have evolved past hunting and killing. Put these hunters in the desert to fend for themselves if they think they need to protect their primitive skills. Take away there automatic guns,expensive bows. 4 wheel drive vehicles. six packs and refrigerators. Let them live off the land as our tribals did. Kill for food to live not to enjoy the kill. Please stop this before it gets out of hand. Don't destroy Australia's and the worlds view of NSW, don't give in to barbarism.

Ann Rodgers.

****************************************************

Portugal
*******

Dear Minister/Premier Carr,

This Bill is unethical and biased in its nature in a number of ways:

1) Hunt is defined as to use any firearm, bow, animal or other hunting device to capture kill or harm the animals, but does not include laying or using poison for that purpose (page 2).

This is just totally unacceptable. Licensed hunters under the Bill will be able to inflict terrible suffering. An animal struck by an arrow, is likely to suffer great injury, but may run for miles and take days to die of those injuries. And yet again we have the terrible reality of legally permitting dogs to be used against other animals. While the dogs may themselves be injured (e.g. as is almost inevitable in a fight with a wild pig), any of the animals pursued by dogs will be mauled before a hunter could catch up and perhaps then kill the animal. Stray pursuit dogs that are not retrieved will also add to the wild dog population.

2) Game Council membership (page 6): the Bill dictates that 7 of the 14 members of the Game Council must be nominees of hunting organisations; that the Chairperson must be one of those nominees; that the Chairperson has both a deliberative vote if an equity of votes and then a second or casting vote on the Council; and that a quorum is just 8 members present (pgs 35 & 36 & 40). The proposed membership and operating procedures of the Game Council ensures that the hunting organisations are in total charge of the Council. Their interests in a virtual open season on game and designated pest animals will take precedence over both the suffering of sentient target animals and over even any possible long-term reduction in damage to the environment or agricultural interests.

3) The Bill indicates that the Game Council is to issue a Code of Practice (page 19) and may make it a condition of license.

It is regrettable that such a Bill could even be drafted, but I urge you to now simply withdraw it before the NSW Parliament moves to debate the issue . The Game Bill is based on flawed and outdated principles and would cause the unnecessary and brutal suffering of many millions of hapless animals in your State.

Yours sincerely,
Maria Lopes
Portugal

************************************************

Click here to go to Page 2 of letters opposing NSW Game Bill 2001

Click here to return to Game Bill 2001
Click here to return to Rabbit Information Service