ricrunner wrote:I am all for the removal of the majority of the horses from KNP. But not all. Maybe leave 500 hundred thereeir. I know the damage caused by them is significant, but I also see the heritage value of them being there. If there is a change of government and they change this ruling that all the horse and deer as well have to go, I do not want them culled but removed and sold. They are excellent horse stock impervious to a lot of diseases and could quite easily be exported for use in countries that require good horse stock. Murdering horses does not sit with me, as a former soldier I have totally lost the need to kill and I wont kill another living thing. But as a former professional shooter as well, not all kills are clean. To see a horse in pain from a bad shot, tears at your heart strings.
I have considerable empathy for those put in the position of killing anything and I cannot understand how anybody would get enjoyment from it. The personal things you have shared gives me great hope for mankind and I at least appreciate your service. I must however address a few matters.
We shoot for meat and pest eradication but we don't kill for fun. I must say my taking of any life still gives me an awkward feeling and one I did not feel when younger. Those who are not vegetarian will eat meat killed by another with little thought as to how it got to the supermarket and all love the meat we put on our table but few take up the offer to be involved in the messy process first hand. Any animal deserves a clean kill but that is not always the case and horses are no different to a fox or rabbit when it comes to that. The human connection with horses over centuries evokes a greater emotional response such as the one you have shared. Public land managers are now put in a position of culling, not murdering, a domestic animal which was not managed by its owner and allowed to escape (or worse, released) to an area it had no place being. Some people arguing vigorously for culling are very much detached from the actual consequence and your point should be well considered.
These horses are now very much inbred, worm infested and suffer from many congenital faults which are passed on to domestic horses when they are captured and bred. A locking stifle joint is one and it is not pretty to watch and quite uncomfortable to ride a horse downhill with the problem. They are not all good stock (in fact not many) so some people have been seeding mares into wild populations to increase the diversity in the gene pool. I would not say they are impervious to disease either. Most diseases are transmitted via contact with infected animals and diseases affecting horses would be less in the NP.
Watching horses starve to death is much worse than watching a horse in pain for a short time from a bad shot. It is likely to affect the shooter more though as there is a direct involvement in the suffering. We (the people and the government) have a responsibility though to control these horses and ensure they do not suffer because they are not suited to the environment they live in. We also have a responsibility to ensure they do not damage the environment for those animals who are natural to the area and have a right to be there. If we are to talk heritage then the native animals being displaced by habitat destruction will have to win. Instead, those who speak of heritage only consider the last 200 years. The people wanting to save the feral horse from a 'cruel' fate also want to continue 'brumby' running which is itself a very cruel pastime. I feel they argue more for the horse because it furthers their own agenda. People make money from these horses. They capture the young and sell them off with the heritage price tag. Personally, you could not give one to me and 3 of our 4 horses were free. If the brumby lovers were to engage in the practise (heritage) of their forefathers (pioneer settlers) then culling would be normal. The feral horse was considered a pest by most farmers and was killed. Not always by shooting. The management plan suggested capture and re-homing was the first option but nobody wants an old feral mare in their paddocks. They only want the young ones. Trucking these horses out is also very stressful and often not practical. Unfortunately it comes down to one of two solutions. Leave them all alone or shoot them. Trapping is an ineffective long term solution but short term perhaps they could trap horses and force the 'brumby' advocates to take them all away and look after them. That would sort out those who are serious pretty quick and I am sure there would be a quite a few shot or turned into pet food because the horses would be unmanageable and even dangerous.
Do we need another thread discussing all this? Perhaps further discussion could go over to the Horses and Heritage or both amalgamated.