A question for aussie's

Aren't roos a pest in Australia?

Originally posted by NoEarthlyReason
Aren't roos a pest in Australia?

It is my understanding that nature is self regulating depending on food and habitat? Is it not the case?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
It is my understanding that nature is self regulating depending on food and habitat? Is it not the case?

Not necessarily. The earth doesn't exist in a 'state of nature' any more. Once species are intoduced from other landmasses, for instance, the ecological balance can be seriously upset, leading to extinctions without further management. Changes in habitatats (or man-made habitats created), may also upset the balance. In the UK if we didn't shoot and poison rats and other vermin, for example, we ourselves would be overrun with disease. I'm sure the same is true of many other countries. I'm not sure whether kangaroos are a pest or not, or why, but if they are it may be preferable to control their numbers in whatever way.

Originally posted by NoEarthlyReason
Aren't roos a pest in Australia?

Yes, but that in itself is no excuse - you don't see anyone in London throwing boomerangs at Aussie barstaff!

Originally posted by NoEarthlyReason
Not necessarily. The earth doesn't exist in a 'state of nature' any more. Once species are intoduced from other landmasses, for instance, the ecological balance can be seriously upset, leading to extinctions without further management. Changes in habitatats (or man-made habitats created), may also upset the balance. In the UK if we didn't shoot and p ...[text shortened]... t or not, or why, but if they are it may be preferable to control their numbers in whatever way.

If you didn't shoot and poison rats and other vermin we would be over run? I don't think that can be substantiated, because if there is no food for them they will die off, its simply a much better policy to be hygienic with waste. No one is saying that the balance of nature cannot be tipped but its self evident that if left alone it finds its own balance.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
If you didn't shoot and poison rats and other vermin we would be over run? I don't think that can be substantiated, because if there is no food for them they will die off, its simply a much better policy to be hygienic with waste. No one is saying that the balance of nature cannot be tipped but its self evident that if left alone it finds its own balance.

According to people I've spoken to involved the control of vermin, yes. There's no chance of there being no food for them while we're around. Obviously we should be more hygienic with waste but the simple fact is that however clean and well-managed a settlement, it generates some pollution. A city the size of Glasgow or Edinburgh let alone London or Los Angeles generates so much more. It may be a better policy, but since when do governments unfailingly follow "better policies"? Unless of course we by some miracle go back to tribes around a campfire, then the food source for rats would diminish. Which I admit sounds beautiful to some, 'most all of whom if they tried it wouldn't survive five minutes.

And nature does tend to find its own balance and is definitely resilient, but once permanent changes like new species or land use have been introduced it is up to us to attempt to recover the ecosystem once we have disrupted it. For examples of species which destroy the ecological balance or are harmful in other ways, witness giant hogweed, Japanese bindweed, the signal crayfish, the cane toad in Australia, muntjac deer, and countless others. Many of these can easily destroy ecosystems that simply haven't evolved ways to protect themselves. Evolution is too slow a process in these cases; nature does not redress the balance, we must intervene.