Crazy - what a waste of what could eb decent food. Understand that there could be issues with parasites / worms with kangaroos but sure that it is not insurmountable. Leaving it there to rot is totally out of line...That is good meat!

That's why I no longer do it BN. For me it contradicted my values as a hunter and as long as there were others (and in no way would I disparage their good names for taking on the job - it has to be done) prepared to do it, I was happy to step aside.

If the situation arose where there was no one else to do it, well then I'd step up because despite my feeling uneasy doing it, letting the population balance itself the 'natural' way, or letting farmer Joe suffer through economic hardship would be worse. But I wouldn't do it quietly either. Every politician and bureaucrat would be hearing from me!

Speaking of harvesting meat, I have about 30kg of free-range, organic venison sitting in the freezer at home after the weekend's activities with a total food mileage of about 400km

I think there needs to be proper systems set up in order to ensure the meat can be butchered and distributed safely, with no risk of people consuming substandard (ie. diseased meat or meat that has not been properly refrigerated) product. I agree its absolutely ridiculous that its allowed to happen but there is no system set up to deal with the meat in the first place. The government really does need to change their stance on this issue because its simply wasting good food and providing another food source for wild dog/cats etc. Im sure there would be thousands of hunters willing to help out if they could make a couple more bucks out of selling the meat. The only problem i can see is that further controls would be needed to ensure the rules arent exploited by those only interested in the monetary aspect i.e. stringent quotas, accreditation/license endorsements etc.

No David, it's totally illegal to remove the carcasses from the property, that is the ludicrous part of the whole thing!

Of course all the safety nets with regard to health and safety would need to be met, but they would be formalities and something that I think could be quite easily accomplished.

How long has the pig chiller trade been operating is northern Australia? Years! The infrastructure is already in place, all it takes is for the wasteful, overbearing money and power hungry Governments to pull their fingers out and start acting...

Hey Simmo, I was down your way over the weekend (about 40 minutes SSE on the Rose River); it's where I dropped the sambar.

Yeah the pig chiller industry has been around for years and even the commercial roo harvest has been around for a while; no reason why the roos shot under the s121 (or whatever the number is) license can't be donated to charities to feed the poor/homeless or harvested for personal use. It's just such a waste for them to sit and rot in the paddock.

Nice and cold up there mate. Congrats on the freezer full.

Nooooo! Don't drop your meat consumption majorowe! I'm coming from a beef farmer's perspective here I do know where you are going with that thought, and I do agree. It does seem a bit odd that we grain feed cattle when we have starving mouths in the world.

A few months back I had a very interesting discussion with an ethanol (biofuel) producer. I was having a bit of gripe about how biofuels were diverting grains away from feed lotters and how it was causing the price on the available grain to go up. He was saying to me that even after the production of ethanol, there is still enough energy left in the grain for it to go to the feed lot where cattle can consume it and still stack on the weight. Sounds like pretty good utilisation if you ask me, but it still means that instead of grain heading to those who need it, it still ends up in fuel tanks and on our dinner plates in the form of a juicy piece of steak.

I just want to expand on the reasons for grain feeding. As we've seen many many times in this thread, we've often been talking about creating a demand and a market will form to satisfy that demand. When it comes to beef, the consumer is usually concerned with one thing... Tenderness. Coming second is taste. There are a few different ways to try and make beef tender but one of the easiest ways is to have it well marbled. Marbling for those who don't know is the presence of fat throughout the muscle. Generally this makes for a reasonably tender, juicy piece of meat. The easiest way to get fat on cattle is with grain, it also requires the least area! On our farm, a good stocking rate is a beast per four acres, in a good season it can get as low as one beast per 2.5 acres and in a poor season we saw it stretch to 1 per 8 acres! Personally, I don't like seeing cattle in feed lots, and I do think that grass finished cattle do taste better. There's usually a hefty premium to be paid for that though!

On a slightly different track. I'm not sure how many people would be aware of the campaign against Cadbury and the use of palm oil in their chocolate? A case of well meaning enviros wanting to save orangutans through prevention of habitat destruction. The argument is that a big corporate like Cadbury is engaged in pillaging the environment for company gain. Now, I'm not about to sing the virtues of Cadbury, but the unspoken word is that palm oil is also an excellent biofuel. In the lead up to the GFC, the price of palm oil went up about 300%. Why? Was it because people were buying lots of chocolate? Nope, it was because ever increasing amounts were being sidelined into biofuel production that is going to save the planet! With every GFC cloud, there is a silver lining, and thankfully since cash has dried up, people are driving cash into essentials rather than luxuries like orangutan filled diesel Mercedes!

Roo Culling: Not sure about the property that you were shooting on BW, but on the property that I go shooting on the roos are in plague proportions! To me it makes sense to cull numbers to reduce competition so that each animal yields more meat. I know you weren't saying that numbers didn't need reducing, but rather it seemed a waste leaving carcasses there, can't say I know in what condition the roos were in that you guys tagged? The roo shooters that I know aren't disappointed to learn of smaller, gaunt animals being culled. Most of the roos that I've seen on the property are so malnourished and stunted that it's hardly a feel good moment seeing them bounce around the paddock. If numbers were kept in check enough so that surviving roos weren't as hungry or as malnourished as they are now, than good ole skippy roo might be looked at in a more favourable light by all concerned. They are definitely a resource that can be used, but like anything they need to managed effectively to look after the animal and the landholder

Darn good post there, Andy.

I guess the enviros have never heard of the "Law of Unintended Consequences" that attaches itself to any action or policy implementation.
The cure often turns out to be far worse in it's unintended consequences than the disease.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions!!!

Interesting that ethanol production has cropped up; I was at a stakeholders meeting for a new ethanol plant in our region last week and they went through the process of ethanol production. All they use from the grain is the starch (which they convert to sugars and then ferment) which leaves a high protein waste stream which can either be transported to an adjoining feedlot or be dried and transported (it's actually food grade, so there's potential for it to be used in the manufacture of high-protein food stuffs like biscuits etc).

Speaking of roos Andy, we were working in an area where there's no commercial harvest of roos, only the non-commercial culling. In that situation it is illegal to remove the kangaroos from the property they are shot on. I agree that it has to be done and as I said, if there's no one else then I'll do it; but as long as there are others prepared to do it I'll let them.

Good post Andy W.

It just goes to show that if the human race was deadly serious about eliminating famine there's a good chance that they could - it would require telling people what they can and can't eat however rather than letting economics dictate.

Just on biofuels I don't think I've ever come across an environmentally consciencious person who supports the idea, and rightly so. I'm not even sure how the idea earned its reputation as environmentally beneficial. I guess it is because it is an alternative to oil and biofuel companies (some of them being oil companies) work hard to create this perception.

Well for a start it's a renewable energy, secondly it has the ability to reduce dependence on fossily fuels and thirdly it produces less greenhouse gasses than conventional fuels.

Some very interesting info here about lots of things including what is happening to food...
Watch with an open mind.
http://esotericagenda.net/eawatch.html

Organic food costs a lot more. People seem to think its common knowledge that organic food is "healthier" than regular food.........not true at all. In fact, it may even be less healthy. Studies have found that there are no health benefits to organic food at all, and it's also nearly impossible to detect a difference in the taste of regular and organic food.

Regards,

i would beg to differ!
i would rather eat my own home grwon produce rather than the bland tasteless crap you get from supermarkets.
The main reason it is FRESH picked straight from your own back yard rather than like say for example banana's they are grown in Nth qld picked 1 month before they are ripe sent all the way down to the Brisbane markets, then wholesalers, suppliers (each one adding their bit of profit along the way) only to find the Bananas shipped back up here to North Qld a good week or so later to be stocked in supermarket shelves (with a whole heap more money added to the original cost of them!) and most times they then sit in the back of the shop for another week or so...
Try a shop bought Banana to an organic Banana there NO comparison! shop bought banana's are bland, pasty, tasteless and extremely pale in colour where an organic Banana is sweet, very smooth and a rich dark yellow.

I wonder if people realize the amount of Chemical fertilizers, pesticides, fungicides and herbicides that is used to grow their food? Quite frankly it is enough to make you sick! and then there is the on coming scourge of genetically modified produce, it might sound good in theory but is it really good for you?

How can modifying a corn plant with a compound that when a caterpillar eats into the corn plant it dies?! it may be beneficial in the growth of the plant so you get the perfect looking produce that everybody seems to desire now days.

But what about in the long run? there has to be some sort of cumulative effect in the human body over the years from eating genetically modified foods as well as those that are sprayed within an inch of there lives with all sorts of chemicals!

What is the solution? go organic and grow your OWN FOOD! tell the big supermarkets and chemical companies what you really think of their produce! you might not think that it can make a difference but people are the ones that drive the consumer market! if there is no demand for chemical based grown produce then things may change to a more cleaner way of producing food.

I think you will find that post was just a spammer. They originally included a website & advertising. It has been their only post ever.

For anyone who has tasted home-grown produce or has bought organic produce knows that it tastes better and is likely to be more healthy.

BTW, for Adelaide people, we buy our food & veges atm through Food Connect
All organic produce grown by local farmers in SA. It is fantastic!
I believe there are branches in other states too - do a search if you are interested.

But that's an unfair comparison.
If you grow your backyard bananas organically, and I am next door growing mine with an odd spray of fungicide or whatever.
We both pick them when they are ripe and take them to the El Arish markets.
I'm sure that the bananas would be identical in taste, nutritional value and chemical residue values.
But because you grow yours 'organically', you seem to be able to sell yours for $2/kg when the normal price should be say $1.50/kg. Good business if you can convince enough people of the evils of chemical use.

Another comparison would be for us to send our ripe bananas to Melbourne with a truckload of commercially grown bananas.
I'm sure the people of Melbourne would prefer the tasteless cardboard bananas than the black mush we would deliver.

I'm all for minimal chemical use, or even zero chemical use, but while ever there are 10 million people in southern Oz that like to eat bananas and paw paws etc, and people in northern Oz like to eat stone fruit or apples and pears, commercial growers have to modify their production systems from the ideal, to provide an acceptable product to these markets.

Sorry but totally disagree. We use local organic bananas in our store most of the time, but when we can't get them we use organic bananas from Tully - and they are in amazing condition when they get to us...and certified organic. Only another 24 hours to Melbourne so can't see the problem (other than looking into whether it is sustainable to send bananas right across the country...perhaps sometime we need to get more into local food as Teckert suggested above)

DNO is exactly right, mission_shak is comparing apples and oranges. They have not compared organic to orthodox, they have compared fresh organic to delayed wholesale orthodox. What I'd be interested to see would be whether an organic banana (or any fruit) is as tasteless and bland if it were picked a month early, shipped 1000km and held in cold storage for another month then shipped another 1000km and stored for another few weeks before finally being put out for sale? And vice versa, if an orthodox banana were picked when ripe and eaten within a couple of days whether it would be as good as the organic?

Again, as DNO says, it would be wonderful to go organic, but as long as we're trying to feed 20 million +, the main priority is to get the food on the table within an appropriate time-frame, cost and quantity. Now if organic can deliver that, then all the better, but if it can't, then really our hands are forced.

But isnt that what mission shak is comparing? Organic produce to delayed orthodox?
They haven't said anything about comparing to orthodox produce that was picked in last 24 hrs.

And so far I dont think anyone has suggested we go totally organic. All thats been suggested is that its recommended for taste & health purposes.