RSPCA Tasmania Play On Words and Facts

RSPCA in Tasmania was running a poll up until 14^th December 2006.

The question was “Do you think recreational duck shooting should be banned in Tasmania?”

Poll Voting Conditions

Please refer to our privacy policy for general conditions on how we treat any information captured using this web site. With specific regard to RSPCA Tasmania´s Online Poll facility, to help ensure the accuracy of this survey we reserve the right to: Record specific information about a recorded vote such as the internet address it came from and the time of the vote. Remove specific votes if they are analysed and assesed as being made in an attempt to unfairly bias the poll result. These assesments are based on the logged information for the poll and web site.

The Poll was shut down (see this screen shot for reason given by RSPCA)

Doesn’t it seem a very strange coincidence that the poll should be shut down when the NO vote began to over take the yes vote?

Only 271 votes were received (see screen shot) and this was classed as ‘malicious use’. What gives? I don’t think 271 votes is such a huge amount but maybe the RSPCA wasn’t expecting so many NO votes.

But I guess the RSPCA wants a ‘certain’ outcome and will do what it takes. Look at that last point in the Poll Conditions “Remove specific votes if they are analysed and assesed as being made in an attempt to unfairly bias the poll result. These assesments are based on the logged information for the poll and web site. ”

Who exactly will determine if votes are unfair or not?

What, exactly, is the criterion to assess votes to make such a determination?

I do not think you need to be a rocket scientist to work out that the RSPCA wants a predetermined outcome and will get it one way or another.

It is important for all purebred dog owners, for all shooters and related groups to remain vigilant at all times. Keep an eye on web sites such as the RSPCA site and alert stakeholders to any adverse activity such as Polls. The RSPCA will use all information gathered to argue their point of view to the law makers.

Support each other.

Just because you do not have a Gundog breed should not prevent you from uniting against a common enemy. Tomorrow it may be your breed and you will need the Gundog support.

I do not know what it will take for us all to show unity but I do know that at the rate of recent events and legislative changes, there will be no such thing as a purebred dog. No hunting partner, no guide dog, and no sniffer dogs at our airports.

Behind the scene of the smaller things we see, is a very tangled web, a very complex web that will take a broad thinking mind to see the signs. The signs that are ever so small, ever so well disguised.

Nothing is ever what it seems on the surface.

Look at the careful wording of the above mentioned Poll. The use of the word ‘recreational ’.

How would the Poll voting be effected if that word was removed?

Again, you do not need to be a rocket scientist to work that out which is the very reason that word was used. It seeks to unequivocally mislead you into thinking that duck shooting is done for recreation when it is not.

Duck Shooters perform an import task. They prevent Botchulism duck. Botchulism comes about through uncontrolled numbers of ducks, providing a haven for the disease. When the animal acquires the disease, its death is soon to come. After it dies, maggots invade the body.