there are plenty of 'roo hunters .. and even more 'roos! ... and rabbits, foxes, feral cats, feral dogs, feral deer of various breeds, feral pigs, ducks, camels, water buffalo and various other critters ...  some people hunt and some people dont ..  .. i used to a decade ago ... not enough free time now.

i'm interested in what verdon did with his buck? ... i would think cape and head for sure .. i've spoken to a lot of U.S. hunters over the years that backpack out all the meat too .. in some areas its mandatory! ... some areas its donated to the locals or natives .. but usually not much is actually left behind ..

looks like a tasty enough critter too! 

oh and yeah as Pave said .. 'roo permit is required for pro-hunters that make a living off selling the meat.... most farmers have a slightly different paperwork pile that lets them shoot a certain number per year depending on crops and land ratio.... they can then shoot on their own time or ask licenced shooters to assist them..... but for any sale of product you must have a tag per animal.

there is approximately zero chance that 'roos as a genus will become extinct from the current or 'expanded future levels' of commercial and recreational hunting .. certain species of wallabies and other smaller 'roos are 'endangered' .. but these levels are not really attributable to any one 'group' of people ... and nearly all the hunters out there will know exactly what type of critter they looking at and if its on the 'hands off list' then that critter continues on its merry way! .. 

Quote from: Janx101 on October 10, 2012, 07:12:40 PM
there are plenty of 'roo hunters .. and even more 'roos! ... and rabbits, foxes, feral cats, feral dogs, feral deer of various breeds, feral pigs, ducks, camels, water buffalo and various other critters ...  some people hunt and some people dont ..  .. i used to a decade ago ... not enough free time now.

i'm interested in what verdon did with his buck? ... i would think cape and head for sure .. i've spoken to a lot of U.S. hunters over the years that backpack out all the meat too .. in some areas its mandatory! ... some areas its donated to the locals or natives .. but usually not much is actually left behind ..

looks like a tasty enough critter too! 

oh and yeah as Pave said .. 'roo permit is required for pro-hunters that make a living off selling the meat.... most farmers have a slightly different paperwork pile that lets them shoot a certain number per year depending on crops and land ratio.... they can then shoot on their own time or ask licenced shooters to assist them..... but for any sale of product you must have a tag per animal.

there is approximately zero chance that 'roos as a genus will become extinct from the current or 'expanded future levels' of commercial and recreational hunting .. certain species of wallabies and other smaller 'roos are 'endangered' .. but these levels are not really attributable to any one 'group' of people ... and nearly all the hunters out there will know exactly what type of critter they looking at and if its on the 'hands off list' then that critter continues on its merry way! .. 

Nicely said
Oh and HUFF the only reason Kangaroos are hunted here is because they are considered a pest in most parts and only permitted if you can prove that.

fair enough. but how does one prove it?, damage to property/home/vehicles or injury repeatedly? or? ive never had to prove that anything was a pest. it either was or was not. a thing here in tn we cannot hunt out of season is a bear of any kind. UNLESS we can prove it is endangering ourselves/family or pets. easily done ( selves if inside home or TWRA can look and see what bear was doing before its death and see it was justified) other animals fall into this category as well. some more difficult than others to prove a pest or a nuisance

Quote from: yamahonkawazuki on October 10, 2012, 08:15:21 PM
fair enough. but how does one prove it?, damage to property/home/vehicles or injury repeatedly?

You nailed it right there in your first sentence

yeah some of them like to do the 'deer in the headlights' gig "Urrr!!! dat looks pretty lights!" wham!.. some are in towns and cities now .. eating roses and shrubs and golf courses ...

for 'roos and farmers its usually crop damage though .. the relevant authority looks at how much crop the farmer has planted that year .. and gives an  x to y assessment of potential damage .. then an x to y allotment of 'cull' numbers is given. its kinda vague in some ways but there are monitored reports etc... farmers dont have THAT much extra time to be driving around a lot of nights spotlighting 'roos off the crop.. so they may ask a pro-shooter in who does have a specific number of tags.

an example i have personal experience of... The farmer where i used to go hunting .. out past Dubbo NSW .. might easily spend $50k to $75k on planting 3000 to 6000 acres of wheat .. once the crop is near full term then its no big issue cos there is plenty of leaf matter the 'roos will eat and leave the grain heads alone... but when its young and up to 4" high .. then 1 hungry 'roo can eat out the green shoots over about a 30 sq yard area in a night ... multiply that by maybe 200 'roos in the field and its easy to lose a whole lotta $ ...

either the pro-shooter or the farmer is not there to eradicate the whole lot .. they hop away anyway before maybe 5 or 6 get shot (if the person on duty knows their stuff) .. but thats part of the idea .. move them on.. make it slightly less attractive to be eating there.

another example of numbers ... back in the drought years of last decade (and previous) but i think this was about 1993 .. a lot of the city folks were 'terribly worried' that the poor ole kangas might go 'puff up in smoke' cos of the poor conditions ... so one of the 'larger' landholders near Dubbo invited a few newspaper people out for a " 'roo drive" ... no actual animal shooting to be done (so no one had to faint at the sight of blood)..

just a roundup to show numbers in one area ... the other farmers around the district were asked to lend a hand on the day/evening too .. they all spread out around the perimeter of the farmers total land holding (about 12-14 sq miles) and just started to drive/ride/walk through the various scrub areas ... several hours later and in the dark they had the as yet uncounted kangas more or less surrounded in a 300 acre paddock .. they patrolled the perimeter till dawn and didnt 'lose' too many through the patrol lines ...

some of the reporters were excitedly chatting about how cool it was to be able to photograph maybe 600 -700 kangas in one area .. when there was enough light to properly count them, the farmer asked several people who were experienced at 'rough counting' different types of stock animals to go up a nearby small hill for a better viewpoint .. as well as a few photographers who had the better cameras to take photos with identifiable background markers for a 'panorama shot' collage and count .. the general consensus later on was between 8000 and 11000 'roos of various sub types ..

now they may have missed some on the initial perimeter close .. but probably not too many ... and the owner of the land DID have a real good crop that year that was like a huge flashing buffet sign for herbivores ... so the concentration might have been slightly denser ..

One reporter was heard to say that "how good it was to see so many healthy kangaroos that didnt die" .. another one was doing some mental math according to the rules of the governments "kangaroos per area" official estimate of that year, he decided that there were too many 'roos and accused the farmers of "bringing in many truckloads of kangaroos the night before and 'I hope they all get taken back to their rightful territory after your big media stunt' " ... the farmers were slightly amused and asked him why he thought they would want to "bring more of these f@%$@ mongrels to eat our crops? .. we have more than enough to start with!" .. .... ...
so there isnt really much shortage of hopping critters around ..

its a bit of a human created problem though ... the 'roos always been there .. then the farmers bring the nice juicy green crops in ... so the roos are not stupid and will eat crops before they want to eat native grasses etc .. which tend to be a little dry ..

'roos are one of the most efficient converters of 'green to muscle' around ... and with all the extra food available their overall numbers in farming areas are usually much higher than the norm....

we need the farmers to grow the crops so we have bread, cereal, corn etc ... but the roos want to eat it.. and they have higher than normal numbers so they eat a lot ...  ... its one of those circular problems.

theoretically if we could farm kangaroos large scale instead of sheep and cattle then the muscle per kilo food ratio produced would be way higher .. but anyone who has seen a kangaroo stampede (and im not making this up!) knows that large scale farming and control of the stock would be like .. ok .. take the Nitro Circus boys ,give them all big powerful pogo sticks ,then give them all a big dose of LSD, wait till they fully paranoid and trippin' , then jump out of a big box with a monster or alien costume on... kinda like that!! 

plus the general public are still a little squeamish about eating the meat .. it is showing up in large supermarket meat sections now though... steaks, sausages (kanga banga's), diced meat for stirfries, strips for kebabs .. with various marinades and stuff on some of it too... the meat is incredibly lean and very high protein .. just not hugely popular....

thats my 'novella' for the day ... hope it interests rather than bores ... and no i'm no scientist! ... not a statistician either ... i just happened to be lucky enough to see some way weird things happen in the countryside! 

Very nicely done Janx
I read every fucken word too

Plus, female roos are ALWAYS preggers.

And then there is the drought sitch.... farm food sees roo numbers expand, drought hits, crops perish, roos either starve to death until sustainable numbers are achieved or are culled until sustainable numbers are achieved. Let them starve to death or end them quickly?

As far as 1911 format .22's...

There's one made by GSG that's awfully nice. We sell them at my place of employment for pretty cheap. I sold one the other day.

Oh, and yeah, it's the same thing as the Sig-Sauer 1911-22 but a bit cheaper.

I've heard really good things about them. Halfway considered one myself.

what about ruger's sr22? I've never shot one, is it any good?

-Ruger 22/45
-Glock 19
-Springfield XDM .40

I really need to get a few rifles and a shotgun but until my money tree gets planted I'll live with what I got.

Quote from: kyled25 on October 12, 2012, 10:08:27 AM
what about ruger's sr22? I've never shot one, is it any good?

-Ruger 22/45
-Glock 19
-Springfield XDM .40

I really need to get a few rifles and a shotgun but until my money tree gets planted I'll live with what I got.

I really like how the sr22 feels in my hand. It reminds me of a walther .22 They are a bit pricey in my area which is why i will probably never own one. I have heard from several owners that they are really nice range pistols. I really like the 1911/.22s and will end up getting one of those, right now my current toys include:
FN 5.7 pistol
PS90 rifle
S&W model 1006/10mm
S&W BG380
Poly LW-15 AR lower with PSA 5.56 upper
M1 carbine
some hunting rifles and some shotguns...the wife says i have enough!

Ok cool, my gf wants a .22 pistol for plinking, but the markIII pistols are somewhat of a PITA as far as takedown/reassembly for cleaning in comparison to pistols with normal slides.

OK, so I've been tossing this around in my head for bit. What is the best gun for $500 and why? This could be rifle, carbine, pistol, shotgun, cannon, RPG, etc. And not 1980 $500, "well  my FAL was only $400 in 198whatever" , but last 5-6 years $500.

dang man, that tosses out just about every "tacticool" weapon. My vote would be a hand picked wasr10 or saiga ak, meaning one that has fairly decent tolerances and straight sights confirmed before purchasing. We are stating for a brand new gun right? No "well you might be able to find a used blah blah blah at a gun show".

Well, after consulting the committee (me), I would say that guns more available as used than new, this would include any sks, ak-47, m9, ruger mk series,etc. are suitable for the list. I'm leaning towards a yugo sks. It's cheap at around $250-$450 so one can easily be had for the $400 cutoff, they are reliable as anything, easily deadly accurate at 300yd, parts are everywhere, ammo is more common than assholes. Not to mention they are quite a quality made firearm. I know many are gonna say AK-47 but these are hard to find anywhere near the $400, ARE reliable BUT nowhere near as accurate for the $$$.

you just lowered the cut off a hundred bucks from the original post, so yeah 400 bucks won't cut it for almost any ak anymore. Plenty of awesome pump shotguns can be had in the price range tho. Didn't even think about sks tho, good call.

Quote from: codajastal on October 11, 2012, 12:06:49 AM
Very nicely done Janx
I read every fucken word too

as did i 

My bad.... Call it $500.

Quote from: Huff1371 on October 16, 2012, 06:07:52 PM
Well, after consulting the committee (me), I would say that guns more available as used than new, this would include any sks, ak-47, m9, ruger mk series,etc. are suitable for the list. I'm leaning towards a yugo sks. It's cheap at around $250-$450 so one can easily be had for the $500cutoff, they are reliable as anything, easily deadly accurate at 300yd, parts are everywhere, ammo is more common than assholes. Not to mention they are quite a quality made firearm. I know many are gonna say AK-47 but these are hard to find anywhere near the $500, ARE reliable BUT nowhere near as accurate for the $$$.

facepalm

LoL, not really a fan of the m9 tho, ergos suck for my smaller hands and trigger pull too long in DA.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ABGIJwiGBc