slim6y
Almost Legendary
I have a real problem with the fact that this view is so widely held. An eastern grey kangaroo found 200km from where eatern greys lived prior to european settlement is just as feral as a cat, goat or dog.
Just because something is native to Australia does not mean it is native to the area.
Interesting point... hehe...
Feral \Fe"ral\, a. [L. ferus. See Fierce.] (Bot. & Zo["o]l.)
Wild; untamed; ferine; not domesticated; -- said of beasts,
birds, and plants.
Hmmmm... Well does that mean sugar gliders are feral too??? They're not domesticated...
Nor are they beasts however... similar to be said of roos...
However...
feral
adj : wild and menacing; "a ferocious dog" [syn: savage]
The adjective would be close to stating a wandering roo was a 'menace'.
How ever native to a country normally isolates pockets of the said species.. Therefore on that suggestion any new pockets that may occur will be ordered by natural selection.
In the case of cane toads... not native to this country nor area, but natural selection is forcing other animals (natives) out...
Now a native forcing a further native out does sound closer to natural selection, therefore the word feral in my opinion is not the word to use...
This easter grey found its way, 200km from its own family... Natural selection will therefore determine the order of species in that pocket...
Sorry magpie, all respect to you and the idea. But I just don't buy it
Keep it rolling!
(incidentally, for your info, I'm not anti culling, im anti murdering for our mistakes)