Please Help - STAY OF DESTRUCTON OF RARE BREED POULTRY.

[chooks4life]

@delisha: I think you need to read the actual change.org petition; I didn't read the newspaper article, the news is full of tripe anyway....

I did not sign it.

I saw no copy of reports and have nothing to base my decision on. The report is one sided and an emotional plea from one person. Bringing birds into a different country could prove to be detrimental when they have tested positive for any type of disease. I would like to see documentation and testing results and hear the other side first.

From the change.org site:

This is the first importation of Rare Poultry in 60 years and is required to ensure the preservation of these types of birds for future generations. Whilst the last thing the Importation Syndicate wants is to bring in any form of disease. The decision to destroy all birds for one chick which died of salmonella in the first week (this is already in Australia), whilst subsequent testing of birds since has proven negative. We feel the Syndicate made up of Poultry Fanciers across Australia, deserve the opportunity to seek to save the birds they have waited so long for.

Stay of destruction of Rare Breed Poultry on 16th July 2013. Please give the Poultry Syndicate the opportunity to prove, that these birds, do not pose a disease risk.

This is an aggregation of people, not 'one emotional person' --- and it sounds justified and justifiable to me, especially considering the disease in question does NOT justify culling these birds.

 

[RussianChickens]

I signed! I hope they give them a chance to prove not all birds are infected!

 

[cluckcluckluke]

Hi, I want to sign the petition but has anybody gotten spam emails from these people? Thanks.

No, they send you an email thanking you. I have had no spam!

 

[cluckcluckluke]

THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR SIGNING!!

!!!

Delisha I am sorry you don't agree, they gave us no chance to respond to this as the news has only just gotten out so I couldn't get a mountain of information.

 

[realsis]

I don't understand why they would destroy these birds when the other samples taken have came up negative! Am I reading this correctly that the birds in question have came back negative for disease yet they still want to destroy them? This is very sad and a terrible waste of life. It makes no since at all! Am I missing something here? Because of one death with numerous negative tests on the birds they still want to destroy them! Why would they do this? What a terrible waste! How awful!

 

[chooks4life]

Your need to call me out on this is unnecessary. Not a topic for BYC. If you feel the need to challenge someones personal opinion and reason they make a decision, the PMs are a better place. Open forum is not. It is MY opinion and I stand by it.

That's a misunderstanding-fueled overreaction which again is fueled by a mistake on your part.

Yes, you are free to stand by your opinion, but the error you stated as a truth remains corrected. Your opinion was not the issue, it was your mistaken dismissal of the subject matter as "emotional" and "one person's plea" --- it is not either of those, and to make it simple to clear up, I even quoted the relevant bits from the petition, which site you must not have even visited.

I didn't "call you out" --- how you arrived at that, I don't know.

I corrected your simple mistake. Nothing wrong with that. I suggested you re-read it since you arrived at a false conclusion and shot the thread starter's topic down in unnecessary severity as a result of your confusion.

How is it "not a topic for BYC"? It is exactly the place for this topic.

I didn't "feel a need to challenge someone's personal decision and the reason they make a decision" (etc) --- I pointed out the facts to you since the facts you stated were erroneous.

I don't need to PM you to do that. You should have PM'd the threadstarter if your opinion on it was so secret, instead of using the open forums. Especially because of the way you responded to their thread, rejecting its validity. You should have used PM, not me.

 

[Tinybabes]

I signed hope the petitions do the job.

 

[cluckcluckluke]

I don't understand why they would destroy these birds when the other samples taken have came up negative! Am I reading this correctly that the birds in question have came back negative for disease yet they still want to destroy them? This is very sad and a terrible waste of life. It makes no since at all! Am I missing something here? Because of one death with numerous negative tests on the birds they still want to destroy them! Why would they do this? What a terrible waste! How awful!

yes, sadly you are reading it right.
At the quarantine island they have all these birds in 3 different sections, we are at least trying to save the 2 other sections where there is no salmonella. The third section that had the 1 infected chick will probably be destroyed even if the other 2 are saved.
Well, even if we can save 1 section of birds it's better than nothing but still just a ridiculous amount of wasted life.

 

[cluckcluckluke]

Well for those you who are interested in listening what happens ( because it can't even make news headlines

).
UPDATE: The Injunction has been grated till Friday now and if you don't know what that means ( like me

), it means a temporary stay of execution. So the chicks might have a chance of being saved...we hope

.

 

[SunnySkyFarm]

That's a misunderstanding-fueled overreaction which again is fueled by a mistake on your part.

Yes, you are free to stand by your opinion, but the error you stated as a truth remains corrected. Your opinion was not the issue, it was your mistaken dismissal of the subject matter as "emotional" and "one person's plea" --- it is not either of those, and to make it simple to clear up, I even quoted the relevant bits from the petition, which site you must not have even visited.

I didn't "call you out" --- how you arrived at that, I don't know.

I corrected your simple mistake. Nothing wrong with that. I suggested you re-read it since you arrived at a false conclusion and shot the thread starter's topic down in unnecessary severity as a result of your confusion.

How is it "not a topic for BYC"? It is exactly the place for this topic.

I didn't "feel a need to challenge someone's personal decision and the reason they make a decision" (etc) --- I pointed out the facts to you since the facts you stated were erroneous.

I don't need to PM you to do that. You should have PM'd the threadstarter if your opinion on it was so secret, instead of using the open forums. Especially because of the way you responded to their thread, rejecting its validity. You should have used PM, not me.