It is hard to imagine what the world would be like without
The Bucket doing it’s job as a tenacious watchdog and counterbalance for biased and questionable scientific research.
A study commissioned by the Nature Conservancy and Pew Environmental group found that if all feral animals, including camels, were culled from Australia’s sparsely populated interior, an additional 1.3 billion tonnes of carbon could be stored in the natural revegetation by the year 2050.
“When feral animals belch, they release methane, a particularly noxious greenhouse gas, and every single camel releases the equivalent of around one tonne of CO2 each year.”
The Bucket recently received the following correspondence from a Mr. Habib Afghan-Camel, from Alice Springs.
“Dear Mr Bucket,
I have been humouring humans for nigh on ten years now, humping rich tourists along the dry and sandy Todd River bed in exchange for food and shelter from my
As spokescamel for the Dromedary Action Group (DAG) I wish to challenge the Nature Conservancy report which is highly discriminatory against my species on the following two grounds.
1. The fecundity and population density of camels is regulated by the environmental provisions of Mother Nature.
This inviolable rule of natural balance has, to date, not been accepted by you humans who consider yourselves to have immunity, despite all the warning signs that ignoring it will ultimately have catastrophic consequences.
You continue to procreate like rabbits after a rutting competition.
Of greatest concern to the DAG is Australia’s persistence in paying out a $5185 Bonking Encouragement Allowance, payable by the Government nine months after the event, upon presentation of suitable evidence that the bonk did actually take place.
We view the camel eradication program as being nothing more than “species cleansing”, to create extra space for the additional 20 million humans (and their automobiles) to occupy by the year 2050.
2. The quoted figures of camel-gas emissions are both erroneous and fanciful. The Report refers to emissions from “every single camel”.
Did they measure output from ALL members of the DAG?
No, of course they didn’t.
It is poor science and statistical ineptitude to make general conclusions after studying only small samples of individuals.
Please let me provide an example of wide natural variations within your own human population.
Last Monday, regular tourist Mr Dilbert Gross-Beergut, a businessman from Sydney spent half an hour perched on my back after consuming a breakfast of baked beans washed down with a litre of coca-cola.
I estimate that during that time he belched two cubic metres of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and twice that amount of pungent and probably highly flammable gas from a lower orifice which caused my skin to blister and scald quite badly.
A square foot of hairs on my hump subsequently fell out of their follicles on Tuesday, and my wife, Harbette, who was following closely behind now has acute ventricular flatulitis.
Why not cull Mr. Gross-Beergut also, on the evidence of HIS excessive emissions, if you are so concerned with the welfare of the planet?
In contrast, my passenger on Wednesday, a total stanger by the name of Mr GOF, was a genteel man of distinguished good grace, who has never been known to habitually pollute the environment in either of these unsavoury or unsustainable ways.
I herewith rest my case.
In the vast black universe of increasingly myopic human research, the Dromedary Action Group continues to rely upon The Bucket to provide a single twinkle of realistic sanity.
Mr. Habib Afghan-Camel