An American's Impressions

On 16 Nov 2007 14:31:29 GMT, Frank Slootweg
wrote in
:

kangaroo16 wrote:
On 15 Nov 2007 12:45:10 GMT, Frank Slootweg
wrote in
:

Alan S wrote:
[...]
You seem to like wandering the outback too much:-)

AFAIC, there's no such thing as "too much". Next year is already a
'compromise' because that time we will be driving a 2WD campervan, so no
unsealed roads. We will concentrate on the *towns* in outback QLD and
NSW which we 'had' to skip on this year's 12,000 km trip.

[...]
I wouldn't think that the "rule", if there is one, could be
absolute, as if crews are working on a stretch of highway and
have a detour set up, it will usually be unsealed.

Yes, we have experienced these situations quite a lot (like on the
Nullabor, where there is no other road anywhere (for a few thousand kms)
!:-)). The rental companies obviously mean a road which *normally* -
i.e. when it's not under repair - is sealed.

The rental companies' rules for not driving on unsealed roads are very
strict, IMO way *too* strict.

I would definitely agree with you. I didn't realise that they
were now that strict. They weren't when I rented a 4 tonne
truck a few decades ago. I would assume that they would be
much less strict on rental 4-WD vehicles.:-)

Most of them even have penalties when
there is *no* damage to the vehicle.

It would be interesting to know how they could
discern whether the mud on the chassis was due
to the driver taking a detour around a highway repair
site, or taking a gravel or dirt road by choice.

It could be done, of course, if the vehicle was fitted
with a camera and sealed VCR. Or a satellite tracking device.
Or even sending out a staff member to discreetly follow each
rented vehicle :-)

Still, I would assume that if you rent a vehicle you would be
required to take out insurance to cover damage for the rental
period, in which case they shouldn't worry about minor damage.
Perhaps they are trying for a " no claim bonus" from their
insurance company?

On a long enough trip it would probably be cheaper to buy
a second hand vehicle and sell it when you leave. Perhaps
travel agents should get together and set up a plan to buy
a vehicle here, and rent it out to a succession of their clients.

In recent years, I note that there is an increasing tendency
for tourists to arrange for use of each others homes. Say that
family "A" lives in inner Sydney and family "B" lives in Surfers
Paradise. If "A" wants to visit Surfers, it normally would cost
them a lot for, say, a 3 week holiday. Family "B" might want
to spend 3 weeks touring and shopping in Sydney, but
don't want to pay a lot for accommodation?

It makes much more sense to get in touch with the other
family and use each others homes for the period. I don't
know how they get in touch with each other, but it does seem
to work for a lot of people.

A few years ago I saw a news item where an Aussie wanted
to have a look at London. He got there, found out how
much it cost to rent a car for the period, and decided it would
be much cheaper to buy an old car. I don't remember the
exact figures, but say he paid 200 pounds for it. He drove it
around for a few weeks, tried to sell it when he was finished
with it, but didn't manage to do it before he had to depart.

So he simply abandoned it at the airport, and flew back to
Sydney. A couple of weeks later the U.K. police notified him,
warned that he was accumulating over parking penalties, and
warning that if they weren't paid within a month, the car would
be seized and sold at auction. This didn't worry him at all. A
few weeks later he got a registered air mail letter informing him
that his car had been sold at auction for 300 pounds, that his
accumulated fines had amounted to 80 pounds, and enclosed
a cheque for the balance of 20 pounds. :-) He then sold his
story to the news media for around $A 25, so he was quite
satisfied with how it had all worked out.

Cheers,
Kangaroo16





[(very) much deleted]

You probably know much of this, Frank, as you have been in
Australia before. Other readers might not know, though.

Yeah. We've done many of the remote 'tracks' like the Strzelecki,
Birdsville, Oodnadatta and Tanami tracks, Gibb River Road, Great Central
Road, Plenty 'Hwy', Darling River Run, etc., and several 'unnamed' ones
and lots of other outback areas.

When I mentioned this to the nice gentleman from Main Roads QLD (who
helped us with our enquiry about the road from Eromanga to Nockatunga/
Noccundra and) who warned us about outback travel, he replied "You have
seen more of outback Australia than I have....". We hear that a lot when
we talk to Australians on our trips! :-)

Frank "We *love* the open spaces!" Slootweg

Well, Frank, plenty of open space here. In 1990,
Alaska had a population of 1 person per square mile.
In the continental U.S. Wyoming in 1990 had 4.7
per square mile.

Australia has about 6 per square mile, but this is misleading
as around 85% of the population is in the major capital cities.
Get about 75 km from the coast, and inland areas might
have an average population of 1 to 1.5 people per square
mile. The large inland desert areas used to be marked on
maps as "uninhabited".

So for any traveler who likes to get away from it all, this is
the place! :-)

It sure is!

kangaroo16 wrote:
On 16 Nov 2007 14:31:29 GMT, Frank Slootweg
wrote in
:
[...]
The rental companies' rules for not driving on unsealed roads are very
strict, IMO way *too* strict.

I would definitely agree with you. I didn't realise that they
were now that strict. They weren't when I rented a 4 tonne
truck a few decades ago. I would assume that they would be
much less strict on rental 4-WD vehicles.:-)

Well, even for 4WD the rules are relatively strict. Tyres, your
expense. Windscreens, your expense. Water damage, your expense. Top
(anything above the top of the driver cabin) damage, your expense.
'Towing' from 'remote' areas, your expense. Etc., etc..

Most of them even have penalties when
there is *no* damage to the vehicle.

It would be interesting to know how they could
discern whether the mud on the chassis was due
to the driver taking a detour around a highway repair
site, or taking a gravel or dirt road by choice.

Not so much "mud", but the fine - mostly red - sand that gets
everywhere. Way too much effort to remove and the amount is a sign
whether the vehicle has been 'misused'.

It could be done, of course, if the vehicle was fitted
with a camera and sealed VCR. Or a satellite tracking device.
Or even sending out a staff member to discreetly follow each
rented vehicle :-)

No need for that. Nearly all of them have a - often free - phone
number on them! So *other* people can call in with rego and location. To
be [f|F]rank, I've been tempted to do that when I saw that 2WD vehicles
were *really* abused, i.e. for example when 'our' 4WD Toyota 'Troopie'
Landcruiser was already having a hard time.

Still, I would assume that if you rent a vehicle you would be
required to take out insurance to cover damage for the rental
period, in which case they shouldn't worry about minor damage.
Perhaps they are trying for a " no claim bonus" from their
insurance company?

That's both unknown and irrelevant territory. The renter is bound by
hir rental agreement with the rental company. What's in or not in the
contract between the rental company and its insurance company is
irrelevant. For example when the hirer takes out "Full Cover" (which
does *not* mean what it says) insurance, the rental company may
sub-contract the "Full" part to an insurance company or take the
risk/profit themselves.

[...]

On 16 Nov 2007 21:40:21 GMT, Frank Slootweg
wrote in
:

kangaroo16 wrote:
On 16 Nov 2007 14:31:29 GMT, Frank Slootweg
wrote in
:
[...]
The rental companies' rules for not driving on unsealed roads are very
strict, IMO way *too* strict.

I would definitely agree with you. I didn't realise that they
were now that strict. They weren't when I rented a 4 tonne
truck a few decades ago. I would assume that they would be
much less strict on rental 4-WD vehicles.:-)

Well, even for 4WD the rules are relatively strict. Tyres, your
expense. Windscreens, your expense. Water damage, your expense. Top
(anything above the top of the driver cabin) damage, your expense.
'Towing' from 'remote' areas, your expense. Etc., etc..

Thanks for the info, Frank! One wonders why they bother with
offering insurance if it doesn't cover such things? Would be
afraid to rent such a unit, as would take most of the fun
out of 4-WD driving, and the worry wouldn't make it worthwhile.
I would be afraid to take a rental 4WD off the pavement, which
rather defeats the purpose of the vehicle.

I've never checked, but I would imagine that the daily or weekly
rental isn't that cheap either.

Were I a tourist visiting Oz and wanted to experience a bit
of bush bashing, I would probably choose to approach a local
4 WD club and ask to attend one of their meetings, on the chance
that might be offered a trip. Or even better, tell them that
I wanted to experience it and would cover the cost of fuel and
food for a chance at a trip. One of the Sydney clubs used
to make an annual expedition across the Gibson desert or
Great Sandy Desert, both in W.A. If could arrange to
go along on that as a passenger, would see a lot that the
average tourist will never see, as well as learning a lot
about 4WD driving and vehicle recovery skills.


Most of them even have penalties when
there is *no* damage to the vehicle.

It would be interesting to know how they could
discern whether the mud on the chassis was due
to the driver taking a detour around a highway repair
site, or taking a gravel or dirt road by choice.

Not so much "mud", but the fine - mostly red - sand that gets
everywhere. Way too much effort to remove and the amount is a sign
whether the vehicle has been 'misused'.

Yes, that would be true. It must take the rental company a fair
bit of effort or expense to give it a clean between users.



It could be done, of course, if the vehicle was fitted
with a camera and sealed VCR. Or a satellite tracking device.
Or even sending out a staff member to discreetly follow each
rented vehicle :-)

No need for that. Nearly all of them have a - often free - phone
number on them! So *other* people can call in with rego and location. To
be [f|F]rank, I've been tempted to do that when I saw that 2WD vehicles
were *really* abused, i.e. for example when 'our' 4WD Toyota 'Troopie'
Landcruiser was already having a hard time.

You and other readers interested in the subject of "dobbing"
people in might be interested in the following column.


Ruth Ostrow: Dark tell-tale signs
October 27, 2007
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...012694,00.html

or, more simply,
http://tinyurl.com/2ayd7o

Cheers,
Kangaroo16


Still, I would assume that if you rent a vehicle you would be
required to take out insurance to cover damage for the rental
period, in which case they shouldn't worry about minor damage.
Perhaps they are trying for a " no claim bonus" from their
insurance company?

That's both unknown and irrelevant territory. The renter is bound by
hir rental agreement with the rental company. What's in or not in the
contract between the rental company and its insurance company is
irrelevant. For example when the hirer takes out "Full Cover" (which
does *not* mean what it says) insurance, the rental company may
sub-contract the "Full" part to an insurance company or take the
risk/profit themselves.



[...]

kangaroo16 wrote:
[...]

Thanks for the info, Frank! One wonders why they bother with
offering insurance if it doesn't cover such things? Would be
afraid to rent such a unit, as would take most of the fun
out of 4-WD driving, and the worry wouldn't make it worthwhile.
I would be afraid to take a rental 4WD off the pavement, which
rather defeats the purpose of the vehicle.

Very true. That's why all but one time we rented from a small company
where we know the owner and most of the employees. While they also have
a lot of small print, it's mainly to cover their posteriors in case a
customer acts likes a jerk. I.e. it's basically: If you treat us and the
vehicle well, we treat you well. Very fair IMO and the real Aussie
spirit.

I treat the vehicles like they are my own and have driven about one
and a half times 'around the world' in Australia without any damage
worth mentioning. But not every renter is like that.

I've never checked, but I would imagine that the daily or weekly
rental isn't that cheap either.

Were I a tourist visiting Oz and wanted to experience a bit
of bush bashing, I would probably choose to approach a local
4 WD club and ask to attend one of their meetings, on the chance
that might be offered a trip. Or even better, tell them that
I wanted to experience it and would cover the cost of fuel and
food for a chance at a trip. One of the Sydney clubs used
to make an annual expedition across the Gibson desert or
Great Sandy Desert, both in W.A. If could arrange to
go along on that as a passenger, would see a lot that the
average tourist will never see, as well as learning a lot
about 4WD driving and vehicle recovery skills.

We actaully do (more or less) *both*, i.e. rentals for several (mostly
six) weeks and guided tours of a day each. Both are lots of fun, but, at
least IMO, totally uncomparable. The tours are mostly small groups (like
four, *including* the two of us :-)) and one time with the OKA, which is
an *incredible* machine. Worth every dollar.

[...]

You and other readers interested in the subject of "dobbing"
people in might be interested in the following column.

As I said, I never dobbed anybody in, but I dislike total jerks and
there *may* come a time when I dislike a particular jerk more than I
dislike dobbing someone in. So total jerks of the world, be warned! :-)

On 17 Nov 2007 13:52:28 GMT, Frank Slootweg
wrote in
:

kangaroo16 wrote:
[...]

Thanks for the info, Frank! One wonders why they bother with
offering insurance if it doesn't cover such things? Would be
afraid to rent such a unit, as would take most of the fun
out of 4-WD driving, and the worry wouldn't make it worthwhile.
I would be afraid to take a rental 4WD off the pavement, which
rather defeats the purpose of the vehicle.

Very true. That's why all but one time we rented from a small company
where we know the owner and most of the employees. While they also have
a lot of small print, it's mainly to cover their posteriors in case a
customer acts likes a jerk. I.e. it's basically: If you treat us and the
vehicle well, we treat you well. Very fair IMO and the real Aussie
spirit.

Very true, although when I was growing up, business deals of far
higher value were often settled with a handshake without the need
of much, or any, small print. I suppose it is necessary these
days, given the increased prevalence of "jerks" and other
dishonest individuals. :-(

Simple example: When I was attending University in the U.S., the
Uni. library only required the production of a simple student
I.D. card, or at most, a library card. Only had a name and
signature on it. Students sometimes lost a library book, and
were asked to pay for its replacement, which they did. Very few
if any, students actually tried to steal books by smuggling them
out.

In the past few decades, though, a lot of university [and public]
libraries have had to use security procedures involving
electronic detectors at the doors which will sound an alarm if
someone tries to carry a book through that hasn't been passed
through the checkout procedure.

IMHO, this doesn't say much for the honesty of the general
public. One would hope that Uni students might be more honest,
but apparently not.

Alternatively, as another example, consider the precautions that
schools and universities must now take to discourage cheating on
exams, term papers, _et. al._ As to exams, lots of
conventional and electronic means that cheaters can use.

One solution that would provide some counter to this is to
enclose all exam rooms inside a big Faraday cage, and require
students to strip completely before taking the exam.

In a class involving both sexes, this might distract some
students, but this would encouraging them to learn to concentrate
their attention to the task at hand. :-)

I treat the vehicles like they are my own and have driven about one
and a half times 'around the world' in Australia without any damage
worth mentioning. But not every renter is like that.

Unfortunately!

I've never checked, but I would imagine that the daily or weekly
rental isn't that cheap either.

Were I a tourist visiting Oz and wanted to experience a bit
of bush bashing, I would probably choose to approach a local
4 WD club and ask to attend one of their meetings, on the chance
that might be offered a trip. Or even better, tell them that
I wanted to experience it and would cover the cost of fuel and
food for a chance at a trip. One of the Sydney clubs used
to make an annual expedition across the Gibson desert or
Great Sandy Desert, both in W.A. If could arrange to
go along on that as a passenger, would see a lot that the
average tourist will never see, as well as learning a lot
about 4WD driving and vehicle recovery skills.

We actaully do (more or less) *both*, i.e. rentals for several (mostly
six) weeks and guided tours of a day each. Both are lots of fun, but, at
least IMO, totally uncomparable. The tours are mostly small groups (like
four, *including* the two of us :-)) and one time with the OKA, which is
an *incredible* machine. Worth every dollar.

To use an old saying derived from a popular cartoon character,
you seem to be "Smarter than the average bear." :-)

[...]

You and other readers interested in the subject of "dobbing"
people in might be interested in the following column.

As I said, I never dobbed anybody in, but I dislike total jerks and
there *may* come a time when I dislike a particular jerk more than I
dislike dobbing someone in. So total jerks of the world, be warned! :-)

Obviously there are no hard and fast lines. Ever hear of the
Kitty Genovese case?

The Killing of Kitty Genovese

Her public slaying in Queens becomes a symbol of Americans'
failure to get involved

By Michael Dorman

Extract:

"Kitty Genovese: It was a name that would become symbolic
in the public mind for a dark side of the national character. It
would stand for Americans who were too indifferent or too
frightened or too alienated or too self-absorbed to ``get
involved'' in helping a fellow human being in dire trouble. A
term ``the Genovese syndrome'' would be coined to describe the
attitude.

Detectives investigating Genovese's murder discovered that no
fewer than 38 of her neighbors had witnessed at least one of her
killer's three attacks but had neither come to her aid nor called
the police. The one call made to the police came after Genovese
was already dead." [more at]

http://www.newsday.com/community/gui...,7944135.story

Her murder was in 1964. One of the factors that I took into
considering when deciding to migrate to Australia, actually.

Australia has changed a lot since then, but even today it hasn't
deteriorated to that extent.

On morning news:

Couple charged with murder
Article from: AAP
November 17, 2007 06:57pm

"The parents of a little girl who allegedly starved to death have
been charged with her murder.

Seven-year-old Shellay Ward weighed nine kilograms when her body
was found at her home in Hawks Nest, north of Newcastle, on
November 3. . .

.. . .Police made a public appeal for the couple's whereabouts
after warrants were yesterday issued for their arrest.

They were spotted just before 11am (AEDT) today on the platform
at Albion Park railway station by a member of the public, who
called triple-0. . . [more at]

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sto...005961,00.html

or
http://tinyurl.com/2srbrq

Regards,
Kangaroo16

On Nov 16, 5:39 am, wrote:

AFAIK Marmite is a "Beef" product, not from yeast like Vegemite


Nope. Yeast, same as Vegemite.

Cheers,
George W Russell
Bangalore

gday 'roo16
local supermarket chain has ceased carrying vegemite in the foreign foods
section, the withdrawl is killing.
vegemite and Kraft cheese spread in a drinking glass container, cheeze whiz
doesnt cut it

would like to find someone to mail it, rellies just laugh
--
If at first you dont succeed
try try try again
If at first you do succeed
try not to look surprised

_
"kangaroo16" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 19:44:47 +1100, Alan S
wrote in :

On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 05:14:33 GMT, kangaroo16
wrote:


Clipped

I don't remember meeting any visitor that found it
particularly attractive, which is probably why most supermarkets
in the U.S. don't stock it.

Have heard that some Australians in the U.S. miss it so much
that they have family or friends here mail it to them. Or they
did in the past, anyway. With current high security on posts
and allowable imports, it is quite possible that a passenger
trying to bring his own supply into the U.S. would attract
the attention of customs officers. After all, a lot of things
could be hidden in a jar of opaque black Vegemite. :-)

Snipped


Cheers, Alan, Australia

Regards,
Kangaroo16

Point to K16
Bovril is the pommie beef extract, dont let anyone tell you
vegemite/marmite/promite is bad, wwwwhhhhhhooooo

--
If at first you dont succeed
try try try again
If at first you do succeed
try not to look surprised

_
"kangaroo16" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 09:39:08 +0900, wrote in
:

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 00:00:21 GMT, kangaroo16
wrote:
sNIP sNIP Snip.....
the attention of customs officers. After all, a lot of things
could be hidden in a jar of opaque black Vegemite. :-)

Not sure that it is that much of a "secret" either. From memory,
British "Marmite" is very similar, and think it was invented
first. However, easily checked.

AFAIK Marmite is a "Beef" product, not from yeast like Vegemite

Well, you know me, Alan, I like to be accurate, so am pleased to
actually check ingredients as well as when introduced.

Just did so. Score one point for me, unless you can find
conflicting info :-). See:

http://www.marmite.co.uk/love/nutrit...gredients.html

You are still ahead on points, so I welcome your challenges, or
any constructive criticism for that matter.

I do sometimes receive other criticism, but I don't define some
of it as "constructive".:-)

In passing, any particular local time of day that you check
posts & reply to same?


Yep, Marmite invented in 1902, Vegemite invented 1926. No
longer an Aussie company, as Kraft Foods bought the
company several years ago.


Cheers, Alan, Australia

Regards,
Kangaroo16

Kind regards,
Kangaroo16
1539 hours [3:59 PM] AEDT
Current time zone offset: UTC/GMT +11 hours
Time zone abbreviation: EST - Eastern Summer(Daylight) Time

"texas is quite large", the second largest US state,, but,,
sq km
Au00 Aust. Antartic Terr. 6,119,818
Au01 Western Australia 2,645,615
Au02 Queensland 1,852,642
Us01 Alaska 1,481,347
Au04 Northern Territory 1,420,968
Au05 South Australia 1,043,514
Au06 New South Wales 809,444
Us02 Texas 678,051
....
not so big ,, but,,
way bigger than
.....
Au08 ACT 2,358
FR France 547,026

--
If at first you dont succeed
try try try again
If at first you do succeed
try not to look surprised

_
"Janet Wilder" wrote in message
...
kangaroo16 wrote:
On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 17:37:29 -0600, Janet Wilder
wrote in
:


In Australia we visited Ularu and did the Sounds of Silence dinner
which
was a wonderful experience. I snorkeled on the Great Barrier Reef, too.

Assume that you found it interesting.:-) One of our greatest
tourist attractions.

We saw it at sunset and at sunrise. Watched it changing color with the
angle of the sun. More than just interesting.

I did taste some of the local brews and found them to be
very nice. The wines of both countries were fabulous, but that goes
without saying.

Yep, we export a lot of it. Probably a lot more expensive there
than here.

We get a lot of it here and it's very reasonably priced.

For the ultimate tourist food, were you offered, and did you
try a "wichetty grub". Bores into trees, can be fished out with
a twig or a bit of wire. Sort of like a large hairless
caterpillar.

We were told about them, but not offered any. I would have most
definitely declined to taste them. I draw the line at bugs. Ugh!

The library is very pretty. The
"Beehive" in my opinion, was quite ugly.

I like your honesty! You don't worry about possibly offending
readers!

Not too many Kiwis are enamored of it either. From what we learned, it
was conceived by a bunch of politicos having drinks over a matchbook
cover.

We looked at all the stuff that tourists are supposed to purchase but
I'm not fond of opals so there wasn't much in Oz to tempt me.

Not even the black opals? AFIK, only found in Australia. Solid
ones can be more valuable, weight by weight, than diamonds.

Most of what I saw did not appeal to me. What did appeal to me was too
expensive.

The possums in N.Z. aren't really native, AFIK, probably came
from Australia.

They did. It seems that all of the "pests" in NZ were introduced by
settlers.

Far south Texas on the Rio Grande, perhaps? Ever met "Cath" who

Met her via this board. I don't think she lives near us. Texas is quite
large. I live 4 miles from the Rio Grande. We are about 20 miles
up-river from the Gulf of Mexico.


--
Janet Wilder
Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
Good Friends. Good Life

On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 17:45:05 GMT, "AlmostBob"
wrote in
BS_%i.7389$Ji6.182@edtnps89 :

Point to K16
Bovril is the pommie beef extract, dont let anyone tell you
vegemite/marmite/promite is bad, wwwwhhhhhhooooo

Actually didn't even think of Bovril, although have probably
tried it at one time or another. I don't claim that any of the
products are "bad" as they are loaded with valuable nutrients and
vitamins.

All I have said is that many people, including me, simply don't
like the taste of Vegemite/marmite/promite. Perhaps I
should try Bovril just in case haven't tried it?

I generally don't mind trying new foods, although have yet to eat
a witchetty grub, raw or cooked. Kangaroo is excellent, though.
Far more healthy than beef due to far less fat content. Contrary
to common belief, lots of Kangaroos in Australia. It is
estimated that about 10x as many than at settlement.

http://www.dfat.gov.au/facts/kangaroos.html

Impossible to get an actual count of Kangaroos, though.
20 million to 40 million? Not feasible to even try to count
them. Would be like trying to get an accurate population
count of wild jackrabbits in the USA.

Probably would be harder, actually, as:

"Kangaroos have adapted to the varied conditions across
Australia in many ways. One of the most unusual, is the way
females of some species can delay the progress of pregnancy. In
this way the female is ready to give birth to a replacement for
the young in her pouch if it dies early, or within a week of when
it permanently leaves the pouch. This ability to delay births
means that there can be up to 12 months between a mating and the
birth of the young one resulting from that mating (when the
normal gestation period is less than 35 days). It also means that
the species can best respond to periods of drought and plenty.

Species which have this unusual ability normally mate again soon
after the female gives birth. The tiny newly born kangaroo (less
than 25 mm long) moves unaided into its mother's pouch and
attaches itself to one of four teats. During the early stages of
pouch life the young is permanently attached to the teat, but as
it matures and begins to grow hair it also develops the ability
to release and reattach itself to the teat. In the late stages
of pouch life, once it has a thin covering of fur, the young one
begins to explore the outside world for increasing lengths of
time until eventually it is old enough to be excluded permanently
from the pouch. Complete weaning may take a number of months more
after the young has permanently left the pouch. If the mother
gives birth during this time, the newborn young will attach
itself to a different teat to that being used by the older young.
It is remarkable that when this happens the mother produces two
different kinds of milk for the two different-aged young."
[More at]

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiv...o/biology.html

Readers who like to play with numbers might like to estimate how
fast kangaroo populations can multiply under ideal conditions.
Say we have 40 million kangaroos, or roughly 20 million female
kangaroos. They normally breed year around. The joey in the
pouch becomes independent after several months, a year at most.

With a gestation period of 35 days, she can soon have another
Joey in the pouch.

Readers concerned with overpopulation of the earth should be
glad that humans are placental mammals and not marsupials. If
a human mother could give birth in 35 days and the child became
independent at a year, the human race probably would have
suffered a massive population crash long before now.

As it is, though, the closest we have come to a population
crash was the Bubonic Plague centuries ago. Many of us
think that if the world doesn't stablise population growth
a much larger one is coming eventually, perhaps not that
many generations ahead given global warming and climatic
changes.

Cheers,
Kangaroo16