travolta
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,459
Likes: 1,170
|
Post by travolta on Aug 13, 2019 14:46:16 GMT
My Mum had a Harris Tweed suit ,it was unbearably itchy. I have banned all beating/ hunting and dogs on my land , which pisses off the locals no little. I have lived longer on my land than most of them anyway. Breeding chickens and shooting them is not sport ...its easier to stalk them and hit them with a catapault . Pity the barbour brigade dont do squirrels instead. I'm my opinion all landowners know where the foxes are and can shoot them whenever required (as I do).
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,012
Likes: 4,824
|
Post by adrianc on Aug 13, 2019 15:16:22 GMT
travolta - don't even start me on the bushy-tailed-tree-rat-b'stds... They're waiting with their sodding wheelbarrows for our walnut tree to get close to ripe. AGAIN.
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,156
Likes: 4,830
|
Post by ozboy on Aug 13, 2019 15:23:29 GMT
The debate is if the outcome was to ban grouse shooting. We have some nice beavers up here We don’t shoot them. (Often) I'm quite partial to a nice beaver.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,012
Likes: 4,824
|
Post by adrianc on Aug 13, 2019 15:26:42 GMT
The debate is if the outcome was to ban grouse shooting. We have some nice beavers up here We don’t shoot them. (Often) I'm quite partial to a nice beaver.
|
|
daveb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 236
Likes: 194
|
Post by daveb on Aug 13, 2019 20:21:51 GMT
Someone told me that drainage on the moors is often "improved" to make it better for rearing game birds and shooting them. Which is fine except the moors are supposed to store heavy rain and gradually release it, but after draining them the water rushes through and causes flooding downstream. I have no idea if it is true, but if so that seems to me a better reason to discourage grouse shooting than "sticking it to the rich."
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Aug 13, 2019 21:19:34 GMT
Anyone that thinks its fun to shoot a bird for nowt is a fool... and im a climate change denier... of sorts. edited grammar, " src="//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/angry.png"> That's your opinion and worthless to boot. If you don't like it don't do it. I bring back 12 pheasants to give e to people who are skint, they appreciate it. Who cares what you think....other than you. Hopefully.. one day in the future.. your dead pheasants ancestors will learn how to use your gun... and then you will get yours.. and i do not give a hoot what you think either.. have a nice day at the shoot.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,012
Likes: 4,824
|
Post by adrianc on Aug 14, 2019 8:41:44 GMT
As far as the rights and wrongs of hunting (of any flavour) are concerned, I can't get too excited. Mankind is omniverous, and hunted to survive for the vast majority of our history. Not only for nutrition, but social interaction and co-operative working developed around the hunt.
If we look at the modern diet, then is hunted meat really any worse than farmed? Is the environmental impact of changing terrain for hunting any worse than changing it for farming? There is simply no such thing as a natural landscape in these islands, with a handful of tiny exceptions - mankind has changed EVERYWHERE, mostly to benefit farming practices. And vegetarians and vegans needn't get too smug, because I'm not just talking about farming for meat.
Is the use of vast swathes of land for the sport of a few something which should be dissuaded? Could those moors be more effectively farmed for other, more egalitarian, crops? Perhaps. But if we're considering the social equality of sports, I'm not sure hunting is the only one that needs consideration...
For me, it's a simple one. If you partake in these sports, look at yourself in the mirror, and tell me that you're happy with being the kind of person who enjoys nothing more than spending a day in a cross between an exclusive gentleman's club... and an abattoir. Because that's pretty much what a grouse shoot is. There certainly isn't any kind of challenge about it. Fisherman say it's a "battle of wits", man against fish. I'm not sure how well that reflects on them when they come back empty-handed, having roundly lost that battle of wits against a trout... At least fishermen can put back anything they caught but don't want to eat. It's hard to put a bird back after it's been shot - so the excess food gets distributed in a patronising gesture.
(Did you know that the record "bag" is held by the 6th Baron Walsingham, who shot 1,070 grouse in one day, on Yorkshire's Blubberhouses Moor in 1888? He wasn't alone, of course - there were forty beaters, and he had two people reloading his four guns. Just think about the rate of fire to make that possible... On one of the day's drives, he shot one bird every 13 seconds for over 20 minutes... Is that really "sport"? Oh, and without even the faintest hint of hypocrisy, he was also a keen amateur naturalist, president of the Entomological Society, and donated his collection of over 260,000 butterflies and moths to the Natural History Museum...)
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Aug 14, 2019 9:33:02 GMT
As an omnivore, I can't and wouldn't get on a high horse about the shooting and hunting community per se. I wouldn't however do a mass shoot myself, even if I am happy to shoot squirrels (leave that bird feeder alone) and would be happy to shoot foxes were I to be in a location where it made sense.
I do however believe in humane treatment of animals as much as possible. If we are going to kill animals for food, we should endeavour to raise them humanely and kill them humanely, and we should ensure that what we kill gets properly and fully utilised.
Hence I used to be quite happy eating shot pheasant. After all, it had a wild life before it met its demise. Except you then discover that pheasant chicks are raised in conditions as bad as battery hen farming, and shipped in from the continent, in no doubt less then luxurious conditions, to feed the thirst for mass pheasant shoots. Shoots are now so popular, that the quantity of birds killed outstrips the market for them, and so are often simply stuffed into pits. Where does that fit in with the country idyll ?
Its absolutely right that the environmental impact of these activities should be taken into account, including impact of land management practices on other animal species and diversity. The extremes of grouse moor management has been a target (pun intended) or concern for some time on several grounds. The RSPB I believe produced a report, which may or may not be largely unbiased. I don't particularly have a view as I've not researched, but it would hardly be a surprise if there were illegal acts (killing protected grouse predators ?) in support of increasing the available cannon fodder. Edit: but that of course doesn't mean there isn't a perfectly good balance to be had. And at least with Grouse shooting you can be pretty confident that the crop will find its way onto the dinner table somewhere.
Despite having been brought up in the countryside, I was never happy with hunting foxes with hounds: having an exhausted fox ripped to bits by a pack of hounds never felt like a particularly efficient way of tackling a problem of fox over-population, nor a particularly nice thing to do. There are many ways to get pleasure from riding a horse at speed I'm sure: but getting pleasure from the killing of an animal for its own sake is not something I can really understand.
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Aug 14, 2019 21:48:22 GMT
Being brought up in the sticks and having always lived in the sticks to this day, there is without doubt an alarming decrease of what i seem to remember as being the norm... lapwings, curlew, skylark, yellowhammer, greenfinch etc etc, i saw a recent interview with harry rednap, he said he spent £40 a week on birdfood , im not that keen, but i do spend around a tenner a week, and it all seems to go on sparrows, squirrels and bluetits... very rarely do i see the likes of "any" finches, linnets or buntings.
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Aug 15, 2019 6:07:24 GMT
I'm no longer in the sticks, but current location has a good deal of green bordering which helps towards us having a good number of visitors.
Greenfinches, somtimes up to 4 at a time, used to be regulars a few years ago. Not seen one now for 4 years or so I would think. One garden doesn't make a census, but I recall that greenfinches have suffered a dramatic drop generally. Still fortunate enough to get occasional goldfinches and bullfinches. Plus bloody parakeets. Even the nuthatches take note and bugger off when they turn up. As they also do when the woodpecker turns up.
I have a noticed a larger population of blue tits this year. Not sure why that is, whether we just happen to have more families in the vicinty, but having up to about 8 a time. Weekly food bill has increased.
|
|
sd2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 621
Likes: 224
|
Post by sd2 on Aug 29, 2019 14:52:44 GMT
As an omnivore, I can't and wouldn't get on a high horse about the shooting and hunting community per se. I wouldn't however do a mass shoot myself, even if I am happy to shoot squirrels (leave that bird feeder alone) and would be happy to shoot foxes were I to be in a location where it made sense.
I do however believe in humane treatment of animals as much as possible. If we are going to kill animals for food, we should endeavour to raise them humanely and kill them humanely, and we should ensure that what we kill gets properly and fully utilised.
Hence I used to be quite happy eating shot pheasant. After all, it had a wild life before it met its demise. Except you then discover that pheasant chicks are raised in conditions as bad as battery hen farming, and shipped in from the continent, in no doubt less then luxurious conditions, to feed the thirst for mass pheasant shoots. Shoots are now so popular, that the quantity of birds killed outstrips the market for them, and so are often simply stuffed into pits. Where does that fit in with the country idyll ?
Its absolutely right that the environmental impact of these activities should be taken into account, including impact of land management practices on other animal species and diversity. The extremes of grouse moor management has been a target (pun intended) or concern for some time on several grounds. The RSPB I believe produced a report, which may or may not be largely unbiased. I don't particularly have a view as I've not researched, but it would hardly be a surprise if there were illegal acts (killing protected grouse predators ?) in support of increasing the available cannon fodder. Edit: but that of course doesn't mean there isn't a perfectly good balance to be had. And at least with Grouse shooting you can be pretty confident that the crop will find its way onto the dinner table somewhere.
Despite having been brought up in the countryside, I was never happy with hunting foxes with hounds: having an exhausted fox ripped to bits by a pack of hounds never felt like a particularly efficient way of tackling a problem of fox over-population, nor a particularly nice thing to do. There are many ways to get pleasure from riding a horse at speed I'm sure: but getting pleasure from the killing of an animal for its own sake is not something I can really understand.
RSPB are in favour of pheasant and partridge shoots. First they have no remit to protect foreign species. Pheasant shoots create woodland that supports a vast increase in in wildlife particularly birds. Nest sites and increased food. The same is true of the cover crops.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2019 15:24:52 GMT
I think we have to be clear. The RSPB is neutral on shoots. Their argument is more complex and worth understanding. But neutral is the point.
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Aug 29, 2019 15:49:04 GMT
.... The extremes of grouse moor management has been a target (pun intended) or concern for some time on several grounds. The RSPB I believe produced a report, which may or may not be largely unbiased. I don't particularly have a view as I've not researched, but it would hardly be a surprise if there were illegal acts (killing protected grouse predators ?) in support of increasing the available cannon fodder. Edit: but that of course doesn't mean there isn't a perfectly good balance to be had. And at least with Grouse shooting you can be pretty confident that the crop will find its way onto the dinner table somewhere. .....
RSPB are in favour of pheasant and partridge shoots. First they have no remit to protect foreign species. Pheasant shoots create woodland that supports a vast increase in in wildlife particularly birds. Nest sites and increased food. The same is true of the cover crops. Yes, my mention of RSPB was specifically with regard to a report I believe they did, and criticisms they made, of some of the practices associated with Grouse shoot management. My mention of Pheasants was more my personal distaste regarding rearing, shipping and releasing chicks in industrial quantities and conditions. I note now however that the RSPB support for the likes of pheasant shooting (benefits to habitat) is not entirely without its caveats, particularly when done on an industrial scale: "...however, there can be negative environmental impacts associated with high densities of gamebird release, .... And it is the continued increases in the numbers of pheasants and red-legged partridges released - up to c50 million per annum - that cause us particular concern ..."
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Aug 29, 2019 15:58:09 GMT
I think we have to be clear. The RSPB is neutral on shoots. Their argument is more complex and worth understanding. But neutral is the point.
Agreed, I think the nuances of that blog need to be understood. In it the statement is that the RSPB is neutral on the ethics of shooting. They clearly however see habitat/wildlife benefits from what they would view, from that perspective, as associated good land management practices. And are happy to help farmers/estates with advice to aid those "good" outcomes. And at the same time they want to call out what they would view as detrimental behaviours).
|
|
sd2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 621
Likes: 224
|
Post by sd2 on Aug 30, 2019 11:46:11 GMT
I'm no longer in the sticks, but current location has a good deal of green bordering which helps towards us having a good number of visitors.
Greenfinches, somtimes up to 4 at a time, used to be regulars a few years ago. Not seen one now for 4 years or so I would think. One garden doesn't make a census, but I recall that greenfinches have suffered a dramatic drop generally. Still fortunate enough to get occasional goldfinches and bullfinches. Plus bloody parakeets. Even the nuthatches take note and bugger off when they turn up. As they also do when the woodpecker turns up.
I have a noticed a larger population of blue tits this year. Not sure why that is, whether we just happen to have more families in the vicinty, but having up to about 8 a time. Weekly food bill has increased.
In "olden days!" When they cut wheat with a scythe huge amounts of wheat were left on the ground. The first lot of tractors were even more inefficient. Vast amounts of wheat were left on the ground. So much so that children (maybe even adults) went into the fields and collected it to feed their chickens over winter. It was called gleaning. Of course eventually the equipment got more efficient and it still is doing so. And there ended the vast flocks of what are now your garden birds. The farmer created them and now has brought about their near demise.
|
|