We may need to shut this section of the site down...

Latest Articles

We may need to shut this section of the site down...
Page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Downsizer Forum Index -> Shooting and Trapping for the Pot

Author

Message

vegplot

Joined: 19 Apr 2007
Posts: 21301
Location: Bethesda, Gwynedd

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 15 11:43 am Post subject:

[quote="oldish chris:1434449"]

vegplot wrote:

Quote:

and you found your ignorance as well.

My dear fellow downsizer Vegplot, a bit of a personal problem, I'm currently bed-ridden due to a health issue. I know I can rely on you not to be even slightly sympathetic, for which i am grateful. However, as a result I have been able to give our latest run-in a lot of thought.

Our differences over OSes illustrate the problem nicely (IMHO).

I have observed over the years that you have a considerable in-depth knowledge of computing and software development. Similarly, over many years in IT, I too, have acquired such knowledge. However, when you compare the sub-set of human knowledge in your brain with that in mine, the lack of overlap is, lets be honest, frightening (IMHO).

It must be the same with hunting, shooting and field-sports.

I am not ignorant. I am not a "Townie". I am a City dweller. For the past 34 years I have lived on the outskirts of Liverpool. Ecology has long been of great interest to me, (since A levels) and I find Rob's tales of hill farming fascinating (but we'll never agree on beef portion size). My studies of the importance and management of upland areas will be directed by the importance of the Lake Vyrnwy Nature Reserve and Estate.

Field sports are a totally alien concept to me, (City Dweller - remember) and on the rare occasions that me and the shooters have bumped into each other, (three times so far) they did rather antagonise me.

So, yet again, we have two large sub-sets of human knowledge with a frightening lack of overlap.

I'm here to learn, I hang on because I have learnt quite a lot so far.

PS. it was wrong of me to be deliberately antagonistic. No promises but I will try to stop.

No harm done and thank you. I made a personal comment in public which I shouldn't have done. My apologies. I should have been more polite about it.

vegplot

Joined: 19 Apr 2007
Posts: 21301
Location: Bethesda, Gwynedd

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 15 11:45 am Post subject:

Graham Hyde wrote:

I was describing a long ago TV series where one man went out killing things, no pleasant company, not involved with managing land, just killing things.

We have one of those in our rifle and pistol club. A most distasteful man. He has no idea of the concept of conservation just like to kill animals foxes mainly.

Tavascarow

Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 8407
Location: South Cornwall

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 15 11:51 am Post subject:

oldish chris wrote:

vegplot wrote:

Those who think field sports is the preserve of the wealthy have a very narrow view and limited understanding of the sport.

Conversation relies, in part, on the activities of field sports which not only help enrichen biological diversity but also provide valuable revenues for many rural enterprises. By taking an emotional and onesided look at the whole debate serves no real purpose but I expect many who take a vitriolic stance against any form of field sport care not a jot about anything else except their own opinion.

OK! Add to "wealthy", nouveau riche, or anybody who isn't an actual creative type who has a cue about ecology. So, with 1,000s of acres of uplands, massive potential for productivity, or simply to create fresh air and water, some of us refer to charge over it in RangeRovers, run around in Barbour Jackets and shoot everything that moves. Gosh, that's delayed climate change by a 100 years!!!

Hey Nick, I've found where I'd left my chip - Its back in place.

I can see both sides of the argument.
I used to shoot with a shotgun, mainly rabbits & pigeons over my dads farm & neighbours. Occasional duck & woodcock in the winter months. I don't have a problem if anyone else want to continue doing that as long as they respect the countryside & the welfare of their quarry.
Likewise at the 'richer' end of the sport. Shooting pheasant, grouse, hare or deer isn't cruel if done properly.
A lot less cruel, if the truth be known than the majority of animals that go through our more industrial abartoirs, but we (as a nation) turn a blind eye to that.
Maintenance of habitat for say grouse also creates & protects habitat for rarer species like ptarmigan & mountain hares.
Like wise control of deer populations. Because we as a species removed red deer only natural predator centuries ago, left uncontrolled their populations can become so large they cause large amounts of habitat destruction. If they are stalked & shot humanely I see no problem.
I do take issue with coursing & fox hunting because with coursing IMHO catching a wild animal only to release it later to be killed by dogs isn't that far from bull, bear & badger baiting, which have all been illegal for decades.
Likewise fox hunting. Running a wild animal to ground, turning in terriers & eventually shooting or as sometimes happens the hounds getting there first is both cruel & not effective as a control method IMHO.
A man with a lamp, a squeak & a high velocity rifle can kill a lot more foxes in a night than a hunt will in a season.
Is it any crueller for me to work my terriers on rats over say traps or poison? Even if you use live traps you have to destroy the rats by law , how are we going to achieve that? Poisons are a fairly painless way of killing vermin but I'm hearing reports of owls being poisoned after eating rats & mice. I don't want to poison the local owl population, there aren't many of them. But as I said earlier despite being a country boy who sees both sides I will still back the Greens because they are the only party addressing the real issues as I see them.
Hope you make a speedy recovery.

OtleyLad

Joined: 13 Jan 2007
Posts: 2737
Location: Otley, West Yorkshire

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 15 11:52 am Post subject:

Graham Hyde wrote:

Otley Lad, do you go on the moor 'ba tat'?

Only a sunny day

vegplot

Joined: 19 Apr 2007
Posts: 21301
Location: Bethesda, Gwynedd

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 15 12:02 pm Post subject:

There's good and bad in all classes who participate in field sports. Fields sports has traditionally been seen as the rich man's preserve and in some cases it remains so. But there are so many more involved and participating and is nowhere as exclusive as it perhaps once was.

Estates, which once used field sports as an exclusive pastime, have been forced to diversify their client base to be more inclusive. The elitism and snobbery is largely gone and once you're involved the class differences are largely ignored.

Graham Hyde

Joined: 03 Apr 2011
Posts: 365

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 15 12:03 pm Post subject:

Hey, I'm sorry I started this.
I believe shooting is a sport. The subject of my original post was about a long ago TV series which showed one man hunting various animals/fish/birds over several weeks. This programme was made well before P.C. was ever heard of and at the time it struck me as killing animals in a not very sporting way.
It was not like the programme of Hugh of River Cottage joining a shoot for a day or a cull of pigeons, it was no nonsense, non sporting killing.
It made such an impression I can remember it now and I was just asking ....does anyone else remember it.
However, I will say again, it didn't seem very sporting to me.

Hairyloon

Joined: 20 Nov 2008
Posts: 15425
Location: Today I are mostly being in Yorkshire.

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 15 1:10 pm Post subject:

OtleyLad wrote:

Graham Hyde wrote:

Otley Lad, do you go on the moor 'ba tat'?

Only a sunny day

Apparentlyit is not a moor. Moors are classified by the species living thereon and Ilkley moor has lost too much of its moorland species to qualify... It is officially a hill.

dpack

Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 46211
Location: yes

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 15 5:51 pm Post subject:
clifton moor is about 15 m above sea level and covered in close build modern housing ,a business park and shopping mall but it is still a moor . sorry ,na im not

crofter

Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Posts: 2252

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 15 8:43 pm Post subject:

Graham Hyde wrote:

one week was a stag, one week a salmon and that goose I mentioned. It wasn't a Canadian Goose, I remember it being all white.

Possibly a swan.

Bebo

Joined: 21 May 2007
Posts: 12590
Location: East Sussex

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 15 10:03 pm Post subject:

The Greens policy on gun licensing concerns me:

Licensing
A single rigorous licensing process will be put in place based on considerations of public safety rather than the convenience of shooters. Subject to relevant criteria, licenses will be issued for permitted shotguns and rifles, all lethal airguns and permitted deactivated guns.
Users of firearms for sporting or agricultural purposes will be required to demonstrate their competence in handling firearms and satisfy the authorities of their mental and emotional stability:
Applicants should also be required to obtain the signature of, say, ten citizens (just as a prospective electoral candidate) who will vouch for the good character of the licence holder. This will discourage the 'loners' and socially isolated individuals who are most at risk of committing the horror that occurred at Dunblane and Hungerford.
The cost of medical and psychological tests must be borne by the applicant, together with a new annual fee which is sufficient to repay the economic damage - to police, court and NHS - inflicted on it by the abuse of guns generally. When licences are awarded the onus will be on the applicant to demonstrate his or her suitability to handle firearms rather than on the authorities to prove the applicant's unsuitability. Licence holders will be required to renew their applications on an annual basis individuals whose licence application is rejected will be required to wait at least two years before re-applying.

Why should it be down to legal, responsible gun owners to pay for the costs of gun abuse? Almost all gun related crime is by those that hold guns illegally. Penalising those of us the happen to enjoy clay pigeon shooting for the costs associated with nutters with illegal handguns carrying out drive-by shootings is like making everyone on prescription drugs pay a penalty to cover the cost of drug related crime.

dpack

Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 46211
Location: yes

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 15 10:35 pm Post subject:
they wont get elected so dont worry

Falstaff

Joined: 27 May 2009
Posts: 1014

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 15 10:39 pm Post subject:
They really do seem to want to damage those who actually involve themselves in teh countryside as much as possible don't they ? On e would have thought that a party calling itself "green" would have at least Some regard for nature and the management of balances.

Rob R

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 15 10:46 pm Post subject:

Bebo wrote:

The Greens policy on gun licensing concerns me:

Most of their policies concern me, even the ones I support. The mistake I made was to read the policies.

dpack

Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 46211
Location: yes

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 15 11:04 pm Post subject:

my "green manfesto"would start

reduce the human population to pre agriculture numbers within a century.
that isnt going to be popular but with some one child per very extended family policies and some genocidal murder i recon it could be done

"king"david attenborough was on telly yesterday and he was correct when he said the number of humans had increased by 300%in his life time(tis over 200% in mine)

he also said that living like the average rwandan the planet could manage another 50%

green would be far more unpopular than try to take the weapon from my cold dead hand:lol:

Rob R

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York

Posted: Mon Mar 16, 15 11:43 pm Post subject:
To be fair to the Greens, that is in their policies, only without so much detail as to the 'how'

	Downsizer Forum Index -> Shooting and Trapping for the Pot	All times are GMT Page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Page 3 of 4

View Latest Posts