More scottish bans being proposed

[One on top of two]

I see some one has rattled the chuckle brothers cage again. 

[Chanonry]

15 hours ago, Moorlander said:

Hare`s can be legally shot 

So its ok to annihilate them ? Really. You can't see the problem in this? We can soon change their legal status if all of this conservation is beyond you.

The world must be a frightening place for you. Perhaps that's reflected in your views of the SNP being simultaneously Maxist and Fascist. It would seem that it is you that would benefit from some wider reading.

[Novice1]

18 hours ago, Re-Pete said:

https://raptorpersecutionscotland.wordpress.com/2017/07/31/mountain-hares-slaughtered-on-scottish-grouse-moors-new-report-published/

Sickening isn't the word for it...............and as for the constant whining, mostly from game shooters,  that we should support each other.............good luck with that.

Pete

I find this a particularly odd attitude. What exactly is the issue here, particularly given the lack of information behind the image? Any idea of the acreage that number of hares was taken off? Any idea of the actual population on said acreage and the percentage reduction those numbers would achieve? I'd suggest not. Without that information, aren't you just falling straight into the intended trap set by the antis? 

What that image shows to me is keepers sorting the hares at the end of the day for storage prior to entering the food chain. If the likes of Rith Tingay were to be believed, they should be loading them into a dumper bucket for tipping onto a midden or into a hole somewhere. 

Blue hare culls have been taking place for a long, long time on scottish estates. I'm not saying that some estates are trying to reduce the population to low levels in a (mistaken in my view) belief that to do so will noticeably reduce the tick population. What is happening here is a confusing of that with wider culling.

I'm always interested in a comparision of blue hare populations on upland areas not managed for grouse compared to those that are. I'd suggest there's a big difference. The heather habitat maintained on grouse moors is more suitable for blue hares also. Taking a crop off in the same way as the grouse isn't an issue in my view.

The antis seem to be hanging their hats recently on a paper released by Dr Adam Watson (a very respected name in terms of Scottish wildlife) not long before he died. I'm certainly not going to denigrate his wider work, but I did find that paper a bit lacking. Seemed to me that he'd been recording hare numbers incidental to other work in particular areas over a period of time. I couldn't see any real consistency in terms of time of year, date, weather conditions etc to try to keep variables consistent. I recognise that these things can't be maintained as they could in a lab, but that to me is the achilles heel of a lot of wildlife based study, there are no absolutes. However, where something fits with the narrative of those opposed to something like culling blue hares, then all of a sudden a lot of that is overlooked and it's preached as gospel. 

[Re-Pete]

Actually, I don't give a s**t what the acreage was, whether or not they carry ticks, or are destined to end up on some restaurant menu.

I see a heap of dead hares, killed simply because they're presence was seen as an inconvenience to a money making enterprise. .

The illegal killing of raptors on grouse moors is another example.

Pete

 

 

[One on top of two]

1 hour ago, Novice1 said:

I find this a particularly odd attitude. What exactly is the issue here, particularly given the lack of information behind the image? Any idea of the acreage that number of hares was taken off? Any idea of the actual population on said acreage and the percentage reduction those numbers would achieve? I'd suggest not. Without that information, aren't you just falling straight into the intended trap set by the antis? 

What that image shows to me is keepers sorting the hares at the end of the day for storage prior to entering the food chain. If the likes of Rith Tingay were to be believed, they should be loading them into a dumper bucket for tipping onto a midden or into a hole somewhere. 

Blue hare culls have been taking place for a long, long time on scottish estates. I'm not saying that some estates are trying to reduce the population to low levels in a (mistaken in my view) belief that to do so will noticeably reduce the tick population. What is happening here is a confusing of that with wider culling.

I'm always interested in a comparision of blue hare populations on upland areas not managed for grouse compared to those that are. I'd suggest there's a big difference. The heather habitat maintained on grouse moors is more suitable for blue hares also. Taking a crop off in the same way as the grouse isn't an issue in my view.

The antis seem to be hanging their hats recently on a paper released by Dr Adam Watson (a very respected name in terms of Scottish wildlife) not long before he died. I'm certainly not going to denigrate his wider work, but I did find that paper a bit lacking. Seemed to me that he'd been recording hare numbers incidental to other work in particular areas over a period of time. I couldn't see any real consistency in terms of time of year, date, weather conditions etc to try to keep variables consistent. I recognise that these things can't be maintained as they could in a lab, but that to me is the achilles heel of a lot of wildlife based study, there are no absolutes. However, where something fits with the narrative of those opposed to something like culling blue hares, then all of a sudden a lot of that is overlooked and it's preached as gospel. 

It’s such a shame one has to wade through so much garbage  to find a decent , well balanced post. 

Thank you for that 👍

[Novice1]

Wow. I'd love to hear your opinions on some of the "magic eye" images out there. Quite a vivid picture you've managed to create. 

Clearly you have some strong views on grouse shooting, I'm not privy to how you've got to that position. What I will say, and not interested in getting into further protracted dialogue on the issue, is arguments tend to fall down when they're based on the perception that sporting estates are some sort of lucrative money spinner. 

A lot of estates, especially in Scotland, have cancelled most grouse days this year. I'm not sure that's the most productive of business models... 

 

[Johnnyha]

This report is from 2017? 

[One on top of two]

1 hour ago, Novice1 said:

Wow. I'd love to hear your opinions on some of the "magic eye" images out there. Quite a vivid picture you've managed to create. 

Clearly you have some strong views on grouse shooting, I'm not privy to how you've got to that position. What I will say, and not interested in getting into further protracted dialogue on the issue, is arguments tend to fall down when they're based on the perception that sporting estates are some sort of lucrative money spinner. 

A lot of estates, especially in Scotland, have cancelled most grouse days this year. I'm not sure that's the most productive of business models... 

 

I’m on your side with this one mucker 👍

[Popsbengo]

The original posts were commenting on how awful it would be should additional controls be introduced and how (in some twisted logic) this was akin to Nazi or Marxist behaviour.  We then have the 'thin end of the wedge' argument about how' we shooters must all stick together' because they'll come for your guns next...

The rights and wrongs of  controlling hares is highly emotive and will exercise the non-shooting majority for sure.  Surly the sensible thing for the shooting (of critters) community to do is smarten up their act, avoid highly emotive pictures getting into the public domain and enforce regulations that do exist to avoid illegal and/or dubious practices.

But, hey, that's a mature position, better to whine about it on a forum looking for an echo chamber response about those evil nasty non-shooters who just don't understand...

Good luck in changing any minds.  I'll take my chances at protecting target shooting sports without any help from the game shooting community;  thanks but no thanks.

 

[drum]

8 hours ago, Re-Pete said:

Actually, I don't give a s**t what the acreage was, whether or not they carry ticks, or are destined to end up on some restaurant menu.

I see a heap of dead hares, killed simply because they're presence was seen as an inconvenience to a money making enterprise. .

The illegal killing of raptors on grouse moors is another example.

Pete

 

 

Serious question Pete,if these were rabbits would you be as outraged?

[Re-Pete]

There's a big difference in my book between someone walking round with a gun taking a few rabbits and the odd muntjac or pheasant for the pot, and industrial scale slaughter by the lowlife who simply enjoy killing and are willing to pay in order to do so, "legally" or otherwise.

Rabbits, unlike mountain hares, are in the same league as grey squirrels, not a native species. Introduced during the Roman occupation, afaik.

As for the mountain hares: Protected in the UK under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981. Priority Species under the UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework.

Pete

[MJR]

Pete, are you in receipt of the full facts?  What acerage were the hares taken from and why? What was the density of the hare population prior to the 'industrial scale slaughter' you refer to. 

I do not know these facts but expect they were influential in the decision to remove the hares from the ground.  If you do know them then please share.

If you don't know these facts are you in a position to comment in such a manner?

[MJR]

Popsebengo, why are you actively promoting a split between different branches of shooting?

As I have stated in other posts I am not in receipt of the facts relating to a specific image but it seems neither are you?

[Popsbengo]

33 minutes ago, MJR said:

Popsebengo, why are you actively promoting a split between different branches of shooting?

As I have stated in other posts I am not in receipt of the facts relating to a specific image but it seems neither are you?

MJR,  I'm not.  Let me just reiterate - I have nothing against hunting and vermin control if done sensibly and ethically.  I'm fed up with an assumption by some, who enjoy the wholesale shooting of wildlife, that they can expect me and others of my point of view, to dumbly support their firearms rights and put out of my mind the fact I don't agree with what they do.  I also don't think there's any practical relevance either, after all what does this "support" look like?   Am I to ally myself to persons who make offensive and dumb comments  - I don't think so.

It's just a fact of life that the majority of the population are anti shooting for a variety of emotional and some rational reasons.  Surly the best approach is to win hearts and minds not fling abuse around and accuse those proposing opposing legislation of being "like nazis".  Take a leaf out of the 50Cal shooters group who put an excellent case together and won based on rational argument.

[Reloader54]

not wishing to show preference to either side here,,, but given the name of this forum it seems a strange dialog within at times.

[Popsbengo]

Just now, Reloader54 said:

not wishing to show preference to either side here,,, but given the name of this forum it seems a strange dialog within at times.

fair point, but surely a robust debate is good?  It confirms or refines our beliefs.  Echo chambers are for snowflakes that need a 'safe space' to all agree in😉

[MJR]

Define 'wholesale' please. 

And no one is asking you to ally yourself with anyone making as you phrase it, offensive and dumb comments.

I note however you now say you are not promoting a split but earlier state you will not,support other types of shooting.

I take it you are similar to Pete and myself in so much as you are not in receipt of the facts either? But wish to spout publically about wholesale slaughter anyway? Hmmm.

[Popsbengo]

I was not particularly commenting on the hares in the truck so 'those facts' aren't overly relevant to me (but I do think it an awful thing).

Spout publicly?  You mean express a view some are not happy hearing? Is this forum only a safe space for like-minded persons?

I'm not sure one can deny that the release of tens of thousands of game birds to shoot is anything other than wholesale?  It's a major money making operation for estates is it not?

I'm not promoting a split - I'm denying there's ever been a collective view!  If there is please point me at the evidence and I'll gladly review my belief.

 

[Reloader54]

44 minutes ago, Popsbengo said:

fair point, but surely a robust debate is good?  It confirms or refines our beliefs.  Echo chambers are for snowflakes that need a 'safe space' to all agree in😉

"robust debate"  can be good indeed, however reading some posts it's hard to believe some people here actually possess any guns. 

surely a compliment on fine accuracy makes for a better discussion than arguing over the type of target. 

the choice of paper or varmint as quarry should not ideally drive a wedge between disciplines no more than  choice of which hat to wear. 

[Popsbengo]

Just now, Reloader54 said:

"robust debate"  can be good indeed, however reading some posts it's hard to believe some people here actually possess any guns. 

surely a compliment on fine accuracy makes for a better discussion than arguing over the type of target. 

👍

[MJR]

So you're not going to define wholesale and now wish to move onto 'major money spinner' 

Again, do you have any facts as to the major money spinner? Yes undoubtably thousands of people are employed as a result of game shooting, it no doubt supplies an income to many estates that would otherwise struggle. 

Waiting to see where you move the goal posts.....

[drum]

7 hours ago, Re-Pete said:

There's a big difference in my book between someone walking round with a gun taking a few rabbits and the odd muntjac or pheasant for the pot, and industrial scale slaughter by the lowlife who simply enjoy killing and are willing to pay in order to do so, "legally" or otherwise.

Rabbits, unlike mountain hares, are in the same league as grey squirrels, not a native species. Introduced during the Roman occupation, afaik.

As for the mountain hares: Protected in the UK under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981. Priority Species under the UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework.

Pete

Ive set the rabbit boxes ,i expect to take between 200 and 300 rabbits tomorrow.This at the request of the farmers who need the grass .Wholesale slaughter Pete? Does it matter that i enjoy doing this or not? Mountain hare or the humble rabbit,when the numbers reach a level where you can kill these numbers this usually tells you that you should maybe think about lessening the numbers.

[Re-Pete]

I learnt a long while ago that I can't argue with faith, and there's no way you'll change my point of view, so it's time to call it a day.

Pete

[MJR]

You meant you don't have a well reasoned and logical response?

[sauer]

I can’t believe the tsunami of shite from some on this ..... obviously havent set food on a grouse moor lately .

obviously know Jack about conservation or even care it seems .

 

take emotion out of it and look at facts and figures & science 

 

go google Shane Mahoney ... one of the greatest conservationists of our time ... his words paraphrased 

you don’t need to like a conservation technique but if it works to the benefit of target species or others you can’t argue with it.

 

who hell needs anti shooting brigade when you’ve got FAC holders like this.

aye you wrap yourselves up in your bubble and think your sports “safe”

 

I’d  be interested to know how many of our grouse moor “fans” eat meat ... of so where do you get it ?  

What conservation methods or acts have they done lately to benefit local wildlife etc?

 

paul