More scottish bans being proposed

[17 Rem]

Well said, sauer.

[JBirchall]

On 8/16/2019 at 9:51 AM, 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

 

 

I’m flabbergasted by such an ignorant view. Wow!

[Popsbengo]

Not ignorant just different.  If you shout louder maybe you will change minds?

[One on top of two]

1 hour ago, JBirchall said:

I’m flabbergasted by such an ignorant view. Wow!

👍👍

And thus I why tend to not give a Hoot about such types .. the only point of view that matters is there own  . 🤔

[Moorlander]

1 hour ago, JBirchall said:

I’m flabbergasted by such an ignorant view. Wow!

That typifies the anti hunting mob , very little knowledge about how the countryside/ecology works and they dont want to learn as often the real science hurts their fluffy feelings. 

[Popsbengo]

Who's anti-hunting?  I think I expressed pro hunting views in earlier posts.  My only beef is with the industry of raising birds to shoot them for 'sport'.  I'm quite happy to recognise that the game industry does have conservation objectives but that's only as a by-product of the industry.  Just about all of the UK is a man-made environment, that's clear.  I do not consider raising masses of birds to shoot them a reasonable thing.

I can't see why you can't just accept a differing point of view without resorting to emotional outbursts.  Just because I have an FAC doesn't follow that I must support an industry I don't approve of does it?

Reasonable debate is always worth it I thought.

[sauer]

ok 

yes the industry has had to change and rightly so .....in past game keeping was indeed a case of wipe it out .

times change, attitudes change and progress hopefully is the case, biodiversity WAS maybe a byproduct of the game industry , now a days and in these days of  environmental awareness its a main goal.  

yes there is still crap  going on within the industry with regards to BOP , but its  undeniable a minority and BOP numbers are better than they have beenin 10yrs plus.

now to tar the whole industry with same brush isnt fair....you get one bad mechanic does that  mean ALL mechanics are bad?.

there is good and bad in ALL demographics of life.

with regards to hares, why do you think its possible to shoot hares in these numbers ? proven time and time again there are more hares on keepered ground than un managed grounds ...incl RSPB own reserves, this includes as you all hear waders and other species etc.

 

1️⃣Mountain hare numbers fluctuate naturally. Every 4-15 years, the population size fluctuates from half to almost double the average population size. This is completely normal. 

 

2️⃣  There is no national mountain hare count in the UK and no clear evidence of a population decline. 

 

3️⃣The Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust (GWCT) has found that mountain hares are present in good numbers on sites that the report (referred to by the RSPB) states as having zero mountain hares. 

 

4️⃣Grouse moors benefit mountain hares. This year, a study by GWCT showed that mountain hare numbers are 35 times higher on moorland managed for grouse shooting. 

 

5️⃣The biggest threat facing mountain hares in Scotland is the widespread fragmentation of heather moorland and predation in areas where there is no predator management.

why do people  ignore facts and science ?

Reared birds industry ....it has its points that need to be addressed, i agree ...if you want to go shoot 50 birds but arent willing to take them home & Utilise them go shoot clays.....

who  eats  chicken? ...ive got 8 ex battery hens rescued and i was bloody astounded at state of them and even more so that this still goes on in the UK !

reared birds / pheasants are a damn site more looked after than that i can tell you.....and in turn live a life far better or free range or chicken ive seen. It should be done with consideration to a habitat as well

https://www.gwct.org.uk/advisory/guides/sustainable-gamebird-releasing/

the benefits of a well run shoot are of course biodiversity and economical , gives jobs to keepers beaters local hotels rural pubs hotels etc . 

Many rural places would be derelict  /   empty places both bilogically and socially without it.

ita land use and as long as  done sustainably  and the meat is used, if your a meat eater how can you argue with that?

leads me to hunting for "Sport" or fun.....im not going to tell you i hate what i do ...that im forced to do this only to do my bit for conservation......sorry no ....i love what i do .....stalking ....fishing.....pheasant / bird shooting .

yes an animal dies....but for me thats such a small part of the day not the whole point .

i may be different in that i use  all game i kill for my own table ...thats the main reason for me ....so i can eat meat that i know its natural ethical & in turn had its own life and ability to go where it wanted fly  or not fly etc. its own choices.

the whole day is the point , the experience ...being outside ...sights smells the rain the sun the wind ...watching the other wildlife doing its thing ......and any ethical sustainable hunter isnt going to wipe out his best stock, he / she will hunt for the benefit of the species and amount there ....again proven thru time and management .

 

yes there are bad shoots and people but dont  knock those the majority who are doing a good job both for  their area and part of a local economy and for  the  wildlife on their patch......spend a day with a grouse keeper / deer stalker or pheasant keeper worth their salt and youll meet someone with alove of the land and the animals and species on it .

 

Paul

 

 

 

[Kalahari]

Brilliant reply. Can I put in a word for the GWCT the work they do is of the highest level and properly peer reviewed.

 

David.

[Popsbengo]

Sauer, you make powerful points and I respect that.  I think what you say is factually correct however I have a problem with the ethics (my problem not yours).   I eat meat, I've killed to eat meat, I see no problem with culling invasive and damaging species (especially if it's edible).  I also try to only purchase ethically reared meat even though that's expensive.

Yes, game shooting provides much needed work in rural communities, yes many of the sporting shoots rear birds well and respect the environment however I can't get past the idea of the "sporting" aspect of providing living beings as targets (even granted some of the kills can be eaten).  I remain unconvinced that the primary purpose is food - it's "sport" for many of those that shoot - I'm very willing to appreciate the need to not tar everyone with the same brush, there are shooters who primarily want birds for the pot but you must agree there are those that are just in it for the killing.

Getting back to the OP,  I was struck by the expectation that all shooters must blind themselves to other considerations and just support each other irrespective of other factors.  Referring to opposing views as "nazi" just hardens those views. Other posters have weighed in with abuse and emotional outbursts against nothing other than an opposing view.  That sort of arguing isn't going to convince those that make decisions that affect their lives and recreation. Surely, the best approach is, as you have set out, argue with facts.   I don't agree with large scale rearing of birds for shooting on ethical grounds, I don't want to see people out of work, life is complex, we do what we feel is right.

 

[MJR]

Ethical grounds? Please explain.

[Popsbengo]

54 minutes ago, MJR said:

Ethical grounds? Please explain.

I think that was explained:  My ethics preclude supporting the rearing and shooting of birds as sporting targets.  What your ethical stance maybe, is your business, I suspect it's different to mine and that's ok by me.  I'll say it again ad-nauseam: why "must" I support the game-bird  shooting industry just because I have a FAC/SGC?  I reject the simplistic logic of "all standing together", it's not an effective strategy when foolish language is used to denigrate opposing views

[Reloader54]

2 hours ago, Popsbengo said:

I think that was explained:  My ethics preclude supporting the rearing and shooting of birds as sporting targets.  What your ethical stance maybe, is your business, I suspect it's different to mine and that's ok by me.  I'll say it again ad-nauseam: why "must" I support the game-bird  shooting industry just because I have a FAC/SGC?  I reject the simplistic logic of "all standing together", it's not an effective strategy when foolish language is used to denigrate opposing views

So putting ethics to one side for the moment,, 

do you think if game shooting were to be legislated out of existence your discipline would be allowed to carry on regardless?  

and perhaps more to the point do you think you could defend it were it threatened

by similar legislation.?  you really think because the cute little animals aren't getting killed its all gonna be just dandy?     perhaps you should think back to the banning of pistols as an example.

[Popsbengo]

24 minutes ago, Reloader54 said:

So putting ethics to one side for the moment,, 

do you think if game shooting were to be legislated out of existence your discipline would be allowed to carry on regardless?  

and perhaps more to the point do you think you could defend it were it threatened

by similar legislation.?  you really think because the cute little animals aren't getting killed its all gonna be just dandy?     perhaps you should think back to the banning of pistols as an example.

Put ethics aside? No, that's not how a civilised person should work is it?

Your "cute little animals" comment is crass; cute or not is irrelevant to me but not irrelevant to the general public whom you do need to get on side.  Best of luck with your tactic.  If it comes to a proposal to ban game shooting I won't worry about any ban rolling over into target shooting until there's an actual proposal to counter.  I can't support the narrow interest group you clearly do support however  I will lend my voice to support general vermin control and wild hunting as I've said previously (for the little it's worth).

OK, we are now going around in circles so I'm done on this subject.  Thanks to Sauer for sharing an intelligent opposing view,  it certainly promoted me to review evidence.

[Kalahari]

I think you are being very naive if you think your type of shooting will be fine so there is no need to support other shooting sports.

After Dunblane Lord Cullen recommended that there was no need for a pistol ban but it occurred with an exemption for target rimfires, then Tony Blair banned target rimfires. Now all shooting sports have been "left out" of the next Commonwealth Games. I see a pattern here even if you can't.

 

Sporting shooting can show a strong positive link with conservation, with wide reaching benefits for other species, particularly red listed avian species. As far as I can see there is little conservation benefit for pure target shooting and there is continuing pressure to eliminate all private gun ownership. Your branch of the sport might be fairly far along the list but when you are the target there will be no other shooters to support you and quite frankly I see little reason, after your  "I am alright Jack" attitude why anyone should.

 

David.

[Miseryguts]

3 hours ago, Kalahari said:

I think you are being very naive if you think your type of shooting will be fine so there is no need to support other shooting sports.

After Dunblane Lord Cullen recommended that there was no need for a pistol ban but it occurred with an exemption for target rimfires, then Tony Blair banned target rimfires. Now all shooting sports have been "left out" of the next Commonwealth Games. I see a pattern here even if you can't.

 

Sporting shooting can show a strong positive link with conservation, with wide reaching benefits for other species, particularly red listed avian species. As far as I can see there is little conservation benefit for pure target shooting and there is continuing pressure to eliminate all private gun ownership. Your branch of the sport might be fairly far along the list but when you are the target there will be no other shooters to support you and quite frankly I see little reason, after your  "I am alright Jack" attitude why anyone should.

 

David.

Plus 1 here for K's analysis - 

During my lifetime I have seen many of my interests disappear _ as a boy and young man I followed Otter hounds. As I approached my majority I took up handguns. Then as my financial situation improved I was huntsman and master of a pack of Beagles. Injury forced the closure of that phase of my life so I took up Falconry which is still just about legal I think. Then more disability forced the closure of that phase. Then I went back to shooting and indulged in game shooting in the form of a small syndicate shoot on land where I rent the sporting rights. More disabilty closed that down too, so I am left with my rifles and a lot of memories  - for now.

My point is this - the attitude of "they will never stop my sport" has allowed the closure of: Otter Hunting, Handgun shooting, all sports with Hounds, , and is threatening the game shooting sport as it has never been threatened before, so the "I'm all right jack"  people in the target shooting world(which is the only shooting I can now do) really need to think carefully if they are really "all right" now.

M raising his head above the parapet in cloudy S Wales

 

[Scrumbag]

I believe Kalahari and Miseryguts have a point...

[Reloader54]

18 hours ago, Popsbengo said:

Put ethics aside? No, that's not how a civilised person should work is it?

Your "cute little animals" comment is crass; cute or not is irrelevant to me but not irrelevant to the general public whom you do need to get on side.  Best of luck with your tactic.  If it comes to a proposal to ban game shooting I won't worry about any ban rolling over into target shooting until there's an actual proposal to counter.  I can't support the narrow interest group you clearly do support however  I will lend my voice to support general vermin control and wild hunting as I've said previously (for the little it's worth).

OK, we are now going around in circles so I'm done on this subject.  Thanks to Sauer for sharing an intelligent opposing view,  it certainly promoted me to review evidence.

boy  you sure do read and add  some sh1#  into a simple post, do you get some sort of kick out of being a thrush.

[sauer]

Popengos

 

i can but thank you back for  polite discussion ...

 

normally turns into  slanging match

i understand your sporting ethics see where your coming from .... it’s a hard one to defend .... would be easier if ALL involved took birds home and used them ... some should give it up go do clays .... no interest in food.

but for me and many others it the whole day and experience ...& the biodiversity and economics arguments win it for me ....

lot of the grounds if shoots not there would just be overgrown with little species ....

& no rural income , no small hotel or pub etc so n so forth 

its all about balance 

 

defiantly go to   GWCT site read some of their stuff 

And if on Instagram check out likes of

the armchair hunter etc

trying to promote ethical sustainable hinting thru food 

and regarding your sport .... lot of antis don’t give two hoots about wildlife or sport .... they purely anti gun & don’t think ANY public should have access to guns  no matter the discipline...

be warned

 

yours

Paul

 

[Popsbengo]

31 minutes ago, sauer said:

Popengos

 

i can but thank you back for  polite discussion ...

 

normally turns into  slanging match

i understand your sporting ethics see where your coming from .... it’s a hard one to defend .... would be easier if ALL involved took birds home and used them ... some should give it up go do clays .... no interest in food.

but for me and many others it the whole day and experience ...& the biodiversity and economics arguments win it for me ....

lot of the grounds if shoots not there would just be overgrown with little species ....

& no rural income , no small hotel or pub etc so n so forth 

its all about balance 

 

defiantly go to   GWCT site read some of their stuff 

And if on Instagram check out likes of

the armchair hunter etc

trying to promote ethical sustainable hinting thru food 

and regarding your sport .... lot of antis don’t give two hoots about wildlife or sport .... they purely anti gun & don’t think ANY public should have access to guns  no matter the discipline...

be warned

 

yours

Paul

 

Cheers Paul

over and out on this subject for me

[Kalahari]

Sorry but I meant to add to my my previous post, actually with pistols and the problems with the Commonwealth games in Manchester it appears that actually target sports has had a rougher time than game shooting of various kinds.

 

David.