Sooo mad four pheasants killed!

psychic-hack

John Griffin wrote: »

Many of the people that appreciate/love nature and wildlife also hunt.

If you really love nature and wildlife so much why do you want to put an end to it's life force and beauty with your gun.

Amalgam

ODD-JOB wrote: »

And i think the mod here is way out of order letting it go on , everybody thanking each other and congradulating each other on their posts....???

By all means argue a point or opinion, but when it comes to who thanks whom on a thread, that's none of your business as far as I'm concerned.

ODD-JOB

marlin vs wrote: »

ODD-JOB I don't hunt for sport, I hunt to watch my dog's working, now. (selfish is not a nice thing to call anyone)

Well my heart bleeds for you , it really does. Im sure you'll make a recovery though.......
It's just I dont think the wild-life you blow out of the woods will recover quite so easily.

I hope re-incarnation exists,......

Ban the animals-lovers .... protect the pro-hunters on this forum

marlin vs

ODD-JOB wrote: »

Lock this thread before i make sure its locked,


Lock this thread now or personal abuse it on its way, and ban me if you like , I've lost all respect for this forum now

The Hill Billy

ODD-JOB wrote: »

Im sorry , but you cant respect the other point of view whilst shooting a bird out of the sky ! it's one or the other...

blah, blah, blah...

Post reported for deliberately dragging the thread off-topic.

ODD-JOB - Take it to Humanities if you have an issue with people who are prepared to kill their own food.

John Griffin

psychic-hack wrote: »

If you really love nature and wildlife so much why do you want to put an end to it's life force and beauty with your gun.

Firstly most of my shooting is Deer Culling which is part of my job and it is done to control the deer population, which is unarguably necessary. All the meat goes towards food. I kill other wildlife because i eat meat like the vast majority of the human race. But unlike the vast majority of the human race i choose to do it in the most environmentally friendly and respectful way possible.
To most of the human race a burger is never thought of as a cow and a sausage is never thought of as a pig. I know what i am eating, i have seen it from the wild to the plate and i respect my meat, i worked hard for it and it is never wasted. Compared to the waste and pollution created by mass production, people who take their food naturally from the wild and respect the environment and animals should be applauded not scorned by those in ivory towers.
If you have never eaten farmed meat then i respect your views. But that said, i will not be told that i should not eat meat when i am naturally a omnivore and designed by nature to do so. It was hunting for meat and creating tools to hunt and gather food that stimulated the ancient human brain and made us what we are today.

Hammiepeters

John Griffin wrote: »

Many of the people that appreciate/love nature and wildlife also hunt.

This is 100% true. I dont know anyone out there who hunts and doesn't love nature.

John Griffin

ODD-JOB wrote: »

If you can appreciate nature and kill a bird for the sport...
If you did understand and value nature you would know about the importance that one bird has in relation to it's family structure. many birds pair for life in a family unit with a territory raising young.

If you know this , and feel that your sport enjoyment is more valuable than the life of a bird then you are really selfish.

Ever hear the sayin "Don't tell your Granny how to suck eggs":D:D:D
I am a professional conservationist (Wildlife Ranger). I don't need you to explain the dynamics of bird family structures.:rolleyes:
A cock pheasant can have many females and they don't mate for life. None of our game species mate for life or get married:rolleyes: And the hunting season is closed to allow for the breeding season.

By the way ,... there is nothing natural about using a gun to hunt.
If you feel hungry , go down and get a slice pan.

There is nothing natural about the monoculture of wheat to make the sliced pan, intensive farming and pesticides have done a million times more damage than the gun to wildlife.:rolleyes: And what about all the pigeons and crows that are shot legally at the request of the farmers during the breeding season to protect this wheat to make your sliced pan:eek::eek::rolleyes:

And i think the mod here is way out of order letting it go on , everybody thanking each other and congradulating each other on their posts....???

I think you are in the minority here at the moment. Maybe, just maybe you are incorrect or mistaken in your views, or else you unwittingly picked the most suitable nickname ever.;):)

Whispered

ODD-JOB wrote: »

Ban the animals-lovers .... protect the pro-hunters on this forum

ODD-JOB, people are having a conversation here, a civilised one. Not everyone is pro-hunting, but you would have to have had a very sheltered life not to accept that at times hunting is necessary.

ODD-JOB, if you are vegetarian then please accept my apologies for what I am about to say: Go research what sort of practises you are supporting every time you go to a supermarket and buy meat or dairy products.

Do you know how milk is produced? How many calves are born and killed so you can have cheese between your slices of bread.

Do you know that many many pigs have a life just as bad as battery hens in crates too small for them to turn around in.

If you ever have enjoyed a night at the dogs, I assume you know how many pups are killed every year because of this industry.

And I hope that every time you watch horse racing you are aware of the practise of breeding another mare at the same time so the throughbred, expensive foal can feed from her.

Seriously, research what you are talking about before shouting about how "hunting" is cruel, you support more cruelty every single day then you even realise.

Benazir Bhutto

Do 2 or more wrongs make a right ?

If u go to the supermarket or the dogs, does that make hunting wildlife ok ?

Wildlife is gradually being squeezed out to make room for humans,whether it be loss of habitat missing links in a food chain or hunting and I believe farmers should have to compete with nature and wildlife , and not just wipe out competition with a shot-gun.

In generations to come , will we all wonder where it went wrong ?

Rowley Birkin QC

Benazir Bhutto wrote: »

Wildlife is gradually being squeezed out to make room for humans,whether it be loss of habitat missing links in a food chain or hunting and I believe farmers should have to compete with nature and wildlife , and not just wipe out competition with a shot-gun.

I'm sorry but exactly what are you suggesting here?

Whispered

Benazir Bhutto wrote: »

Do 2 or more wrongs make a right ?

If u go to the supermarket or the dogs, does that make hunting wildlife ok ?

There is a huge difference in the quality of life for a barn chicken & a wild phesant. I personally hate the thought of hunting, but I accept that it has to happen because.....:(contd below)

Benazir Bhutto wrote: »

Wildlife is gradually being squeezed out to make room for humans,whether it be loss of habitat missing links in a food chain or hunting

....... who is doing more for conservation? People who spend their time giving out about how cruel some things are, how they buy organic, free range etc etc and so think they can hold their heads high for doing their bit for the animals, or the hunters, who are breeding birds who otherwise would not survive here or spending freezing mornings out killing diseased rabbits to give the population some sort of chance, hunters who have to cull one species (usually introduced and not native) to give another species a chance.

When I was young, my dad shot a magpie out our back, I was upset, he explained to me that the magpies were killing the robins we had in our garden. So while it was sad that this magpie was killed, it gave a whole family of robins a chance.

I could never be with someone who hunts, I could not have a rational conversation with someone who tries to tell me that hunting is just a sport to them. But I would not throw a fit about how cruel it is either.

It might also be wise to remember that these animals are prey animals. They are born to be killed, if a man does not shoot them, they may be caught by a fox etc, I can almost guarantee that they wont die of old age anyway.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

I had promised myself to stay out of this thead as it was creeping into a Hunting debate - which belongs elsewhere. But...

helena.ryan wrote: »

....... who is doing more for conservation? ... the hunters, who are breeding birds who otherwise would not survive here or spending freezing mornings out killing diseased rabbits to give the population some sort of chance,...

When I was young, my dad shot a magpie out our back, I was upset, he explained to me that the magpies were killing the robins we had in our garden. So while it was sad that this magpie was killed, it gave a whole family of robins a chance.

I don't know what hunters you come across but any I know (and that's many) do not kill diseased Rabbits with the intention of preserving the remaining population. They shoot healthy and diseased animals alike; if they bother to shoot Rabbits at all. Breeding a non native Pheasant for shooting is hardly conservation. While the hunting fraternity on Boards.ie will quote many breeding programmes for other species, it is minimal.

Your Dad, I'm sorry to say, was wrong and perpetuating a myth. Why shoot one native species of bird over another? Did he shoot Sparrowhawks to protect the Blue Tits, Kestrels to save Mice? Magpies are native and deserve to survive as much as any species - and more than Pheasants. Their effect on songbird populations has been discussed here ad infinitum. Research has shown that Magpies do not have a detrimental affect on Songbirds. But let's not wander even further off topic.

That's my rant and I promise I'm out of this thread before it turns nuclear.

Whispered

Gordon Ugly Uteri wrote: »

I don't know what hunters you come across but any I know (and that's many) do not kill diseased Rabbits with the intention of preserving the remaining population. They shoot healthy and diseased animals alike; if they bother to shoot Rabbits at all.

I don't know many at all so you may be right about the ones you do know. I didn't mean shooting diseased rabbits, I meant hunting with dogs. Maybe I just know very reponsible hunters, but for a while, I know a few who specifically went out for diseased rabbits. Then again the popultion of rabbits where I'm from (around kilkenny) dropped dramatically for a few years due to mixo, so maybe it was a case of hunting and more than likely the rabbit caught would be sick. Also I know that when the population began to recover, they laid off rabbit hunting for a while to let the population build back up. There may have been a more plesant slant put on it for me, being a child at the time. Also AFAIK the gun clubs were encouraging members to shoot rabbits at one time.

Gordon Ugly Uteri wrote: »

Why shoot one native species of bird over another? ....... Magpies are native and deserve to survive as much as any species - and more than Pheasants. Their effect on songbird populations has been discussed here ad infinitum. Research has shown that Magpies do not have a detrimental affect on Songbirds. But let's not wander even further off topic.

He wasn't "shooting magpies to protect robins" He shot a magpie who had been pulling a robin nest apart. they were without doubt killing them, I saw it myself.

Perhaps it's not fair. Ideally there would be no need for conservation, or people killing animals to protect another.

.

Gordon Ugly Uteri wrote: »

That's my rant and I promise I'm out of this thread before it turns nuclear.

Believe me, I dislike hunting as much as the next guy. I just think that too many people jump on the "cruelty bandwagon" and don't know what they are talking about. I don't want it to look as though I'm trying to defend hunting as a sport, as I don't agree with it. I do think it is sometimes necessary.

Just as a matter of interest, where should a conversation like this go? In the hunting forum you will have biased posts, in the animal forum you will have biased posts.

lightening

ODD-JOB wrote: »

By the way ,... there is nothing natural about using a gun to hunt.
If you feel hungry , go down and get a slice pan.

This is like a comedy show. Processed food in plastic is more natural than freshly caught meat?

ODD-JOB, get out to a farm and see how your processed chicken lives in comparison to game that is shot in the countryside!

Vegeta

Gordon Ugly Uteri wrote: »

I don't know what hunters you come across but any I know (and that's many) do not kill diseased Rabbits with the intention of preserving the remaining population. They shoot healthy and diseased animals alike; if they bother to shoot Rabbits at all. Breeding a non native Pheasant for shooting is hardly conservation. While the hunting fraternity on Boards.ie will quote many breeding programmes for other species, it is minimal.

I will condition my post with the following, while I read this forum quite a bit I do not like posting here as I am immediately seen in a negative light due to my pastime and the forum I mod

Gordon Ugly Uteri I can only speak from personal experience here but here is my 2c. I am a member of a tiny gun club in a small town in the west of Ireland. There are 35 members of which about 5 actually do anything.

We have noticed a distinct lack of mallard on the lake in recent years, so 2 years ago we raised and released 100 (all we could afford to feed) mallard onto Lough Derg. No one in the club shot one of these birds (they were tagged so it would have been known if we did, sure they could have been shot by other gun clubs). We cleared/created a pond about 2 miles from the shore (which is a sanctuary so means no shooting allowed there) which they can flight into. We put up an electric fence around the pond to keep out fox and mink. Duck are still coming and going from this pond. Personally I see this is a net gain for the species, we added to their numbers and created a sanctuary for them.

Last year we released 100 pheasants and I believe 5 of them have been shot to date. Again the same type of work was put into them, sanctuaries with hoppers of feed left out for them.

Now we are a tiny bullsh1t gun club and if the interest was there we could have much more projects on the go.

Our neighbouring gun club, who we help from time to time, have tried to introduce partridge to the area again and control shooting on the bog land to give grouse a chance.

So I can put my hand up and say honestly that I have created some habitats and sanctuaries for the local fauna. We are a bad gun club by any measure due to terrible turnout and number of people helping but we are doing something at least.

Your Dad, I'm sorry to say, was wrong and perpetuating a myth. Why shoot one native species of bird over another? Did he shoot Sparrowhawks to protect the Blue Tits, Kestrels to save Mice? Magpies are native and deserve to survive as much as any species - and more than Pheasants. Their effect on songbird populations has been discussed here ad infinitum. Research has shown that Magpies do not have a detrimental affect on Songbirds. But let's not wander even further off topic.

What are we using to define a species being native. I thought magpies turned up sometime in the 1600s and were not a native (here at end of last ice age) species.

Even if they're not native I think Pheasants arrived as a quarry species for hunters at around the same time as the Magpie was recorded being here.

Not any real point there just think its a little unfair to say a magpie deserves to be here more than the pheasant.

That's my rant and I promise I'm out of this thread before it turns nuclear.

Pity, you are a level headed poster who makes good points

doctor evil

helena.ryan wrote: »

And I hope that every time you watch horse racing you are aware of the practise of breeding another mare at the same time so the throughbred, expensive foal can feed from her.

As far as I'm aware other mares (generally cobs) that are bred as potential surrogate mothers (if original tb mare dies or rejects foal) are covered earlier than thoroughbreds so the foals are born earlier and are older if needs be separated. These foals are then kept together and given milk in a bucket if needs be. The foal group may have an older horse to keep an eye on them and teach them manners. Weaning does not depend on age alone but also the foal as an individual and the way its managed.

Kaldorn

just want to say i think this is a great debate and i am enjoying reading it alot,I will sit on the fence!:o

Half-cocked

Vegeta wrote: »

What are we using to define a species being native. I thought magpies turned up sometime in the 1600s and were not a native (here at end of last ice age) species.

Correct, magpies arrived here some time in the 16th-17th century. They get a lot of bad press for robbing songbird nests. But if they have been here for so long, why have our songbird numbers only crashed since the latter half of the 20th century? Because it's habitat destruction, not magpies, that is the problem. Gun clubs actually create suitable habitat for songbirds. Its not the reason they do it, but a welcome by-product of shooting. All that gun club planted cover that pheasants love is also a sanctuary for much of our wildlife in an increasingly sterile countryside.

Research in the UK into song bird predation by introduced species shows the magpie has very little impact on numbers. The domestic/feral cat is the biggest culprit of them all - estimated to kill 55 million songbirds annualy! A magpie will mainly take eggs/unfledged young, 90% of which will die from natural causes before reaching breeding age anyway. The cat kills breeding adults therefore having a much greater impact on the overall songbird population.

boneless

I will not be told how to mod this thread. If certain posters have a problem with this let them PM me. I am close to banning people here but there are two or three who should take real heed of this; keep it civil.

I look forward to the PMs.

lightening

Game food is lovely! The animals are wild, healthy, natural and free. They don't actually have a huge chance of getting killed. Its a zero carbon, healthy, eco friendly way of getting non processed food on the plate while making good sport for people.

These hunters don't want to obliterate their prey, they will even make an effort to repopulate areas and improve the environment. Its a win win situation.

Farmed animals do get killed early. Actually its a guarantee, they will get killed. Some of them may never see daylight, most of them won't mate, the conditions are not great, they have no choice about what they eat, where they go, what they do.

Be reasonable folks. I know there are a few people who are abhorred by people eating meat, but we have been doing it for thousands and thousands of years. It's part of our evolved diet.

It wasn't me!

At some point, my ambition is to be entirely self-sufficient in terms of meat, which means hunting a lot during the appropriate season for each animal, legal and natural. As such, I take full responsibility for what I kill and eat and how it's killed and treated. I refuse to feel like a monster for that, and while I've certainly seen the bottom of quite a few upturned noses for it, I could care less. I feel better for that than if I decided to just ignore farming practices as they exist while reviling the guy with the gun.

artieanna

This blew up a bit didn't it...

I just posted to say how sad I felt to see the phesants, I had grown accustomed to seeing daily, were gone.

It was posted in the nature/birdwatching forum for that reason.

I have no problem with hunting as long as the animal is used as food and is not wasted also as long as weaning populations of animals are not affected.

I live on a beef farm and am well aware of the life cycle of animals both wild and reared and would have no problem cleaning an animal or fish for cooking or killing an animal if it is suffering and has no chance of recovery.

Everything in moderation is the key I think!

John Griffin

People are often surprised that people who hunt can actually be passionate about Nature and wildlife. Or that they look at the Nature and Birdwatching Forum.
My life long obsession with wildlife started from going hunting with my Father as a child, I have made a career as a Wildlife Ranger out of my knowledge of Irelands wildlife and habitats, I am a very keen birdwatcher and wildlife photographer. I have to cull animals in my job for conservation reasons and on my days off i still go hunting or fishing for the table. Yes it is my sport too and i enjoy it, why shouldn't i enjoy being part of nature. I have yet to take newcomer out for a days hunting and for them to come back and say they didn't enjoy it. My fiancee was a vegetarian and very dedicated animal lover when she met me. She now helps me butcher deer and loves venison steak and enjoys a days hunting. And no i didn't brainwash her:D:D She spent 4 years studying environmental science, that did the trick:)

Whispered

John Griffin wrote: »

My fiancee was a vegetarian and very dedicated animal lover when she met me. She now helps me butcher deer and loves venison steak and enjoys a days hunting. And no i didn't brainwash her:D:D She spent 4 years studying environmental science, that did the trick:)

:eek: See you admit, you tricked her. I know it's a bit off topic, but there are many different reasons to become vegetarian. Learning about environmental science wouldn't change everybodies mind. I know you're not saying this, but I just want to point out that someone being vegetarian, does not necessarily mean they are doing it through lack of knowledge or understanding of food processes.

I must tell my dad about your post - let him think there's a bit of hope for me poor fella can't understand it at all.

(Please delete this post if it's gone too far off the original topic)

marlin vs

Artieanna, you brought on a good discussion, I hope you see a nice few pheasant's around you'r place this year again, you obliviously have the passion for nature.It's nice to see someone that can look at both sides of the coin.

donalkennedy

we wouldnt have got very far as a race if we didnt hunt and kill animals and besides the local gun club would have more than likely bread those pheasants costing a fair bit of money so why should they not be allowed to shoot them:mad:

magicbastarder

Half-cocked wrote: »

Research in the UK into song bird predation by introduced species shows the magpie has very little impact on numbers. The domestic/feral cat is the biggest culprit of them all - estimated to kill 55 million songbirds annualy!

as posted on another thread:
http://www.rspb.org.uk/advice/gardening/unwantedvisitors/cats/birddeclines.asp

magicbastarder

Vegeta wrote: »

What are we using to define a species being native. I thought magpies turned up sometime in the 1600s and were not a native (here at end of last ice age) species.

i've never heard of the ice age criterium being used to determine whether a species is native - that strikes me as being far too context specific. i had always understood that a species is defined as native if its arrival was through natural means, i.e. not artificially introduced by man. and with the magpie, there is no evidence either way.

Mr. Presentable

John Griffin wrote: »

Pheasants are not a native species, they were introduced to Ireland for shooting. Without gunclubs releasing pheasants they would quickly die out regardless of shooting. Pheasants are shot and eaten. Think of it this way, they are chickens that were reared for the table but they were allowed to live in freedom and given a fair chance at survival up until they were harvested. They had a much better life than the life a lot of farmed birds get and a they were a hell of a lot better to eat too. If more people ate pheasants instead of chicken we would have far better habitats for wildlife in this country.
Game meat is the healthiest and most environmentally friendly source of meat possible and the most natural and humane way of treating an animal for food.

That's pretty much it. They are bred and released for shooting. Not my cup of tea, but a fact of life.