Hare Coursing

Sparks

archer22 wrote: »

There is not a single post anywhere from me that was ever anti Gun or anti shooting.

Not even one?

Sparks

reprazant wrote: »

I like how, suddenly, if you do not agree with coursing you are in league with fanatical animal rights groups.

...he said on a thread about a petition by one of those fanatical animal rights groups, ignoring all the posts pointing out that animal welfare groups are regarded seperately by those who have serious objections to the acts of the fanatical animal rights groups.

archer22

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

[/B]

All of a sudden????:rolleyes::rolleyes:
As the old rascist quip goes.."Ive nothing against black people some of my best friends are black..But...
You have just had four examples of the EX PRO of ICABS writing to the national press about gun bans in recent times..But if that isnt good enough for you I suggest you go and research the group you are about to join and sponsor around the early.mid oughties when Tierney was the PRO and you will find plenty of his anti gun/shooting bile there.
If you cant accept that,well I suggest you go and say to Aideen Yourell when you sign up that you are a gun owner and proud of it and see what reaction you will get or whether your membership will be accepted.:p

"all of a sudden" nothing all of a sudden bud..look at my user name ARCHER one who shoots Bows.22 guess what 22 as in the calibre .22,now do you get it..and as for your telling ICAB I am a gun owner,no prob..once again you are making up lies as there is nothing on that site that says gun owners not welcome

reprazant

Sparks wrote: »

Not even one?

That's not anti gun. That's anti-bad aim.

If you are going to shoot an animal, make sure you take it down.

Or do you disagree?

reprazant

Sparks wrote: »

...he said on a thread about a petition by one of those fanatical animal rights groups, ignoring all the posts pointing out that animal welfare groups are regarded seperately by those who have serious objections to the acts of the fanatical animal rights groups.

No, I said on a thread about coursing where the OP asked a question "So what do we think, cruel and should be banned? or acceptable?"

The OP links to a report in breakingnews.ie, not a petition.

You seem to be in the wrong thread.

Sparks

reprazant wrote: »

The OP links to a report in breakingnews.ie, not a petition.
You seem to be in the wrong thread.

A report about an ICABS campaign which is based around a petition. I'm not in the wrong thread, I just seem to have done more background reading about it than some.

Sparks

reprazant wrote: »

That's not anti gun. That's anti-bad aim.
If you are going to shoot an animal, make sure you take it down.
Or do you disagree?

I don't disagree - I just think that that post characterised all hunting in one swipe of a very broad brush. Bad shots do happen - often through no fault of the shooter - but they're not the norm by any means or metric.

archer22

Sparks wrote: »

Not even one?

Taken out of context Bud it was a sarcastic remark to another poster..lets be honest wounding does sometimes happen in Gun hunting thats a FACT..Nothing there calling for gun Ban..you must be getting desperate

Sparks

archer22 wrote: »

Nothing there calling for gun Ban

I thought it was ICABS that you were saying hadn't called for a gun ban (despite the several calls listed above) rather than yourself, who you were just saying wasn't anti-gun and hadn't ever posted even one post saying bad things about guns (well, assuming you don't count the ones search turns up)?

reprazant

Sparks wrote: »

A report about an ICABS campaign which is based around a petition. I'm not in the wrong thread, I just seem to have done more background reading about it than some.

It is irrelevant that the report is about a petition. The OP does not link to the petition, it links to a report about an article about coursing and asks what peoples opinions are about coursing. I read the report but I fail to see why it is important since we are talking about coursing, not the people behind the petition.

This thread is about coursing yet you have repeatedly tried to turn into a thread about ICABS.

Sparks

Sparks wrote: »

I don't disagree - I just think that that post characterised all hunting in one swipe of a very broad brush. Bad shots do happen - often through no fault of the shooter - but they're not the norm by any means or metric.

A gun? That's not hunting. That's like using cheats in a computer game. Use your bare hands or some sort of homemade spear and we'll be impressed. People who get off on killing an animal that has no idea that a gun is even being pointed at it are people who...lets just say, you wouldn't be having them over for dinner. They lack sophistication.

Sparks

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

A gun? That's not hunting. That's like using cheats in a computer game. Use your bare hands or some sort of homemade spear and we'll be impressed.

You'd be impressed by strangling an animal... but you think hunters aren't up to a civilised par.

I think we just hit the knee of the diminishing returns graph.

archer22

Sparks wrote: »

I thought it was ICABS that you were saying hadn't called for a gun ban (despite the several calls listed above) rather than yourself, who you were just saying wasn't anti-gun and hadn't ever posted even one post saying bad things about guns (well, assuming you don't count the ones search turns up)?

Now you are talking Gibberish ...what exactly are you trying to say.

Benny Cake

Seachmall wrote: »

Not watching a terrified animal get ripped apart for enjoyment makes Bambi a better person.


If it was done to a dog in a garden by one man with a knife we call it animal abuse and demand he be locked up.

If it's done to a hare on a racecourse by 50 men with dogs we call it sport and let it continue.

Opinions like this really show how poorly understood the sport of coursing is....

Chuck Stone

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

A gun? That's not hunting.

Top of the food chain humans with high powered rifles and/or packs of dogs shoots at an animal from hundreds of feet away and/or watches it being torn to shreds by a pack of dogs and they like to think of themselves as 'hunters'.

steddyeddy

Sparks wrote: »

That wasn't what the thread you were suggesting was about; you were suggesting that if we had tighter links to conservation bodies, then extremist groups like ICABS would leave us alone.

The objection wasn't to tighter links to conservationists - because the hunting community already has links like that and has had for some time.

The objection was to this idea that (a) ICABS and their ilk should be appeased; and (b) that they ever could be appeased.

These extremist groups are the kind of people who not only claim credit for violent and destructive acts on the web, but who actually have to have seperate icons to denote arson, vandalism, sabotage and what they call "liberation" (which usually entails loosing thousands of pretty vicious non-native predators into an ecosystem that they then destroy). Why on earth would wI e ever want to encourage that kind of group by making them think we would want to seek some sort of compromise with them? They should be charged, convicted and imprisoned, not negotiated with as though they were legitimate protestors.

I.wanted to say you should appease ICABS? What I was referring to public support, which i might add you dont care about either way . Hand on heart I have never heard of ICABS before you lot mentioned it today!!

Sparks

steddyeddy wrote: »

I.wanted to say you should appease ICABS? What I was referring to public support, which i might add you dont care about either way . Hand on heart I have never heard of ICABS before you lot mentioned it today!!

Ahem...

paddy the man

Pro's for Coursing:
Long tradition and brings money to local economy
Heavily regulated by goverment
Dogs muzzled so fatality rate for Hares has decreased
Coursing clubs carry out predator control on Foxes to help protect Hare
Coursing clubs often prevent people shooting Hares on their lands
Hares are wormed and fed well when in captivity
After Coursing Hare is tagged and released (tagged animals not used again)


Con's for Coursing:
4% fatality rate for Hares involved. Capture Myopathy main cause.
Hares are captured in Nets prior to the Coursing meeting. Usually several weeks previous.
Hares held in artifically high numbers in captivity
Coursing meeting often held during breeding season. Breeding season: Jan-Sept
Being chased by dogs, held in captivity, handled by people unpleasant for the Hare
The effects of hare coursing on wild Hare populations are not known.
Introduced Brown Hares from Coursing clubs hybridise with Native Irish Hare

Sparks

Sparks wrote: »

You'd be impressed by strangling an animal...

Yes, I would. I would be extremely impressed to see a hunter go one on one trying to strangle a stag of a similar maturity/health.

Hunters who kill for fun? My cat has killed for fun because it doesn't know any better. So to me, a hunter is about as mentally proficient as my cat. Without the sophistication. Horrible people.

robertpatterson

Con's for Coursing:
4% fatality rate for Hares involved. Capture Myopathy main cause.
Hares are captured in Nets prior to the Coursing meeting. Usually several weeks previous.
Hares held in artifically high numbers in captivity
Coursing meeting often held during breeding season. Breeding season: Jan-Sept
Being chased by dogs, held in captivity, handled by people unpleasant for the Hare
The effects of hare coursing on wild Hare populations are not known.
Introduced Brown Hares from Coursing clubs hybridise with Native Irish Hare





Last coursing meeting is in early February

paddy the man

robertpatterson wrote: »

Con's for Coursing:
4% fatality rate for Hares involved. Capture Myopathy main cause.
Hares are captured in Nets prior to the Coursing meeting. Usually several weeks previous.
Hares held in artifically high numbers in captivity
Coursing meeting often held during breeding season. Breeding season: Jan-Sept
Being chased by dogs, held in captivity, handled by people unpleasant for the Hare
The effects of hare coursing on wild Hare populations are not known.
Introduced Brown Hares from Coursing clubs hybridise with Native Irish Hare





Last coursing meeting is in early February

Irish hares are seasonal breeders the mating season runs from January through to September but if conditions are favourable and there is an abundance of food combined with mild weather then they may breed year long.

fourleafclover

paddy the man wrote: »

Pro's for Coursing:
Long tradition and brings money to local economy
Heavily regulated by goverment
Dogs muzzled so fatality rate for Hares has decreased
Coursing clubs carry out predator control on Foxes to help protect Hare
Coursing clubs often prevent people shooting Hares on their lands
Hares are wormed and fed well when in captivity
After Coursing Hare is tagged and released (tagged animals not used again)


Con's for Coursing:
4% fatality rate for Hares involved. Capture Myopathy main cause.
Hares are captured in Nets prior to the Coursing meeting. Usually several weeks previous.
Hares held in artifically high numbers in captivity
Coursing meeting often held during breeding season. Breeding season: Jan-Sept
Being chased by dogs, held in captivity, handled by people unpleasant for the Hare
The effects of hare coursing on wild Hare populations are not known.
Introduced Brown Hares from Coursing clubs hybridise with Native Irish Hare

Capture Myopathy is a very dubious diagnosis, the studies pertaining to it in general are questionable. It also in one study says that 4 hares 6 weeks after a coursing meeting died due to capture myopathy, what is strange is that of the 84 hares released 4 died due to coursing but none died due to natural causes or due to predators??


The coursing season is october to february so as NOT to interfere with breeding.


Effects of hare coursing on hare population are known - the quercus report by Queens university belfast has said hares are 18 times more populant in areas with coursing than areas without and that the population of hares in the north has diminished since coursing was banned.

robertpatterson

paddy the man wrote: »

Irish hares are seasonal breeders the mating season runs from January through to September but if conditions are favourable and there is an abundance of food combined with mild weather then they may breed year long.

Im not disagreeing with you about their breeding
You said coursing often takes place during their breeding season Breeding season: Jan-Sept
I said the last coursing meeting is held in early February so its not really a great point youve made if theyre breeding season is for 9 months of the year and coursing only takes place for one month of that

paddy the man

fourleafclover wrote: »

Capture Myopathy is a very dubious diagnosis, the studies pertaining to it in general are questionable. It also in one study says that 4 hares 6 weeks after a coursing meeting died due to capture myopathy, what is strange is that of the 84 hares released 4 died due to coursing but none died due to natural causes or due to predators??


The coursing season is october to february so as NOT to interfere with breeding.


Effects of hare coursing on hare population are known - the quercus report by Queens university belfast has said hares are 18 times more populant in areas with coursing than areas without and that the population of hares in the north has diminished since coursing was banned.

Capture myopathy is a well documented syndrome following the restraint of wild animals. It can be diagnosed by post mortem lesions. The Irish Coursing Club does not dispute this.

The Coursing season attempts to limit the effect it has on the breeding Hares, but Irish Hares can breed in Jan/Feb.

Due to beneficial predator control numbers of Irish Hares are higher in Coursing areas. Also captured Hares are relocated to these areas (often fenced) which lead to higher population densities.

What surveys have shown that the banning of Coursing has led to a drop in numbers of Irish Hares in Northern Ireland? Since Irish Hares undergo yearly cyclical variation in population numbers it is not possible to determine whether a population has decreased in two years since the ban.

wexfordman

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Top of the food chain humans with high powered rifles and/or packs of dogs shoots at an animal from hundreds of feet away

Youve obviously never been hunting. And, from my own perspective:-
I am less of a coward, and far more ethical in the manner in which I provide food for my family.

I raise my own animals

I hunt duck, pigeon, pheasant and deer, and its all done entirely by myself, shot prepared and brought to the table for my own family.

I know the health of the animals I hunt
I know how they died
I ensure it is as quick and painless as possible
I abide by rules and regulations to maintain population levels
I support and assist most of the animals I eat and hunt, to ensure it is sustainable.

Compare that to most of the individuals on this forum who claim to be concerned about animal welfare, but couldnt give a toss where their meat came from whether it be from intensive pig farming, whether it be some mangy ill treated drugged up horse, whether it be battery farmed chickens, whether it was killed humanely or not.

As long as it came in a plastic wrapper, and they dont have to associate it with a living breathing animal, then for some absurd reason they perceive themselves to be more ethical and caring of animals than those of us who have an active involvement in hunting and wildlife preservation.

There is literally no excuse for meat eaters to claim some for of ethical superiority to hunters, in fact it is quite the opposite, and it makes most look very foolish indeed, and literally stranded for any sensible or credible argument.

OldNotWIse

wexfordman wrote: »

Youve obviously never been hunting. And, from my own perspective:-
I am less of a coward, and fare more ethical in the manner in which I provide food for my family.

I raise my own animals

I hunt duck, pigeon, pheasant and deer, and its all done entirely by myself, shot prepared and brought to the table for my own family.

I know the health of the animals I hunt
I know how they died
I ensure it is as quick and painless as possible
I abide by rules and regulations to maintain population levels
I support and assist most of the animals I eat and hunt

Compare that to most of the individuals on this forum who claim to be concerned about animal welfare, and couldnt give a toss where their meat came from whether it be from intensive pgi farming, whether it be mangy ill treated drugged up horses, whether it be battery farmed chickens, whether it was killed humanely or not. As long as it came in a plastic wrapper, and they dont have to associate it with a living breathing animal, then for some absurd reason they perceive themselves to be more ethical and caring of animals than those of us who have an active involvement in hunting and wildlife preservation.

There is literally no excuse for meat eaters to claim some for of ethical superiority to hunters, in fact it is quite the opposite, and it makes most look very foolish indeed, and literally stranded for any sensible or credible argument.

Very much agree with the bolded part.
I think the issue is with hunting for the sake of "sport" as opposed to doing it for food?? And yes I think your approach beats intensive battery farming hands down...but I suspect the morons frequenting the coursing etc still buy their meat in tesco or aldi.

reprazant

Damn you Chuck Stone and your ill-informed generalisations about hunting.

Oh, by the way,

most of the individuals on this forum who claim to be concerned about animal welfare, and couldnt give a toss where their meat came from whether it be from intensive pgi farming, whether it be mangy ill treated drugged up horses, whether it be battery farmed chickens, whether it was killed humanely or not. As long as it came in a plastic wrapper, and they dont have to associate it with a living breathing animal, then for some absurd reason they perceive themselves to be more ethical and caring of animals than those of us who have an active involvement in hunting and wildlife preservation.

reprazant

reprazant wrote: »

Oh, by the way,

Well, that's a big lie. I very much refuse to eat from anywhere, or from any source that I consider animal treatment to be below par.

Any other groundbreaking observations to add?

wexfordman

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Well, that's a big lie. I very much refuse to eat from anywhere, or from any source that I consider animal treatment to be below par.

Any other groundbreaking observations to add?

First off, its not a big lie, its a fair generalisation.

So, where do you source your meat from, and how do you "consider" it to be below par or not ?

Chuck Stone

wexfordman wrote: »

I hunt duck, pigeon, pheasant and deer

You mean you shoot them with a gun.

fourleafclover

paddy the man wrote: »

Capture myopathy is a well documented syndrome following the restraint of wild animals. It can be diagnosed by post mortem lesions. The Irish Coursing Club does not dispute this.

The Coursing season attempts to limit the effect it has on the breeding Hares, but Irish Hares can breed in Jan/Feb.

Due to beneficial predator control numbers of Irish Hares are higher in Coursing areas. Also captured Hares are relocated to these areas (often fenced) which lead to higher population densities.

What surveys have shown that the banning of Coursing has led to a drop in numbers of Irish Hares in Northern Ireland? Since Irish Hares undergo yearly cyclical variation in population numbers it is not possible to determine whether a population has decreased in two years since the ban.

1) You will have to show me where the ICC recognise capture myopathy? As no independent study has been done on the irish hare in relation to capture myopathy and furthermore it is in relation to poor nutrition and diet, something that you do not get in hares held by coursing clubs.

2) The hare may possibly breed in january and february as you have said, however this is uncommon unless there is a mild winter and furthermore gestation is six weeks meaning that coursing is OVER come birth.

3) The preserves where the hare are released back into are NOT fenced and the hare is free to roam for 500 miles if it so wishes.

4) What you said is not true, hare numbers have declined in the UK and in the North since coursing was banned, i refer you to a Quercus study in 2010.


Apparently you do not know the full Pros and Cons of coursing and your scripted points although valued were inaccurate and misleading.

warehouse1

Chuck Stone wrote: »

You mean you shoot them with a gun.

No he mean's hunt its not just a case of going out into the countryside and finding an animal and shooting it.

yubabill1

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Yes, I would. I would be extremely impressed to see a hunter go one on one trying to strangle a stag of a similar maturity/health.

Hunters who kill for fun? My cat has killed for fun because it doesn't know any better. So to me, a hunter is about as mentally proficient as my cat. Without the sophistication. Horrible people.

What a mixed-up opinion set.

First off, I have witnessed the first scenario, albeit the guy had a knife; and yes, very impressive. Jumped on the stag's back, one stick was all that was needed.

Second, your cat and the thousands of others let roam free in the countryside cause untold damage to songbirds, young rabbits and anything it can catch.

Cass

archer22 wrote: »

Well boys you have done yourselves no favours invading this thread and insulting people........

Pot = Kettle.

..my personal response has been to check out that ICABS site you are so obsessed about and will donate to them tomorrow and would ask everybody else you have been sneering at here to do the same.Its Karma time

Karma!!!!!! You think that makes sense. To finance such a group to "stick it to us"?

Fair enough i'll give you Karna. For every Euro you donate, i'll shoot a fox. How is that karma? Be sure to post up how much everyone donates or i'll simply round up. That makes as much sense as your ramblings.

archer22 wrote: »

After what I have seen happen on this thread that is now my view..if you fellows think you can intimidate and harass people having a discussion well then to hell with you..your enemy is my friend.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. Talking about blind ignorance to what is going on. We take part, and you get all pissy as though we have no business posting here.

steddyeddy wrote: »

Antis, antis antis. You guys are the author of your own missfourtune o be honest.

You are simply lashing out at being refused. You have not added anything to the topic of this bar your own self serving needs/issues.

archer22 wrote: »

............ I am a Gun owner and target shooter.

Yeah, sure. :rolleyes:

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

My cat has killed for fun because it doesn't know any better. .

Typical. "Oh, cats are free, and should be able to roam". Nothing about the destruction they cause to fauna. It's a case of lazy pet owners not taking responsibility for the actions of their pets. You shouldn't be allowed to own animals if you cannot control them.

Artful_Badger

Cass wrote: »

Pot = Kettle.

You have not added anything to the topic of this bar your own self serving needs/issues. .

Kettle = Pot.

Jesus Christ but you hunting folks are blind to your own bullshít. You came in here en-masse from the hunting forum to load the poll and then turned the thread into a hunting debate because you dont allow any debate in your own forum.

Its just been the same hunting forum posters circle jerking and rounding on the stragglers since you guys turned the thread to shít. So you are not really in any position to be criticising anyone else contribution to the thread are ya ?

wexfordman

Chuck Stone wrote: »

You mean you shoot them with a gun.

Seriously ? Thats all your able to comment on from my post ?

Looks like I was right

wexfordman wrote: »

There is literally no excuse for meat eaters to claim some for of ethical superiority to hunters, in fact it is quite the opposite, and it makes most look very foolish indeed, and literally stranded for any sensible or credible argument.

wexfordman

Artful_Badger wrote: »

Kettle = Pot.

Jesus Christ but you hunting folks are blind to your own bullshít. You came in here en-masse from the hunting forum to load the pol

This is an after hours forum is it not ? And the poll was an honest attempt at a poll was it not ? I'm confused about how a poll could be otherwise if you exclude anyone, I would imagine those that are against hare coursing, or actively engage in protest against it are welcome to add to the poll too, so why would people from hunting forum be banned ?

Artful_Badger wrote: »

l and then turned the thread into a hunting debate because you dont allow any debate in your own forum.

There is a reason for that, and it seems odd for on one hand for you to say we dont allow debate, and then criticise us for engaging in it ?

It seems very strange to me how you could wish to have any form of debate and exclude a significant portion of people fromtaking part in it.

What would you like, a 100% poll in favour of banning coursing, and all posters repeating the same anti coursing comments ?

Sorry the results didnt go your way (so far), but no point in crying over it. Perhaps the OP should have written the thread and poll was only for those in favour of a ban!

Sparks

Artful_Badger wrote: »

Jesus Christ but you hunting folks are blind to your own bullshít. You came in here en-masse from the hunting forum to load the poll

I'm still waiting for anyone who can point out a rational reason that holds up to scrutiny as to why posters from the hunting forum should not be allowed vote on a poll that concerns fieldsports.

I've seen plenty of people saying "well, duh" or its equivalent, but that's not an argument, it's an appeal to a peer group to support a belief that has no data behind it. But an actual reason? Nothing yet. So I continue to conclude that there just are more people in favour of coursing than there are against it, and you don't like that.

Artful_Badger

wexfordman wrote: »

This is an after hours forum is it not ? And the poll was an honest attempt at a poll was it not ?

I'm confused about how a poll could be otherwise if you exclude anyone, I would imagine those that are against hare coursing, or actively engage in protest against it are welcome to add to the poll too, so why would people from hunting forum be banned ?

It was until there was an organised effort in the hunting forum to load it. Which is what happened. Hunting forum organised and skewed the poll and derailed the thread.

I'm not gonna spoon feed this to you as I had to do with the others. Everyone is welcome to their views but the organised effort to load the poll meant it was never gonna be a reflection of anything other than the fact it was skewed. There was only an organised effort on one side.

There is a reason for that, and it seems odd for on one hand for you to say we dont allow debate, and then criticise us for engaging in it ?

Problem being this isnt a thread for debating about hinting. IT was a thread about Hare Coursing with a poll to gauge public opinion. Didnt stay that way though, ended up with a skewed poll and a hunting debate courtesy of the fine fellows of the hunting forum.

Artful_Badger

Sparks wrote: »

I'm still waiting for anyone who can point out a rational reason that holds up to scrutiny as to why posters from the hunting forum should not be allowed vote on a poll that concerns fieldsports.

Its actually getting rather pathetic that you are continuing to argue that considering its been explained to you so many times. Just finger sin the ear and invent an argument rather than facing the facts.

Cass

Artful_Badger wrote: »

Kettle = Pot.

Jesus Christ but you hunting folks are blind to your own bullshít. You came in here en-masse from the hunting forum to load the poll and then turned the thread into a hunting debate because you dont allow any debate in your own forum.

Its just been the same hunting forum posters circle jerking and rounding on the stragglers since you guys turned the thread to shít. So you are not really in any position to be criticising anyone else contribution to the thread are ya ?

Artful_Badger wrote: »

It was until there was an organised effort in the hunting forum to load it. Which is what happened. Hunting forum organised and skewed the poll and derailed the thread.

I'm not gonna spoon feed this to you as I had to do with the others. Everyone is welcome to their views but the organised effort to load the poll meant it was never gonna be a reflection of anything other than the fact it was skewed. There was only an organised effort on one side.



Problem being this isnt a thread for debating about hinting. IT was a thread about Hare Coursing with a poll to gauge public opinion. Didnt stay that way though, ended up with a skewed poll and a hunting debate courtesy of the fine fellows of the hunting forum.

All i'm hearing is whinging because it didn't go your way.

steddyeddy

Do you guys even listen to yourselves? You complain about the “antis” (which includes everyone from Dublin and anyone who doesn’t hunt) hijacking threads,yet you posted a thread in the hunting forum which instructed others to comealong (hijack) this thread. You give out about “antis” calling you names yetevery second word from your mouth is “uneducated Dubs” and “townies”.

I genuinely think that you guys are seriously turning people of hunting in general. You call anyone interested in conservation an anti, you sayyour into conservation but don’t want connection with conservation groups andyou act with hostility to anyone who might disagree with coursing.

As I said I generally have no problem with hunting. It’s notsomething I would do and I think there are some irresponsible hunters out therebut I can’t disagree with all hunting as some people shoot to kill.

I would love if conservation was an aspect of Irish huntingbut it’s not. Anyone talking about it on the hunting forum is apparently an “anti”or some other collective group that the hunting lobby blames for its troubles. Iwas suspicious of Irish hunting as I said as I think some people in the lobbythink along the lines of “dumb animals” and “Disney gave us anthropomorphism”as opposed to the scientific view and I have to say my suspicions arewarranted. You come across as a bunch of people with little respect forwildlife (a number don’t believe in wildlife laws for that matter) or little respect for the public in general.

I would also say you need to update your hunting charter tobe more specifically anti conservation.

Artful_Badger

Cass wrote: »

All i'm hearing is whinging because it didn't go your way.

All I'm seeing is a mod and cmod making tits of themselves and derailing a thread after allowing their forum to rig the poll.

steddyeddy

Cass wrote: »

Pot = Kettle.

Karma!!!!!! You think that makes sense. To finance such a group to "stick it to us"?

Fair enough i'll give you Karna. For every Euro you donate, i'll shoot a fox. How is that karma? Be sure to post up how much everyone donates or i'll simply round up. That makes as much sense as your ramblings.


Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. Talking about blind ignorance to what is going on. We take part, and you get all pissy as though we have no business posting here.

You are simply lashing out at being refused. You have not added anything to the topic of this bar your own self serving needs/issues.


Yeah, sure. :rolleyes:

Typical. "Oh, cats are free, and should be able to roam". Nothing about the destruction they cause to fauna. It's a case of lazy pet owners not taking responsibility for the actions of their pets. You shouldn't be allowed to own animals if you cannot control them.

Am I reading this tripe? He doesnt agree with coarsing so he cant own guns?

yubabill1

Artful_Badger wrote: »

There was only an organised effort on one side.

If you believe that, then you are simply wrong.

This thread is a proxy.

Sparks

Artful_Badger wrote: »

It was until there was an organised effort in the hunting forum to load it. Which is what happened.

No, it wasn't. What happened is that a link was posted in the Hunting forum. Oddly, you're not complaining when the exact same link was posted on the front page on http://www.boards.ie where the entire world could see it.

You wanted data; you got it. Not our fault it's not the data you wanted.

There's a word for what you've got, and to give you a hint, it's not "science".

Artful_Badger

yubabill1 wrote: »

If you believe that, then you are simply wrong.

This thread is a proxy.

Its clear to anyone with two eyes in their head that it happened. The voting changed completed as did the number of posters arguing against a ban as soon as a thread went up in the hunting forum calling for the forum to mobilise and back a no ban vote. Even the topic changed to suit the agenda of the hunting forum.

Cass

Artful_Badger wrote: »

Its actually getting rather pathetic that you are continuing to argue that considering its been explained to you so many times.

That's right. You didn't want a fair poll just all anti field sports people voting.

Start another one, and see if it goes any better.

Steddyeddy wrote:

Am I reading this tripe? He doesnt agree with coarsing so he cant own guns?

Not worth replying to. You are annoyed at the shooting mods so nothing i say will work. You just want to vent about your "conservation" idea being rebuffed.

Artful_Badger wrote:

All I'm seeing is a mod and cmod making tits of themselves and derailing a thread after allowing their forum to rig the poll

Brilliant. No argument, so just call names. Go for gold.

Benny Cake

Artful_Badger wrote: »

Its clear to anyone with two eyes in their head that it happened. The voting changed completed as did the number of posters arguing against a ban as soon as a thread went up in the hunting forum calling for the forum to mobilise and back a no ban vote. Even the topic changed to suit the agenda of the hunting forum.

Get over yourself. You don't like the answer the poll is giving you, simple as that. The hunting fraternity are every bit as entitled to express an opinion as you are....

paddy the man

fourleafclover wrote: »

1) You will have to show me where the ICC recognise capture myopathy? As no independent study has been done on the irish hare in relation to capture myopathy and furthermore it is in relation to poor nutrition and diet, something that you do not get in hares held by coursing clubs.

2) The hare may possibly breed in january and february as you have said, however this is uncommon unless there is a mild winter and furthermore gestation is six weeks meaning that coursing is OVER come birth.

3) The preserves where the hare are released back into are NOT fenced and the hare is free to roam for 500 miles if it so wishes.

4) What you said is not true, hare numbers have declined in the UK and in the North since coursing was banned, i refer you to a Quercus study in 2010.


Apparently you do not know the full Pros and Cons of coursing and your scripted points although valued were inaccurate and misleading.

1) I know several Vets who work for the Department who inspect the Hares. Capture Myopathy is a fact. What do you think the cause of the 4% fatality rate since death due to trauma from coursing are rare/uncommon since muzzling? To say that Hares don't get Capture Myopathy is foolish.

2) Hare can breed in Jan/Feb although uncommon, but it does happen.

4) Coursing has been banned in the North since mid 2010. As I previously said since Irish Hares undergo yearly cyclical variation in population numbers it is not possible to determine whether a population has decreased in two years since the ban. Since the Quercus report is from 2010 it is impossible to know whether a decrease in population is due to Coursing being banned. Do you not understand what cyclical variations in Hare population is?