Hare Coursing

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

In fairness would it not look strange if a person who has never attended one suddenly went to a meeting?

No, why should it? I went to a few and decided that it's not for me. Facilities were a bit primitive for my liking, but others were having a great time!

Artful_Badger

rambojon wrote: »

Id respectfully suggest anybody to attend a meeting to judge it for themselves ... there are many very vocal people agaisnt this sport who have never attended a single meet and really havent much of an idea whats involved. im strongly in favour of a great country persons sport.

Why the hell would someone who disagrees with the sport on the grounds of animal welfare want to go and support an event ??

Its like saying cock fighting may not be for you but you could at least go to a fight before you decide.

I'd respectfully suggest anyone who takes pleasure in causing animals distress to try find something else to do with your time.

fourleafclover

Artful_Badger wrote: »

Why the hell would someone who disagrees with the sport on the grounds of animal welfare want to go and support an event ??

Its like saying cock fighting may not be for you but you could at least go to a fight before you decide.

I'd respectfully suggest anyone who takes pleasure in causing animals distress to try find something else to do with your time.

You clearly have never been to a meeting as your views thoughts and opinions on it are quite wide of the mark. It is quite a shame really that some people form an opinion without due reason. It is like saying I dislike rugby because one player got an injury in a video clip i saw one time. People are entitled to an opinion and a viewpoint without a doubt. However, it should be an educated one.

Artful_Badger

fourleafclover wrote: »

You clearly have never been to a meeting as your views thoughts and opinions on it are quite wide of the mark. It is quite a shame really that some people form an opinion without due reason. It is like saying I dislike rugby because one player got an injury in a video clip i saw one time. People are entitled to an opinion and a viewpoint without a doubt. However, it should be an educated one.

I've seen enough of it to see that it causes distress to the Hare and in some cases physical harm. Its quite a shame some people have such little regard for creatures that they would put it through something like that just to have something to do of an evening.

Its nothing like saying anything about rugby or any other sport where people take part of their own free will. Its capturing a Hare and then having dogs chase it to entertain people.

fourleafclover

Artful_Badger wrote: »

I've seen enough of it to see that it causes distress to the Hare and in some cases physical harm. Its quite a shame some people have such little regard for creatures that they would put it through something like that just to have something to do of an evening.

Its nothing like saying anything about rugby or any other sport where people take part of their own free will. Its capturing a Hare and then having dogs chase it to entertain people.

Artful you just literally cemented my argument - if as you say you have seen enough of it you would surely know that coursing begins at 11.30 in the morning and finishes circa 2.30 in the afternoon, it is not an EVENING sport as you proclaim.

I can only deduce from your apparent misunderstanding of what occurs that you have a very uneducated opinion. That is quite embarassing, to have such a strong stance from something you know very little about would you not say?

Artful_Badger

fourleafclover wrote: »

Artful you just literally cemented my argument - if as you say you have seen enough of it you would surely know that coursing begins at 11.30 in the morning and finishes circa 2.30 in the afternoon, it is not an EVENING sport as you proclaim.

I can only deduce from your apparent misunderstanding of what occurs that you have a very uneducated opinion. That is quite embarassing, to have such a strong stance from something you know very little about would you not say?

Whats embarrassing is that considering what we are talking about you think the time of day that it takes place matters.

My stance in on needlessly causing distress to animals. Its quite clear that that is what takes place in Hare Coursing. In fact you havent once tried to deny that it causes distress to the Hare. You simply throw out nonsense arguments about the time of day its on and trying to compare it to other sports that are not in the remotest sense like it.

Because you know it causes distress, you just dont care.

fourleafclover

Artful_Badger wrote: »

Whats embarrassing is that considering what we are talking about you think the time of day that it takes place matters.

My stance in on needlessly causing distress to animals. Its quite clear that that is what takes place in Hare Coursing. In fact you havent once tried to deny that it causes distress to the Hare. You simply throw out nonsense arguments about the time of day its on and trying to compare it to other sports that are not in the remotest sense like it.

Because you know it causes distress, you just dont care.

Show me your study on how it causes distress? I can show you many on how the hare after being coursed its heart rate returns to normal and it eats which happens naturally in the wild also, if distress occured then the hare would not eat and its heart rate would be abnormal.

Now you came into this thread speaking out against people going coursing and making a self educated opinion on the sport, I have pointed out that you know very little about it and that you have never been to a meeting and as such you can not ask people to not go and witness for themselves.

You are afraid that people will actually realise that as a sport it has nothing to hide thats its doors are wide open to the public, it is well regulated by the NPWS and it is licensed by the Dept. Or very simply, how can 30000 people attend a coursing event in February with 25 protesters outside of the meeting being the ones who are in the right in their opinion. The numbers do not add up.

Artful_Badger

fourleafclover wrote: »

Show me your study on how it causes distress? I can show you many on how the hare after being coursed its heart rate returns to normal and it eats which happens naturally in the wild also, if distress occured then the hare would not eat and its heart rate would be abnormal.

lol Holy fcuk you'll even try to claim it doesnt cause the Hare any distress. Explain to me Einstein why would the Hares heart rate be increased ? Anything to do with the fact that its been taken from its environment, locked in a box then released to have two dogs chase it ? And you call me uneducated.

Now you came into this thread speaking out against people going coursing and making a self educated opinion on the sport, I have pointed out that you know very little about it and that you have never been to a meeting and as such you can not ask people to not go and witness for themselves.

I have witnessed it. There are videos at the start of this thread. Are you gonna claim that isnt coursing ? Are you gonna claim I am wrong in thinking that coursing is the act of two dogs chasing a Hare around a field ? No ? So I am well aware of what takes place then. Going along to support it as if I would suddenly lose interest in the well being of the Hare (presumably because of the amount of craic I'd be having) is just another in a long line of absolutely ridiculous arguments to come from your side of this discussion.

You are afraid that people will actually realise that as a sport it has nothing to hide thats its doors are wide open to the public, it is well regulated by the NPWS and it is licensed by the Dept. Or very simply, how can 30000 people attend a coursing event in February with 25 protesters outside of the meeting being the ones who are in the right in their opinion. The numbers do not add up.

And all that means what ? That I shouldnt dislike animals being tormented ? You might get your moral queue by whatever the crowd is doing and whatever you can get away with but I dont. If I see something as wrong I see it as wrong despite how well regulated it is or how many people like it.

fourleafclover

Artful_Badger wrote: »

lol Holy fcuk you'll even try to claim it doesnt cause the Hare any distress. Explain to me Einstein why would the Hares heart rate be increased ? Anything to do with the fact that its been taken from its environment, locked in a box then released to have two dogs chase it ? And you call me uneducated.



I have witnessed it. There are videos at the start of this thread. Are you gonna claim that isnt coursing ? Are you gonna claim I am wrong in thinking that coursing is the act of two dogs chasing a Hare around a field ? No ? So I am well aware of what takes place then. Going along to support it as if I would suddenly lose interest in the well being of the Hare (presumably because of the amount of craic I'd be having) is just another in a long line of absolutely ridiculous arguments to come from your side of this discussion.



And all that means what ? That I shouldnt dislike animals being tormented ? You might get your moral queue by whatever the crowd is doing and whatever you can get away with but I dont. If I see something as wrong I see it as wrong despite how well regulated it is or how many people like it.

I dont have to be Einstein, I just have to be more intelligent than you to realise that when you run your heart rate rises.


As i said, you have formed your opinion from a video clip, it is plain to see from your inaccurate, uninformed and uneducated arguments that this is the case and engaging with you when you seem unable to accept that witnessing a clip does not give an overall portrayal is like expecting water to flow up a hill.
Thankfully, anybody reading this will plainly see that and they will make their own opinion by actually attending a meeting. You are trying to argue that 30000 people have a very wrong moral compass and that the 25 divine saviours are correct. It is laughable. Artful you are entitled to your opinion, I personally have no problem with that, I too have mine, I do suggest yours should be better informed/educated but that is your perogative. I do think that you should not be advising people not to attend a meeting, to decide for themselves what the sport is, just on your opinion.

Coursing has nothing to hide, it is open to anyone to attend, I for one would welcome anybody to a meeting, if they decide it is not for them I shall accept and respect their opinion in equal quantities for the fact that they were open enough to educate and decide for themselves.

Artful_Badger

fourleafclover wrote: »

I dont have to be Einstein, I just have to be more intelligent than you to realise that when you run your heart rate rises.

And thats all it is, just running ? Not running for its life to avoid two predators which would cause distress to any creature. I fear you're not as intelligent as you think you are.

As i said, you have formed your opinion from a video clip, it is plain to see from your inaccurate, uninformed and uneducated arguments that this is the case and engaging with you when you seem unable to accept that witnessing a clip does not give an overall portrayal is like expecting water to flow up a hill.

No, I have formed my opinion based on the fact that the sport itself is two dogs chasing a Hare. You might be influenced by the craic had, and the amount of people there but I wont be. So going wont change my opinion at all unless the Hare is having a right laugh and gives a post match interview outlining his strategy for avoiding the dogs. I dont have to attend a cock fight to know what that entails and how despicable it is and neither do you. But that wont suit your agenda so best ignore it.

Thankfully, anybody reading this will plainly see that and they will make their own opinion by actually attending a meeting. You are trying to argue that 30000 people have a very wrong moral compass and that the 25 divine saviours are correct. It is laughable. Artful you are entitled to your opinion, I personally have no problem with that, I too have mine, I do suggest yours should be better informed/educated but that is your perogative. I do think that you should not be advising people not to attend a meeting, to decide for themselves what the sport is, just on your opinion.

Again you seem to have no clue as to what's going on, which I'm sure is clear to any people reading without an agenda. I'm arguing that needlessly tormenting an animal is wrong. You're arguing that loads of people like it so it must be ok. You've attended the events and still you need to use other people to justify it for you. I'd advise everyone not to attend as its nothing more than the needless torment of an animal for sheer entertainment.

Coursing has nothing to hide, it is open to anyone to attend, I for one would welcome anybody to a meeting, if they decide it is not for them I shall accept and respect their opinion in equal quantities for the fact that they were open enough to educate and decide for themselves.

You should try get in some dog fights, cock fights and the like too. Educate yourself on them before deciding they aint for you. :rolleyes:

Benny Cake

Artful_Badger wrote: »

You should try get in some dog fights, cock fights and the like too. Educate yourself on them before deciding they aint for you. :rolleyes:

Both these activities are illegal & unregulated, so the comparison to coursing is a pathetic attempt to curry favour for your argument....

Artful_Badger

Benny Cake wrote: »

Both these activities are illegal & unregulated, so the comparison to coursing is a pathetic attempt to curry favour for your argument....

It wasnt a comparison. The posters argument was that to have an opinion on such a thing you have to attend and see it for yourself regardless of your views on how it affects the animals.

Would that be the case if dog fights were legal ? Would he or you have to attend before being able to come to the conclusion that two dogs tearing lumps out of each other for entertainment was wrong ? I didnt think so. Then again in the case of the other poster if it was legal and there was enough people there then it couldnt be wrong.

Second time in this thread you've jumped in with your two cents without actually understanding what was being discussed.

wexfordman

Artful_Badger wrote: »

I've seen enough of it to see that it causes distress to the Hare and in some cases physical harm. Its quite a shame some people have such little regard for creatures that they would put it through something like that just to have something to do of an evening.

Its nothing like saying anything about rugby or any other sport where people take part of their own free will. Its capturing a Hare and then having dogs chase it to entertain people.

The same can be said for horse racing.I assume you would vote for an end to that also ?

And fishing,catch and release etc!

Artful_Badger

wexfordman wrote: »

The same can be said for horse racing.I assume you would vote for an end to that also ?

Indeed I would.

wexfordman

Artful_Badger wrote: »

Indeed I would.

Fishing ?

Artful_Badger

wexfordman wrote: »

Fishing ?

Anything that I'd consider needless and distressing to an animal. Fishing included. There are enough things to occupy us in this world without having to spend our time tormenting other creatures.

wexfordman

Artful_Badger wrote: »

Anything that I'd consider needless and distressing to an animal. Fishing included. There are enough things to occupy us in this world without having to spend our time tormenting other creatures.

Are you a vegan ?

lauramckk

artful i think your posts spell more about you than your opinions. clearly you are against any sport concerning animals. could i ask do you also oppose hurling, gaa, soccer and golf?

you surely must also be vegan and not wear any animal products?

your aligning of coursing to illegal cock and dog fighting is despicable. coursing dogs wear muzzles hares run to an escape and it is legal, but that does not suit your argument at all of course so you ignore it. shame on you, then again blatant lies are often the food of antis

lauramckk

fourleafclover wrote: »

I dont have to be Einstein, I just have to be more intelligent than you to realise that when you run your heart rate rises.


As i said, you have formed your opinion from a video clip, it is plain to see from your inaccurate, uninformed and uneducated arguments that this is the case and engaging with you when you seem unable to accept that witnessing a clip does not give an overall portrayal is like expecting water to flow up a hill.
Thankfully, anybody reading this will plainly see that and they will make their own opinion by actually attending a meeting. You are trying to argue that 30000 people have a very wrong moral compass and that the 25 divine saviours are correct. It is laughable. Artful you are entitled to your opinion, I personally have no problem with that, I too have mine, I do suggest yours should be better informed/educated but that is your perogative. I do think that you should not be advising people not to attend a meeting, to decide for themselves what the sport is, just on your opinion.

Coursing has nothing to hide, it is open to anyone to attend, I for one would welcome anybody to a meeting, if they decide it is not for them I shall accept and respect their opinion in equal quantities for the fact that they were open enough to educate and decide for themselves.

well said

Artful_Badger

wexfordman wrote: »

Are you a vegan ?

I'm not a strict vegan no. I'm a vegetarian but I try to take care with what I eat. I try to avoid eggs and dairy and such but its tough to avoid them completely, in saying that I dont eat them with any regularity and dont purchase them myself. I'm not perfect in how I live by a long way and I dont expect others to be either, particularly given how much society and the food industry is based on animal products. But with the likes of sports its much more easily avoidable and its an active choice to be involved in the distress with sports for no other reason than for entertainment.

Artful_Badger

lauramckk wrote: »

artful i think your posts spell more about you than your opinions. clearly you are against any sport concerning animals. could i ask do you also oppose hurling, gaa, soccer and golf?

I'm not a fan of GAA or Golf but I dont oppose them. Why would I ?

you surely must also be vegan and not wear any animal products?

As I said in the previous post I do my best to avoid those things.

your aligning of coursing to illegal cock and dog fighting is despicable. coursing dogs wear muzzles hares run to an escape and it is legal, but that does not suit your argument at all of course so you ignore it. shame on you, then again blatant lies are often the food of antis

Please read back, I have already spelled that out for another poster, if the argument is that one must attend these things to formulate an educated opinion then that must also be the case for dog fighting and cock fighting. I wasnt comparing the two sports. I'm an anti am I ? No guessing what your opinions are on the matter then.

And shame on you for registering to support needlessly distressing animals for sheer entertainment.

lauramckk

Artful_Badger wrote: »

I'm not a fan of GAA or Golf but I dont oppose them. Why would I ?

because if you were a person of principle you would oppose them afterall in gaa the ball is leather!! oh and in golf how do you think they stop rabbits from destroying golf courses??? yes they are poisoned!! that is where myxomatosis came from.

SHAME ON YOU, YOU HAVE NO PRINCIPLES ONLY ILL INFORMED BELIEFS

Artful_Badger

lauramckk wrote: »

because if you were a person of principle you would oppose them afterall in gaa the ball is leather!! oh and in golf how do you think they stop rabbits from destroying golf courses??? yes they are poisoned!! that is where myxomatosis came from.

I already stated I was against all things that needlessly caused distress to animals. And I concede that a lot of those things are ingrained in society and all you can do is avoid them where you can. But that doesnt mean I'm against everything in Society. I'm not against the sport of GAA because they use a leather ball. Just as I'm not against shops because they sell meat. I'm against the use of leather in making balls and the meat industry itself.

SHAME ON YOU, YOU HAVE NO PRINCIPLES ONLY ILL INFORMED BELIEFS

You accuse me of having no principles while you come on here to defend the needless torment of animals ? You're the one without principles, only self centred wants. Some of us try to live as best we can without tormenting other creatures needlessly, while other like you couldnt care less as long as you had your fun in doing it.

wexfordman

Artful_Badger wrote: »

I'm not a strict vegan no. I'm a vegetarian but I try to take care with what I eat. I try to avoid eggs and dairy and such but its tough to avoid them completely, in saying that I dont eat them with any regularity and dont purchase them myself. I'm not perfect in how I live by a long way and I dont expect others to be either, particularly given how much society and the food industry is based on animal products. But with the likes of sports its much more easily avoidable and its an active choice to be involved in the distress with sports for no other reason than for entertainment.

No problem,just needed to get an idea of what angle you were conning from, it is fairly clear.

While I respect the fact that at least you are committed to your beliefs, I certainly don't agree with them, and I think most people would be in the same boat.

The fact that you said you would also vote for a ban on horse racing and fishing perhaps should make many people consider more long term agenda of antis (and you are an anti I would think you don't disagree with that).

Artful_Badger

wexfordman wrote: »

No problem,just needed to get an idea of what angle you were conning from, it is fairly clear.

While I respect the fact that at least you are committed to your beliefs, I certainly don't agree with them, and I think most people would be in the same boat.

The fact that you said you would also vote for a ban on horse racing and fishing perhaps should make many people consider more long term agenda of antis (and you are an anti I would think you don't disagree with that).

Yeah I doubt too many would agree with my view in the wider sense. Depends on what you mean by anti, I thought up until now it was a term to mean people who opposed hunting and the traditional bloodsports. I dont even like the sound of it to be honest as it makes me sound like I'm part of some resistance movement.

I dont really have an agenda, I'm not campaigning for anything and not a member of any group. I just happen to think we dont need to be tormenting animals so lets just not torment them and my long term hopes would be that that outlook caught on a bit and less animals were tormented. But I dont do anything other than live my life as close to the principles I hold as I can and maybe express my opinion on occasions such as these from time to time.

If thats what you mean by anti I suppose I'm an anti.

ManMade

Artful_Badger wrote: »

I'm not a fan of GAA or Golf but I dont oppose them. Why would I?

A cow had to die after spending its life on an industrial farm to make that football so humans can be entertained!!!

They poison the bunnies!!!

Where are your morals?

Dyr

ManMade wrote: »

A cow had to die after spending its life on an industrial farm to make that football so humans can be entertained!!!

They poison the bunnies!!!

Where are your morals?

Was anyone there watching the cow being tortured to death, working up an erection while drooling all over their stone age bogger chin?

No?

Then stfu mi amgio

ManMade

Bambi wrote: »

Was anyone there watching the cow being tortured to death, working up an erection while drooling all over their stone age bogger chin?

No?

Then stfu mi amgio

for after hours this is a scarily hostile thread.

*slowly leaves room and closes door*

DEFTLEFTHAND

Bambi wrote: »

Was anyone there watching the cow being tortured to death, working up an erection while drooling all over their stone age bogger chin?

No?

Then stfu mi amgio

What's the story with this stone age bogger thing. Where do you live? Doesn't the world view Ireland as a backward hayseed land anyway?

Benny Cake

Artful_Badger wrote: »

It wasnt a comparison. The posters argument was that to have an opinion on such a thing you have to attend and see it for yourself regardless of your views on how it affects the animals.

Would that be the case if dog fights were legal ? Would he or you have to attend before being able to come to the conclusion that two dogs tearing lumps out of each other for entertainment was wrong ? I didnt think so. Then again in the case of the other poster if it was legal and there was enough people there then it couldnt be wrong.

Second time in this thread you've jumped in with your two cents without actually understanding what was being discussed.

And its the umpteenth time you've been called out on the flimsy foundation upon which your argument is based. You also appear to be very much alone on this thread, maybe the poll isn't so "biased" after all....

Artful_Badger

Benny Cake wrote: »

And its the umpteenth time you've been called out on the flimsy foundation upon which your argument is based. You also appear to be very much alone on this thread, maybe the poll isn't so "biased" after all....

Lets go back to it now for a second. You accused me of a pathetic attempt to curry flavour my argument by comparing coursing to dog and cock fighting.

I didnt and and I explained that to you. Its not my arguments that have the flimsy foundations now is it ? You missed the point and misunderstood the argument and not for the first time.

I'm not alone on this thread at all, there just happens to be quite a lot of hunting forum posters in here trying to push their agenda. Did you miss the point of the whole "biased poll" thing argument too ? :rolleyes:

wexfordman

Artful_Badger wrote: »

Lets go back to it now for a second. You accused me of a pathetic attempt to curry flavour my argument by comparing coursing to dog and cock fighting.

I didnt and and I explained that to you. Its not my arguments that have the flimsy foundations now is it ? You missed the point and misunderstood the argument and not for the first time.

I'm not alone on this thread at all, there just happens to be quite a lot of hunting forum posters in here trying to push their agenda. Did you miss the point of the whole "biased poll" thing argument too ? :rolleyes:

In fairness badger,everyone including yiu, in fact definately you,has an agenda .its just yours has proven at thus stage to be in the minority!

Artful_Badger

wexfordman wrote: »

In fairness badger,everyone including yiu, in fact definately you,has an agenda .its just yours has proven at thus stage to be in the minority!

No, everyone including me has an opinion on this topic. Opinion does not equal agenda. But I dont have an interest past expressing my opinion of coursing or whatever else anyone asks of me. I have no desired outcome in relation to this thread.

Its clear that those from the hunting forum do as they used it as is clear from the thread in the hunting forum. It was an opportunity to show up and get more representation in the poll than they usually do and argue the wider arguments of hunting.

The fact that I'm in the minority just means I'm one of the few who didnt lose interest when the thread was hijacked by the hunting forum.

Pumpkinseeds

I could be wrong, but I don't believe that the majority of members on the Shooting/Hunting forum are pro coursing. Just because people have an interest in shooting/hunting doesn't mean they have to enjoy coursing.

I'm not a fan of shooting or hunting but I do understand that it plays an important and practical part of rural life. If foxes or rabbits/hares have to be killed I would rather it be a quick clean kill by an experienced shooter, causing the least amount of suffering possible to the animal as opposed to more barbaric ways such as poisoning,traps/snares or hounds.

There will never be a compromise on hare coursing. People will either see it as an outdated barbaric form of animal abuse or they will be entirely pro the sport. Frankly I'm against it and it disgusts me. Being disgusted by hare coursing doesn't make people necessarily anti rural life.

Thats all I have to say on the matter.

Sparks

Poisoning's not legal; the kinds of traps and snares that can be used are strictly controlled by law; and hounds kill the hare pretty much instantly, as do most predators in nature who evolved not to play with their food (with the possible exception of cats).

As to coursing not being something people can compromise over, nonsense. It prevents the hare going extinct; that in and of itself is worth quite a lot in trade, and if it's not your cup of tea, well, you find a better way to keep the hare off the endangered list, because in places with coursing, the species is perfectly healthy and in places without coursing, it's endangered.

(and the undertone of "well, we like some of the hunting community, <sigh> if only they'd disown the rest of the community..." - I mean, is it just me that thinks that it's incredibly amateur to be that open about that tactic?)

starlings

Sparks wrote: »

(and the undertone of "well, we like some of the hunting community, <sigh> if only they'd disown the rest of the community..." - I mean, is it just me that thinks that it's incredibly amateur to be that open about that tactic?)

I think people have been rather clear that they like some of the hunting practises, and if they're honest enough to tell you where they draw their line, it's pointless - not to mention paranoid - to take it so personally and to speculate on agenda.

lauramckk

starlings wrote: »

I think people have been rather clear that they like some of the hunting practises, and if they're honest enough to tell you where they draw their line, it's pointless - not to mention paranoid - to take it so personally and to speculate on agenda.

it appears via the above poll that coursing is one of the practices they dont have an issue with.

paddy the man

Sparks wrote: »

As to coursing not being something people can compromise over, nonsense. It prevents the hare going extinct; that in and of itself is worth quite a lot in trade, and if it's not your cup of tea, well, you find a better way to keep the hare off the endangered list, because in places with coursing, the species is perfectly healthy and in places without coursing, it's endangered.

Do you have a link/survey which specficially states that Coursing prevents the Irish Hare from becoming extinct?

paddy the man

fourleafclover wrote: »

1) I asked you to show me where the ICC accept Capture Myopathy and all you have produced is "I know several vets who work for the department". My ill informed friend believe it or not but so do I, what it has to do with capture myopathy though is beyond me? You brought another % into the equation also, you may care to read what you wrote again, you have just made a Pro coursing argument. Capture Myopathy has not been studied in relation to the Irish Hare, it is a phrase quite commonly used by anti organisations with very little research based fact to back it up.

Capture myopathy is a recognised condition. http://www.merckvetmanual.com/mvm/index.jsp?cfile=htm/bc/91011.htm The mortality rate for Coursing Hare's is 4.1%. What causes these fatalities since death due to trauma are rare?

Sparks

paddy the man wrote: »

Do you have a link/survey which specficially states that Coursing prevents the Irish Hare from becoming extinct?

Just the one quoted earlier where the hare density in comparable areas showed that areas with ICC clubs had ten to a hundred (or more) times the population density of hares; combined with the polls that show seriously declining population in all hare species in the UK and Ireland in the last few decades due (according to those running the polls) to changes in agricultural practices.

The only way to have what you are specifically looking for would be to allow the species to go extinct and study it as it happened. Which would not really be ethical when there's a well-understood means to prevent it.

hyperborean

paddy the man wrote: »

Capture myopathy is a recognised condition. http://www.merckvetmanual.com/mvm/index.jsp?cfile=htm/bc/91011.htm The mortality rate for Coursing Hare's is 4.1%. What causes these fatalities since death due to trauma are rare?

whats the mortality rate of hares in the wild (outside of coursing)?

Sparks

hyperborean wrote: »

whats the mortality rate of hares in the wild (outside of coursing)?

Fast answer:

The mortality rate for this species is high, numbers will vary widely but in some areas 80% of newborns will not survive their first year while 50% of the adult population will die each year in Ireland. The life span of a mountain hare in Ireland is a maximum of 9 years.

fourleafclover

paddy the man wrote: »

Capture myopathy is a recognised condition. http://www.merckvetmanual.com/mvm/index.jsp?cfile=htm/bc/91011.htm The mortality rate for Coursing Hare's is 4.1%. What causes these fatalities since death due to trauma are rare?

Paddy you will have to be more specific with the 4.1%, where or what study is this from? If you care to read the link you have posted you will realise it discusses capture myopathy in the restraint of wild animals (hares are not restrained) furthermore it is in relation to poor diet and poor manual holding both of which do not occur in coursing. Now if you cared to read my query to you I asked you to show me the study in relation to the Irish hare and capture myopathy and to show me where the ICC accept it as a diagnosis in relation to the Irish hare?

I presume I was correct and you were incorrect in relation to my other three points as you choose to ignore responding to them, you will find i'm correct in relation to capture myopathy also.

P.S we can all use google to find capture myopathy, perhaps you should read more into it, you will find many studies have been performed by animal rights activists, as a result the studies are questionable and unverified.

Furthermore in relation to your query on the Irish Hare going extinct perhaps you should read the last paragraph in this link, it may be of interest to you - http://www.qub.ac.uk/sites/Quercus/Projects/2010/3HarecoursinginIreland/

Sparks

4.1% is quoted here (which is in turn quoting Reid, 2007), but neither source makes mention of capture myopathy at any point.

paddy the man

Sparks wrote: »

Just the one quoted earlier where the hare density in comparable areas showed that areas with ICC clubs had ten to a hundred (or more) times the population density of hares; combined with the polls that show seriously declining population in all hare species in the UK and Ireland in the last few decades due (according to those running the polls) to changes in agricultural practices.

The only way to have what you are specifically looking for would be to allow the species to go extinct and study it as it happened. Which would not really be ethical when there's a well-understood means to prevent it.

Would capture of Irish Hares from areas and translocation to ICC areas have anything to do with high Hare densities?

The only way to have what you are specifically looking for would be to allow the species to go extinct and study it as it happened. Which would not really be ethical when there's a well-understood means to prevent it.

In my farm out in West Mayo there is no local ICC area. Irish Hare numbers are good even taking into account natural yearly variations. You suggested that Coursing

It prevents the hare going extinct

Going by what you said the Hares in my area should become extinct

fourleafclover

paddy the man wrote: »

In my farm out in West Mayo there is no local ICC area. Irish Hare numbers are good even taking into account natural yearly variations. You suggested that Coursing Going by what you said the Hares in my area should become extinct

Could you post a link to the University or Departmental study that evaluated the hare numbers in your locality? Or are we to believe that you personally are out counting hares each year to compare?

starlings

lauramckk wrote: »

it appears via the above poll that coursing is one of the practices they dont have an issue with.

"they" who? I meant posters, and the content of their posts distinguishing between various practises. Did you mean the voters?
LOL

Sparks

paddy the man wrote: »

Would capture of Irish Hares from areas and translocation to ICC areas have anything to do with high Hare densities?

Unlikely since the areas were chosen so that no translocation occurs.
From [url=]Reid et al, 2010[/url]:

Eight of the clubs fifteen preserves were randomly selected and compared to nine sites selected from the wider countryside. The later were not known to have been previously managed nor used for the capture of hares for coursing but anecdotal reports suggested that hares were present at all sites selected. Sites in the wider countryside were not chosen at random but on the basis of their perceived suitability for hares ie the presence of favourable habitat, specifically a heterogeneous mix of improved and unimproved grasslands interspersed by dense rush (Juncus spp.) or heather cover.

In my farm out in West Mayo there is no local ICC area. Irish Hare numbers are good even taking into account natural yearly variations. You suggested that Coursing Going by what you said the Hares in my area should become extinct

You are suggesting that an individual measurement be taken as indicative of a species' population across an entire country. We both know that can't be done with any degree of reliability whatsoever.


It's also not merely a matter of concentrating populations into one area. Again from Reid et al:

Tapper and Stoate (1994) suggest that predator control by landowners and gamekeepers is an important factor in helping to maintain local hare populations. Predation by foxes may limit hare numbers principally impacting juvenile recruitment (Lindström et al. 1994, Reynolds and Tapper 1995). Vaughan et al. (2003) suggested that hares were less abundant on farms where foxes were seen frequently whilst a fox sarcoptic mange epidemic demonstrated that fox removal can increase hare abundance (Lindström et al. 1994). It seems likely, therefore, that active fox control by coursing club members and associated landowners may positively affect local hare abundance.

In Ireland, were hares are held in captivity for up to 2 months prior to coursing, there may be less obvious benefits of coursing. Periods of captivity, veterinary attention, treatment with anthelmintics and artificial feeding during captivity (Anonymous 2008) may actually improve pre-breeding condition and subsequent reproductive fitness of hares released back into the wild (Murray et al. 1998, Dyrcz et al. 2005, Molony et al. 2006). Overwinter survival of Scottish mountain hares Lepus timidus scoticus can be significantly improved by supplementary feeding, increasing male body mass and allowing females to breed earlier while treatment with Ivermectin (a broad spectrum anti-parasite medication) can significantly improve female fecundity (Newey et al. 2007). Moreover, translocation of animals among subpopulations may increase genetic heterosis and combat the problems associated with habitat fragmentation.

Burns et al. (2000) suggested that in the absence of hare coursing there may be reduced tolerance by farmers of damage to agricultural crops, less interest in encouraging and sustaining suitable habitats, greater propensity to allow shooting, an increase in illegal coursing and deliberate culling of hares to prevent illegal poaching. Coursing clubs are also responsible for actively publicising the hare and maintaining its importance to rural communities whilst collaboration with Government and academic institutions allow clubs to contribute information on the biology of the species.

paddy the man

fourleafclover wrote: »

Paddy you will have to be more specific with the 4.1%, where or what study is this from? If you care to read the link you have posted you will realise it discusses capture myopathy in the restraint of wild animals (hares are not restrained) furthermore it is in relation to poor diet and poor manual holding both of which do not occur in coursing. Now if you cared to read my query to you I asked you to show me the study in relation to the Irish hare and capture myopathy and to show me where the ICC accept it as a diagnosis in relation to the Irish hare?

I presume I was correct and you were incorrect in relation to my other three points as you choose to ignore responding to them, you will find i'm correct in relation to capture myopathy also.

P.S we can all use google to find capture myopathy, perhaps you should read more into it, you will find many studies have been performed by animal rights activists, as a result the studies are questionable and unverified.

Furthermore in relation to your query on the Irish Hare going extinct perhaps you should read the last paragraph in this link, it may be of interest to you - http://www.qub.ac.uk/sites/Quercus/Projects/2010/3HarecoursinginIreland/

The 4.1% mortality rate is in the link you provided.:rolleyes:
You said Hares are not restrained. They are caught in nets and put into transport crates. They are handled on numerous occasions. How is that not being restrained. What causes the 4.1% mortality?

Sparks

paddy the man wrote: »

The 4.1% mortality rate is in the link you provided.:rolleyes:
You said Hares are not restrained. They are caught in nets and put into transport crates. They are handled on numerous occasions. How is that not being restrained. What causes the 4.1% mortality?

That study (which is again quoting Reid, 2007) specifically refers to mortality during coursing events. So presumably injury is the cause, though it's not stated explicitly.