Hare Coursing

wexfordman

OldNotWIse wrote: »

ahahahahahaha as distinct from the "real warriors" chasin' down them damned hares and keeping the rest of the country safe.

Your username is not lost on you!

Artful_Badger

yubabill1 wrote: »

Well, for the record, everything sparks said has made sense to me, which is considerably more than can be said for the emotive and illogical stuff coming from you over the past several days.

Well for the record you agreeing with sparks was never really not an option was it ?

Sparks

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Thanks.
Also from the same source:

Video records, therefore, underestimate overall hare
mortality by excluding deaths that occur in captivity before
or after the filmed event. Other causes of mortality apart
from the actual course that may account for discrepancies
between the number of hares released and those caught may
include natural causes and injury, stress or disease resulting

from capture or confinement.

Yes; which is why the studies cited above list 4.1% mortality as the mortality calculated by counting the number of hares captured and the number of hares released; the video count numbers are what place the mortality figures at 1.9% and 0.96%. This isn't a discrepency that's gone unnoticed even in this thread.

smash

wexfordman wrote: »

ye had better either accept the genuine positive impact that hunting and coursing has on these species, or stfu!

Here, why don't you get aggressive there... it's guaranteed to make people agree with you :rolleyes:

OldNotWIse

yubabill1 wrote: »

Don't follow your thinking. Hope it's a bit of fun, though, because the rest is getting bogged-down.

Well good, that shows you're not inside my head. Always a good sign that.

my point was, what the heck was that post about???

Free TV license - that'll cut down on the number of nippers

yubabill1

You know, in all seriousness (and I have been mischevious today) but I'm starting to worry that this is getting unhealthy.

Not for me btw but I feel that some posters are going to get really distressed.

Madam

Sparks wrote: »

So why have a problem when an animal does it in a way that makes it far more likely that both the individual hare and the species survive?

I can't equate the two if I'm being honest. Perhaps cos it's more 'natural' in my mind?

OldNotWIse

wexfordman wrote: »

Your username is not lost on you!

That ol' chestnut lol

I picked an "easy picking" name intentionally - helps me separate out the ones who have strength in their own convictions...and the ones who resort to name calling to substantiate themselves. I tend to avoid such offenders as they usually have very little to bring to the table. It's a good litmus test really :P

OldNotWIse

yubabill1 wrote: »

You know, in all seriousness (and I have been mischevious today) but I'm starting to worry that this is getting unhealthy.

Not for me btw but I feel that some posters are going to get really distressed.

I worry about the ones who dont have a break in their posting between Friday evening and Monday morning... thats a bit scary

Conmaicne Mara

OldNotWIse wrote: »

try reading the thread title??

Really, best you could do?

When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.

smash

After just seeing the opinions and comments in the thread in the hunting forum that directed you lot here, I'm going to step out. Some of you need help!

Sparks

Madam wrote: »

I can't equate the two if I'm being honest. Perhaps cos it's more 'natural' in my mind?

The thing about "natural", is that it's a word that's been hijacked. We think "natural" as being a positive thing, as having no unpleasant or harmful aspects. But smallpox was perfectly natural. So's being eaten alive by a bear. So's arsenic. So were the sixteen nuclear reactors in Oklo. So are extinction level events that kill off 96% of life in the sea and 70% of life on land.

There are a lot of "natural" things that are not particularly nice or pleasant or positive for either an individual or its species.

It's a lot easier to evaluate the comparison if you don't consider which is more "natural", but just look at which gives the better survival chance to the individual or the species.

wexfordman

OldNotWIse wrote: »

That ol' chestnut lol

I picked an "easy picking" name intentionally - helps me separate out the ones who have strength in their own convictions...and the ones who resort to name calling to substantiate themselves. I tend to avoid such offenders as they usually have very little to bring to the table. It's a good litmus test really :P

Seriously dude!! You might wanna revist the thread to which I replied to and reword the one above.

What exactly did your initial post bring to the table, specificly in response to my post I mean ?

fathersymes

smash wrote: »

After just seeing the opinions and comments in the thread in the hunting forum that directed you lot here, I'm going to step out. Some of you need help!

Close the door quietly now.

ejmaztec

yubabill1 wrote: »

Hey, guys- here's one for you to ponder

I've seen foxes bringing live rabbits for their teenage young to chase, torment and kill several times over the years.

Where do you stand on that?

Just curious.

You should have rescued the poor fluffy bunnies instead of just standing there watching them get slaughtered, you heartless so and so.:(

wexfordman

smash wrote: »

Here, why don't you get aggressive there... it's guaranteed to make people agree with you :rolleyes:

In fairness, stfu is more like an irritated LOL:D
You woldnt like me when Im angry!

Micky Dolenz

Mod

Please don't flame or make silly digs. Report posts if you believe this to be happening.

Thanks.

wexfordman

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Mod

Please don't flame or make silly digs. Report posts if you believe this to be happening.

Thanks.

I suppose I better man up and apologise to badger, I may have offended him in an earlier post, by calling him a crackpot, a mod was on to me.

So, I would officially like to apologise to badger for calling him a crackpot. I have ammended the offending post, you can see the ammended section in bold below.

Sorry badger,

Artful_Badger wrote: »

I think its pretty shítty that people think keeping them alive justifies tormenting them.

wexfordman wrote: »

Yea, but going by your posts, your a bit of an odd character who also wants to see an end to fishing and horse racing, so I pretty much assume you would think that sneezing in the wrong direction towards an animal would be sh!tty

Im pretty ammazed that your more than happy to see the extinction of species though!

Micky Dolenz

wexfordman wrote: »

I suppose I better man up and apologise to badger, I may have offended him in an earlier post, by calling him a crackpot, a mod was on to me.

So, I would officially like to apologise to badger for calling him a crackpot. I have ammended the offending post, you can see the ammended section in bold below.

Sorry badger,

Banned


I gave you a yellow card to gently remind you on how to post. This followed a mod warning earlier on the thread of which you were aware.

Swapping one dig for another doesn't fly here.

laoch na mona

I don't see what is wrong with hare coursing the hare gets away and is never used twice

Dyr

Zombienosh wrote: »

People are getting caught up in details here, it boils down to some people find a hare being chased, abused and often killed entertaining. Some people do not.
We can spout all about hare numbers, muzzles and details to try and justify this, but at the end of the day you enjoy watching cruel treatment of animals for entertainment.

Its a common enough justification, Its hard to argue the main point that an activity like coursing isn't backward and perverse so you try to justify it on the basis of some beneficial side effects. You would have had the same argument about tearing badgers up with dogs back in the 70s no doubt.

Rosahane

It would be interesting to see the post count and date of joining Boards of the voters ��

fourleafclover

Rosahane wrote: »

It would be interesting to see the post count and date of joining Boards of the voters ��

Definately, one recent member joined boards and started posting immediately after a tweet was put out looking for votes on the poll by an anti coursing activist.

Zombienosh

Well if we take the reaction of pro hunters/pro coursers on this, The fact that they reacted to sharply and defended so strongly shows that they too believe the general public wouldn't be in favor of hare coursing so they felt the need to really dig the heels in.

Sparks

Zombienosh wrote: »

Well if we take the reaction of pro hunters/pro coursers on this, The fact that they reacted to sharply and defended so strongly shows that they too believe the general public wouldn't be in favor of hare coursing so they felt the need to really dig the heels in.

No, it shows that they're ticked off from years of putting up with all manner of defamation from the animal rights extremists and they're finally starting to put the foot down and demand that they get the same basic civility every other citizen can demand. And I can not only understand that, I share it because everyone in Ireland with a firearms licence regardless of the reason for having it gets exactly the same treatment at all levels from TDs to Gardai to eejits like the animal rights extremists.

So when a thread starts up based off of an animal rights campaign by one of those extremist groups, and most of the first pages are insults of the kind that break basic boards.ie rules and the AH charter, is it any wonder that people take offence?

Play To Kill

Zombienosh wrote: »

Well if we take the reaction of pro hunters/pro coursers on this, The fact that they reacted to sharply and defended so strongly shows that they too believe the general public wouldn't be in favor of hare coursing so they felt the need to really dig the heels in.

The poll has been up 5 days, if the majority of people were against coursing then surely the poll figures would reflect this by now even if the members of the hunting forum reacted sharply.

homerhop

Play To Kill wrote: »

The poll has been up 5 days, if the majority of people were against coursing then surely the poll figures would reflect this by now even if the members of the hunting forum reacted sharply.

It’s the usual spiel out of them, if it goes there way it’s a triumphant victory over the savage heartless hunters, but if it goes against them like some of the recent coverage on TV they are up in arms and all you have to do is look at some of the comments left on the face book pages of those in the public eye to the degree of malice and hatred these people have for anyone against their views.
They are claiming this vote has been rigged yet icabs and co have been calling for support on when there is comments on line in response to newspaper articles.
Ah has hundreds of viewers in a day and yet the poll has only as of now 546 votes in total. That speaks volumes to the level of support that those against any form of hunting/coursing/fishing has and the level of public interest that is out there atm about these issues.

Conmaicne Mara

Zombienosh wrote: »

Well if we take the reaction of pro hunters/pro coursers on this, The fact that they reacted to sharply and defended so strongly shows that they too believe the general public wouldn't be in favor of hare coursing so they felt the need to really dig the heels in.

Stop the presses, fields sports enthusiasts defend field sports. Does Sir Anthony O'Reilly know your talents are going to waste here?

Pumpkinseeds

There is a warning in the OP's first post that the thread is graphic. Many of us have seen graphic images over the years and I suspect that the majority of AHers wouldn't want to see graphic images of animal cruelty. Which I think is why many of the usual Ahers haven't contributed to the thread.You can argue that hare coursing isn't animal cruelty, however outside of this thread many people would disagree with you.

This thread has disintegrated into a paranoid assumption of a perceived attack on shooting/hunting. I don't think it was ever intended to be such. I'm not nor have I ever been a member of or involved with any extremist animal group. I would never condone attacks on people or the release of minks etc into the countryside.

This thread has basically become a farce at this point with anyone opposed to coursing being labeled as extremists or speciest or any number of ludicrous labels people can conjure up. As I said earlier I'm opposed to animals being used in bloodsports for human entertainment. That doesn't make me anti rural life. It seems to have become a grudge match, led largely by a mod from the hunting/shooting forum.

Conmaicne Mara

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

This thread has disintegrated into a paranoid assumption of a perceived attack on shooting/hunting.

Not at all. Firstly there is no paranoia. The squeaky wheels looking to ban this, that'n't'other will, as they do, move on to their next victim once they get their pursuit of choice banned.

What you are seeing here in this thread, I sincerely hope, is the start of all people who enjoy fields ports, defending each others activities, and not just their own.

I don't course, I've never been coursing, but I will throw in my tuppence worth to support them that do because for all I know, it'll be the things I enjoy doing that'll be next on the hit list.

That them on the other side have their nose seriously out of joint because of this, is just icing on the cake.

Artful_Badger

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

Not at all. Firstly there is no paranoia. The squeaky wheels looking to ban this, that'n't'other will, as they do, move on to their next victim once they get their pursuit of choice banned.

What you are seeing here in this thread, I sincerely hope, is the start of all people who enjoy fields ports, defending each others activities, and not just their own.

I don't course, I've never been coursing, but I will throw in my tuppence worth to support them that do because for all I know, it'll be the things I enjoy doing that'll be next on the hit list.

That them on the other side have their nose seriously out of joint because of this, is just icing on the cake.

Yeah you dont sound paranoid at all.

Sparks

Artful_Badger wrote: »

Yeah you dont sound paranoid at all.

If you knew the history involved, you'd know that he didn't.

Conmaicne Mara

Artful_Badger wrote: »

Yeah you dont sound paranoid at all.

Suits you to say that, but go back to the opening post which is connected to ICABS. Them and their ilk would cream themselves to ban everything field sports related.

I'm not particularly bothered by glib internet posts either

Pumpkinseeds

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

Not at all. Firstly there is no paranoia. The squeaky wheels looking to ban this, that'n't'other will, as they do, move on to their next victim once they get their pursuit of choice banned.

What you are seeing here in this thread, I sincerely hope, is the start of all people who enjoy fields ports, defending each others activities, and not just their own.

I don't course, I've never been coursing, but I will throw in my tuppence worth to support them that do because for all I know, it'll be the things I enjoy doing that'll be next on the hit list.

That them on the other side have their nose seriously out of joint because of this, is just icing on the cake.

You have just demonstrated my point. I don't know what field sports interest you, however this is a thread about whether or not people support coursing. Supporting an activity you don't engage in, on the off chance that someone may oppose the field sports that do interest you makes no sense.

I understand that you feel under attack, but the thread is about coursing. So long as people continue to attack each others point of view and don't engage in an intelligent dialogue nothing changes. The cycle of suspicion and paranoia on both sides continues in an us and them battle.

I don't oppose hunting or shooting, I'm not a fan of them but if its a matter of control of a species I'd rather it be done as humanely as possible. I don't agree with animals being used in coursing because its nothing more than entertainment for people and an entertainment that I think a lot of people including people interested in other field sports would find distasteful if not cruel.

fourleafclover

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

There is a warning in the OP's first post that the thread is graphic. Many of us have seen graphic images over the years and I suspect that the majority of AHers wouldn't want to see graphic images of animal cruelty. Which I think is why many of the usual Ahers haven't contributed to the thread.You can argue that hare coursing isn't animal cruelty, however outside of this thread many people would disagree with you.

This thread has disintegrated into a paranoid assumption of a perceived attack on shooting/hunting. I don't think it was ever intended to be such. I'm not nor have I ever been a member of or involved with any extremist animal group. I would never condone attacks on people or the release of minks etc into the countryside.

This thread has basically become a farce at this point with anyone opposed to coursing being labeled as extremists or speciest or any number of ludicrous labels people can conjure up. As I said earlier I'm opposed to animals being used in bloodsports for human entertainment. That doesn't make me anti rural life. It seems to have become a grudge match, led largely by a mod from the hunting/shooting forum.

Perhaps the AHers are not contributing because they don't give a crap either way about coursing? Did that ever dawn on you. Perhaps they voted but did not comment, as they are entitled to do so and judging by the poll they are pro coursing. The anti coursing people are getting their knickers in a twist now because the poll is not going the way they had hoped. (I use the phrase anti until you can furnish me with a phrase you would prefer)

I have seen very little comment regarding shooting/hunting etc so I do not think the thread has disintegrated into paranoia etc.

Finally, this thread has been quite good regarding factual debate and yes anti organisations are mentioned and referred too, but do you not realise who released the video in the first place? Perhaps you should read the thread it in its entirity before casting such aspersions.

May I add re the mod, is that person not entitled to their opinion on this thread because they are from a hunting background? The thread was started by a different mod, yet you do not seem to take umbrage with this.

Artful_Badger

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

Suits you to say that, but go back to the opening post which is connected to ICABS. Them and their ilk would cream themselves to ban everything field sports related.

I'm not particularly bothered by glib internet posts either

So what ? You'll support anything and everything related to field sports or anything and everything ICABS is involved in ? How does that make you lot any different than ICABS ? Who you claim are against anything and everything related to field sports ?

You all seen ICABS and the paranoia set in and regardless of how you might actually see the sport of Coursing you wont support a ban because of the wider agenda. We've been through all this. This thread ceased to be about Coursing when the hunting crowd mobilised. And you have made it clear your motives for joining in and it isnt to do with Coursing.

Pumpkinseeds

fourleafclover wrote: »

Perhaps the AHers are not contributing because they don't give a crap either way about coursing? Did that ever dawn on you. Perhaps they voted but did not comment, as they are entitled to do so and judging by the poll they are pro coursing. The anti coursing people are getting their knickers in a twist now because the poll is not going the way they had hoped. (I use the phrase anti until you can furnish me with a phrase you would prefer)

I have seen very little comment regarding shooting/hunting etc so I do not think the thread has disintegrated into paranoia etc.

Finally, this thread has been quite good regarding factual debate and yes anti organisations are mentioned and referred too, but do you not realise who released the video in the first place? Perhaps you should read the thread it in its entirity before casting such aspersions.

May I add re the mod, is that person not entitled to their opinion on this thread because they are from a hunting background? The thread was started by a different mod, yet you do not seem to take umbrage with this.

I MADE IT CLEAR EARLIER THAT I HAVE NO INTEREST IN CONVERSING WITH YOU. YOU WRONGFULLY ACCUSED ME OF LYING BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T LIKE WHAT I HAD TO SAY. LEAVE IT ALONE.

Conmaicne Mara

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

You have just demonstrated my point. I don't know what field sports interest you, however this is a thread about whether or not people support coursing. Supporting an activity you don't engage in, on the off chance that someone may oppose the field sports that do interest you makes no sense.

I understand that you feel under attack, but the thread is about coursing. So long as people continue to attack each others point of view and don't engage in an intelligent dialogue nothing changes. The cycle of suspicion and paranoia on both sides continues in an us and them battle.

I don't oppose hunting or shooting, I'm not a fan of them but if its a matter of control of a species I'd rather it be done as humanely as possible. I don't agree with animals being used in coursing because its nothing more than entertainment for people and an entertainment that I think a lot of people including people interested in other field sports would find distasteful if not cruel.

Artful_Badger wrote: »

So what ? You'll support anything and everything related to field sports or anything and everything ICABS is involved in ? How does that make you lot any different than ICABS ? Who you claim are against anything and everything related to field sports ?

You all seen ICABS and the paranoia set in and regardless of how you might actually see the sport of Coursing you wont support a ban because of the wider agenda. We've been through all this. This thread ceased to be about Coursing when the hunting crowd mobilised. And you have made it clear your motives for joining in and it isnt to do with Coursing.

Talk around it all night long. I am supporting coursing, end of story

Sparks

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

YOU WRONGFULLY ACCUSED ME OF LYING BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T LIKE WHAT I HAD TO SAY

But isn't that permitted under the AH charter?

Cass

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

You can argue that hare coursing isn't animal cruelty, however outside of this thread many people would disagree with you.

More would agree. Matter of perspective.

This thread has disintegrated into a paranoid assumption of a perceived attack on shooting/hunting.

Not paranoia if it happens.

I don't think it was ever intended to be such.

Most thread deviate from their original topic to some extent. natural flow of any thread.

I'm not nor have I ever been a member of or involved with any extremist animal group. I would never condone attacks on people or the release of minks etc into the countryside.

So you would be classed as Anti. Not a derogatory expression merely one signaling your dislike of such field sports. Anti is very different to extremists for the reason you mentioned in the quoted section above.

This thread has basically become a farce at this point with anyone opposed to coursing being labeled as extremists or speciest or any number of ludicrous labels people can conjure up.

Tempers have flared as this is an emotive subject. However it is not one way traffic. There have been less than flattering comments leveled at people involved in field sports for years including murderers, mentally unstable, gun nuts, , etc, etc (not necessarily here). However the terms used (extremists, etc) are directed at the groups that employ such tactics as you outlined above. They are apt. What would you call a group that releases mink without thought for the environment or fauna and their only thought being it's a victory for animal rights. Yes it was for the mink. As for any other fauna it's far from a victory as is evident from the cull the government must now do to reduce numbers and protect natural wildlife including some species on the brink. Or the people at the receiving end of death threats, harassment, bombings, sear campaigns etc.)

As I said earlier I'm opposed to animals being used in bloodsports for human entertainment. That doesn't make me anti rural life. It seems to have become a grudge match, led largely by a mod from the hunting/shooting forum.

What has being a mod on another forum got to do with it. Outside of their forum a mod is another poster subject to the same rules as any other poster. So mod or not is irrelevant. Much like Artful_Badger. Leading the charge for those opposed. Should i factor in his profession, standing on this site, etc?

fourleafclover

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

You have just demonstrated my point. I don't know what field sports interest you, however this is a thread about whether or not people support coursing. Supporting an activity you don't engage in, on the off chance that someone may oppose the field sports that do interest you makes no sense.

I understand that you feel under attack, but the thread is about coursing. So long as people continue to attack each others point of view and don't engage in an intelligent dialogue nothing changes. The cycle of suspicion and paranoia on both sides continues in an us and them battle.

I don't oppose hunting or shooting, I'm not a fan of them but if its a matter of control of a species I'd rather it be done as humanely as possible. I don't agree with animals being used in coursing because its nothing more than entertainment for people and an entertainment that I think a lot of people including people interested in other field sports would find distasteful if not cruel.

You are being hypocritical now toward the poster you feel is wrong. He says he does not go coursing but he does not oppose it due to his support of other field sports.
Yet you do not oppose hunting or shooting yet you do not practice them? According to your own logic you should not be posting on here either?!

Pumpkinseeds

Sparks wrote: »

But isn't that permitted under the AH charter?

Personal attacks on other posters are juvenile and pointless, regardless of whether or not they are permitted under the charter. I contributed an experience and my opinions on a thread. Engaging in an argument with someone who repeatedly accused me of being a liar,particularly by someone with such a juvenile attitude is not something that appeals to me. In the real world I'd just walk away from someone like that, so refusing to engage with them in a thread is no different.

fourleafclover

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

I MADE IT CLEAR EARLIER THAT I HAVE NO INTEREST IN CONVERSING WITH YOU. YOU WRONGFULLY ACCUSED ME OF LYING BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T LIKE WHAT I HAD TO SAY. LEAVE IT ALONE.

No, you actually said goodbye.

I stand over what I said, you kept altering what you said you saw in photos, it went from grins on the faces of people in the crowd to saying that you just focused on what had occured in the picture, I dismantled your argument and showed you were either lying or bluffing. My apologies if the truth hurts.

PS if you feel my posts were inappropriate and were insulting you can flag them to the mod and let them decide. If they want to read the context of the debate and the answers you posted and if the mod decides I was wrong I will apologise.

Conorf1

I went to the coursing in Clonmel this year on Saturday and the Sunday. I'd never been before and had been told the worst and what to expect. 
I decided to see for myself after some of the tv programmes showing a different light. 
I can honestly say over that 2 days there must have been over 120 races and not one hare was pinned or mauled. This was my experience and I thoroughly enjoyed the buzz. I met some people who told me the conservation work done and some of the stats etc. which I found astonishing. I was neutral/slightly against coursing before this visit but most definitely pro coursing after my experience of it. 
From this little experience I can understand why all hunters and coursers will be up in arms defending each other because all what I had previously read and heard had come from anti coursing people and hand on heart from my experience, it couldn't have been further from the truth

Pumpkinseeds

Cass, I won't quote your post as its too long. Not liking hunting or shooting doesn't make people extremists. I wouldn't accuse people who engage in field sports of being murderers etc. As I said I don't condone attacks on people. I don't see how people attacking hunts etc does anything but endanger both people and animals.

I don't like a lot of things in life but I don't think they should be banned just because I don't like them. I'm not trying to offend anyone. I'm simply making the point that I don't agree with animals being used in coursing. I also said that I can understand that people involved in hunting/shooting may support others involved in coursing due to a feeling of being attacked by non supporters.

Most people who don't live in rural areas have no real idea of what goes on with field sports. My own experiences of hunting/shooting are just of my uncle coming home with rabbits and cleaning his gun. I also gave up horse riding as a youngster as I was put under a lot of pressure to get involved with the hunt. Its not about who wins a poll, thats irrelevant at this point. I think people should be honest about their true opinions.

It might be more beneficial to people who hunt/shoot to contribute more in a different After hours thread about how they feel about their sports and why they feel that they are under attack. That way people would learn more about field sports and people could engage in a meaningful discussion. Most Ahers don't visit the hunting/shooting forum. Maybe if there were a genuine discussion thread outside of hunting/shooting people could form informed opinions rather than being influenced by extremists on either side.

fourleafclover

Conorf1 wrote: »

I went to the coursing in Clonmel this year on Saturday and the Sunday. I'd never been before and had been told the worst and what to expect. 
I decided to see for myself after some of the tv programmes showing a different light. 
I can honestly say over that 2 days there must have been over 120 races and not one hare was pinned or mauled. This was my experience and I thoroughly enjoyed the buzz. I met some people who told me the conservation work done and some of the stats etc. which I found astonishing. I was neutral/slightly against coursing before this visit but most definitely pro coursing after my experience of it. 
From this little experience I can understand why all hunters and coursers will be up in arms defending each other because all what I had previously read and heard had come from anti coursing people and hand on heart from my experience, it couldn't have been further from the truth

Great to see a bit of honesty coming through from someone impartial.

A word of warning though, as a new member you are going to get abuse any time soon about it being a coincidence that you become a new member and post on coursing! And they try to label hunting/shooting/coursing folk paranoid!! lol

Micky Dolenz

Conorf1 wrote: »

I went to the coursing in Clonmel this year on Saturday and the Sunday. I'd never been before and had been told the worst and what to expect.
I decided to see for myself after some of the tv programmes showing a different light.
I can honestly say over that 2 days there must have been over 120 races and not one hare was pinned or mauled. This was my experience and I thoroughly enjoyed the buzz. I met some people who told me the conservation work done and some of the stats etc. which I found astonishing. I was neutral/slightly against coursing before this visit but most definitely pro coursing after my experience of it.
From this little experience I can understand why all hunters and coursers will be up in arms defending each other because all what I had previously read and heard had come from anti coursing people and hand on heart from my experience, it couldn't have been further from the truth

fourleafclover wrote: »

Great to see a bit of honesty coming through from someone impartial.

A word of warning though, as a new member you are going to get abuse any time soon about it being a coincidence that you become a new member and post on coursing! And they try to label hunting/shooting/coursing folk paranoid!! lol

Mod

Please do not post on this thread again pending Admin review.

Thanks

Cass

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

Cass, I won't quote your post as its too long.

I can ramble with the best of them.

Not liking hunting or shooting doesn't make people extremists.

Correct. Nor would i refer to those opposed to hunting in any of it's form as such. When i use the word extremist i refer to the peopl so blinded by the fight they do not stop to consider the consequences. The oes that would endanger animals, and people to "strike a blow". They are extremists is every sense of the word.

I use the word anti, in a non derogatory way, to describe the general population of anti hunting people. People that dislike it, voice their dislike, but do not engage in such extremist methods to get their point across.

I wouldn't accuse people who engage in field sports of being murderers etc.

It has been done though, and not once. We find it as distasteful as you or anyone opposed to hunting being described as extremists.

I'm simply making the point that I don't agree with animals being used in coursing.

As is your prerogative.

I also said that I can understand that people involved in hunting/shooting may support others involved in coursing due to a feeling of being attacked by non supporters.

We do not support any activity without being fully informed or for the sake of a row/argument. We do so to defend a tradition, and way of life that while not liked by some, or pursued by others is non the less their legal right.

Most people who don't live in rural areas have no real idea of what goes on with field sports.

I would disagree with that sentiment. No one truly knows the opinions or beliefs of all people, however from my own perspective i would say that 90% of poeple i know, am related to, am friends with, have experienced some form of field sports.

I think people should be honest about their true opinions.

It might be more beneficial to people who hunt/shoot to contribute more in a different After hours thread about how they feel about their sports and why they feel that they are under attack. That way people would learn more about field sports and people could engage in a meaningful discussion. Most Ahers don't visit the hunting/shooting forum. Maybe if there were a genuine discussion thread outside of hunting/shooting people could form informed opinions rather than being influenced by extremists on either side.

I agree with the sentiment. Open, honest discussion is good, but it rarely lasts. Both sides defend their opinions/beliefs strongly, and this always boils over. However i would argue your point about estremists on pro shooting/hunting/coursing side. We do not force our will on others to the pint that we actively seek confrontation IRL. We do not send out unsolicited e-mails, tweets, letters to people's homes, businesses, etc. We do not threaten or damage goods, property, and so on.

Now i do not dare say this is the case with everyone opposed to such endeavours. Far from it. Most are calm, intelligent people able to put their point across in reasoned debate. However those that do act in such a manner destroy any forward movement you may gain or at the very least alienate and diminish the message you try to get across.

OldNotWIse

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

Really, best you could do?

When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.

This post makes no sense to me...

It's almost like people are more worried about the last word or something, than whats actually being discussed...unprecedented on Boards of course

OldNotWIse

wexfordman wrote: »

Seriously dude!! You might wanna revist the thread to which I replied to and reword the one above.

What exactly did your initial post bring to the table, specificly in response to my post I mean ?

Dude??? Have I gone back in time?

Hey Ted, leave them bunnies alone lol