Wife's First Alaska Caribou

[Steve Walker]

you lucky bugger but water finds its own level so the water table will be poluted ,nice bit of open country there my detecting arm is itching ,pretty here but in a woody sort of way,more houses though its commuter belt surrey

 

Was a great place to live, just a few miles outside Aberystwyth. The other side of that hill slopes down to the sea. But, it was an old house with gaps under the doors and no heating but an open fire and electric storage heaters we couldn't afford to run so it was bloody freezing in winter.

 

 

Also, being a few miles out of town and having a puritanical god-bothering elderly landlady who lived on a house overlooking the only access road had certain disadvantages for a house full of young lads - you had to sneak girls in

[Sportsman]

never seen half a dozen for 60p around here ,being commuter land prices are sky high ,6 eggs at local shop £2.05 ,over the counter plastic wrapped loaf £1.72 sometimes morals can not be put to highly if you cant afford them

i expect if you had the dosh most people would eat "good" food some dont have the money to others the inclination too

 

 

2.05 for 6 eggs

I usually pay 1.50 a dozen for eggs that come from the chickens I can see scratching around in the garden.

 

I don't think it is a morals thing, I think that particularly in urban environments there is a lack of connection between the consumers and the food that they eat.

I was bought up in rural Essex (yes it did exist then) and my father had commoners rights over Danbury Common. One of these was to take rabbits for consumption. We lived on rabbit stew/casserole/pie and rabbit with a rabbit sauce. We knew exactly where and how it was produced. Chicken was a rare and expensive delicacy and came from a neighbour in exchange for surplus rabbits.

All of this is very different these days, meat comes on styrofoam trays and doesn't have fur

[chesters1]

my mrs has a need to be near her daughters (well ours but i stopped when they were 18) so were stuck here ,my son though has gone to the land of fish (no sun ,nor warmth,not trees etc) way ooooop north lucky bugger .

i crave the empty landscape but i suppose my mrs is thinking what happens when i croak at least she can shack up at a daughters for safety

 

"2.05 for 6 eggs ohmy.gif

I usually pay 1.50 a dozen for eggs that come from the chickens I can see scratching around in the garden.

 

I don't think it is a morals thing, I think that particularly in urban environments there is a lack of connection between the consumers and the food that they eat.

I was bought up in rural Essex (yes it did exist then) and my father had commoners rights over Danbury Common. One of these was to take rabbits for consumption. We lived on rabbit stew/casserole/pie and rabbit with a rabbit sauce. We knew exactly where and how it was produced. Chicken was a rare and expensive delicacy and came from a neighbour in exchange for surplus rabbits.

All of this is very different these days, meat comes on styrofoam trays and doesn't have fur wink.gif"

 

yes thats pretty "reasonable" here surrey isnt sconny botland were tightly packed (although here isnt to bad) and you pay the price for everything ,we live in a tiny (i mean small) 4 roomed bungalow its (because of its location) band D ,my mates sis lives in a 3 bed ,3 reception with a garden 6 times the size a few miles away and its also band D.

you pay the price even when you dont have the money after all we are supporting your governments incentives

all our kids know what meat is they ate plenty of them in the crude form even the odd pet got into the pot on occasion ,dont recommend fox though

i used to hunt a lot for the pot ,i dont know we can afford "basics" but i cant say i never will again if times got hard.

buyers (and i admit myself included) will be deliberately blinkered they know meat is an animal but so long as its behind closed doors how it appears is OK ,i worked in a chicken factory on the killing line (i swiftly left because of the cruelty of the majority of the staff ,perhaps it made them get through the appalling day i dont know) but i still eat chicken.

the process is pretty crude but no doubt highly efficiently but i suspect it would take more than a few banner wavers to clean it up so the food died respectfully only the staff can do that the company want it done cheaply so they can compete with imports from less legislation bound companies.Cost is an issue but far second to profit! only not buying it pushes the price down ,people just buy more inferior meat its no doubt killed and treated the same way as the expensive stuff the expensive stuff becomes the cheap stuff if you can't sell at overinflated prices it it just means less profit so lower paid staff and poorer treated animals are the result

Edited September 2, 2010 by chesters1

[gozzer]

Yes perhaps the org who made that film would be opposed to angling, however that doesn't make the evidence which they provide any the less valid.

The reason I posted the film which showed cruelty to those captive animals (who are labelled 'food' and therefore seem to fall into a different category to the 'wonderful wild things) was to illustrate what we accept so readily. One can mention eating a bacon (that is a piece of a pig) sandwich in here and feel free from others condemnation, yet the deer shooting attracts apparent distaste.

 

I understand why you posted it Emma, and I agree with what you say, hence my insistence that we are all hypocrites, dependant on the standards of those doing the judging.

'Cruelty', is subjective and varies in meaning according to a persons own ethics/knowledge, and to an extent, their needs.

 

John.

[gozzer]

Don't know about that, John, this is the fifth time he's posted a hunting video, and has had a similar response on some previous ones (shooting bears).

 

You're right Steve, (I should have done a check), I'd forgotten about the bear video.

 

John.

[chesters1]

the advertising media make it worse "line caught tuna" strangely is good but mentioning the practice is killing lots of albatrosses doesn't get mentioned,now dolphins are not mixed with the contents the flavours gone as well .We dont eat dolphins yet starve them by eating all their dinner strange .why not eat the dolphins? AH they go click click and were in a TV series thus "fluffy" wheras tuna are not

theres two sides to all stories probably the harder you look the more sides there are but you will only see the relevant one to the story tellers slant

i mentioned the bear in post 12 it IS different though we see deer as meat therefore there's a reason! we don't as a rule eat bears perhaps they routinely do? food becomes fun

Edited September 2, 2010 by chesters1

[gozzer]

the advertising media make it worse "line caught tuna" strangely is good but mentioning the practice is killing lots of albatrosses doesn't get mentioned,now dolphins are not mixed with the contents the flavours gone as well .We dont eat dolphins yet starve them by eating all their dinner strange .why not eat the dolphins? AH they go click click and were in a TV series thus "fluffy" wheras tuna are not

theres two sides to all stories probably the harder you look the more sides there are

i mentioned the bear in post 12

 

Hang on chesters, I thought everything was 50/50, so there can only be 2 sides to everything.

 

John.

[chesters1]

Hang on chesters, I thought everything was 50/50, so there can only be 2 sides to everything.

 

John.

its 50-50 you will find them

Edited September 2, 2010 by chesters1

[Vagabond]

Point of information. The caribou would almost certainly have been eaten. In all the states where I have held hunting/fishing licences, the game laws state it is a crime to waste game.

[Worms]

Point of information. The caribou would almost certainly have been eaten. In all the states where I have held hunting/fishing licences, the game laws state it is a crime to waste game.

As I recall from the bear shooting post (I was rather anti that one) and my subsequent investigations, It is quite interesting to see the rules that north America/Canada have regarding game, probably stricter than 'domestic food' animals!

 

Vagabond is quite right, there are very strict laws regarding seasons, species, sex and, after you've shot it, how you dispose opf the carcase/entrails/skin etc.

 

I have no aversion to shooting game for food, or, catching it with a rod and line. I do however feel (don't really know why) that the American way of filming everything and posting it as a "look what I just shot/caught" is likely to wind up a lot of folks in this country.

 

I certainly wouldn't post pictures of the 110/120 stone of pollack that five of us caught on a wrecking trip on Monday