Hunting, shooting and fishing poll

[Emma two]

II have NOTHING against hunting at all, that's not what i'm trying to get across here, just killing for fun.

 

Should a slaughterman who kills the animals so many people eat be sacked if he enjoys his work? Why the downer on people enjoying thier work?

[corydoras]

And with foxes if shooting isn't a solution then i dont know what is. If they can make guns that bring down antelope and deer in one go, i'm sure there's one that can take care of a fox without just wounding it.

There are plenty of weapons that will bring a fox down 'in one go', but all of them need a good marksman to be effective (that's not me BTW, I'm just an average shot), but marksmen, even the best are human and can miss, leaving the animal mortally wounded. This never happens with a pack of dogs. Edited October 15, 2008 by corydoras

[Sportsman]

I hope i am wrong about prince harry and his friend but at the end of the day he wash shooting exactly where they were shot (no one else was), and the police made an enquiry but never investigated. I'm sorry i just feel strongly about killing birds of prey.

 

And with foxes if shooting isn't a solution then i dont know what is. If they can make guns that bring down antelope and deer in one go, i'm sure there's one that can take care of a fox without just wounding it.

 

I have NOTHING against hunting at all, that's not what i'm trying to get across here, just killing for fun.

 

 

Shooting birds of prey is illegal and saying that anyone has performed an illegal act on a public forum, without proof, is unwise.

 

Shooting foxes is now the only real way of controlling them (if we ignore trapping, snaring and poisoning, which I would like to do )

The problem is that foxes are not easy to shoot, although yes the "guns" exist to do it. They are wild and difficult to approach, or to get a clear shot. This is why they are often shot at night with a lamp. Simply because they are difficult to shoot at other times. They do not present a large target and the bullet would only have to be a few inches off target to leave a seriously wounded animal to die later in pain and suffering.

The advantage of catching a fox with a pack of hounds is that they either catch it, in which case it is killed instantly, or it escapes completely. No wounded animal to die later.

As there is no legal hunting with hounds now gamekeepers and farmers will kill them in any way that they can, including snaring, poisoning, trapping and shooting (often badly). This results in many more foxes being killed and wounded and much more suffering for the fox population than was the case with hunting with hounds.

I occasionally get asked to shoot foxes that are being a particular problem to a local farmer. It is not something that I enjoy but it is a service to the farmer and in return I get to shoot rabbit and pigeon over his land. That's how it works in a country community.

[Anderoo]

Everyone has a right to kill for the plate, (and in some cases population control) i just dont think taking a life should be done for the sole purpose of 'fun'.

 

That exactly sums up my position. All I'm hearing is a load of rhetoric skirting around the real issue which is, I enjoy killing animals. What a pity angling is lumped in with it all.

 

And, yes, if somebody who works in a slaughterhouse really enjoys their work there's something wrong with them!

 

I think it was Chris Yates who compared modern angling with war - batteries of rods, all camo'd up, with a definite enemy in mind. As much as I find hunting and shooting distasteful, I have to say that many aspects of modern fishing are even less defensible, as they don't actually achieve anything. I'm thinking primarily of overstocked artificial lakes.

[Sportsman]

That exactly sums up my position. All I'm hearing is a load of rhetoric skirting around the real issue which is, I enjoy killing animals. What a pity angling is lumped in with it all.

 

And, yes, if somebody who works in a slaughterhouse really enjoys their work there's something wrong with them!

 

I think it was Chris Yates who compared modern angling with war - batteries of rods, all camo'd up, with a definite enemy in mind. As much as I find hunting and shooting distasteful, I have to say that many aspects of modern fishing are even less defensible, as they don't actually achieve anything. I'm thinking primarily of overstocked artificial lakes.

 

I haven't seen one post on here that says "I enjoy killing animals"

 

I have seen posts that say I enjoy being out in the countryside, shooting, fishing or hunting.

 

I am sure that you can have a days fishing, maybe even catch something, but I would bet that at the end of the day your enjoyment of it was not measured in the numbers caught.

Just the same with shooting in my case. I sometimes enjoy a day shooting driven pheasants where 10 "guns" may shoot in excess of 100 birds. (carp commercial)

Most days I prefer walking up a few hedgerows with one good companion and a couple of dogs, and maybe shoot 2 or 3 birds (stalking barbel)

Every now and then I will set up a hide and decoys and try to attract pigeons down to the field in front of me (Groundbaiting my swim and then sitting behind a battery of rods and buzzers)

 

I'm afraid that to lump fishing in with other field sports is to put it exactly where it ought to be, and some fishermen need to be a bit more honest with themselves about that.

[Anderoo]

I haven't seen one post on here that says "I enjoy killing animals"

 

Me neither! That's what I said

 

I'm afraid that to lump fishing in with other field sports is to put it exactly where it ought to be, and some fishermen need to be a bit more honest with themselves about that.

 

Huge difference there Sportsman - the taking of life.

[gozzer]

I've solved the problem!

 

We could devise 'humane' methods of capturing animals. Take them out of their natural environment for a while (maybe dunk them in a bowl of water for instance), weigh them, photograph them for our records, admire them for a bit, (in some cases we could keep them caged until the end of the session), and then release them back into their natural environment totally unharmed.

We could have National Records for different animals to compare sizes.

We could import different species, and densely pack them into fenced off areas, just to add variety and to make the catching of them easier.

We could even have competitions in these areas. Where a group could get together and the one that trapped the highest weight of creatures wins a prize.

 

We would have to think of a name for it, because it wouldn't be 'hunting' would it?

 

John.

[lutra]

I hope i am wrong about prince harry and his friend but at the end of the day he wash shooting exactly where they were shot (no one else was), and the police made an enquiry but never investigated. I'm sorry i just feel strongly about killing birds of prey.

Prince Harry comes across as being a bit young and foolish to me. There dose seem to be an element of anti bird of prey thing going on in the game shooting world, a bit like the anti otter one in the fishing world. Cant see any justification for either myself.

 

And with foxes if shooting isn't a solution then i don't know what is. If they can make guns that bring down antelope and deer in one go, I'm sure there's one that can take care of a fox without just wounding it.

One of the problems with large caliber guns is they are just not safe in a lot of the heavily populated UK.

[corydoras]

Just the same with shooting in my case. I sometimes enjoy a day shooting driven pheasants where 10 "guns" may shoot in excess of 100 birds. (carp commercial)

It's funny that you should compare thetse two. I detest both of these 'pastimes' with equal fervour. When I was a child I used to hate pheasant shooting time for two reasons. On one level I hated losing my 'right-to-roam' over the 5,000 acres that made up my back yard and I just hated the ***** that turned up to shoot what to me at the time were my 'pets'. It did not seem fair to me to shoot something that would come running up to you if it thought that you might have some barley in your pocket. I know that the shooters paid the rent, paid for our electricity, coal etc, but as a seven year old I thought that they were just a bunch of tossers and my opinion has not changed. If shooting 10+ pheasant in one day is not 'killing for fun' then I don't know what is.

[Sportsman]

It's funny that you should compare thetse two. I detest both of these 'pastimes' with equal fervour. When I was a child I used to hate pheasant shooting time for two reasons. On one level I hated losing my 'right-to-roam' over the 5,000 acres that made up my back yard and I just hated the ***** that turned up to shoot what to me at the time were my 'pets'. It did not seem fair to me to shoot something that would come running up to you if it thought that you might have some barley in your pocket. I know that the shooters paid the rent, paid for our electricity, coal etc, but as a seven year old I thought that they were just a bunch of tossers and my opinion has not changed. If shooting 10+ pheasant in one day is not 'killing for fun' then I don't know what is.

 

The point I was trying (and obviously failing) to make was that there was more to a day out in the field than the final score.

 

There are commercial pheasant shoots that I would not contemplate, just as there are commercial carp puddles that I would not fish.

The driven pheasant shooting that I enjoy consists of a small syndicate of farmers, keepers and ghillies where we walk one drive as beaters and stand one drive as guns.

The way that the birds are fed and released means that they have minimum contact with humans and certainly would not come running up to you. All of the birds shot are taken by the guns to either eat or to give to others (often local pensioners) to enjoy.

Do I enjoy the day? of course. It is a good day out with likeminded people. Does that make me a tosser? If you think so.

Can I live with that thought? most certainly.