-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Gamekeeper fined £500 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Henry B
- Start date
Mary Evelyn
New member
valley boy said:
Oh No :eek!:
MKinHK said:
Hi MKinHK living in HK you've no doubt seen all these Eagles throwing themselves onto the blades and crushing their skulls.
I don't doubt that there will be some bird fatalites, but like all other aspects of life the birds will soon learn to avoid the blades.
Perhaps you would to suggest some other form of power source for us here in Scotland. "Nuclear Power" perhaps.
Living in Scotland I would rather lose the odd bird to a turbine strike than lose the whole of Scotland "Birds and All" to a Nuclear accident.
...Wonder where all the Eagles would be then! "Still... not your problem, you live in HK".
ESTEBANNIC said:
Living in Spain and not here in Scotland, have you actually seen the blades on these turbines turning???
"Yes" on paper the basic laws in Physics will show the tips speed of the blades to be FEET/second/second etc,etc.
But in reality the actual visual speed isn't all that fast.
Perhaps you are thinking of the small wind turbines people put on there houses. "those go round like stink".
What a stupid arguement. What if theres a world war and were all wiped out by the nuclear threat. You are talking rubbish Sputnik. How are the birds going to learn to avoid blades? How long is this learning process going to take, are there going to be many eagles left before they learn the lesson.Look up whats happened to the Eagles in Norway, perhaps they are a bit slooow there and didnt learn fast enough. There are other options not just Windpower. so maybe all people are saying is that these routes should be explored. By the way there is an actual thread if you want to post about windfarms, come on over to it if you want a debate, leave this thread for what it is about, gamekeepers killing birdssputnik said:
Last edited:
deborah4
Well-known member
Sputnik
Being new to the Forum, you may not be aware there are protracted debates on the windfarm issue elsewhere - you may also want to do some background reading before commenting further:
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=31406
As Valley Boy says, this is not the place to discuss windfarms, regardless of your point of view.
Everyone is entitled to post their opinions here regarding the prosecution of gamekeepers. (Unless of course they should happen to be a gamekeeper or troll, just intent on hijacking the thread, which would become obvious to most concerned after several postings anyway).
Perhaps you have some more thoughts on your above comment, having read my previous post?
Being new to the Forum, you may not be aware there are protracted debates on the windfarm issue elsewhere - you may also want to do some background reading before commenting further:
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=31406
As Valley Boy says, this is not the place to discuss windfarms, regardless of your point of view.
Everyone is entitled to post their opinions here regarding the prosecution of gamekeepers. (Unless of course they should happen to be a gamekeeper or troll, just intent on hijacking the thread, which would become obvious to most concerned after several postings anyway).
sputnik said:
Perhaps you have some more thoughts on your above comment, having read my previous post?
Last edited:
saluki
Well-known member
Hang on! I can't agree with that Deborah - surely anyone who subscribes to BF is entitled to have their say on any subject up for discussion? There's at least one full-time keeper who posts on BF, and several others (such as myself) who have experience of gamekeeping. Surely it wouldn't be fair to deny us our opinion? I've already posted on this thread, but I've certainly not 'hijacked' it - in fact I was supporting the prosecution!deborah4 said:
Jonathan
ESTEBANNIC
Well-known member
sputnik said:
Strange that you point out where we all live. I don't really see what that matters. I have seen wind farms in Scotland, a country I visit often as most of my family live there. I have also witnessed the blades turning and witnessed pieces of bird scattered in the proximities. Please do a little reseach before posting utter rubbish.
Osprey_watcher
Ένας ερασ&
Well said. :clap:ESTEBANNIC said:
saluki
Well-known member
Does it? I cut it short for brevity, the mods do a good job of dealing with trolls. However, if you insist VB:valley boy said:
"Everyone is entitled to post their opinions here regarding the prosecution of gamekeepers. (Unless of course they should happen to be a gamekeeper or troll, just intent on hijacking the thread, which would become obvious to most concerned after several postings anyway)".
Jonathan
deborah4
Well-known member
saluki said:
er...yes it does, Jonathan. Not sure what your point is, but apologies if you were offended by my remark - it certainly wasnt directed at you personally or gamekeepers in general, or anyone else for that matter. (As you say, think the Mods would deal with anyone deliberately trying to hijack a thread for ulterior motives whether they were gamekeepers or not!) Of course everyone's opinion is welcome and valid - think that was my main point really. Perhaps the statement was a bit too ambiguous and could be taken in the way you took it, but certainly not my intention.
saluki
Well-known member
Hi Deborah,deborah4 said:
I wasn't offended, I simply thought you where suggesting keepers shouldn't be allowed to express their opinions - which, I'm sure you'll agree, wouldn't be healthy for BF. It did seem out of character to be honest, so I'm sure I misunderstood you - in which case I appologise.
Jonathan
deborah4
Well-known member
saluki said:
No problem Jonathan!
Once got repremanded by a tutor at Uni for quoting Voltaire in a law lecture on censorship: 'I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it'"* which is kind of where I come from generally - subject of course to mores of public decency, incitement of racial hatred etc etc (and on here, Bf's own boundaries!) - so I'm all for freedom of speech.
Anyway back to the thread - almost forgotten what it was about now!
While the fine may have seemed harsh to some people, ie. considering the particular gamekeeper was not actually harming the birds in question, IMV (and I may be wrong), the sentence is a welcome indicator that the Courts are becoming willing to intervene with punishment on the basis of foreseable harm (ie. using 'intent' etc) where Sch.1 species are concerned. The problem here however, is that it potentially results in the public release of information regarding perhaps previously kept quiet locations of breeding sites. I think VB alluded to it earlier, that a lot of sites are only known to those who discover them, sharing such knowledge with the RSPB. But as VB also said, once the 'deed' has been done, it is often too late (on evidencial grounds) to secure a conviction. The problem, IMV, is a question of balance - too early, and risk of charges being dropped but site revealed anyway - too late - and we have more dead raptors to contend with.
*The phrase 'I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it' is widely attributed to Voltaire, but cannot be found in his writings. With good reason. The phrase was invented by a later author as an epitome of his attitude. "
