new petition re driven grouse shooting (1 Viewer)

Robin Edwards · Jul 29, 2016

Adam W said:
You mention species like Fox and Stoat suffering from Grouse shooting but many people including the RSPB and plenty of non shooting birders happily acknowledge the conservation benefits of legal predator control.
Only the other day I read a comment from a local birder who spent the day on the Durham Grouse moors delighted to be surrounded by Curlew,Redshank,Lapwing,Snipe and Golden Plover but not a Crow or magpie in sight now its not rocket science to see there's a link there but you might choose to pick out only the part about the negative impact on Corvids.

Wholesale species removal vs legal predator control - there is a difference.
Curlew,Redshank,Lapwing,Snipe and Golden Plover have existed alongside corvids and grouse species as well as predator species for eons of time before the invention of shotguns and tweed. Serving these waders up as a reason to kill everything else is simply a risible practice. There is nothing that comes near conservation from driven grouse shooting other than conserving a sporting tradition that makes some people a tidy profit.
Rocket Science? - where does science come into anything you've said so far Adam?

John Cantelo · Jul 29, 2016

Adam W said:
Lastly as for Mark's book well no I haven't read and and no I wouldn't take much notice of it I I did.

Well, I've just lost a bet with myself on that one, Adam. If for no other reason than it puts you in a much stronger position to criticise what he writes I'd urge you to read it. Saying that you wouldn't take any notice of it were you to do so seriously undermines your credibility. I'm sure you can get a copy via your local library so you don't need to buy a copy.

pppppvvvv · Jul 29, 2016

I lost a bet courtesy of AdamW too yesterday! The thing is, we get entrenched in our initial views, and have a mechanism in our brain that doesn't want to admit we are wrong at the fundamental level. Anyone can read pretty much anything, and can find info that they can interpret as reinforcing their position.

Just look at the EU referendum thread for other examples.

I think rather than trying to convert Adam, converting people currently with no opinion like our friends and relatives would be the more low lying fruit.

Adam W · Jul 29, 2016

I think Peter has hit the nail on the head, yes I admit that it's very unlikely that Mark Avery or anyone else for that matter is going to convert me against Grouse shooting and maybe that makes me wrong and narrow minded but i'm equally sure I or anyone else can't say anything that will convert anyone commenting here to agree with Grouse shooting and either side trying to do so will always be a waste of time really.

pppppvvvv · Jul 29, 2016

I think you are just human Adam!

Sharp Shin · Jul 29, 2016

Adam W said:
I think Peter has hit the nail on the head, yes I admit that it's very unlikely that Mark Avery or anyone else for that matter is going to convert me against Grouse shooting and maybe that makes me wrong and narrow minded but i'm equally sure I or anyone else can't say anything that will convert anyone commenting here to agree with Grouse shooting and either side trying to do so will always be a waste of time really.

I'd hate to write off rational debate so easily. Many people will be approaching this issue uncommitted and/or not informed (as I was a while back). Some will be reading the debate going on in this thread and looking for points of view and information. So, I trust that it isn't all "a waste of time". (And. by the way, I think 'debate' has been carried on rather well in this thread, with no insults or 'trolling'.)

Stewart

Mickr · Jul 29, 2016

Adam W said:
Argh so many points to try and reply to.

Firstly Stewart, I of course totally respect for right to you opinions and I take on board what you are saying but I simply don't agree with any of it but then you obviously feel the same about me so I think all we can do is respectfully agree to disagree.

Now Robin, you list a number of species that clearly don't benefit from grouse shooting but I suspect you know that you could have equally listed a number that do benefit such as a variety of Waders not to mention Grouse themselves of course and what about Black Grouse that are thriving in Durham in the exact same areas where people keep complaining about the negatives of Grouse shooting. You mention species like Fox and Stoat suffering from Grouse shooting but many people including the RSPB and plenty of non shooting birders happily acknowledge the conservation benefits of legal predator control.
Only the other day I read a comment from a local birder who spent the day on the Durham Grouse moors delighted to be surrounded by Curlew,Redshank,Lapwing,Snipe and Golden Plover but not a Crow or magpie in sight now its not rocket science to see there's a link there but you might choose to pick out only the part about the negative impact on Corvids.
It's really pretty easy to make a strong case either for or against Grouse shooting by simply picking out the right facts that fit and ignoring the rest it just depends which side you are on and what your personal opinions are.
One point I'd make about raptors and Hen Harriers in particular is yes of course you are quite right that Grouse shooting has a negative impact on them but only because they are illegally killed its not the very idea of Grouse shooting or the habitat that is created and manged for Grouse shooting that's the problem its only the illegal persecution part.
This idea that seems to have recently come about largely due to Mark Avery that managing the land for Grouse shooting is the root of all evil and the cause of every problem known to man is nonsense. The reason we have such a conflict between Grouse shooting and Hen Harriers isn't because managing the land for Grouse shooting destroys the habitat,quite the opposite it actually creates the perfect habitat for Hen Harriers rich in prey low in predators that as a ground nesting bird Hen Harriers themselves could easily fall victim to.
Any raptor species found on Grouse moors benefit from how the land is managed for Grouse provided they aren't then killed and this is the reason that I and many people like the RSPB believe that the best option is to keep Grouse shooting for its positives and keep trying to work towards finding a way to eliminate the negatives.

Lastly as for Mark's book well no I haven't read and and no I wouldn't take much notice of it I I did. Now I know you'll all say typical ignorant shooter ignoring the facts etc but think of it the other way round there's plenty of books written by shooters telling you all about how great Grouse shooting is and backing it up with selectively chosen facts but do you really think Mark will be reading them and accepting the facts and changing his opinion? I very much doubt so why would I be any different.

I look forward to a day when Driven Grouse Shooting has ended, the quicker the better. The shooters can't get their house in order so banning it is the only way to protect our currently persecuted wildlife. 3 pairs of Hen Harriers when we have enough habitat to provide territories for more than 300 pairs is a national scandal and one which needs to be confined to history.

Killing animals for fun is a barbaric, sadistic outdated pastime that is rife with criminal activity which largely goes unpunished. A ban on Driven Grouse Shooting will almost certainly put an end to the need for these criminals to illegally kill.

Jos Stratford · Jul 29, 2016

Mickr said:
... banning it is the only way to protect our currently persecuted wildlife...

How would you ensure the preservation of the actual moors? i.e. not see them end up under forestry or overgrazed with sheep?

Mickr said:
3 pairs of Hen Harriers when we have enough habitat to provide territories for more than 300 pairs is a national scandal and one which needs to be confined to history.

Agreed.

Mickr said:
Killing animals for fun is a barbaric, sadistic outdated pastime.

Not helpful language in moving forward. The responsible element of the hunting community does need to step up and be far more vocal on this disgraceful killing of protected raptors, and looking at real ways to try to stop it, but will labelling their activity as barbaric and sadistic encourage them?

Mickr · Jul 29, 2016

Jos Stratford said:
How would you ensure the preservation of the actual moors? i.e. not see them end up under forestry or overgrazed with sheep?

They could use the subsidies we, the taxpayer pays, to keep the moors as they are and perhaps encourage wildlife tourism. Some of the moors should be returned to forests though as they look awful.

Jos Stratford said:
Not helpful language in moving forward. The responsible element of the hunting community does need to step up and be far more vocal on this disgraceful killing of protected raptors, and looking at real ways to try to stop it, but will labelling their activity as barbaric and sadistic encourage them?

I have described it as I see it, both words used are factual and fit well when describing people who take pleasure from a pastime which results in the death of a living animal. An animal whose death is the sole purpose of their actions. If they were shooting solely to hit a moving target, they could go clay pigeon shooting.

We're not moving forward and using nice words has failed so it's time to call a spade a spade. The RSPB have tried to cosy up to the shooters and they have had their eyes taken out.

Adam W · Jul 30, 2016

Well I see normal service has been resumed, Took a bit longer than usual I suppose.
Anyone reading Micks comments still think I have no reason to fear that banning driven Grouse shooting would only be the thin end of the wedge?

rosbifs · Jul 30, 2016

The laws to protect these birds are in place it is the application of them that is lacking. Changing the attitudes of the land owners and gamekeepers will never happen unless they have something to gain or something to lose.

Another problem behind it is the more that we try to shout about it the more closed off it becomes - this is a greater danger.

pppppvvvv · Jul 30, 2016

Adam W said:
Well I see normal service has been resumed, Took a bit longer than usual I suppose.
Anyone reading Micks comments still think I have no reason to fear that banning driven Grouse shooting would only be the thin end of the wedge?

I like the way one person's perceived opinion trumps everyone else's. But oh yes, his opinion reinforces your beliefs.
I think you could be genuinely concerned if mickr was in line to become environment minister, but you have no worries there.

Mickr · Jul 30, 2016

Adam W said:
Well I see normal service has been resumed, Took a bit longer than usual I suppose.
Anyone reading Micks comments still think I have no reason to fear that banning driven Grouse shooting would only be the thin end of the wedge?

Normal service for the grouse shooting industry is to bury their heads while the illegal killing of birds of prey is rife. Only having 3 pairs of hen harriers in the whole of England suggests that the problem isn't only down to a "few bad eggs" as is often claimed to be the case. If it was only a "few bad eggs" then the problems would be limited to a few locations but it clearly isn't.

The highlighted words above are your words not mine, I do think killing any animal for fun is wrong but I'm not against all forms of hunting, even if I disagree with it. I'm against driven grouse shooting and the scorched earth policy towards anything that is seen as a threat to the grouse which are killed for fun.

If the driven grouse moors stopped breaking the law by killing birds of prey today then I wouldn't be for banning driven grouse shooting but we all know that isn't going to happen because they've had more than enough time to stop and have decided not to do so.

Please don't twist my words in an attempt to justify your position.

John Cantelo · Jul 30, 2016

As I tried to point out previously the 'thin end of the edge argument' tends to encourage people not to look at the very real and seemingly intractable problems that driven grouse shooting entails and by failing to do so makes the "anti" case stronger. Essentially, it's a flawed short-term view. Judging by the comments here and elsewhere much of the impetus for banning driven grouse shooting stems from concerns regarding the environmental problems that goes with this intensive form of shooting and above all the illegal persecution of raptors (which seems to be worsening rather than improving). Take away these two factors and the campaign becomes much weaker and lacks a broad-based appeal. Hence even if it were to be successful I very much doubt that a similarly successful campaign could be directed at shooting as a whole - even less so if the industry got it's house in order over illegal persecution and lead shot.

As for name calling those who hunt this isn't argument but abuse which has no place in debate ...

Mickr · Jul 30, 2016

John Cantelo said:
As I tried to point out previously the 'thin end of the edge argument' tends to encourage people not to look at the very real and seemingly intractable problems that driven grouse shooting entails and by failing to do so makes the "anti" case stronger. Essentially, it's a flawed short-term view. Judging by the comments here and elsewhere much of the impetus for banning driven grouse shooting stems from concerns regarding the environmental problems that goes with this intensive form of shooting and above all the illegal persecution of raptors (which seems to be worsening rather than improving). Take away these two factors and the campaign becomes much weaker and lacks a broad-based appeal. Hence even if it were to be successful I very much doubt that a similarly successful campaign could be directed at shooting as a whole - even less so if the industry got it's house in order over illegal persecution and lead shot.

As for name calling those who hunt this isn't argument but abuse which has no place in debate ...

I wasn't name calling, I was describing an act, not a person, I'm now guessing that maybe Adam W is a shooter?

Sadistic (The deriving of pleasure, or the tendency to derive pleasure, from cruelty) and barbaric (Savagely cruel) are both fitting.

The grouse are flushed by beaters and driven towards the guns where birds are often hit and left to crash to the ground while still alive and they flap around on the ground, presumably in agony. Some end up in the mouths of dogs which may or may not kill them. Others are left flapping about on the ground until the drive is over and they are picked up and then killed.

As for the birds of prey, they can be poisoned and die of organ failure, shot or they can be trapped on poles by their broken legs. They're often left hanging until they die over a period of time or their legs snap and they fly off to die somewhere else.

John Cantelo · Jul 30, 2016

Mickr said:
I wasn't name calling, I was describing an act, not a person, I'm now guessing that maybe Adam W is a shooter?

Sadistic (The deriving of pleasure, or the tendency to derive pleasure, from cruelty) and barbaric (Savagely cruel) are both fitting.

The grouse are flushed by beaters and driven towards the guns where birds are often hit and left to crash to the ground while still alive and they flap around on the ground, presumably in agony. Some end up in the mouths of dogs which may or may not kill them. Others are left flapping about on the ground until the drive is over and they are picked up and then killed.

As for the birds of prey, they can be poisoned and die of organ failure, shot or they can be trapped on poles by their broken legs. They're often left hanging until they die over a period of time or their legs snap and they fly off to die somewhere else.

Well, it sounds awfully like name calling to me and making assumptions about what motivates those who hunt (I very much doubt that it is either sadism or barbarism). Certainly, anyone who has followed his comments for even a short while knows that Adam would not endorse the illegalities to which you describe.

Sharp Shin · Jul 30, 2016

Adam W said:
Well I see normal service has been resumed, Took a bit longer than usual I suppose.
Anyone reading Micks comments still think I have no reason to fear that banning driven Grouse shooting would only be the thin end of the wedge?

Like John, I've tried to keep the discussion on this thread focussed and away from straying into a general 'anti-hunting' campaign. I've done this because there is a scientific and data-supported case against driven grouse shooting, but also for two other reasons: firstly to address Adam's 'thin end of wedge'/'slippery slope' argument; and secondly because it serves our case well not to enter into abuse. Adam feels that 'normal service has been restored' because of some comments posted here and, hence, he feels that his slippery slope argument is proven.

Well, if 'slippery slope'/ 'thin end of the wedge' arguments are valid, it may well work the other way. What are we to make of Natural England's announcement that a licence has been granted (yes, as yet one licence) to kill Buzzards (a native species) to protect Pheasants (an introduced species reared and released in huge numbers for the 'sport' of shooting). Anyone subscribing to 'thin end of the wedge' theories might well be thinking "what next"!

And, if one thinks that Mick's strong but heart-felt comments are 'abuse', then it might help give a sense of proportion to read the comments made (presumably by members of the grouse-shooting community) to Bowland brewery for deciding to launch a Hen Harrier beer and post a photo of Mark Avery and Chris Packham drinking it. I don't want to repeat the awful words here, but if you do want to get a flavour of them you can see them here on the entry dated 27th July. I only hope that this level of hate from the hunting community is not the thin end of the wedge to something much more awful (and of which we've seen too much in recent days).

Stewart

Mary · Jul 31, 2016

Not a million miles away from this topic, there's a chance to contribute your views to an Inquiry re Future of the Natural Environment; closing date 9/9/2016. Follow links to guide on how to put forward your submission.
http://www.parliament.uk/business/c...ronment-after-the-eu-referendum-launch-16-17/

Sharp Shin · Aug 5, 2016

Hen Harrier Day tomorrow at Rainham Marshes. Chris Packham will be there and hundreds of other people who want end an end to the illegal persecution of Hen Harriers, and an end to all the other ill effects of driven grouse shooting. I'm taking my son and, if his opinions are typical, there's a new generation coming who see driven grouse shooting as an anachronism and rotten hobby of a privileged few. See you there.

Stewart

ProwlingBoy · Aug 5, 2016

I'll be there tomorrow at Rainham too. The last time I spoke to Howard the warden a couple of weeks ago he said he expected over 1,000 people, so it could be very busy indeed. I plan to get there early, well before the 11.00am start.

If I see a man with a draw telescope, I'll say hi.

Otherwise have a good day.

new petition re driven grouse shooting (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Well-known member

Guest

Well-known member

Guest

Stewart Belfield

Well-known member

Eastern Exile

Well-known member

Well-known member

PutAin STOP

Guest

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Stewart Belfield

Well-known member

Stewart Belfield

Active member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread