Trapping Predators - Birds Of Prey

[Paul_B]

In my ignorance after listening to the above arguments I do think Aaron has some valid points about a vacuum that would result if grouse shooting suddenly stopped. It would be difficult to change from a managed landscape for grouse directly to a managed landscape for moorland farming or as a nature reserve. There is only so much a volunteer force and a charity can do in a reserve and farming would most likely be difficult to re-introduce. Quite possibly because the landscape has been too managed for one particular species (even if others seem to benefit).

I also question the shooting estate's who claim they are supporting natural diversity through their actions. I must admit I do not have the evidence or the knowledge to argue this but I do think the land was not a natural landscape before shooting for sport came along and it wouldn't have been developed into a shooting estate if there wasn't a suitable landscape there before the shooting. If the landscape, habitat and species biodiversity came before the shooting then it is possible for them to survive without shooting. The difficulty is to get back to the patterns of land use prior to the switch to shooting estates. Might not be a good argument but makes a kind of logic in my mind. BTW I grew up on the edge of the Ribble Valley and not too far from the great big shooting estates that are the Forest of Bowland. Before CRoW act it was mostly a huge no go area. The only places you could go were a few public rights of way and certain estates not owned by shooting businesses such as United Utilities. Shooting is definitely still doing well despite access but from a non-shooter's / walker's view it has a feel of mono-culture just as much as the coniferous swathes put up by Forestry Commision. Only it does have a bit more life. Fortunately the Hen Harrier is not doing too badly up in the Forest of Bowland. However in over 13 years of growin up there I never saw one. I did about 3 years ago and it was a sight. If managed shooting moorland is so great then why are there not more of them around? Surely I'd see more.

 

[Manacles]

One of the issues with shooting is that many of our game birds were introduced by the shooting estates specifically for that purpose but have now, through time, entered the public consciousness as indigenous (pheasants for example) and there would doubtless be much opposition should they become endangered. I am of the opinion that most well run shooting estates do preserve habitat. It is largely down to pheasant and partidge shooting in south west England that many copses exist today that may well have been grubbed out in the 70s.

I don't want to sound political but I did have a thought rereading the thread and that is that bird shooting is percieved by many of its opponents as a class issue (similarities to fox hunting there) rather than a cruelty issue. It is just easier for opponents to give it the cruelty label and take the moral high ground (I've often wondered how meat eating opponents might feel if they toured an abbattoir...)

 

[Paul_B]

There was that Julia Bradbury programme about cows last night. I do want to go round an abbattoir for that reason. All the times I've seen the slaughtering proces on TV I have not been bothered but I do wonder with the full sights and smells whether that would bother me more. I don't think so because I have had a realistic view on meat production and hunting sports. I have no qualms about eating game birds just like I have no qualms about eating cow meat. I also use, eat or wear many parts of many animals and I believe that is all right and good. For me I only have issues with the quality of the end of life. I get all my meat from Booths. More expensive but I do know the places they get their meat from as I used to be the one putting the invoices on their finance system many years ago. I have been to look at the places, the farms, the abbattoir, etc. albeit from the outside looking in. I trust in the ethical nature of the Booth business that all animals have been treated as well as food sources can be. Best practise I think. My concern is that best practise in shooting is down to the accuracy of the shot. It is not a captive bolt to the forehead or a numbing shot of electricity and a dispatch with a knife which AFAIK is the way with birds bred for food. Shooting is more random but I do believe most kills are as quick as that method can be. Either the shot or the gun dog dispactching it if only brought down. However I do not know. just like I do not know for sure Booths meat is killed well too. I do have relatives (well did have) who were beaters for shoots down Wiltshire way. They always had plentiful supply of pheasants. The estates all over produced the birds and as a result they killed more in a shoot than the shooters would want. Hence the pay for beating was birds. The overpopulation of the birds meant for good sport. More birds downed in a shoot but the land was not at its natural levels (if there is such a thing for pheasants anyway).

 

[Manacles]

Sadly I missed last night's JB programme, we are on digital TV but are right at the edge of the catchment area for our signla so any bad rain reults in a loss of BBc channels. I am hoping they will repeat it.

Good point on the meat, I've been buying mine from a local farm shop for years as I can see the animals alive on the farm and ultimately eat it. A couple of vegetarian friends still argue that it results in a death etc but I believe we are omnivores and as long as we take animal husbandry seriously and eat as cruelty free as possible then it's okay.

I used beat and train for keeping in South Gloucestershire. I got 8 quid a day for beating and a couple of birds if I wanted (I'd have done it for free for the countryside access and fresh air). I was living with my parents then (late teens) and my mum wouldn't prep the birds so a local guy did it. We gave him a bird and he'd do three or four for us - happy days! Like all good things it came to an end as I couldn't afford a place in the country so moved where I could get work that paid for a mortgage etc - so I joined the 9 to 5 treadmill...........

 

[spartacus]

Good enough for him, well deserved.

 

[santaman2000]

...My concern is that best practise in shooting is down to the accuracy of the shot. It is not a captive bolt to the forehead or a numbing shot of electricity and a dispatch with a knife which AFAIK is the way with birds bred for food. Shooting is more random but I do believe most kills are as quick as that method can be. Either the shot or the gun dog dispactching it if only brought down...

Gun dogs (pointers, setters and retrievers) are taught to have a "soft" mouth so as not to damage edible meat. In other words pointers and setters will locate, point and retrieve game birds while retrievers will normally only retrieve (game species of Morning Doves or waterfowl) They do not kill game birds (Pheasants, Doves, Quail, Chukar, Ducks, Geese and Ptarmigan) Wounded birds are killed by the hunter wringing their necks the same as a farmer killing a domestic bird.

The only instance where the dogs are used to actually kill the game is Raccoons, O'possum (although possums are more normally regarded as vermin taken incidental to coon hunting) and Fox.