Why are some countries over-ran with Anti's

ivanthehunter

IMO it seem that the UK is overran with antis.

QUESTION Is this simply a function of the population demographics?

In the UK there is a higher % of the population living in towns and cities. As we all know these people have very little exposure to their daily food supply and in general they have misconceptions of hunting and its integral standing within the country.

Will this town/city culture spell the end for country events.
Are the anti mob constant in their of thought i.e. is it right that they attack hare coursing and yet they leave falconry and ferreting alone.


There constant chipping away at the old block will win out in the end as it has in the UK...

Remember our sport is our right by tradition... The Inuit and the native Americans use this excuse to warrant their hunting trips...

cavan shooter

Ivan there is a fundamental flaw with your argument which could cause some issues

The native americans including the inuit do not in the main hunt for sport neither do the Lap or suomi but for food and to supplement there diet.

When you start to equate killing animals for sport, then you will upset people i.e(blood sports). Rough shooting is more acceptable than driven shooting as it is akin to foraging, driven shoots on the other hand is seen as something done to allow people to shoot pheasants and for sport.

I knew a very nice girl in College (in the UK) who was a big anti and I could see her point as she could see mine. She accepted shooting for the table, she opposed shooting for sport.

Now on the other point you make, You and I in the main have no right to shoot. Thats why you need permission to hunt somebodies land and never forget that. We can hunt for as long as we have permission unless we own the land or sporting rights.

That should open it up a bit

cantona1111

cavan shooter wrote: »

Ivan there is a fundamental flaw with your argument which could cause some issues

The native americans including the inuit do not in the main hunt for sport neither do the Lap or suomi but for food and to supplement there diet.

When you start to equate killing animals for sport, then you will upset people i.e(blood sports). Rough shooting is more acceptable than driven shooting as it is akin to foraging, driven shoots on the other hand is seen as something done to allow people to shoot pheasants and for sport.

I knew a very nice girl in College (in the UK) who was a big anti and I could see her point as she could see mine. She accepted shooting for the table, she opposed shooting for sport.

Now on the other point you make, You and I in the main have no right to shoot. Thats why you need permission to hunt somebodies land and never forget that. We can hunt for as long as we have permission unless we own the land or sporting rights.

That should open it up a bit

You make some good points, but i would like to take you up on one point, when you equate shooting animals for fun with the term "blood sport"
Does this mean when i shoot pidgeons or rabbits for vermin control that im involved in a "Blood sport", would it be more acceptable if I tried not to enjoy it as much when I do it, Im not getting at you personally. But i hate the use of that term


Im new to hunting, this was my first game season, Im from the country and my dad hunted years ago and there was allways guns around and to be honest with you the reactions that I have had from people when they find out that I have started hunting, has been mothing short of shocking.

To be honest with you, there are so many ignorant people(I mean that in the lack of knowledge sense) with an opinion out there its unbelievable, Im now at the stage where i wouldnt dream of mentioning hunting in a conversation as people think they have the right to abuse you, I dont abuse people for playing GAA when I personally wouldnt have any appreciation for it.

In short, I think we (Shooting fraternity) are fecked, I think we are going to be restricted into extinction

Thats todays big negative rant over:(

cavan shooter

To me the difference is that your shooting to control the vermin and the, for want of a better word thrill of the hunt. I have to agree totally with your last comments. Your shooting for a purpose, and I shoot for a purpose the fact you/we like the thrill is secondary. When it becomes a sport, we go shooting for no other reason only to derive pleasure from it and to past the time.

I was after foxes last night because
1. My neighbours have some lambs already
2. My neighbours have lost ducks recently
3. With mating new foxes start poking there nose around and I want to keep them out of the area.

If I didnt have the interets in game or have the aspect of vermin control for my neighbours I wouldnt shoot foxes. (personal opinion)

I am happy to shoot what I eat 8 pheasants this year 5 duck, and enoy the hunt and the excellent meal afterwards. I would struggle with my conscience if I shot and left it there. I have shot driven days and walked up days in Shropshire where I lived and I couldnt believe when people would walk away and not bring a brace of pheasants, to me thats an outrage. Even when I shoot rabbit or pigeon I take some home.

You will always get that reaction when you tell people you like hunting (from some people) others will ask you for a pheasant, Put forward a solid and sane argument and best of luck.

(I have to work today and wont have access to the computer till this evening to reply if any are needed, so for any posters I'm not being rude )

ivanthehunter

Back to the demographics of the anti;s.


Do you think its true to say that towns-folk are more anti than rural-folk when compared per capita?????

And can you give any reasonable explanation or evidence for your beliefs or observation.

PS well said CS +1

cantona1111

ivanthehunter wrote: »

Back to the demographics of the anti;s.


Do you think its true to say that towns-folk are more anti than rural-folk when compared per capita?????

And can you give any reasonable explanation or evidence for your beliefs or observation.

PS well said CS +1

More people from the town/city are really removed from the reality of vermin control or food production, but its not an exclusive thing, In my experience its mostly women, if men have an issue with it, they keep it to themselves,

cantona1111

cavan shooter wrote: »

To me the difference is that your shooting to control the vermin and the, for want of a better word thrill of the hunt. I have to agree totally with your last comments. Your shooting for a purpose, and I shoot for a purpose the fact you/we like the thrill is secondary. When it becomes a sport, we go shooting for no other reason only to derive pleasure from it and to past the time.

I was after foxes last night because
1. My neighbours have some lambs already
2. My neighbours have lost ducks recently
3. With mating new foxes start poking there nose around and I want to keep them out of the area.

If I didnt have the interets in game or have the aspect of vermin control for my neighbours I wouldnt shoot foxes. (personal opinion)

All good points, but i disagree with one point,
You say the thrill of the hunt is secondary
I disagree, the thrill of the hunt is number one for me, if you dont get the thrill of the hunt, i dont see the point in going out hunting, I dont need to hunt, i can go to the shop and buy phesant/rabbit/pidgeon, i go hunting cause i like the thrll, and lightly fried pidgeon breast and salad is a great bonus.

Sorry if it sounds like im picking on ya, just in the mood for lively discussion:)

cavan shooter

No worries cantona everybody is different and there reason for enjoying the sport

The hunt to me is secondary, I wont deny I enjoy it but I get more enjoyment working my dog and off season rearing pheasants (topping up feeders) than I do when I shoot one. I am one of the guys who goes for a shot and doesnt care if I get one or not and on a good day I'll bag 2 but have on plenty of occassions let the next bird fly off into the sun set.

As for the domographics of antis that Ivan is talking about Antis can be found in the countryside too, As Secretary of the local club we have permissions to shoot land that goes back years but on occassion we are finding that sons of Farmers are asking us not to shoot while their Fathers (60+) were all big shooters. (I like to see the pheasants on the land, theyll say) (miss the point that there's pheasants because the club released 120 of them.

Shooting and hunting was very much part of the rural scene in days gone by and my Father, Uncles and Grandfather all shot for the pot and controlled Foxes. Things change Farmers Have cattle, not the mixed Farm of old you'll buy a chicken for 2.99 so why rare one, dont have chickens no worries from foxes? so they cant see the issue shooting foxes.

lightening

cantona1111 wrote: »

I disagree, the thrill of the hunt is number one for me

Absolutely, if you like it do it, don't hide behind some excuse of population control or being some sort of hero to the farming community traipsing around on miserable nights with a lamp and a gun. If people were that concerned about the farmers they would be inundated with offers of help at lambing time, making silage and hay etc....!

I think this urban/rural bull**** divide is annoying, assuming once someone is from Dublin or Cork or Belfast city they think everything comes in a plastic bag. It's not the case. City people visit the country more than country people visit the cities. City people are using traditional butchers more and more, game is appearing on a lot of shelves around Dublin. I wouldn't be surprised if more rural people eat supermarket meat than city people, Dublin city center has dozens and dozens of butchers. There was a queue outside FX Buckleys on Moore st. last time I was there. There is also queues outside the fish monger I use. The fish are often bought whole, gutted at home. Dublin is a city of pigs trotters, cows tongue and tripe.

I am a Dub. I have a huge network of friends through sports, work, school... the usual. Not one of them could be arsed about rural hunting. They do however enjoy game, I cook it for them a good bit. The only person I know that doesn't like hunting is from outside Galway, but she doesn't protest or demonstrate. I haven't seen an anti hunt demo in Dublin in years.

I think there is a lot of paranoia about the dreaded anti's.

This is not England.

lordarpad

couldn't agree more. I buy my fish in howth and have it cleaned and gutted there. makes no difference in price, so why not. Yes I despise hunting animals from horseback with hounds, there is nothing clean about it in my opinion. But I will learn how to shoot straight and how to kill a deer or boar or fox or goose cleanly and efficiently with the minimum amount of distress to it.

lightening

Dude, the English style hunt, red jackets and the like are crap at catching foxes to be honest. They usually fail. I'm not crazy at how the fox ends up, but the amount the catch is minimal, road kill claims hundreds and hundreds more foxes, sometimes leaving them injured for hours.

lordarpad

doesn't matter - they set out to abuse the creature and that is despicable. I agree that roadkill kills more, but that ain't intentional. And that makes all the difference.

ivanthehunter

lightening wrote: »

This is not England.

I;m glad you mentioned that, if you look at the %'s of the pop living in towns and cities its more than 50%, this is one of the main reasons the anti's have so much strength.

Too many townies telling country people how to live their lives just because they took a weekend trip to the country and they saw something they didn't like.

Thats as simple as it..

Kids in school need to be taught about the countryside and its activities in a manner thats not romantic. Hard facts and the real issues about the true state of affairs.. Too much molly coddling going on with fancy story's that place human traits on animals.

lightening

ivanthehunter wrote: »

Too many townies telling country people how to live their lives

I presume you mean in England and not in Ireland.

ivanthehunter wrote: »

Kids in school need to be taught about the countryside and its activities

I would hope this would be taught at home (as I was), not in schools. People need to realise that it's the most eco friendly, carbon friendly way to get good, nourishing, protein rich food on the plate. Look at the life of a mallard compared to a non-freerange chicken. I am really romantacising things here, but I for one would rather the life of a wild duck with the risk of a shotgun than the life of a chicken from a huge processed chicken farm.

And I certainly prefer the taste of game than heavily farmed meat!

I would love if there was an easy way for your work to get on to my plate. And I am a **** hot cook, I would love you to taste what I can do with you're bag!

il gatto

A massive amount of people who live in the Irish countryside are not country people as that term would've indicated 20 years ago. Many have moved from towns and cities to the countryside. Many, though born and raised in the country have through lifestyle, employment and even by choice, become detached from the countryside outside of admiring the scenary and liking the peace and quiet. I know people who have spent most of their 30 or so years living in the country and might not have stepped into a field more than once every few years. People commute to work, come home and watch the T.V. Loads only have a small garden shed and have no reason to potter around outside in the way most farmers would in the evening. The countryside is just that nice green place framed by their double glazed window.
Some people grow up around guns, tractors, motorbikes, boats, Landrovers etc. and know the enjoyment of these dangerous things grown ups around us did. Some people don't, but acquire the taste for them. Some people don't and just never understand and as a follow on, find it objectionable.
Personally, I don't shoot foxes. We never had sheep and the only chickens we ever lost, our own bloody Springer killed. But I don't think people who do want to shoot them are doing anything wrong. I grew up with it (including my father and my mother's father). If I thought I'd eat a rabbit, I'd have no bother shooting it. Same for pheasant or any good game. Otherwise I just wouldn't bother (Except rats. Dirty feckers). But that's just me and I defend anyone's right to do their own thing as long as there's no cruelty involved.

whitser

lordarpad wrote: »

couldn't agree more. I buy my fish in howth and have it cleaned and gutted there. makes no difference in price, so why not. Yes I despise hunting animals from horseback with hounds, there is nothing clean about it in my opinion. But I will learn how to shoot straight and how to kill a deer or boar or fox or goose cleanly and efficiently with the minimum amount of distress to it.

quite happy to shoot a fox or boar etc...but its wrong to hunt with dogs??? how will you drive these boars and foxes to your gun??? and your going to be such an excelllent shot that every time you pull the trigger you'll have an instant clean kill. you'll be the only one on the planet with a 100% clean kill record. lets just pretend that you actuallly dont kill first time and the boar or fox gets away- how will you find him? at least when hunting with dogs its either killed or gets away uninjured no in between. you obviously have a bit to learn about shooting and hunting.

togster

Well isn't this part of the problem really. Why do shooters have to defend hunting on horse back or with hounds. I used to do alot of fox-hunting on horse back but im in Sweden now and it's banned here. They mainly shoot moose, deer and wild pig.

I can safely say i have seen foxes terrorised, distressed and torn to bits. Not many, i mean many got away.Soon after i stopped hunting with hounds. I hate to admit it but it's the truth. I think the shooting fraternity would do themselves a huge service in distancing themselves from the hunting with hounds crowd tbh...or will you guys be next? Isn't that what would happen?

To answer the OP, i think a persons location has a large impact on how they view our sports. The rural/urban issue has a large bearing on ones understanding of hunting.

lordarpad

whitser wrote: »

quite happy to shoot a fox or boar etc...but its wrong to hunt with dogs??? how will you drive these boars and foxes to your gun??? and your going to be such an excelllent shot that every time you pull the trigger you'll have an instant clean kill. you'll be the only one on the planet with a 100% clean kill record. lets just pretend that you actuallly dont kill first time and the boar or fox gets away- how will you find him? at least when hunting with dogs its either killed or gets away uninjured no in between. you obviously have a bit to learn about shooting and hunting.

funny that. reading you, one would think that countries that don't allow driving wild animals with dogs would be overrun with foxes. Like germany, Sweden, all of continental Europe in fact. In actual fact hunters there bring home a lot of foxes. Same for wild boar, they either sit in wait for them or have driven hunts with human drivers who gently rustle the animals out "Drueckjagd" and push them towards the hunters. I would say that it might be useful for you to widen your horizon before trying to talk down to me.

Also in all these countries dogs are of course used for searching. The problem is driving.

lightening

togster wrote: »

The rural/urban issue has a large bearing on ones understanding of hunting.

Where do you see evidence of this in Ireland? From what I can gather city folk in Ireland understand rural folk better than some rural folk understand the city people!

I think most city people perfectly understand hunting and why it exists. The rest just don't really give a shlt. Sorry to burst your bubble, but anyone I know from the cities just aren't bothered about what you do. The ones that are are only interested, like me. Just interested in the food, the nature, the wildlife, the cull....

Vegeta

Folks do not talk down other peoples forms of hunting or judge them for it.

If you want to do that there are plenty of other forums out there for you.

Next person to take a pop at someone's hunting methods (well, as long as they are legal and in the remit of this forum) will be taking a holiday from posting.

Consider this an on thread warning.

Vegeta

lightening wrote: »

Where do you see evidence of this in Ireland? From what I can gather city folk in Ireland understand rural folk better than some rural folk understand the city people!

I think most city people perfectly understand hunting and why it exists. The rest just don't really give a shlt. Sorry to burst your bubble, but anyone I know from the cities just aren't bothered about what you do. The ones that are are only interested, like me. Just interested in the food, the nature, the wildlife, the cull....

Great folks why don't we get out our big generalisation brushes and have a generalisation party. (I am not talking to lightening specifically I am just quoting his post to highlight this theme running in the thread)

Unless someone can come up with some facts can we all stop talking out our ass holes please.

lightening

Just going on who and what I know Vegeta. Didn't realise I needed cold hard facts to continue in the debate.

I am on the other side, a city dweller, thought my imput and thoughts would be handy, maybe dispell the myth that the cities of Ireland host swarms of anti-hunt people.

Vegeta

lightening wrote: »

Just going on who and what I know Vegeta. Didn't realise I needed cold hard facts to continue in the debate.

I am on the other side, a city dweller, thought my imput and thoughts would be handy, maybe dispell the myth that the cities of Ireland host swarms of anti-hunt people.

That's fair enough lightening but person A says "People in the country are more in touch with hunting". Person B says " Where's your evidence, I know loads of people in the city and they know all about it"

That is a circular arguement with no end and I am stopping a fight before it starts.

Now if you want to create a poll asking hunters who (rural or urban) they think understand hunting best, then by all means go right ahead. That way you'll get empirical data at least and straight from the horses mouths too.

cantona1111

Great folks why don't we get out our big generalisation brushes and have a generalisation party. (I am not talking to lightening specifically I am just quoting his post to highlight this theme running in the thread)

Unless someone can come up with some facts can we all stop talking out our ass holes please.

Was this thread set up to discuss the anti hunting lobby and a possible urban rural divide?

Im not trying to be smart here, but it is hard to discuss without a certain amount of generalising.

In my personel experience the majority of antis I have met are from the town/city, am I now generalising?

PS. Im trying not to come over as a smart arse

BryanL

"funny that. reading you, one would think that countries that don't allow driving wild animals with dogs would be overrun with foxes."


just back from Germany and Holland where both countries allow foxes to be driven by dogs and people. woods are surrounded and foxes are driven forward to the line of guns by people on foot 15-20 feet apart with dogs working the cover and terriers trying every hole they pass.
It's far less sporting than hunting with hounds, it does not favour the survival of the fittest and injured foxes do get away.

Hunting with hounds is not traditional in most of Europe(because of the damage done to hound's and horses going over frozen ground. But they kill a lot more foxes(and badgers!) So they'd hardly be poster boys for guys apposed to hunting?
Bryan

cantona1111

Vegeta wrote: »

That's fair enough lightening but person A says "People in the country are more in touch with hunting". Person B says " Where's your evidence, I know loads of people in the city and they know all about it"

That is a circular arguement with no end and I am stopping a fight before it starts.

Now if you want to create a poll asking hunters who (rural or urban) they think understand hunting best, then by all means go right ahead. That way you'll get empirical data at least and straight from the horses mouths too.

The term " Understand hunting the best " could be taken up in different ways,
Person A " I understand hunting best, I know all the facts and figures about how cruel it is,

Person B " I understand hunting best, I know how shoot very well and get a clean kill, I love it very much

Another circular arguement

Again, Im not picking a fight, just looking for middle ground

lightening

Vegeta wrote: »

That is a circular arguement with no end and I am stopping a fight before it starts.

Fair enough, I just think the anti people are rare and scattered all over the country. The fear of city people telling country people how to live their lives is unfounded, extremist, a little rabble rousing and tribalist in my opinion.

I get a feeling that some hunters would like there to be more antis for some morbid reason. Some people on here seem to want to fight, to prove their right to hunt.

Vegeta

cantona1111 wrote: »

The term " Understand hunting the best " could be taken up in different ways,
Person A " I understand hunting best, I know all the facts and figures about how cruel it is,

Person B " I understand hunting best, I know how shoot very well and get a clean kill, I love it very much

Another circular arguement

Again, Im not picking a fight, just looking for middle ground

Don't ask for evidence or sources, there's your middle ground

Lightening posted:

Where do you see evidence of this in Ireland? From what I can gather city folk in Ireland understand rural folk better than some rural folk understand the city people!

In such a generalisation heavy thread this approach will cause arguments.

You can generalise away but if you are going to ask for sources or evidence then have some of your own to back it up. Is that too much to wish for?

Vegeta

lightening wrote: »

Fair enough, I just think the anti people are rare and scattered all over the country. The fear of city people telling country people how to live their lives is unfounded, extremist, a little rabble rousing and tribalist in my opinion.

I get a feeling that some hunters would like there to be more antis for some morbid reason. Some people on here seem to want to fight, to prove their right to hunt.

lightening I am not agreeing or disagreeing with anything you are saying. I just ask (of everyone) not to make generalisations while seeking sources or evidence from the opposing side.

The "prove it" response.

This nearly always leads to a fight and I don't want to ban anyone as input from both sides is greatly apprecaited as long as things stay civil

lightening

OK, understood.

whitser

togster wrote: »

Well isn't this part of the problem really. Why do shooters have to defend hunting on horse back or with hounds. I used to do alot of fox-hunting on horse back but im in Sweden now and it's banned here. They mainly shoot moose, deer and wild pig.

I can safely say i have seen foxes terrorised, distressed and torn to bits. Not many, i mean many got away.Soon after i stopped hunting with hounds. I hate to admit it but it's the truth. I think the shooting fraternity would do themselves a huge service in distancing themselves from the hunting with hounds crowd tbh...or will you guys be next? Isn't that what would happen?

To answer the OP, i think a persons location has a large impact on how they view our sports. The rural/urban issue has a large bearing on ones understanding of hunting.

is this post from the same togster who on the equestrian forum when someone asked did they hunt he said yes and that he couldnt wait to get home so could do some hunting??????? do the people who you hunt with know that your so against it?
sweden must be a funny place to live.its illegal to hunt with hounds on horse back but its legal to dig badgers:rolleyes:

IRLConor

Tone it down please whitser.

whitser

tone what down? im only asking why togster on the equestrian is pro hunting with hounds and is against it on now. same togster who showed me pics of his hounds in the pic thread when i first came on boards.

whitser

actually togster dont answer, i could care less. im sick getting involved in threads like this on boards.ie.
good luck lads, hunt hard kill swiftly.
good bye.
mods please delete me from this site.

IRLConor

whitser wrote: »

actually togster dont answer, i could care less. im sick getting involved in threads like this on boards.ie.

Woah, hold on there. I only asked nicely. No need to get angry about it.

whitser wrote: »

mods please delete me from this site.

We can't do that. Only the site owners can, and they generally don't.

Grizzly 45

Well, We are hardly over run with antis here.All of maybe 10/15 Hard core nutters who can manage the odd bit of harrassment or vandalism of private property.That supplimented with UK "mercenaries" swells up their ranks once in awhile.If you want to see the mass of them be down in Clonmel in Feb for the opening of the coursing season.[20 odd muppetts last year]It should be a right joke as it was last year.The only trouble is they use the media better than we do,and have emotions on their side rather than facts.
By and large even in the UK they are losing support as after the "Hunting Act" most of their support went downhill as everyone thought they had "won" and Foxie Woxie was safe from the nasty hunters.So the support base moved off onto other worthy causes to protest.
Not to mind that it is considerd more a Class war thing in the UK.Hunting,shooting,etc was always considerd a "Toffs" or upper class sport .Maybe in a way it was right back a 100 odd years ago ,when Lord Muck owned the best river stretch or land for shooting.However there are just as many commoners in hunting packs,shooting or fishing than the nobility nowadays. Even New Labour insiders have said this is a point scoring exercise against the Conservative upper class in the UK,for what Thatcher did to the unions and workers in the 80s. I mean it is amazing how many anarchists,reds and whatnot other Leftie rabble show up to "sab " hunts.If you follow the most prolific letter writer from Callan on the anti side of things.Some of his comments reflect this arguement."West Britons" "Squireens" "upper crust clowns on horseback".Doesnt quite run accurately here in the ROI,but has Class asperations.

So apart from those fascile arguements,the rest of it here is IMO the urbanisation of the Irish pouplation .With one and a half generation away from the country,who moved to the city,back to the country[and hopefully with the recession,back to the city].A loss of knowledge of where milk and meat comes from,or the knowledge of how to grow their organic veggies for their plant eating diets would be a given.

As for why "Par Force" [hunting by horseback with hounds] isnt that common on the Continent,is more to do with it's unique "Anglo Saxon" heritage.Europe has different customs and laws to game ownership and property than did Great Britan rather than a humane or animal rights issue.

lordarpad

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

As for why "Par Force" [hunting by horseback with hounds] isnt that common on the Continent,is more to do with it's unique "Anglo Saxon" heritage.Europe has different customs and laws to game ownership and property than did Great Britan rather than a humane or animal rights issue.

actually the fact that it has a french name might tell you where it comes from. And it was practiced in France and Germany and widely so, especially before the advent of firearms.

Grizzly 45

Das weiss Ich auch .;)Bin auch Waidmann heir in Irland
And only the French and English practise it in Europe.It is correctly refered in "Jagd latien" as Parforce.As a matter of fact it was practised up untill the 18th century on a grandiose scale that was one of the causes of the French revolition and near enough bankrupcy of several German states before Bonaparte started pushing Europe around,and bringing it under Code Napeloen,with it's French style of law pretaining to properety,etc.Also firearms were pretty good by then.You have to differ between where hunting by the nobility in those times was just a way of satisfying boredom by killing a1000 stags a day in a park trap.Or today where the chance of catching a stag and dispatching it humanely are two different things.
I refer to fox hunting as being more Anglo Saxon tradition.As in Britan the deer of all breeds have had protection and reservation to the nobility since Norman times,under the "law of venision".The fox was always considerd vermin,and therefore "fair game " for nobility or commoner to hunt or dispose of by any means fair or foul.

cantona1111

Where did you get all that info Grizzly, smashing stuff,

I have great memories of being a child and watching the hunt going up the road, loved seeing the dogs and hearing the horn.


It was allways seen as something the rich important people done, but increasingly as I got older i noticed that more people that I knew who werent rich or important started hunting, actually it seemed to be more of a horse passtime for my friends and not a hunting passtime.


For all the happy memories I do struggle to see the point of it, I would support the right of people to do it, but I think there are more effective ways of vermin control

Does this mean there is a touch of anti in me ? :):D

togster

My opinion has changed somewhat since some recent experiences.

lordarpad

Fully aware of code napoleon. And as a member of the Labour party let me point out that I find your line about "left wing rabble" deeply offensive.

cavan shooter

(Aside)Farming independent has a good article on fox hunting today.

On the subect of "Hunting" as in for the table, this appears to be more acceptable than hunting for other reasons even if hunting vermin and I think it falls back to having a valid reason. Remove the reason and you may remove the reason for the hunt.
(opinions on a post card):D

Grizzly 45

lordarpad wrote: »

Fully aware of code napoleon. And as a member of the Labour party let me point out that I find your line about "left wing rabble" deeply offensive.

TOUGH!! If the shoe fits...... Maybe you should go and check out who are what is supporting the hunt sabs in Ireland or the UK.It sure as Hell isnt the National Front..
Abit of friendly advice for you .Dont talk Irish politics or religion as a foreginer to the irish.Gets you into all sorts of trouble;).

Nor are us Irish gunowners too happy with statements coming from Comrade Joe Costello here on banning handguns that are legally held here.
Disarming the Workers.....Advocated by a Labour leader..... .:rolleyes::rolleyes:
Poor old Jim Connolly must be spinning in his grave.:rolleyes:

Grizzly 45

cantona1111 wrote: »

Where did you get all that info Grizzly, smashing stuff,

Bog standard piece of historical knowledge that is part of the German hunting course.

For all the happy memories I do struggle to see the point of it, I would support the right of people to do it, but I think there are more effective ways of vermin control

Indeed there are,proably.Wonder how they ever manage to catch a fox with all that racket and charging about.As you said it is more now about a "right" to do somthing than an effective means of vermin control.Plus,if they are banned.Do you think the antis will pack up and go back to whatever antis do when they are not out sabbing?We are next in the line.

cantona1111

lordarpad wrote: »

Fully aware of code napoleon. And as a member of the Labour party let me point out that I find your line about "left wing rabble" deeply offensive.

Maybe you shouldnt be so sensitive, not haven a dig,

cantona1111

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Bog standard piece of historical knowledge that is part of the German hunting course.



Indeed there are,proably.Wonder how they ever manage to catch a fox with all that racket and charging about.As you said it is more now about a "right" to do somthing than an effective means of vermin control.Plus,if they are banned.Do you think the antis will pack up and go back to whatever antis do when they are not out sabbing?We are next in the line.

Your scaring me now grizzly, How could they protest against against rough shooting?

I mean its not like we all meet up in one place on sunday before we go shooting, They wouldnt have a focal point like clonmel, or a hunt meeting point.

Grizzly 45

Driven shoots??Destroying shooting tree stands,release pens,burning hunting lodges[if you are lucky enough to have one],destroying vechicles,etc.????Have a read of the hunt sabetours manual online www.hsa.org
Remember,with that lot,it doesnt have to be a spectacular every day.But if they disrupt a shoot and get the shooters to go home.It is a "great victory":rolleyes: for them to crow about.

IRLConor

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Abit of friendly advice for you .Dont talk Irish politics or religion as a foreginer to the irish.Gets you into all sorts of trouble;).

Tread carefully here Grizzly. There are fine lines between friendly advice and being patronising and rude. Please make sure it's unambiguous which side you're on.

Everyone:
Discuss this subject all you like, but try and keep it civil and level-headed. If you want to talk about the anti-hunting lobby, fine. If you want to discuss the politics behind it, kindly take that up in the Politics forum.

lightening

IRLConor wrote: »

If you want to talk about the anti-hunting lobby, fine.

On a lighter note, if you want to see the logic of the minor anti hunt sentiment in Ireland, look at what's going on in the nature and bird watching thread! That should let you have a sigh of relief if that's what you are up against!

dresden8

Anybody see Charlie Bird in the Arctic last night?

The eskimo guy made him shoot his rifle just in case he needed to shoot a polar bear.

Charlie shot an oil can and nearly had a nervous breakdown (ok, exagerration) because he had shot a rifle.

There's no hope.

Grizzly 45

IRLConor wrote: »

Tread carefully here Grizzly. There are fine lines between friendly advice and being patronising and rude. Please make sure it's unambiguous which side you're on.

See what I mean......;)