Would You Shoot????

blackstairsboy

There was a report after the cold weather ban that the NARGC might try and get an extension to the season. Now I do not think it will happen for one minute but lets pretend it does. We get an extension until say the 20th of February. Would you continue to shoot in order to make up on time missed. Or would you stop in order to allow birds to begin thinking about migrating home and breeding.

All you have to do is cast your vote and maybe leave a note saying why you voted whatever way you did. Lets please try and not let this thread descend into arguments and go completely off topic.

deerhunter1

blackstairsboy wrote: »

There was a report after the cold weather ban that the NARGC might try and get an extension to the season. Now I do not think it will happen for one minute but lets pretend it does. We get an extension until say the 20th of February. Would you continue to shoot in order to make up on time missed. Or would you stop in order to allow birds to begin thinking about migrating home and breeding.

All you have to do is cast your vote and maybe leave a note saying why you voted whatever way you did. Lets please try and not let this thread descend into arguments and go completely off topic.

Yes it is more about the hunt than the kill

dicky82

i would say yes, but not untill the 20th maybe something like the first eight to ten days of febuary.

woodcock 52

Would say yes up to 14th February

landkeeper

voted no as thats the way i feel assuming we are shooting wild birds i would however have no problem shooting reared/released pheasants on a keepered shoot up till the end of feb but no ducks as most of them will be paired by then

fodda

I would vote no because the the seasons dates were set down by people who had expert advice on when the birds would start the procedure to reproduce whether it be breeding or migrating.....and it's working for many a year maybe hundreds. Otherwise you wouldnt be voting now.

I think if you start challenging these dates before long you will have every tom dick and harry coming out with all sorts of reasons why the season should be extended or done away with all together and these reasons will be to suit them and not the birds/animals. Then one day there will be a complete ban because there simply isnt enough left.

The proof is already there in the animals/birds which werent protected by a season they are either in trouble or extinct.

Grizzly 45

Simple way to get around this problem,is do away with the cold weather ban,or only instigate it after extreme cold weather like minus 10 nationwide for 14 consecutive days and nights.

the seasons dates were set down by people who had expert advice on when the birds would start the procedure to reproduce whether it be breeding or migrating.....and it's working for many a year maybe hundreds. Otherwise you wouldnt be voting now.

More like they were more observable of nature and knew when the birds /animals would mate and have young.So game laws were introduced to protect what was orginally common property of everyone for the nobility to ensure that they had plentiful supply of [1] a natural resource,that was a secondary foodstuff of the peasentry to keep them in control and [2]to ensure they had control of this food supply for survival,and [much] later for sport.Fine example of this is the Norman law of venision pre dating Magna Charta in England.

As such there is nothing wrong with our hunting seasons at all.What is irksome is the fact that a Cold Weather Ban can be slapped on at will by the minister.What applies on the East coast of the country doesnt necessarily apply on the West coast.As for this idea of making up for lost time .It reeks of another Irish" quickfixit" idea.
Instead of addressing the root of the problem IE a CWB being demanded by conservation groups on all 26 counties and the shooting organisations agreeing on good "PR "grounds.It would be better to address how and when it should be introduced on a provincal or even Tri county basis.

The proof is already there in the animals/birds which werent protected by a season they are either in trouble or extinct.

Really...Crows and Wood Piegons are in trouble?? Maybe in the Continent but certainly not here,as this was orginally an EU directive,that didnt take account of local conditions.Shortage in Italy ,doesnt mean a shortage in Ireland.
Name me one game bird that is extinct in Ireland due to overshooting,and not changes by agriculture or urbanisation/destruction of its habitat??

fodda

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

More like they were more observable of nature and knew when the birds /animals would mate and have young.So game laws were introduced to protect what was orginally common property of everyone for the nobility to ensure that they had plentiful supply of [1] a natural resource,that was a secondary foodstuff of the peasentry to keep them in control and [2]to ensure they had control of this food supply for survival,and [much] later for sport.Fine example of this is the Norman law of venision pre dating Magna Charta in England.

Point taken but i suppose they were the experts of their time when ever it was 1066 or 1866 whenever the rulings were made.

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Really...Crows and Wood Piegons are in trouble?? Maybe in the Continent but certainly not here,as this was orginally an EU directive,that didnt take account of local conditions.Shortage in Italy ,doesnt mean a shortage in Ireland.
Name me one game bird that is extinct in Ireland due to overshooting,and not changes by agriculture or urbanisation/destruction of its habitat??

Simple answer to that is "you take some one elses money.......then they call the shots".........dont know about over shooting but agree on other stuff

ronn

I voted no because i think the season should be extened at the start of it not at the end, maybe the second sunday in October

johnner1

an extention of one week at end of this season and one week at start of next would not seem to harsh to me, but i would exclude ducks from next seasons extention IMHO they start a bit too early anyway;)

EPointer=Birdss

Oct is too early for pheasants, late poults haven't pinked up. You could easily shoot into mid feb as I never see a hatch before the end of march if not April. mallard should also be brought in line with pheasants as early birds haven't half the condition of ones got nov onwards...

dicky82

EPointer=Birdss wrote: »

Oct is too early for pheasants, late poults haven't pinked up. You could easily shoot into mid feb as I never see a hatch before the end of march if not April. mallard should also be brought in line with pheasants as early birds haven't half the condition of ones got nov onwards...

i know im no expert but i have heard lots of shooters make both these points in non ban related discusions, duck starts too early and pheasants finish up too early, ofton wondered why people in the field think this but the people with the power havn't addressed it?

cavan shooter

I voted no, these things happen and whether you believe it or not we as hunters have gotten a lot of kudos from non hunters in relation to the voluntary ban initially and then the legislative bans.

I would prefer that they look to actually formalising and setting out on paper when and how a ban would kick off and for how long, where the principal of the ban is good I think its not properly thought through.

Again ducks in September is too early, in fact I never shoot ducks till November, Pheasants Id say no harm stretching the season by a week or two, but I wouldnt like to see it stretched to the end of February.

Just my thoughts:)

welsummer

pheasants could be shot a month later but not ducks as most of them have paired up at this stage.

EPointer=Birdss

You can see ducks paired now alright when walking by drains etc
With ducks you can get very early clutches. A nov to mid Jan would nearly do ya for shooting them.
As said above if the ban criteria were set out properly then a shorter season may not be impacted 2 much by a ban.

BoarHunter

I have no objection for Pheasant but wildfowl is a no no

thekevin4540

yes