Hunting in constitution

dto001

Here's one for you should the various hunting groups Nargc etc, use this opportunity i.e. food sovereignty (from the covid 19) to try get it into the constitution or at least law that every citizen of the country is allowed hunt to put food on the table (allowing for seasons licenses etc.) and for food only not to sell and make money.
Kind of the way its done in Scandinavia.

Cheers

Chiparus

Not a hope.

Cass

Good idea, but would be all but impossible to do.

A law would require trying to convince politicians to make something legal (or illegal as the case may be). That is an oversimplification but for the moment close enough for the purpose of this post. However a constitutional amendment requires a bill introduced in the Dáil, then the Seanad, and if it passes both houses its signed by the President.

Here is the kicker. Then it's put to the people to be voted on in a referendum.

So you're relying on the people to vote on this matter and given the attitude of the general public regarding guns and hunting in general, i wouldn't be optimistic. We wouldn't lose anything as the bill for a constitutional amendment can only contain that one proposal, but how its worded, who it applies to, how it's put into practice could in fact change how we currently hunt.

Plus its in law at the moment, more or less, and while we cannot leave the house in extremely rare conditions certain aspects of the constitution can be suspended (or the entire constitution) in cases of state emergencies meaning its as malleable as any other law, IMO.

Grizzly 45

Seeing that the media always refer to this law as "guidelines from the Dept of Health." Surely then we are entitled to use the same excuse as many a Garda Superintendt has used when dealing with applicatiions for liscenses about the firearms guide lines..."Shure they are just guidelines!"Sauce for the goose an all that.:rolleyes:

As for the idea of being able to provide meat for your fammily as a constitutional right to hunt. About 600 years too late with that.It would need to have been a tradition,and a hard fought and won right as it was in the Nordic lands in their histories FIK.Dunno was it even allowed or mentioned in Brehon law?

Even if it was practible ,how long would our wild pouplatin survive a continious onslaught of 4.5 million+/- 24/7/365?

As how would you control it during breeding seasons ,which was really why the first game laws were introduced when mankind started to settle and farm land.Only later did it become used like after the Norman invasion of Britan,with the law of venison as a privilidge granted by the occupiers and then laters a utter privilidge of kings and nobility, to the subjugated and as a method of control of food supplies,which was a life or death matter back then.

It's why a certain mr R Hood of Sherwood forest,became such a legendary chacter.Not for robbing the rich of gold and keeping 33%[plus VAT@33%!] and giving the remainder to the poor,it was because he was supplying a food source to the people by poaching throughout the year.

So ,how could we even justify it today?Hunting like anything has evolved with mankind to the present day.What was acceptable even 120 years ago in hunting,is looked on upon by some hunters with abhorrence today.Even in this pandemic,the shops still have plenty of food,and if things devolved down to a post-apocalyptic "Mad Max the road warrior" society.I doubt we'd be too worried about the constitutionally then,as we would proably be gladly partaking of our fellow humans if things got that bad .

dto001

Surely now people would be more open to the idea, as this could be an eye opener that people are reliant on the supermarkets/big business in times like these and with everything shut whats not to say food supplies could be restricted?
I'm just seeing a bit more on the food sovereignty and I think this was recently referred to by one of the politicians (I can't remember who) so could it not be an opening for it or at least something which will allow hunting to continue unhindered, especially if its for food.

Grizzly 45

dto001 wrote: »

Surely now people would be more open to the idea, as this could be an eye opener that people are reliant on the supermarkets/big business in times like these and with everything shut whats not to say food supplies could be restricted?
I'm just seeing a bit more on the food sovereignty and I think this was recently referred to by one of the politicians (I can't remember who) so could it not be an opening for it or at least something which will allow hunting to continue unhindered, especially if its for food.

Of course the supplies could be restricted and even rationing could be introduced.Thats why there was this initial panic buying in the 1st place.But being a regular smart bear,you should have at least a months plus supply of grub at hand in non perishables for your Fam anyway?;)

But lets put it like this...The general pouplation these days are stupid,and dependent on a high tech society to function and expect "the government" to look after them from cradle to grave.
We are spoilt rotten in this day and age in the West,we have had an abnormaly longtime of peace and no major societal upheaval in Europe over these last 80 years ,our meat arrives nicely presented in packaging in our supermarkets and doesnt resemble the animal it once was.

How many Irish housewives do youu think today could go out to a barnyard,grab a chicken,lop off its head with an axe,gut and pluck it,and have it in the oven for dinner at 6? That was no bother to the average farmers wife here in Ireland up to 40 years ago.Today,most people would need a years worth of threapy for PTSD if they had to do such.:rolleyes:

So could you see your average Beta Cuck male who works in FB,and needs his safe space and colouring book for the day like a big toddler,if he sees a nasty tweet,and didnt get his soya latte wanting to [1] go out and kill his dinner on a weekly basis?Not that he would,as no doubt he is a vegan anyway [2] with that mindset vote for somoe to give the right to go kill Bambi?:)

Eddie B

It would give poachers an excellent excuse to go on a killing spree

dto001

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Of course the supplies could be restricted and even rationing could be introduced.Thats why there was this initial panic buying in the 1st place.But being a regular smart bear,you should have at least a months plus supply of grub at hand in non perishables for your Fam anyway?;)

But lets put it like this...The general pouplation these days are stupid,and dependent on a high tech society to function and expect "the government" to look after them from cradle to grave.
We are spoilt rotten in this day and age in the West,we have had an abnormaly longtime of peace and no major societal upheaval in Europe over these last 80 years ,our meat arrives nicely presented in packaging in our supermarkets and doesnt resemble the animal it once was.

How many Irish housewives do youu think today could go out to a barnyard,grab a chicken,lop off its head with an axe,gut and pluck it,and have it in the oven for dinner at 6? That was no bother to the average farmers wife here in Ireland up to 40 years ago.Today,most people would need a years worth of threapy for PTSD if they had to do such.:rolleyes:

So could you see your average Beta Cuck male who works in FB,and needs his safe space and colouring book for the day like a big toddler,if he sees a nasty tweet,and didnt get his soya latte wanting to [1] go out and kill his dinner on a weekly basis?Not that he would,as no doubt he is a vegan anyway [2] with that mindset vote for somoe to give the right to go kill Bambi?:)

:D
I agree totally but you'd never know people could have gotten enough of a scare to think finally for themselves that holy f@$k I might not be able to get food from the supermarket maybe we should have this just incase or at least it might be one argument.
On the other hand maybe if we leave it survival of the fittest might take place.....:D:D

Grizzly 45

dto001 wrote: »

:D
I agree totally but you'd never know people could have gotten enough of a scare to think finally for themselves that holy f@$k I might not be able to get food from the supermarket maybe we should have this just incase or at least it might be one argument.
On the other hand maybe if we leave it survival of the fittest might take place.....:D:D

I wish I could have your optimism about people learning from the past or even present.The majority never does,especially here.Were it so ,our two main political parties wouldnt have lasted a 100 months,not to mind a100 years,and politicans would actually have to be honest.:)
Hmm,yeah,it is natures ultimate law,and maybe it's time the human herd gets culled abit.

yubabill

Cass wrote: »

Good idea, but would be all but impossible to do.

A law would require trying to convince politicians to make something legal (or illegal as the case may be). That is an oversimplification but for the moment close enough for the purpose of this post. However a constitutional amendment requires a bill introduced in the Dáil, then the Seanad, and if it passes both houses its signed by the President.

Here is the kicker. Then it's put to the people to be voted on in a referendum.

So you're relying on the people to vote on this matter and given the attitude of the general public regarding guns and hunting in general, i wouldn't be optimistic. We wouldn't lose anything as the bill for a constitutional amendment can only contain that one proposal, but how its worded, who it applies to, how it's put into practice could in fact change how we currently hunt.

Plus its in law at the moment, more or less, and while we cannot leave the house in extremely rare conditions certain aspects of the constitution can be suspended (or the entire constitution) in cases of state emergencies meaning its as malleable as any other law, IMO.

AFAIK constitution can only be suspended by war or major terror. Pandemics doe not qualify, hence the new garda powers are open to court challenges from citizens (good luck with that).

EDIT; Just had a look at Harris' SI - don't see any mention of Garda power to detain non-complying Covid-19 infected person. Open to correction on this.

https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/e9d120-minister-for-health-simon-harris-signs-regulations-to-give-an-garda-/

But the power to detain an infected person was a Rubicon contravening the constitution, the one Harris had problems with the attorney general on.

Cass

Eddie B wrote: »

It would give poachers an excellent excuse to go on a killing spree

A simple and excellent point.

Constitutional rights are God given rights and cannot be taken from you by common laws.

yubabill wrote: »

AFAIK constitution can only be suspended by war or major terror.

Oh, i don't know every reason but war and terrorism would be two of the better reasons. This pandemic is not quite to scale to warrant such a suspension and we haven't hit "the walking dead" level of food shortages so it's a long way off yet.

Pandemics doe not qualify, hence the new garda powers are open to court challenges from citizens (good luck with that).

I'm wondering about that too.

The "NEW" Taoiseach appoints the remaining 11 senators to the Seanad, not the unelected, caretaker Taoiseach we currently have. As the Seanad cannot be "filled" without a new Taoiseach how can any bill pass both houses and go on for signing by the President?

I heard a guy on the radio, Matt Cooper, saying the constitution was a malleable document open to interpretation. I would disagree with that, but on the point of article 18.3 it's very, very clear about who gets to appoint new senators and it's not this unelected Taoiseach.

A guest on the same show said that the Seanad is not always filled anyway due to deaths, sickness, absentees, etc. but the guest was being disingenuous in my opinion. That is when all seats have been filled, but not everyone turns up. That is worlds apart from electing/appointing 85% of Senators and "winging" from there.

The easier option would be an SI, but such an SI may drastically change the Act which would mean an SI would not suffice.

I think there is going to be a hell of a lot of trouble with this and then when it goes to court even more so.

Lastly will these powers be repealed after this pandemic?

yubabill

The constitution is not malleable, but the people interpreting it are.

Read an opinion saying that judges would probably back the gov't, disregarding the technical argument on basis of proportionality in prevailing circumstances. That does not make it right, technically.

The powers have to be reviewed before renewal, so very like the renewal of the State of Emergency we were in for 25 years during the troubles, had to be reviewed/renewed (was every 12 months for that, but Covid SI is much shorter in review period). Don't remember the state of emergency? It was a thing, alright.

Cass

It doens't make it right, end of. Nothing technical about it. If there are the full complement of 60 and all 60 vote for it then so be it, but to have 49 and say "sure close enough" is not nearly close enough. If thats the case then Sinn Fein won the general election by a landslide because people wanted them more. Oh and new laws, why bother with the Dail sure most people would vote for it so just write it up and no need for the President to sign it, he's obliged to, so bypass that bit too.

While i'm being overly sarcastic, you see the point. Skip one step now, and where does it end?

Mellor

dto001 wrote: »

...or at least law that every citizen of the country is allowed hunt to put food on the table (allowing for seasons licenses etc.) and for food only not to sell and make money.

Are you saying out of season, or allowing for requirements of seasons and licenses etc.

If it's the latter, isn't that already in law? The wildlife act, firearms act.
If it was added to the constitution, magically by tomorrow. Then those laws would still remain and the situation unchanged. The constitution would just prevent them being taken away.

Cass wrote: »

Good idea, but would be all but impossible to do.

Ultimately. This is the answer.

dto001

Mellor wrote: »

Are you saying out of season, or allowing for requirements of seasons and licenses etc.

If it's the latter, isn't that already in law? The wildlife act, firearms act.
If it was added to the constitution, magically by tomorrow. Then those laws would still remain and the situation unchanged. The constitution would just prevent them being taken away.



Allowing for seasons and licenses as this is for conservation purposes or at least i would like to think it is. As far as I know(and I probably am) being allowed to hunt ultimately up to the minister's discretion so all it takes is one vegan minister to stop it all (probably a bit more involved but you know what I mean) where as if it was in the constitution it would have to be put out for a referendum before it could be taken away.

In relation to poachers I don't think they need any reason to run riot but as with anything laws have to be enforced having 3/4 deer in the back of the car would not really be classed as for food unless you were feeding the village.

It seems to work in the Scandinavian countries (yet again open to correction) but they can hunt basically anywhere (rural) they like but I think they are very strict on season.

Mellor

dto001 wrote: »

Allowing for seasons and licenses as this is for conservation purposes or at least i would like to think it is. As far as I know(and I probably am) being allowed to hunt ultimately up to the minister's discretion so all it takes is one vegan minister to stop it all (probably a bit more involved but you know what I mean) where as if it was in the constitution it would have to be put out for a referendum before it could be taken away.

The specifics would still in the hands of the minister with an amendment to include hunting.
They could cut permitted species in half. Cut seasons down to a few days, and technically not breach a constitutional right to a hunting season.

Cass

dto001 wrote: »

..... ultimately up to the minister's discretion so all it takes is one vegan minister to stop it all (probably a bit more involved but you know what I mean).....

To repeal an Act, and i'm open to correction, a new Act must be made. Whether that act replaces the existing one or is simply to repeal the existing one the process is the same. A new Act which has to go through the same process in the Dáil and Seanad. So it wouldn't be a case of a Minister just signing it away.

where as if it was in the constitution it would have to be put out for a referendum before it could be taken away.

Constitutional rights have huge ramifications. As i said at the start a constitutional rights are considered a God given right meaning it cannot be taken from you by common law. This would present legal troubles for enforcement of current laws making any prosecution of either impossible or extremely hard.

Look at the current situation with housing and homelessness. There is a Bill, currently held up, which wishes to make housing a constitutional right. Its a noble Bill and has great intentions however the Government are opposed to it as it places the onus on them to provide housing for every citizen. Its not the houses that bother them, but merely the cost of doing it. There is so much more to it than just that, but if putting a roof over everyone's head is being fought against what chances would hunting have.

It wouldn't be a case of it being opposed as much as the apathy most politicians would have toward it.

In relation to poachers I don't think they need any reason to run riot but as with anything laws have to be enforced having 3/4 deer in the back of the car would not really be classed as for food unless you were feeding the village.

As a Constitutional right what grounds would a Garda or NPWS ranger have for stopping a car with Deer? This is where the problems start. Where is the Mens rea, how to prove the ultimate end use of the animals, etc. It goes from being one of law breaking to proving intent.

It seems to work in the Scandinavian countries (yet again open to correction) but they can hunt basically anywhere (rural) they like but I think they are very strict on season.

I've no idea about the Scandinavian model however i'd hazard a guess there are still laws regarding hunting, meaning you cannot trespass, poach, shoot out of season, etc.

Mellor

Cass wrote: »

This would present legal troubles for enforcement of current laws making any prosecution of either impossible or extremely hard.

As a Constitutional right what grounds would a Garda or NPWS ranger have for stopping a car with Deer?

I don’t think it would impact either. Being included in the constitution doesn’t means it’s an always an unconditional right. As an example, There could still be laws limiting or restricting the extent.

For example, abortion is permitted in the constitution. Doesn’t mean people can go and abort any pregnancy at any time no restriction.
It would just require “may be regulated by law” to be included in the article.

Grizzly 45

As foor banning hunting by a militant vegan minister.Not possible under UNESCO directives which we have signed up to,like 99.9% of anything the EU and UN spits out.
Hunting and gunsmithing are recognised by UNESCO as protected crafts or lifestyles under the World heritage acts[?] and cannot be totally removed from a country or society,or be tamperd with to make them impossible to do.
Proably more to do with Eskimoes or Bushmen being able to hunt,but thankfully,it isnt THAT specific.

Got him!

Time to get real here boys! Who actually needs to hunt to put food on the table in this day and age?

tudderone

Got him! wrote: »

Time to get real here boys! Who actually needs to hunt to put food on the table in this day and age?

Well i seriously considered it in the wake of the horse meat scandal. Venison or other game i know 100% how it was killed, processed and handled, and what it was to start with, because it was it was me that did it.

Not some chancers buying up unfortunate ponies, donkeys and whatever they come across, and turning it into mystery meat pies and ready meals.

minktrapper

Got him! wrote: »

Time to get real here boys! Who actually needs to hunt to put food on the table in this day and age?

Maybe not to put food on the table but when you see the number of invasive species roaming around the countryside. Someone has to control wildlife. And if you can eat it all the better.

Having said that look at BSE and the problems with it. Cattle with a brain disorder and linked to a human brain disorder. Everyone takes their food supply for granted until something goes wrong. Now we have Covid 19. Recent talk of dairy farmers having to cut milk supply due to the inability to process milk. A global pandemic affecting virtually everyone on the planet. War. WW2 specifically. When Europe cannot feed itself. Maybe it should be put into the constitution.

The pigeon man

Got him! wrote: »

Time to get real here boys! Who actually needs to hunt to put food on the table in this day and age?

There are very few people in Ireland that need to hunt in Ireland for food.

But we all know now that when we restrict our life to the pure essentials, how much our quality of life and satisfaction drops.

Humans have evolved beyond a stage where we just try to satisfy our needs. Everyone has desires and passions that we pursue which gives us most of the satisfaction in our lives.

whisky_galore

Got him! wrote: »

Time to get real here boys! Who actually needs to hunt to put food on the table in this day and age?

This, there is no need.
Food supply chain is not that affected by CV19, silly panic hoarding which didn't last long notwithstanding. Cut down on the post apocalyptic movies perhaps.

I would dread giving certain people a firearms free for all, they'd shoot inappropriately, shoot themselves and each other, shoot animals into extinction, give themselves food poisoning processing game. Owning a gun is a privilege, not a right.

Del2005

whisky_galore wrote: »

This, there is no need.
Food supply chain is not that affected by CV19, silly panic hoarding which didn't last long notwithstanding. Cut down on the post apocalyptic movies perhaps.

I would dread giving certain people a firearms free for all, they'd shoot inappropriately, shoot themselves and each other, shoot animals into extinction, give themselves food poisoning processing game. Owning a gun is a privilege, not a right.

The current food chain is OK. What happens for the current crops that need to be harvested and their replacement crops being planted is a big issue that no one has an answer to. Look at Keelings controversy where they are doing what they have done for years, bringing in cheap labour, and see how every other developed country harvests its food by bringing in cheap labour to see how much food will be available later this year and next. If migrants don't work on farms there is no food chain or else it'll be so expensive that people won't be able to afford it.

dto001

whisky_galore wrote: »

This, there is no need.
Food supply chain is not that affected by CV19, silly panic hoarding which didn't last long notwithstanding. Cut down on the post apocalyptic movies perhaps.

I would dread giving certain people a firearms free for all, they'd shoot inappropriately, shoot themselves and each other, shoot animals into extinction, give themselves food poisoning processing game. Owning a gun is a privilege, not a right.

I'm not sure if you hunt or not but its your choice but it has nothing to do with post apocalyptic movies, if the present way was so perfect why then is the news constantly full of pictures of queues for food banks and the ads for starving people on the TV?
Surely there should be some right in the constitution to feed yourself as half the far left want people to have a right to a home put in the constitution whats wrong with being able to feed yourself being in it?
As with panic buying I never thought that the Irish would end up doing that (as the Americans seem to do it a couple of times a year) but they have and things generally get worse as time goes by because people tend to remember the "last time it happened" and try and pre-empt it and then others see it happening and so on...

whisky_galore

Del2005 wrote: »

The current food chain is OK. What happens for the current crops that need to be harvested and their replacement crops being planted is a big issue that no one has an answer to. Look at Keelings controversy where they are doing what they have done for years, bringing in cheap labour, and see how every other developed country harvests its food by bringing in cheap labour to see how much food will be available later this year and next. If migrants don't work on farms there is no food chain or else it'll be so expensive that people won't be able to afford it.

It is only soft fruits and some veg which cannot be harvested mechanically. Worst case you might not get home produced strawberries or strawberry jam but you won't starve.

Cass

whisky_galore wrote: »

This, there is no need.

How do you suppose those that want Venison, wild Pheasant, Duck, Pigeon, Rabbit, etc. get this then?

Food supply chain is not that affected by CV19, silly panic hoarding which didn't last long notwithstanding.

The Chinese virus has caused shortages or continued hoarding of some items. Its not quite as bad as at the start of the current situation, but there are still shortages.

I have gone to the supermarkets alternating between Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and even Saturdays to see if the different days give a different selection and it hasn't. Most brands of breads, baking goods, eggs, are continuously sold out. Not an opinion on my part, i'm talking empty shelves, barring a few packs of bagels or some other disliked product. Eggs and flour sold out within minutes and some weeks there are none and other weeks a few (less than a dozen, trays of the uber expensive free range variety left.

Same applies to cold/chilled products. Meat quantities and selection are down and seem to have stayed down the last four (4) weeks and some products are simply not there. Empty shelves in four main supermarkets or the only items left being the uber expensive ones.

Fresh veg is limited with things like Cabbage, potatoes, etc. being scarce to not available.

Then onto important things like dietary needs. Gluten free items which i need for a member of my family that at any other time of the year are plentiful or easily obtained are non existent. Whether this is down to shortages or the "trendy folk" bulk buying, again i don't know, but for the last three weeks i cannot get breads and other Gluten free products that were plentiful for someone that has Coeliacs and needs them.

Now whether this is down to shortages of supply or people still hoarding i simply don't know, but there are noticeable shortages of certain, what i'd deem basic, goods since this started.

None of the above can be solved by a constitutional right to hunt, however its not meant to give a good reason for that as you cannot hunt gluten free bread and Cabbage has no season. Its simply to highlight, at least in the 30 mile radius from where i live, that shortages still exist due to hoarding or supply problems.

Cut down on the post apocalyptic movies perhaps.

I'd agree that is a HUGE stretch of the imagination and we're not only not close to that type of situation, but never will be.

I would dread giving certain people a firearms free for all,

What exactly do you mean by "free for all"? As it currently stands right now anyone, not disentitled, can own a firearm. Yet the level of gun ownership has stood fairly steadily at 3%, or a little over, for many years. There has never been a rush to buy guns and anyone thinking of buying one for the "zombie apocalypse" will get a sudden and sharp dose of reality when they realise what is required to get one.

they'd shoot inappropriately,

What exactly does that entail?

shoot themselves and each other,

Excuse me, but Horses**t. Sensationalist nonsense with no evidence, data or history to support such a wild statement. Never, in the history of the state, has there been a mass shooting or pandemic of licensed firearm owners shooting each other out of ignorance, stupidity or willful act(s).

shoot animals into extinction

As above, a sensationalist statement with no history or data to support it and in utter defiance of current conservation and game rearing programs run all around the country by the various shooting groups.

, give themselves food poisoning processing game.

You cannot fix stupid, but the same people would get food poisoning from eating processed foods simply out of the same ignorance on how to properly cook/prep.

Owning a gun is a privilege, not a right.

As it stands, yes.

Grizzly 45

Cass wrote: »

I'd agree that is a HUGE stretch of the imagination and we're not only not close to that type of situation, but never will be.

, Yes, we are still a good bit off those circumstances,but never say never.We have seen well within our living memories the Yougoslav civil war,and from what survivors of that have said,it started off pretty innocuously enough and could have been stopped easily enough too.There was everything there of civilisation for months beforehand.Mail and food arrived and was deliverd, electricity worked,wetc,but within literally days things went to sht rapidly once the food supplies started drying up.

And lets not say it can't /wont happen here...We had a bit of snow for 2 or 3 days in March 2018,and some people were already looting the local LIDIL with digging equipment.What would they be like if the shops were utterly bare,and the off liscense is stripped?

There has never been a rush to buy guns and anyone thinking of buying one for the "zombie apocalypse" will get a sudden and sharp dose of reality when they realise what is required to get one.

As did many anti gun Americans,who suddenly decided pre lockdown,it might be a "good idea" to have one,and discoverd much to their dismay that a load of lies they were told by anti gun orginsations, just were that...Lies.And what they assumed were lies from the pro gun lobby was the truth. Things like waiting periods,backround checks,the mythical gun show loophole,and that anyone could buy a "full auto AR14"over the counter.

So,in a way this has been a bit of an eye opener for many on many issues.

cookimonster

If we look back to our historys a lot of damage, some irreversible was done in times of need and demand. Hughe herds of deer were either wiped out or nearly due to human intervention and the need for cheep source of food. If you leave out the Buffalo history in the US and look at what happened to the deer population from over hunting by meat hunters supplying the railways expansion and latter the army. The spread of farming and settlers across the great plains, changing the environment also had a detrimental effect on the deer only subsiding with the 'Dust Bowl' period.
In more recent times the fauna of the Balkans was heavily impacted by the onslaught of war driving local populations out to forage for food.
Our own history of famine and penial laws saw the deer populations tumble and later as the estates fell into disrepair the numbers continued to fall. It is only when people came away from the land did we see numbers come back.
The idea of being able to go out and feed ourselves from the land outside of what we as hunters now do is a lovely romantic dream. In my 51 years even fishing for the plate is relatively a thing of the past. Shore fishing is all but gone except for a few secret marks. The great mackerel runs are now mostly bygone memories. Catching a few pan sized mountain brown trout is frowned on if not illegal. The auld lads who'd pluck a fat perch out of a lake for the "tea' would be breaking some by-laws on most waters.
The fact that unlike the US , Australia and Newzealand (those that I know of) we don't have public land for the purpose of hunting is a big player here and we as hunters ate reliant on permission to hunt.

In regards to food production, yes I would agree certain items are not on the shelves any more. This tend to be commercial good produces but in the grand scale of it they are only bit players. The shelves here are packed with both fresh, frozen and dry commodities. What we have to take into consideration is the time of the year this has happened to us here. Retailers project expected business and many practice just in time purchasing. Easter is as busy as Christmas but unlike Christmas theres not a binge of spending after the fact and many shelves are not restocked until after the Easter weekend. The big suppliers were already predicting long term effects of EU countries reaction to the Pandemic and well before Paddys Day there was concerns over certain commodities. The rate at which we are consuming fresh chicken is out stripping the time the flock takes to mature to slaughtering age. A large amount of chicken we eat comes from abroad but as yet the ability for essential services, such as transport and airports, dock lands etc, to continue hasn't effected it as bad as they thought. Orginaly it was envisaged a total lock down of borders.
The 'Covid 19 Social Restrictions" has seen a huge changes in our day to day life. The food retailers are now doing a bomb because people more or less have to eat in now. There are more breakfast and lunches then ever being prepared then ever before in recent times and the amount of home prepared dinners have increased. Remember in places like the US the food retailers were losing out to the cheeper, more time efficent and readable available restaurant food both take out and dine in. Thier response was to corner that part of the market with not only ready prepared meals but with also dash and dine meals. Now we as a nation are at home and we are cooking. Not only are we cooking but to alleviate the boredom we are baking and this has an effect on certain commodities that would be whimsical or seasonal for most customers. Wait until the weather improves and see the BBQ food and ice creams disappear.
Panic buying will never cease, no doubt people horded certain items when Brxit was announced. Unlike the previous wars were a vast amount of food had to be redirected to the military machines this current emergency is not seeing ommodities being redirected to the front lines. Food production is still going on, once the Government issued the list of essential workers it was very clear that farming was covered in that and further along the supply chains are the food producers etc etc etc.
Food production is the least of our problems, outside of the tragic loss of life the long term effect on our economy is the biggest concern that we have. My own 83 year old mother came through the end of WWII, several economic crashes and turmoil but in her own words this is something she has never experienced before. Having said all that, it is my belief we will come through this, thankfully, once in a life time experience.

tudderone

whisky_galore wrote: »

This, there is no need.
Food supply chain is not that affected by CV19, silly panic hoarding which didn't last long notwithstanding. Cut down on the post apocalyptic movies perhaps.

I would dread giving certain people a firearms free for all, they'd shoot inappropriately, shoot themselves and each other, shoot animals into extinction, give themselves food poisoning processing game. Owning a gun is a privilege, not a right.

I'd lay off the whisky a bit if i were you.

Mellor

Del2005 wrote: »

If migrants don't work on farms there is no food chain or else it'll be so expensive that people won't be able to afford it.

I don't think anyone's survival is hinging on the availability or price of raspberries in the supermarket.
The boys from Bulgaria aren't picking potatos.

whisky_galore wrote: »

This, there is no need.
I would dread giving certain people a firearms free for all, they'd shoot inappropriately, shoot themselves and each other, shoot animals into extinction, give themselves food poisoning processing game. Owning a gun is a privilege, not a right.

Where are you getting a free for all. If it's in the constitution, all other current laws still apply. As I mentioned in post #14.

You're post is akin to saying now that abortion is in the constitution, people can go around abort pregnancy when ever they want in an abortion free for all. It doesn't work like that.