Deer Hunting RTE 1

Feisar

useurowname wrote: »

Caught it there. Too many deer, too many seals.. cull/don’t cull, probably need to cull, don’t know how many deer cos there’s been no survey. Animals rights people don’t like the cull idea, they want to give the seals contraceptives and rewild(wolves I’d assume)to sort out the deer. That’s the bones of it .

Ended up missing it after. One has to laugh at the animal’s rights crowd. Shooting bad but let’s bring in wolves to do the job! Go have a look at the aftermath of a dog attack on sheep and come back to me on that one lads. They could also mean tracts of the country been given to wildlife maybe? We’re too small a country with too scattered a population for that.

Grizzly 45

Somewhat surprised that this was balanced for a gap-filling slot done over 18 months...Considering that it was the year before last that this seal cull was mooted.So that was their obvious hanger.

Surprised too at the comment from the Wicklow deer project bloke, about not wanting trophy hunters,as "that would be like shooting the prize bull!" You do realise there are lads in the EU that would pay good monies to shoot a prize stah too, and that you could guide and direct them into a good cullable stag?

Not surprised the John "streaker" Carmody's[As he is known by down here in Limerick] rantings and suggestions of rewilding the place with wolves from the enviro one. If we cant deal with marauding dog packs at lambing season, imagine what a wolf pack will do? And no, they won't stay in their rewilded areas either. A packs range could be the entire length of the 32 counties.

All in all pleasantly surprised... For once that this, by now historical info got aired. as the info is outdated in the last 18 months.
NPWS has been funded, there is an effort being made to try and get some figures on the deer herd size, and there is an animal rights green minister in charge, who seems to be bucking the trend for his political party global policy on hunting,and is actually listening to people who hunt.

tudderone

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Not surprised the John "streaker" Carmody's[As he is known by down here in Limerick] rantings and suggestions of rewilding the place with wolves from the enviro one. If we cant deal with marauding dog packs at lambing season, imagine what a wolf pack will do? And no, they won't stay in their rewilded areas either. A packs range could be the entire length of the 32 counties.

Well if he and his lot are pushing for veganism, then they don't want people eating lamb or mutton anyway, so no need for lambing or sheep to be frank.

minktrapper

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

100%

Most countries do not have a population problem and Ireland doesn't until now.

They say that children are our future. Children will actually be the death of the planet unless common sense is put into practise.

You should check out the population of the African countries. There is so many people there. Also check out population densities. It is trying to feed the planet is the problem. Modern agriculture is destroying the planet.

tudderone

minktrapper wrote: »

You should check out the population of the African countries. There is so many people there. Also check out population densities. It is trying to feed the planet is the problem. Modern agriculture is destroying the planet.

Yup, In 1950 the population of the world was 2.5 billion, its 7.7 billion now and by 2100 it will be 11 billion ! Thats a lot of mouths to feed.

Birdnuts

tudderone wrote: »

Yup, In 1950 the population of the world was 2.5 billion, its 7.7 billion now and by 2100 it will be 11 billion ! Thats a lot of mouths to feed.

With most of the growth coming in countries that can least afford it:(

tudderone

Birdnuts wrote: »

With most of the growth coming in countries that can least afford it:(

It'll be Asia, when you see some of the rubbish they eat now, what will it be like in 80 years time ?

Bog Trotter99

minktrapper wrote: »

You should check out the population of the African countries. There is so many people there. Also check out population densities. It is trying to feed the planet is the problem. Modern agriculture is destroying the planet.

Partly true.

The population of the world has soared in less than 50 years. The only way to feed them is with as you say modern agriculture, but that still isn't enough.

Neither is the food production enough because those people in less advanced countries want what you have. So all that industrial activity to supply those goods is destroying the planet also.

People and too many of them is destroying the planet and will do in just a very short time.

Driving around in an electric car won't make any difference except quicken the Earth's demise.

Taking tractors away from farmers and getting people out there to tend the crops will just make food bills soar, together with land prices. This will have a knock on effect of making roads and housing and everything else more expensive, but also reduce the spending power of people to purchase goods as they spend more money on their food bill.

It is a disaster on a huge scale and it will happen soon as the system breaks down.

Added to all this Western countries are allowing those other countries populations to migrate. So their problem of over population is being exported to our countries.

It won't be a deer or seal cull you will be hearing about in a few years. It will be the vanishing wild animals as food prices start to get more expensive and those 'free' animals become a food source.

Bog Trotter99

tudderone wrote: »

It'll be Asia, when you see some of the rubbish they eat now, what will it be like in 80 years time ?

The first type of 'environmental disaster' type movie I ever saw was made in 1970. The Earth's demise in the film was because of over population, pollution etc.

That film was based on a book, written in 1956. That is how long (at least) they have known about the problems we experience today.

80 years? I doubt there will be many left to tell the tale.


Happy fecker aren't I ?

yubabill

Missed PT last night - usually watch youtube now and forgot.

Glad to hear it wasn't a hatchet job.

On world population, it's expected to peak at 10-11Bn mid-century and then decline naturally.

Africa will be the biggest contributor, as Asia is mostly maxxed out, China is already seeing irreversible decrease in births (and as an aside, apparently Russia has been massaging births for the last 4-5 years). Africa is becoming affluent, it's not the desert they put on TV many millions have escaped absolute poverty, many live in cities with cellphones and cars. Yes, they are less-developed than the West but the people are resilient and have ingenuity, they are progressing at an amazing rate. With this shift away from subsistence farming will eventually come less need for children and more desire for affluence.

I don't see problem feeding 11Bn, we're already doing it with 7-8Bn. When I was a kid, the world had 3.5Bn and they worried about population growth and food. They managed with new techniques and fertilisers etc., granted at the cost of biodiversity.
But a lot of people forget that Nature is not a static, fragile thing - it is dynamic. Just tarmac or concrete a piece of field and see how long it lasts. Eventually, something will burst through and if left alone it will be overgrown. Not in favour of tarmac or concrete, just using to illustrate the passing nature of the things we do as humans. I don't see humans as parasites on the Earth, we are a part of Nature, too just as much as ants, bees, wildebeest and so on. And our population will naturally adjust to the resources available given time.

Feisar

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

It will be the vanishing wild animals as food prices start to get more expensive and those 'free' animals become a food source.

I've noticed a lot of the smaller stuff doesn't seem to be around anymore at all.

Couldn't tell you when I last heard a grasshopper or seen frogspawn. Butterflies, bees and wasps don't seem as plentiful these days either.

Bog Trotter99

Feisar wrote: »

I've noticed a lot of the smaller stuff doesn't seem to be around anymore at all.

Couldn't tell you when I last heard a grasshopper or seen frogspawn. Butterflies, bees and wasps don't seem as plentiful these days either.

This year I have seen only 2 bees. No butterflies. About 10 flies except for millions of midges. No frogs and no grasshopper for years and I live in an area with lots of natural trees etc.

Bog Trotter99

yubabill wrote: »

Missed PT last night - usually watch youtube now and forgot.

Glad to hear it wasn't a hatchet job.

On world population, it's expected to peak at 10-11Bn mid-century and then decline naturally.

Africa will be the biggest contributor, as Asia is mostly maxxed out, China is already seeing irreversible decrease in births (and as an aside, apparently Russia has been massaging births for the last 4-5 years). Africa is becoming affluent, it's not the desert they put on TV many millions have escaped absolute poverty, many live in cities with cellphones and cars. Yes, they are less-developed than the West but the people are resilient and have ingenuity, they are progressing at an amazing rate. With this shift away from subsistence farming will eventually come less need for children and more desire for affluence.

I don't see problem feeding 11Bn, we're already doing it with 7-8Bn. When I was a kid, the world had 3.5Bn and they worried about population growth and food. They managed with new techniques and fertilisers etc., granted at the cost of biodiversity.
But a lot of people forget that Nature is not a static, fragile thing - it is dynamic. Just tarmac or concrete a piece of field and see how long it lasts. Eventually, something will burst through and if left alone it will be overgrown. Not in favour of tarmac or concrete, just using to illustrate the passing nature of the things we do as humans. I don't see humans as parasites on the Earth, we are a part of Nature, too just as much as ants, bees, wildebeest and so on. And our population will naturally adjust to the resources available given time.

It can't decline naturally. They won't let it and do everything to keep it growing. It's the only way they can sustain their economic system.

Less people, means less consumers, means less profit, means less revenue, means economic collapse.

Regards adjusting naturally............thousands of years ago they reckon our population was just a few million. This was because come winter, food was scarce and we died until we discovered the farming of grasses.

Wheat, barley, oats, rice they found can be stored through the winter to feed us and our livestock so the population boomed but peaked at about 1 to 2 billion and stopped that way until around 100 years ago.

Then we had refrigeration and antibiotics and farm industrialization and the result is today.

So where do you think the line is regards a 'natural population'?

Melodeon

Here's the episode, the culling item starts at 16.00 minutes:
https://www.rte.ie/player/series/prime-time/SI0000000825?epguid=IH000400739

corelokttikka

There’s no apex predator apart from hunters end of debate. Everyone knows the harm and damage done by animals to the environment if their not kept in check. Fauna would be wiped out etc etc effecting all species including mankind. Never mind the claims going in for car crashes and damage to vehicles or worse by over populated areas where deer live.
As regards to insects if the fauna is there insects thrive, they do in my gardens and so there’s lots of nesting birds. Farm land however nowadays need to change. A lot are sterile cutting, draining etc for every square inch to grow grass, mono culture for dairying etc

Grizzly 45

tudderone wrote: »

Yup, In 1950 the population of the world was 2.5 billion, its 7.7 billion now and by 2100 it will be 11 billion ! Thats a lot of mouths to feed.

Yeah,and us thinking apes can actually match this population growth,by technology .Food has never been cheaper,plentiful or in abundance n mankind history than in the present day.I am old enough to remember in the 1970s ,India still having a famine because of rice crop failure.
They export rice nowadays.

This "We are,all gonna die,cos the world has too many people!"is another debunked myth that has been around since the 1970s purported by a Mr Eherlich and like the rest of the doomsayers of environmentalism is bunkum. In fact they were talking about this happening in ancient Rome...We are still here ...

tudderone

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Yeah,and us thinking apes can actually match this population growth,by technology .Food has never been cheaper,plentiful or in abundance n mankind history than in the present day.I am old enough to remember in the 1970s ,India still having a famine because of rice crop failure.
They export rice nowadays.

This "We are,all gonna die,cos the world has too many people!"is another debunked myth that has been around since the 1970s purported by a Mr Eherlich and like the rest of the doomsayers of environmentalism is bunkum. In fact they were talking about this happening in ancient Rome...We are still here ...

Unicef say there are 190 million people in India undernourished at the last count. A point has to come when we can no longer feed everyone. Apart from that, what are all these people going to work at ?

Grizzly 45

Feisar wrote: »

I've noticed a lot of the smaller stuff doesn't seem to be around anymore at all.

Couldn't tell you when I last heard a grasshopper or seen frogspawn. Butterflies, bees and wasps don't seem as plentiful these days either.

Wait about another month.Everyhing is about 4 /6weeks behind this year.Courtsey of the jet stream being lower over us than usual and hanging around longer.

tudderone

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Wait about another month.Everyhing is about 4 /6weeks behind this year.Courtsey of the jet stream being lower over us than usual and hanging around longer.

Yeah, including my Tomato plants, courgettes, and strawberry's :mad:

Bog Trotter99

tudderone wrote: »

Yeah, including my Tomato plants, courgettes, and strawberry's :mad:

Tis cold though.

This year 1 cuckoo and 2 swallows which appeared for a day and disappeared then nowt.

Whitethorn flowers just changing to pink. Mass of them this year but what has pollinated them? I have no idea as no flies or bees.

Grizzly 45

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

The first type of 'environmental disaster' type movie I ever saw was made in 1970. The Earth's demise in the film was because of over population, pollution etc.

That film was based on a book, written in 1956. That is how long (at least) they have known about the problems we experience today.

80 years? I doubt there will be many left to tell the tale.


Happy fecker aren't I ?

Paul Eherlich 's masterpiece of bull manure.Long debunked along with a load of other climate doomsayers predictions that as of yet not one of them has come true.
And like all good cults,they keep changing the dates of when their version of their rapture will occur.2050 now at the latest.Be near on a century then of them not getting it right with their multiple predictions.

Bog Trotter99

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Paul Eherlich 's masterpiece of bull manure.Long debunked along with a load of other climate doomsayers predictions that as of yet not one of them has come true.
And like all good cults,they keep changing the dates of when their version of their rapture will occur.2050 now at the latest.Be near on a century then of them not getting it right with their multiple predictions.

No it wasn't. Completely wrong Grizzly:D

It was actually a good subject film but it was cheaply put together. Had big stars and you could say the 'first' disaster movie because the book was written in 1956.

Grizzly 45

tudderone wrote: »

Unicef say there are 190 million people in India undernourished at the last count. A point has to come when we can no longer feed everyone. Apart from that, what are all these people going to work at ?

Not because of a actuaL food shortage tho.But because of their poverty and class system and religious beliefs.That all ties together there.

Work is indeed going to be a problem,for us all if we start replacing our jobs with AI and robotics.
Even est professions would be at risk on that one.What do you need an accountant for ,when you can use a program to do your books?Go to an expensive brick university in person, when you can distance learn at home?


.

Grizzly 45

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

No it wasn't. Completely wrong Grizzly:D

It was actually a good subject film but it was cheaply put together. Had big stars and you could say the 'first' disaster movie because the book was written in 1956.

Ah!I'm thinking of "The population bomb" by Eherlich which came out around the same time.

Bog Trotter99

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Ah!I'm thinking of "The population bomb" by Eherlich which came out around the same time.

No and it still applies today because if a virus killed our grass plants as in the film, we would be in same trouble.

A virus caused through they think pollution killed all grass plants. Wheat, barley, oats. maize and rice. So there was a lack of food. The film was more about the response from Government and normal folk to survive.

The book was............. 'The Death Of Grass' by John Christopher 1956.

The film which got messed up was ......'No Blade Of Grass' 1970. Starred Nigel Davenport, Lynn Frederick, Wendy Richards.

Interestingly they banged on about over population and pollution and burning the rain forests etc then in the film and possibly the book?

That was 51 to 66 years ago and still nowt has been done...............and never will until they can't make any money anymore.

If you remember Grizzly and I know you do. 'This Town Aint Big Enough For Both Of Us' by Sparks. That was about same and that is 47 years old this year.:)

berettaman

Feisar wrote: »

Ended up missing it after. One has to laugh at the animal’s rights crowd. Shooting bad but let’s bring in wolves to do the job! Go have a look at the aftermath of a dog attack on sheep and come back to me on that one lads. They could also mean tracts of the country been given to wildlife maybe? We’re too small a country with too scattered a population for that.

Logically speaking then they will be looking for Great Whites to be released off the Saltees to keep the seals in check.:rolleyes:
They really are away with the fairies.

Feisar

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Not because of a actuaL food shortage tho.But because of their poverty and class system and religious beliefs.That all ties together there.

Work is indeed going to be a problem,for us all if we start replacing our jobs with AI and robotics.
Even est professions would be at risk on that one.What do you need an accountant for ,when you can use a program to do your books?Go to an expensive brick university in person, when you can distance learn at home?


.

I reckon it'll be easier replace desk jockeys such as myself than actual hands on labour.

Birdnuts

berettaman wrote: »

Logically speaking then they will be looking for Great Whites to be released off the Saltees to keep the seals in check.:rolleyes:
They really are away with the fairies.

Great Whites are already in Biscay and off Cornwall so its a matter of time before they are seen in Irish Waters. Indeed they were probably here in the past during warmer climate periods such as the early bronze age

Feisar

Birdnuts wrote: »

Great Whites are already in Biscay and off Cornwall so its a matter of time before they are seen in Irish Waters. Indeed they were probably here in the past during warmer climate periods such as the early bronze age

Another good reason not to go swimming!

Grizzly 45

Bog Trotter99 wrote: »

No and it still applies today because if a virus killed our grass plants as in the film, we would be in same trouble.

A virus caused through they think pollution killed all grass plants. Wheat, barley, oats. maize and rice. So there was a lack of food. The film was more about the response from Government and normal folk to survive.

The book was............. 'The Death Of Grass' by John Christopher 1956.

The film which got messed up was ......'No Blade Of Grass' 1970. Starred Nigel Davenport, Lynn Frederick, Wendy Richards.

Interestingly they banged on about over population and pollution and burning the rain forests etc then in the film and possibly the book?

That was 51 to 66 years ago and still nowt has been done...............and never will until they can't make any money anymore.

If you remember Grizzly and I know you do. 'This Town Aint Big Enough For Both Of Us' by Sparks. That was about same and that is 47 years old this year.:)

Ok.now I got ya... Yes,"No blade of grass" was a mess of the book alright. All those big names,they must have been short a few quid for the pub and did that film for the drink money,or a charity case.

Thanks for filling that gap in my music knowledge...I had no idea who "Sparks" was or that song until you mentioned it...Was trying to figure out what has our Mod "Sparks" got to do with this...:D:D

Well,if you wanted to cause enough problems,all you would have to do is figure out a disease that attacks the rice crops of the planet!! That is THE most critical crop,that surpasses wheat that we grow.More people are dependent on that than wheat to survive.

Yeah,its all the same old chestnuts,51 years ago or 51 days ago,and its still wrong.
Over pouplation...Our populations are now stalling out in the Western and developed worlds. China is now dropping their one child policy as well,so that is saying something. Russia is ageing,and we are living longer in the West.

The burning Amazon...WWF[another crowd with an agenda,and long past their cuddly image of origin] was assuring us that 100 square miles per day was being destroyed in the Amazon,back in 1989...They must have the whole thing done in by now?

Pollution...We have cleaned up our act in industry and lifestyles a lot since then in the West. Now,if we could get over the idea that we are " not "Recycling" anything by shifting all our plastics to 3rd world countries, for them to burn and destroy their environments.
Or that it isn't a good idea for places like the Maldives, which should have been underwater long before now, according to Al Gore.To pollute their paradise by dumping garbage into their ocean.:(