Pheasant shooting curtailed

Messages
84
Reaction score
65
Absolutely spot on. That is why I am so completely against compulsory catch and release. The majority of the general public have no problem with anglers catching fish and killing them to eat. It is not killing them that they don’t get. CCR is just playing right into the anti’s hands. Once they have finished with the grouse, then the pheasants, it will be “rich toff’s tormenting salmon for fun, it’s a disgrace, should be banned!”
I agree wholeheartedly and have been saying this for many years. As long as we have the option of keeping "one for the pot" then fishing for them can be justified. However, as soon as you say that all fish caught have to be returned - I find it difficult to justify targeting that species. It leaves us wide open to the anti-brigade.
 

Safranfoer

Well-known member
Messages
8,630
Reaction score
2,060
I still think that angling is too sentimentally rooted in many people’s memories for it to be a target the general public gets behind. Everyone’s grandad, dad or uncle fished or fishes, there are cosy family shows about fishing on prime time BBC and breathless excitable ones about it on Sky. Angling is also seen as a fair fight. Birds stand no chance against a skilled gunsman. Fish still manage to routinely outsmart the very best of you. The perception would be, the dice is loaded in favour of the prey, and we’re into fair fights as a nation. Wild fishing would be way down the list of causes, and even stocked lakes tend to be for the table.

Just my opinion though.
 

Horsbrugh

Well-known member
Messages
596
Reaction score
542
Location
Peebles
I still think that angling is too sentimentally rooted in many people’s memories for it to be a target the general public gets behind. Everyone’s grandad, dad or uncle fished or fishes, there are cosy family shows about fishing on prime time BBC and breathless excitable ones about it on Sky. Angling is also seen as a fair fight. Birds stand no chance against a skilled gunsman. Fish still manage to routinely outsmart the very best of you. The perception would be, the dice is loaded in favour of the prey, and we’re into fair fights as a nation. Wild fishing would be way down the list of causes, and even stocked lakes tend to be for the table.

Just my opinion though.

Not sure if that would actually be the case with salmon fishing. I think it is still perceived by the majority of the public as an elitist hobby. That is what would make it susceptible to a concerted campaign by the anti “everything we don’t like” brigade.

Regarding birds not standing a chance, I can assure you high pheasants most certainly do stand a chance. My defence when challenged for going shooting, is that if the person challenging me eats meat and especially chicken, then they are the ones being hypocritical. Paying someone else to kill and prepare your meat does not make you the better person. I would also point out, that if there was such a thing as reincarnation and I had a choice of coming back as a chicken, destined to be reared in a intense poultry shed with 24 hour light to keep me eating and growing, with a certain death on a conveyer belt at six weeks old, or, to be a pheasant released on a sporting estate, where I can live free and wild, then take my chances over the guns, I know where I would be. Death is inevitable for all birds and for most, whether wild or farmed, that occurs in their first year.
 

Walleye

Well-known member
Messages
2,815
Reaction score
1,477
I've nothing at all against hunting. It should continue and thrive as a key part of our culture and history. It's very important.

I just have a problem with target shooting using driven birds. It's not hunting imo.

This is also why the antis are focusing on driven shoots. They know it's the easiest win. It's exactly why they went for fox hunting and made progress - some of the methods used don't sit with the British idea of "fair play" associated with most hunting and shooting activities.

They won't get far with any other form of hunting, including fishing.

Oh, and it's not a class war, or a rural / urban thing. Continue thinking that if you like but while you complain about that, target shooting with driven birds will get licensed then banned.
 

Safranfoer

Well-known member
Messages
8,630
Reaction score
2,060
I don’t think the general public know how expensive salmon fishing can be - but the perception of it is that it’s desperately romantic. I know this as somewhat of an oddity in my peer group. I haven’t disillusioned them ;-) It’s definitely not seen as a rich man/elite man’s sport. The vast majority of people lump it in with canal fishing. People would buy me floats and maggot tins for Christmas because ‘I fished’.

Pheasants... are extremely stupid. Unless you shoot them, most only ever encounter them if they saunter out of a hedge on a country lane and stand in front of your car, refusing to move even when you beep the horn. Is shooting them even a sport?! Can’t you just pick them up and wring their neck?

I joke. And have sympathy with those who see their hobbies legislated away, even if it’s not for me.
 
Last edited:

Horsbrugh

Well-known member
Messages
596
Reaction score
542
Location
Peebles
I don’t think the general public know how expensive salmon fishing can be - but the perception of it is that it’s desperately romantic. I know this as somewhat of an oddity in my peer group. I haven’t disillusioned them ;-) It’s definitely not seen as a rich man/elite man’s sport. The vast majority of people lump it in with canal fishing. People would buy me floats and maggot tins for Christmas because ‘I fished’.

Pheasants... are extremely stupid. Unless you don’t shoot them, most only ever encounter them if they saunter out of a hedge on a country lane and stand in front of your car, refusing to move even when you beep the horn. Is shooting them even a sport?! Can’t you just pick them up and wring their neck?

I joke. And have sympathy with those who see their hobbies legislated away, even if it’s not for me.

Pheasants newly released into the countryside can appear a bit stupid, however it does not take them long to wise up, plus they are not shot at that time. They can soon become as clued up as any other wild bird, given time to acclimatise. It is much like newly stocked fish in a lake or river that will grab the first thing cast in front of them. The difference with pheasants, is that they are given time to grow and become accustomed to living in the wild before they are hunted. A lot of trout are stocked one day and are caught the next.

Obviously shooting is not for everyone but it is a form of hunting that is a latent instinct in many of us, as is fishing. Although I do shoot as a member of on a couple of small syndicates, where the bag is shared between members at the end of the day, I do find some very large commercial shoots harder to justify. However, if we are looking at things from a genuine, purely an animal welfare point of view, we should perhaps be focussing our attention on certain intensive farming practices first.
 

Safranfoer

Well-known member
Messages
8,630
Reaction score
2,060
Agree wholeheartedly that there are intensive farming problems that should be tackled first.

Releasing a load of birds in the wild, giving them enough time to get lost and then going out to find and shoot them feels wildly inefficient, from a farming perspective. No one wants battery farmed game. Or battery farmed anything. But the agricultural revolution transformed the way we live and allowed society to form, and centred around trapping the world animals where we are, not keep chasing them.
 

westie4566

Well-known member
Messages
8,713
Reaction score
2,380
Location
Aberdeen
That sounded a bit harsh. I didn’t mean it to be. There are many things everyone does that seem daft when you scrutinise them.
Aye, like chucking bits of fluff, tied on a hook in an attempt to tempt a fish that doesn't feed in fresh water to get it in it's gub....we're all mad ?

On a serous note - the reason that the anti's gain so much traction is that we now live in a very sanitized society and not in a good way. The vast majority of citizens are now so far removed from the country side that produces their food and have got the old 'oh, isn't it cute' virally in their heads that all fieldsports are ultimately doomed.

The real hypocrites are the general public that think Cwiss and his ilk are wonderful- and after watching them on the telly, merrily trundle down to their KFC Drive In to bulk up on battery reared chicken.

In their minds it's ok for someone else to kill their food for them and have it all dressed up and innocuous in breadcrumbs. BUT heaven forbid that someone goes out and catches a fish/shoots a bird, then prepares it and eats its.....how barbaric.:mad:

As ever, the thing we hunters/shooters/fishers are terminally bad at is actually hitting the media hard and jointly with the very message above. I'm probably equally guilty if I'm being very honest. We need to get that message through at grass roots levels though...right back into the schools!

There have been a few great initiatives up in Scotland with Domestic Science classes being held where game is used from source to food in an attempt to educate.

I used to a shoot a bit as a teen, mainly pigeon control on one of the family farms but did have quite a few days at the pheasants back in the day. Can't abide any shoot that wastes birds...to me they were and always will be a real tasty bit of meat.

The braindead General Public are coming for all of us!
 

Horsbrugh

Well-known member
Messages
596
Reaction score
542
Location
Peebles
That sounded a bit harsh. I didn’t mean it to be. There are many things everyone does that seem daft when you scrutinise them.

It is a very hard thing to explain to someone who does not shoot. Anyone that knows me, knows that I have had a lifelong interest in wildlife and the countryside. Yesterday, before I left for our first days pheasant shooting this season, I topped up the bird feeders in my garden. I also occasionally have a pheasant that comes into my garden to feed. I don’t go running to get my gun when it appears.
Pheasant shooting is not about killing pheasants, in the same way that any genuine fisher is not interested in catching loads of newly stocked fish. There has to be a challenge and a sporting chance for the quarry to appeal to most people who shoot or fish.
 

long Preston

Well-known member
Messages
1,914
Reaction score
155
I would define a non-native as a bird that is not naturally occuring here. In fact, should the release of pheasant and RLP be stopped they would slowly die out anyway for they aren't really suited to the UK. Even wild bird shoots aren't as such, they all get 'topped up' by released birds, no matter what people say. Yes, every leisure activity does have impacts on the environment, of course. But rearing MILLIONS of gamebirds and releasing them in the uk countryside to eat everything in their path just so they can be shot>? Hhmmm, whats the real end result and is it really sport? The mass rearing of pheasants causes biodiversity to plummet, they destroy our native wildlife.
I am actually surprised that 'ducks havent been more of a target because the reared duck shooting is about as unsporting a thing ive ever seen. Hundreds of ducks on a muddy, ****-laden pond, that holds ZERO other life, then pushed off the water , often they dont even want to fly. When they do they fly around in a circle to get blatted out of the sky. The crazy thing here is that i'm not even an anti, i'm a fieldsport enthusiast....but just I don't agree with alot of the things i see.... things are changing folks.....this is just the start...
yes and as ususal we will all wring our hands and do feck all while Packham and Avery do their work
 
Messages
84
Reaction score
65
It is a very hard thing to explain to someone who does not shoot. Anyone that knows me, knows that I have had a lifelong interest in wildlife and the countryside. Yesterday, before I left for our first days pheasant shooting this season, I topped up the bird feeders in my garden. I also occasionally have a pheasant that comes into my garden to feed. I don’t go running to get my gun when it appears.
Pheasant shooting is not about killing pheasants, in the same way that any genuine fisher is not interested in catching loads of newly stocked fish. There has to be a challenge and a sporting chance for the quarry to appeal to most people who shoot or fish.

Likewise, at my mother's house, a farmhouse on the east coast of Scotland, we have some pheasants and partridges that come to feed from spillage below the bird feeders in the garden. I don't think that I would be welcome back home if I even thought of taking the gun to them.
 

Walleye

Well-known member
Messages
2,815
Reaction score
1,477
It's not the killing of animals, class wars or urban versus rural attitudes.

The problem the antis have with driven shoots is in the word "driven". It's a very easy hit for them. Target shooting with live animals.

Just like fox hunting - a dozen or so riders and a couple of dozen dogs wasn't considered fair play by the majority. The killing of foxes is still allowed.
 

Horsbrugh

Well-known member
Messages
596
Reaction score
542
Location
Peebles
It's not the killing of animals, class wars or urban versus rural attitudes.

The problem the antis have with driven shoots is in the word "driven". It's a very easy hit for them. Target shooting with live animals.

Just like fox hunting - a dozen or so riders and a couple of dozen dogs wasn't considered fair play by the majority. The killing of foxes is still allowed.

That may well be problem, as you say, the word driven. I like most people who shoot started out on walked up days. As I have grown older, I personally regard a high driven bird as more sporting, as it is much harder to hit than one just flying away from me. I shoot in a small syndicate that is not actually very expensive. However I do still think there is definitely a class thing involved too. Driven shooting is obviously much more expensive, so automatically conjures up the image of very wealthy folk to some people and I suppose they would be correct in certain instances, as very big driven days are only affordable to folks with very large disposable incomes.
 

ashley

Active member
Messages
230
Reaction score
83
That may well be problem, as you say, the word driven. I like most people who shoot started out on walked up days. As I have grown older, I personally regard a high driven bird as more sporting, as it is much harder to hit than one just flying away from me. I shoot in a small syndicate that is not actually very expensive. However I do still think there is definitely a class thing involved too. Driven shooting is obviously much more expensive, so automatically conjures up the image of very wealthy folk to some people and I suppose they would be correct in certain instances, as very big driven days are only affordable to folks with very large disposable incomes.
Then there's another angle...how many birds are injured when shooting the high drives? The antis haven't cottoned onto this yet, but I think they may do. How high is a bird before it's cruel to attempt a shot? Is a 'sporting' bird a bird that's going to go away injured the majority of the time? What is acceptable with regards kills to 'pricked' ratio? I am refering to the very high birds now,. I think the game shooting industry has a year or so to get their house in order, to look at themselves through the eyes of Devil's Advocate and try and ensure they are a tight ship. I fear it's the only way it will survive. You can bet that Packham etc will be scrutinising everything....everything! Don't give him the stick...
 

avonfisher

Member
Messages
31
Reaction score
18
Location
stonehouse lanarkshire
Iam not a fan of the pheasant shoots but before we all get carried away we fishers cause a lot wildlife to be killed what about all the flies that need feathers, fur ,hair etc? I rest my case
 

Safranfoer

Well-known member
Messages
8,630
Reaction score
2,060
That may well be problem, as you say, the word driven. I like most people who shoot started out on walked up days. As I have grown older, I personally regard a high driven bird as more sporting, as it is much harder to hit than one just flying away from me. I shoot in a small syndicate that is not actually very expensive. However I do still think there is definitely a class thing involved too. Driven shooting is obviously much more expensive, so automatically conjures up the image of very wealthy folk to some people and I suppose they would be correct in certain instances, as very big driven days are only affordable to folks with very large disposable incomes.
I don't think the public would know driven shooting is more expensive. They know grouse shooting is a rich man's sport, but I don't think they know WHY. I honestly don't think it's a class thing, in the round. Fox hunting is, because of the costumes worn and the sense that horses are expensive. And grouse is, because people have an idea that rich Saudis come over here and do it. Rightly or wrongly. Everything else I think is seen as fairly working class.
 

ArchieL

Well-known member
Messages
668
Reaction score
291
I think the majority of shoots where local working class boys chip in and put down some birds (1000-2000) and run it more like a syndicate is a great thing and i used to love going to one locally with a friend. The shoot i used to attend was excellent and most guns got a few birds every time out and all the birds were taken for eating by the beaters and the guns.. What is giving the shooters a bad image IMHO is the big estates putting down tens of thousands of birds and then selling these driven days for big bucks. We all know that they charge more for the more birds killled by the guns. What you are left with is guns who are very rich having the ability to pay silly money and shoot a crazy amount of birds that day. This would be like overstocking a trout fishery then chapping all you catch then just tipping them in a bucket for sishery owner to get rid of them when you leave. This does not sit right with me.

I have never liked putting down ducks on ponds then having a go at them when they lift and circle the pond. I have no issue with shooting wild duck and geese and quite enjoy a day out watching this.

Like everything nowadays supply and demand has resulted in a product being available if someone is looking for that product and willing to pay big money for it. I also think Shooters and fishers should stick together and protect the country way of life as the Antis are getting louder and becoming more succesful in getting their voices heard in high places.
 

Horsbrugh

Well-known member
Messages
596
Reaction score
542
Location
Peebles
I see Chris Packham has won over the government to limit numbers of pheasants. Next it’ll be fishing.


Apparently, this actually has no affect on anyone unless they release within 500m of a SPS, SAC or SSI. Even if someone releases with 500m of the above fore mentioned areas, the releases will still be allowed under a general license but very high density releases might be reduced within the licensed area.

It sounds like an other load of distorted spin from Packham and co.
 

johnwest

Active member
Messages
163
Reaction score
42
Location
Central Scotland. Next 2 the river
Then there's another angle...how many birds are injured when shooting the high drives? The antis haven't cottoned onto this yet, but I think they may do. How high is a bird before it's cruel to attempt a shot? Is a 'sporting' bird a bird that's going to go away injured the majority of the time? What is acceptable with regards kills to 'pricked' ratio? I am refering to the very high birds now,. I think the game shooting industry has a year or so to get their house in order, to look at themselves through the eyes of Devil's Advocate and try and ensure they are a tight ship. I fear it's the only way it will survive. You can bet that Packham etc will be scrutinising everything....everything! Don't give him the stick...
Yep agree however what about all the fish that are released (injured) the antis will be on to that later. What surprises me is how a small minority get the ear of the quangos that run the countryside.
 

Wafty Cranker

Active member
Messages
306
Reaction score
255
Location
Galloway
Blown out of proportion yet again by him and the leftie media, gotta keep his crowdfunding going to fund his agenda. He is the biggest threat to our wildlife and his followers get fed what they want to hear and don't understand how damaging WJ actions are to our songbirds and wildlife.
 

Bruce Walker

Active member
Messages
112
Reaction score
41
Apparently, this actually has no affect on anyone unless they release within 500m of a SPS, SAC or SSI. Even if someone releases with 500m of the above fore mentioned areas, the releases will still be allowed under a general license but very high density releases might be reduced within the licensed area.

It sounds like an other load of distorted spin from Packham and co.
The thing is , it establishes precedence and DEFRA conceded this in advance of a formal challenge from Packham et al (which was due later this week I seem to have read somewhere) where they were seeking an exclusion zone of 5000 metres. Given this kind of soft rollover (similar to the General Licence fiasco last year - which continues to rumble on into next years licence process) I`m sure we can look forward to more aggravation in seasons to come from them through arguments over sustainable numbers of birds released and challenges on the size and distance of the buffer zones, given that this minor effort resulted in what amounts to a massive propaganda coup.
Twitter tw*tter will be moving into overdrive. They are not noted for letting facts interfere with a good story - or a bad story come to that.
 

Wafty Cranker

Active member
Messages
306
Reaction score
255
Location
Galloway
Like it or not , the ‘ general public ‘ will simply no longer put up with photographs of piles of dead birds or animals surrounded by grinning guns.
The shooting fraternity has scored a massive own goal with this one.
Ably assisted by digital photography and the ease of posting of photographs on social media , of course.
Social media is our main enemy and a very large important platform for the anti brigade, i do agree that too many photo's of dead birds/animals does not help our plight. Unfortunately we seem to have a generation now that use social media without thinking of the consequences of the posting of dead creatures. I would not dream of posting pictures of any stuff i have shot.

The fishing fraternity need to take heed as well, these anti fieldsport groups have got their eye on us also, we should not be complacent.
 
Top