Big game hunting

Status
Not open for further replies.
I got the terminology of my post wrong. Deer stalkers or should I just say workers with guns to keep the deer numbers down, but I am sure the sentiment and meaning of my post got understood.
Doesn't work like that bud. Stalkers should be licensed and be legal and above board. Workers with rifles could be a very bad thing to have wandering around taking potshots at deer.

Come on guys does it have to be playing the person? Before you know it another thread gets closed, by all means kick the topic but come on play it nice.

Game management is a perfectly fine umbrella terminology both here in the UK and abroad.
Steve and I are fine mate. No need to fret.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
Come on guys does it have to be playing the person? Before you know it another thread gets closed, by all means kick the topic but come on play it nice.

Game management is a perfectly fine umbrella terminology both here in the UK and abroad.
IMHO Ade's post was definitely on topic...
But I'll accept the slap on the wrist (I'm guessing that also means I shouldn't comment on the mangled English on the subsequent post :whistle:)
 
Doesn't work like that bud. Stalkers should be licensed and be legal and above board. Workers with rifles could be a very bad thing to have wandering around taking potshots at deer.

Steve and I are fine mate. No need to fret.
I'm not fretting and I'm not standing up for ST4 either. Just don't like to see another thread end up in kindergarten.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
IMHO Ade's post was definitely on topic...
But I'll accept the slap on the wrist (I'm guessing that also means I shouldn't comment on the mangled English on the subsequent post :whistle:)
And you just did .... Shame.
 
I'm not fretting and I'm not standing up for ST4 either. Just don't like to see another thread end up in kindergarten.
That is ok then. Just pointing some stuff out to Steve, no malice or devilment intended . Be good to have a reasonable debate about the topic. I agree with you.
 
Really, these are ongoing, including lynx

Would be amazing to see lynx in the wild here in the uk and I can't really see any reason not to
I'm not sure about wolves I remember a while ago they reintroduced wolves into a park in the USA can't remember which one but there was a big improvement in he quality of the ecosystem as the herbivores had to start moving around the park and not just stay in one place eating everything
Not sure if this would work in Scotland tho not a large enough area of habitat
 
That is ok then. Just pointing some stuff out to Steve, no malice or devilment intended . Be good to have a reasonable debate about the topic. I agree with you.
Absolutely agree with both of you its brilliant to have a proper discussion on here :)
 
Would be amazing to see lynx in the wild here in the uk and I can't really see any reason not to
I'm not sure about wolves I remember a while ago they reintroduced wolves into a park in the USA can't remember which one but there was a big improvement in he quality of the ecosystem as the herbivores had to start moving around the park and not just stay in one place eating everything
Not sure if this would work in Scotland tho not a large enough area of habitat
I've got to look into it, in the east of the Nederlands they did a trial with Wolves as well. Never followed up on the outcome of that. I do think they are magnificent creatures as well.
 
I'm not sure about wolves........

Probably not the best idea in Scotland & would no doubt eventually prove injurious to their health.

It'd probably only take them 2 or 3 generations before they were in Glasgow bin-dipping for kebabs & deep fried mars bars. :D
 
Probably not the best idea in Scotland & would no doubt eventually prove injurious to their health.

It'd probably only take them 2 or 3 generations before they were in Glasgow bin-dipping for kebabs & deep fried mars bars. :D
:D:D
 
Probably not the best idea in Scotland & would no doubt eventually prove injurious to their health.

It'd probably only take them 2 or 3 generations before they were in Glasgow bin-dipping for kebabs & deep fried mars bars. :D
Hey, at least they exercise whilst eating that lovely comfort food :)
 
Problem with re-introducing such large carnivores is that most carnivores are very lazy in the way they hunt if they can be. Mr Wolf is not going to chase a red deer for miles over moorland if he can just nab a nice,fat,slow ,lumbering sheep belonging to Farmer McParmer.
 
Would be amazing to see lynx in the wild here in the uk and I can't really see any reason not to
I'm not sure about wolves I remember a while ago they reintroduced wolves into a park in the USA can't remember which one but there was a big improvement in he quality of the ecosystem as the herbivores had to start moving around the park and not just stay in one place eating everything
Not sure if this would work in Scotland tho not a large enough area of habitat


Yellowstone Pete and yes it has changed the eco system dramatically with regards to the river banks etc.
 
Back to the thread, I think this has it covered from my point of view...
I don't understand why people want to shoot big game.

However I realise they do. Me getting outraged on Facebook etc. won't change that. I doubt Ricky Gervais greatly worries the average hunter either. So I'd rather hunting was managed in a controlled way, that was in someway useful to conservation then not managed at all. Controversially I think canned hunts (where the animal is bred to be hunted and never truly wild) are better for a species then someone taking a top of the pride lion.

Just to add though, it's a sad reflection on society that people prepared to pay to hunt is the most successful way of monetising nature.
 
Doesn't work like that bud. Stalkers should be licensed and be legal and above board. Workers with rifles could be a very bad thing to have wandering around taking potshots at deer.

Steve and I are fine mate. No need to fret.

So perhaps maybe a sensible comment (and I'll try get the terminology right) is to have more stalkers. Christ knows it would be a good source of employment in rural communities and any rules limiting the numbers of stalkers and deer to be culled should maybe be relaxed a little more.

I think introducing wolves could bring around other issues. Namely as you say, risk to livestock, people. You'll know the fox has evolved to enter urban areas to get food, and you see them in Glasgow quite close to the city centre. Wolves could easily do the same.

Ecosystems have coped without wolves for half a millennia, they'll be just fine without them now.
 
Last edited:
Just to add though, it's a sad reflection on society that people prepared to pay to hunt is the most successful way of monetising nature.

You might think this.

I think hunters, or tourist hunters, are probably like most people. Most here are amatuer photographers, some are into motor sports and rallying. Most here arebt full time pros, I'm not. Some here might like a trackday in their fast cars, they are not full time racing drivers.

I'd love to climb Mount Everest, but I'm not a professional climber. Should I not do this climb and leave it only to the professionals, should I not hang my own landscape images up, but rather buy a print from joe Cornish. Should I not hire a Porsche and take it round a circuit at speed, or should I leave it to the fully pro racing drivers to drive me round in it at speed.

My point is we all partake in things we enjoy but are not professional at.

Most wealthy tourists arebt pro hunters, they want to do the hunt. They think it's fun. They probably seek the sense of adventure, risk and reward of doing it. They might need a guide in the same way that I'd need an instructor to get the best out of a 911 on a racing track but that doesn't stop people scratching their inner Bear Gryls or in my case Aryton Senna.

These hunters, like amatuer rock climbers, hobbyist racing drivers, they're just adrenaline junkies looking to get kicks. Hunting gives them kicks, getting a wonderful landscape or a fast car gives me mine. I don't begrudge anyone their kicks. I think it's the sign of a tolerant society that people can get what they want without fear of being labeled a pariah. Hunting harms no people. IMHO nothing is wrong with it. I find it a shameful reflection on society that others need to feel the need to encroach on other people's freedoms as they don't approve.

What's your kick, most have one.
 
Last edited:
What's your kick, most have one.

Mostly things that don't involve taking pleasure from death.

That aside, I too take the pragmatic view. Might as well take these people's money and put it towards conservation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RIR
You might think this.

I think hunters, or tourist hunters, are probably like most people. Most here are amatuer photographers, some are into motor sports and rallying. Most here arebt full time pros, I'm not. Some here might like a trackday in their fast cars, they are not full time racing drivers.

I'd love to climb Mount Everest, but I'm not a professional climber. Should I not do this climb and leave it only to the professionals, should I not hang my own landscape images up, but rather buy a print from joe Cornish. Should I not hire a Porsche and take it round a circuit at speed, or should I leave it to the fully pro racing drivers to drive me round in it at speed.

My point is we all partake in things we enjoy but are not professional at.

Most wealthy tourists arebt pro hunters, they want to do the hunt. They think it's fun. They probably seek the sense of adventure, risk and reward of doing it. They might need a guide in the same way that I'd need an instructor to get the best out of a 911 on a racing track but that doesn't stop people scratching their inner Bear Gryls or in my case Aryton Senna.

These hunters, like amatuer rock climbers, hobbyist racing drivers, they're just adrenaline junkies looking to get kicks. Hunting gives them kicks, getting a wonderful landscape or a fast car gives me mine. I don't begrudge anyone their kicks. I think it's the sign of a tolerant society that people can get what they want without fear of being labeled a pariah. Hunting harms no people. IMHO nothing is wrong with it. I find it a shameful reflection on society that others need to feel the need to encroach on other people's freedoms as they don't approve.

What's your kick, most have one.
I'm not sure you know who I am? I'm not a full time pro, photographically I get my kicks from paid work and from shooting Rallying (not a soften as I'd like) and other Motorsport (nowhere near as much as I like) cooking, theatre, concerts, fairly average stuff. I understand 'adrenaline junkie' what I don't understand is rock climbing as a tourist activity, it endangers lives, hunting purely for sport I think is truly sick, particularly big game (just pulled those 2 out). I understand track days, hunting for food, rock climbing etc, whilst it's developmental of skill and no-one (who isn't there voluntarily) is getting hurt.

We've won, we're at the top of the food chain, we have high powered rifles, nuclear weapons, we can destroy anything we like, so IMHO someone who gets a kick out of needlessly slaughtering animals has a perverse world view. I have no skills in either field craft or shooting, but a half day course would get me out in the bush to destroy a wild animal. Where's the satisfaction?
 
I don't begrudge anyone their kicks. I think it's the sign of a tolerant society that people can get what they want without fear of being labeled a pariah.

apart from drug addicts and old ladies who like feeding pigeons
 
btw did people see that Jericho has now also been shot by poachers..
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: RIR
Really, these are ongoing, including lynx

Really :)

My point is there is nowehere near the clamour for these vs the outrage at the Big Game Hunting in Africa and \ or the preservation of the wildlife there. Lynx is hardly the same as Wolves or Bears in terms of perceived threat to humans.

Don't get me wrong, I'm personally all for these things, but can't see truly wild Wolves or Bears etc back in the UK, there will be too much resistance and not enough push for it.

I suppose we have some beavers now though...

The Yellowstone Wolves re-introduction was interesting in terms of what happened - the different vegetation around the river of the deer etc did not hang around as much, populations kept more under control.
 
Really :)

My point is there is nowehere near the clamour for these vs the outrage at the Big Game Hunting in Africa and \ or the preservation of the wildlife there. Lynx is hardly the same as Wolves or Bears in terms of perceived threat to humans.

Don't get me wrong, I'm personally all for these things, but can't see truly wild Wolves or Bears etc back in the UK, there will be too much resistance and not enough push for it.

I suppose we have some beavers now though...

The Yellowstone Wolves re-introduction was interesting in terms of what happened - the different vegetation around the river of the deer etc did not hang around as much, populations kept more under control.

We also have wild boars in at least two areas of the country, and, allegedly, feral "big cats" all over the place. There are also non native deer in certain places.

The White Tailed Sea Eagle was reintroduced, as was the trial of the Beaver in Knapdale in Argyll. There is also a wild population of beaver on the River Tay, and, I believe, one down south somewhre. The Red Kite has also been succesfully reintroduced, namely, Galloway and parts of North Wales.

Why do we have urban foxes? Because we've destroyed or diminished their natural habitat.

Wild animals (and I refer to mammals, not amphibians or reptiles), especially carnivorous ones, are naturally wary of people (can't think why), except when protecting their young, and their habitat, with the possible exception, perhaps, of the Polar Bear (the largest land predator on Earth), but not as efficient as us, and we're taking away its habitat anyway.

What ingenious ways have our "intelligent" species come up with to co-exist with wildlife?

Badger Baitting.
Hare Coursing.
Fox Hunting.
Otter Hunting.
Dog Fighting.
Cock Fighting.
Bull fighting.
"Scientific" whale hunting. (another mammal).
Shark Finning (put them back alive to drown after the fins have been removed).
Bear bile extraction.
Miraculuous healing from Elephant/Rhino tusks (Stun the animal, remove the tusks with a chainsaw, and leave it to bleed to death when it recovers from the anaesthetic).
Dog beating (prior to death) as the pain induced "adrenalin" makes the meat more tender, and is considered an aphrodisiac (Korea, Vietnam, The Phillipines).
The Faroe annual whale (mammal) slaughter.
Catch fish too small because of Government (EU) made regulations, and throw them back in the sea - dead.
Cosmetic/Medical experiments.

And "Big Game" hunting.

Etc.


And don't be too certain about non-reintroduction, that's if the human population leaves room and habitat, or doesn't destroy the Earth first: http://www.rewildingbritain.org.uk/

The dinosaurs lasted for how many million years? I don't know, but we wont, hopefully.

And, no, I'm not a "tree hugger". I fish for salmon and trout, and sometimes, sea fish; I eat what I catch. If they're too small, they go back alive, to breed, and to grow bigger. I own two English Mastiffs, and neither would touch a cat or a rabbit (another non indgenous species). Because they're soft :) Unless someone attacks me.:)
 
Last edited:
We also have wild boars in at least two areas of the country, and, allegedly, escaped "big cats" all over the place. There are also non native deer in certain places.

And don't be too certain about non-reintroduction, that's if the human population leaves room and habitat, or destroys the Earth first: http://www.rewildingbritain.org.uk/

I think the escaped big cats are 'unproven' but even if so, not an official release!

My view is it won't happen, but I'll be happy if I am wrong. My point though is not really about the likelyhood of it occuring.

In other news don't hunt armadillos, or needlessly shoot at them for no good reason... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-33748027 :eek:
 
We also have wild boars in at least two areas of the country, and, allegedly, escaped "big cats" all over the place. There are also non native deer in certain places.

The White Tailed Sea Eagle was reintroduced, as was the trial of the Beaver in Knapdale in Argyll. There is also a wild population of beaver on the River Tay, and, I believe, one down south somewhre. The Red Kite has also been succesfully reintroduced, namely, Galloway and parts of North Wales.

Also wallabies.
 
Really :)

My point is there is nowehere near the clamour for these vs the outrage at the Big Game Hunting in Africa and \ or the preservation of the wildlife there. Lynx is hardly the same as Wolves or Bears in terms of perceived threat to humans.

Don't get me wrong, I'm personally all for these things, but can't see truly wild Wolves or Bears etc back in the UK, there will be too much resistance and not enough push for it.

I suppose we have some beavers now though...
.

Beavers have been about for a while now ;)

The reintro programme for wolves has also been ongoing for years, sadly I have to a agree that it isn't practical due to the amount of farmed livestock scattered everywhere,
Lynx may not be a threat to humans but then neither are wolves, they just have a bad reputation but in reality do tend to shy away from humans, both could be livestock killers.
 
The reintro programme for wolves has also been ongoing for years, sadly I have to a agree that it isn't practical due to the amount of farmed livestock scattered everywhere,
Lynx may not be a threat to humans but then neither are wolves, they just have a bad reputation but in reality do tend to shy away from humans, both could be livestock killers.

I think we are in agreement :). I was careful to say perceived threat re Wolves. Whilst I would not say no threat to humans, I would certainly agree with minimal. The perception vs reality is a huge problem with Wolves though, I remember watching a program on Wolves re-introducing themselves down the Rockies, and the permits being given to shoot them.

I'll stop now though I suspect you know more about this than I!
 
btw did people see that Jericho has now also been shot by poachers..

Oh s*** that's awful
I did read that Cecils brother is protecting the cubs which is great news hopefully they will survive if the park authorities there can clamp down on the poachers
 
s***. f*****g c***s. Pardon the language what's wrong with people.

http://news.sky.com/story/1528976/cecil-the-lions-brother-shot-dead-by-poachers
Where and now there is the news report that despite rumours, started by the main authority ????????, that he is not dead and normal collar movements are being tracked and that he is likely just shagging his bird (ok that is my words, they said mating ;)).


http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/aug/01/jericho-not-dead-cecil-the-lion-zimbabwe

I hope the researchers are true, that would be good news. However, if the Zimbabwe Conservation Task Force can get this so wrong I have no faith that justice will be served on Walter the Dentist. But for Jericho's sake I do hope the ZCTF truly are a bunch of Muppets... Unbelievable.
 
Where and now there is the news report that despite rumours, started by the main authority ????????, that he is not dead and normal collar movements are being tracked and that he is likely just shagging his bird (ok that is my words, they said mating ;)).


http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/aug/01/jericho-not-dead-cecil-the-lion-zimbabwe

I hope the researchers are true, that would be good news. However, if the Zimbabwe Conservation Task Force can get this so wrong I have no faith that justice will be served on Walter the Dentist. But for Jericho's sake I do hope the ZCTF truly are a bunch of Muppets... Unbelievable.
Thanks for the update it does look like Jericho is alive and well
It does make you wonder about the Zimbabwe conservation task forces competence and ability to protect the wildlife in the park
 
It does indeed, at best a total misunderstanding of how the world is interested in this. At worst just unfit for purpose.
 
Killing for food is acceptable, but for fun? no!
I don't understand anyone wanting to do that. I actually think many who do must have personality disorders/inferiority complexes & tbh they are probably the folk who actually SHOULDN'T own/use weapons.

Any animals that need culling to keep numbers in check, or for health reasons etc can be performed humanely by licensed game keepers. You don't need to pander to the rich, or those that need to massage their twisted ego's.

Just to add though, it's a sad reflection on society that people prepared to pay to hunt is the most successful way of monetising nature.

If someone is prepared to pay, if that money can be put to good use? If that animal has to be killed, then might as well let someone pay for it provided it's done humanely. That money can then be used for conservation, providing employment to the locals. Should we really be that surprised then that it's not much of a step then to the 600 breeding farms in South Africa who breed and produce trophy animals to hunt, once the big money is there.

Is this the need of the many out-way the need of the few? If it's managed correctly and a small hunting sideline pays for a large conservation area, employment for the locals, increased standard of living tied with responsible environmental practices?

What's you're feeling on Zoos? How about the photographer days at the big cats place at Dover, or even safari's, disturbing the wildlife so you can get close to nature to get your photograph? What about elephants in Thailand, painting or playing football, hardly normal behaviour yet attracts lots of money from the tourists.
Closer to home, how about Dyrham park, national trust property with wild(ish) deer, that you can get close to, take photos, then eat the burgers in the cafe. They are so successful there they have to be managed, yet it's turned into a nice side venture whilst being an attraction.

Rather than say these people have personality disorders, isn't this just the materialistic way of the current state of the population, where in certain groups it's acceptable behaviour when in others that isn't. Some of here treat GAS as a trophy collection. The good outcome of this is that it's been publicised so much. If it makes people think their behaviour is unacceptable then that could only be a good thing.
 
I'm not against hunting as long as there is a clear benefit to the world in general, ie. Management, food etc. however not just for the sheer hell of it. I read somewhere about so called ethical big game hunts, where people paid to "hunt" but instead of high power rifles they used tranquilliser rifles, along with the Rangers were vets. Who then carried out a general health check on the animals. If the animal needed further treatment it could be taken back to the hospital and treated before returning to the wild. The income from the hunts was used to fund vets etc. seems a good idea to me. Personally I'd rather hunt them with a Canon (maybe a 1DX) ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top