straying black bull mastiff type

[leegreen 2,223]

Decent size lambs about £100, sheep in lamb approx £200 ish and Jacobs depending on quality and sex £100 upwards, maybe £500 for a decent ram.

Sounds like one of those Gaelic Mastiffs to me.

[Ideation 8,216]

I read an Article last night in my local news paper and a "hunting type dog" had attacked and killed a Jacobs sheep in a flock of 17 traumatising 2 more which may still die. The article continued to say that "normal working people should not purchase and own hunting dogs".

 

Now I'm sorry about the sheep but thats a stupid comment. There's a good chance the dog was stray or someones pet got off the lead.

 

Any "hunting men" I know stock break there dogs and teach them recall etc so that this doesn't happen. Which in my eyes makes us better dog owners than alot of the public. Surely?

 

Anyway, to answer Aarons question, the lamb was £100 to replace, that was it's Market value. Not sure if these were rare breed as it stated Jacobs Sheep.

 

Gaz

 

 

Whats your point? The paper says that normal folk shouldnt own 'hunting type' dogs. . . . . . i'd agree in many ways. FIrstly if they were not a fashion amongst the non-hunters certain breeds might not get so f****d up, but more to the point of the article, i genuinly would agree that a big running dog with a high prey drive if just bought as a family pet and not worked hard with (as most hunters would do) to instill certain things (stock breaking, recall, general obediance) then it could end up when day causing a lot of trouble.

 

As for most 'hunting men' being better dog owners than the civis, well yes in some cases, these folk have amazing bonds with the dogs and work them hard and treat them well. But lets face it there are a million idiots in our sport whose dogs are point and slip machines, badly raised and badly trained. Plenty of sheep, cats and other stuff have been found chewed up to at-testify to this.

[KittleRox 2,147]

I read an Article last night in my local news paper and a "hunting type dog" had attacked and killed a Jacobs sheep in a flock of 17 traumatising 2 more which may still die. The article continued to say that "normal working people should not purchase and own hunting dogs".

 

Now I'm sorry about the sheep but thats a stupid comment. There's a good chance the dog was stray or someones pet got off the lead.

 

Any "hunting men" I know stock break there dogs and teach them recall etc so that this doesn't happen. Which in my eyes makes us better dog owners than alot of the public. Surely?

 

Anyway, to answer Aarons question, the lamb was £100 to replace, that was it's Market value. Not sure if these were rare breed as it stated Jacobs Sheep.

 

Gaz

 

 

Whats your point? The paper says that normal folk shouldnt own 'hunting type' dogs. . . . . . i'd agree in many ways. FIrstly if they were not a fashion amongst the non-hunters certain breeds might not get so f****d up, but more to the point of the article, i genuinly would agree that a big running dog with a high prey drive if just bought as a family pet and not worked hard with (as most hunters would do) to instill certain things (stock breaking, recall, general obediance) then it could end up when day causing a lot of trouble.

 

As for most 'hunting men' being better dog owners than the civis, well yes in some cases, these folk have amazing bonds with the dogs and work them hard and treat them well. But lets face it there are a million idiots in our sport whose dogs are point and slip machines, badly raised and badly trained. Plenty of sheep, cats and other stuff have been found chewed up to at-testify to this.

Yes there are alot of hunting folk who are idiots as there are ordinary people who are idiots.Both types can be very responsible dog owners also,

I think the point he was making was the way the media reported it,"ordinary folk shouldn,t be allowed to keep hunting dogs"thats just fxckin mental,another example of the sheer ignorance showed by the reporters writing the story,

[Gaz_1989 9,539]

All of the bullshit comments were in inverted commers and were only the views of the woman who's sheep it was so I doubt paper would be bothered. They would say it's just her opinion.

 

But you can imagine half of the dosy b*****ds who read that now, "ooh those nasty hunting dogs killing sheep"...

 

Even my mother asked if mine will be like that and go round killing sheep and continued to say that I need to watch my dog around my little girl...

[Gaz_1989 9,539]

Ideation - What's my point?

 

My point is exactly what Roxy picked up on... The article states that ordinary working folk should not own hunting dogs. I am an ordinary working bloke. My dog will get worked regularly. The article may in fact mean that hunting dogs should not be kept as non-working pets, but it doesnt say that, i disagree with this though aswell.

 

I could have a working bred lurcher and not work it, it sure as hell wouldn't be running around the countryside killing sheep.

 

Also what you say about there being alot of pricks in our game, yes I'm sure there are. But surely they are better being slightly under-educated fieldsports lads and lasses than antis? All sports and hobbies have muppets, but give me a "point-and-slip idiot" over someone trying to get the sport banned any day.

 

Just my view, take it easy.

 

Gaz

[staffs riffraff 1,068]

know what you mean g daniel but its some of them point n slip idiots that are giving the anti fuel and we all know they jump on the slightest misfortune (wankers)

[Ideation 8,216]

Ideation - What's my point?

 

My point is exactly what Roxy picked up on... The article states that ordinary working folk should not own hunting dogs. I am an ordinary working bloke. My dog will get worked regularly. The article may in fact mean that hunting dogs should not be kept as non-working pets, but it doesnt say that, i disagree with this though aswell.

 

I could have a working bred lurcher and not work it, it sure as hell wouldn't be running around the countryside killing sheep.

 

Also what you say about there being alot of pricks in our game, yes I'm sure there are. But surely they are better being slightly under-educated fieldsports lads and lasses than antis? All sports and hobbies have muppets, but give me a "point-and-slip idiot" over someone trying to get the sport banned any day.

 

Just my view, take it easy.

 

Gaz

 

 

Alright mate, sorry think its a case of crossed wires and i read it a bit quick. You have a point, there are many 'ordinary' folk that keep and work 'hunting dogs' and this should not be restricted to organised hunt kennels etc.

 

By 'ordinary' folk I read it to mean, non-working homes, and although i'm sure that many folk keep working dogs and dont work them and get no trouble, there are many many many cases of dogs causing trouble (biting kids, taking sheep, just being mental and hyper) where the problem is they have a dog that has many generations of selective breeding to do a job and perform in a certain way and then are being restricted from performing these tasks. Border collies kept as house pets are a good example. . . . .. they go mental! And yes i'm sure if you kept a lurcher and did not work it then you would still stock break it, but honestly, how many folk who live in towns etc and have pet dogs, go off to farms on the weekend and stock break their dogs from pups? In general i think that many of these kind of folk just avoid the situation and keep their dogs on leads around stock. Its the same with PP dogs, they are a fashion now and few who get hold of them REALLY put the hours in to have the command that they should have over the dog. Now in the case of a lurcher, PP dog or whatever, i just dont think they should go to any home that can pay the cash, its not going to stop obviously but it just creates potential situations where dogs are doing what they are bred for and the owner cant stop it / control it.

 

 

As for the last bit - wow, i'd agree 100%. Take one 'anti' who is really just a moany little student who dont like the fluffy bunnies getting it and yes might sign a petition or wave a banner but will pretty much just moan to her/his mates, and then on the other side take some lad with a bullx who is off killing cats right left and centre and bragging about it and who puts pics of themselves torturing a fox or posts stuff like 'mi dog smashed 6 lst nite' under the name 'fox smasher' or something similar or facebook / thl etc complete with graphic photos and who is more likely to harm our sport. If it wasnt for the f*****g muppets how exactly would the antis get it banned? The sad thing is since the ban the number of idiots has sky rocketed and that why in many senses i hope the ban never gets repealed . . . . . can you imagine the carnage? The british country side would be a horrible place.

 

atb Jai.

[KittleRox 2,147]

Ideation - What's my point?

 

My point is exactly what Roxy picked up on... The article states that ordinary working folk should not own hunting dogs. I am an ordinary working bloke. My dog will get worked regularly. The article may in fact mean that hunting dogs should not be kept as non-working pets, but it doesnt say that, i disagree with this though aswell.

 

I could have a working bred lurcher and not work it, it sure as hell wouldn't be running around the countryside killing sheep.

 

Also what you say about there being alot of pricks in our game, yes I'm sure there are. But surely they are better being slightly under-educated fieldsports lads and lasses than antis? All sports and hobbies have muppets, but give me a "point-and-slip idiot" over someone trying to get the sport banned any day.

 

Just my view, take it easy.

 

Gaz

 

 

Alright mate, sorry think its a case of crossed wires and i read it a bit quick. You have a point, there are many 'ordinary' folk that keep and work 'hunting dogs' and this should not be restricted to organised hunt kennels etc.

 

By 'ordinary' folk I read it to mean, non-working homes, and although i'm sure that many folk keep working dogs and dont work them and get no trouble, there are many many many cases of dogs causing trouble (biting kids, taking sheep, just being mental and hyper) where the problem is they have a dog that has many generations of selective breeding to do a job and perform in a certain way and then are being restricted from performing these tasks. Border collies kept as house pets are a good example. . . . .. they go mental! And yes i'm sure if you kept a lurcher and did not work it then you would still stock break it, but honestly, how many folk who live in towns etc and have pet dogs, go off to farms on the weekend and stock break their dogs from pups? In general i think that many of these kind of folk just avoid the situation and keep their dogs on leads around stock. Its the same with PP dogs, they are a fashion now and few who get hold of them REALLY put the hours in to have the command that they should have over the dog. Now in the case of a lurcher, PP dog or whatever, i just dont think they should go to any home that can pay the cash, its not going to stop obviously but it just creates potential situations where dogs are doing what they are bred for and the owner cant stop it / control it.

 

 

As for the last bit - wow, i'd agree 100%. Take one 'anti' who is really just a moany little student who dont like the fluffy bunnies getting it and yes might sign a petition or wave a banner but will pretty much just moan to her/his mates, and then on the other side take some lad with a bullx who is off killing cats right left and centre and bragging about it and who puts pics of themselves torturing a fox or posts stuff like 'mi dog smashed 6 lst nite' under the name 'fox smasher' or something similar or facebook / thl etc complete with graphic photos and who is more likely to harm our sport. If it wasnt for the f*****g muppets how exactly would the antis get it banned? The sad thing is since the ban the number of idiots has sky rocketed and that why in many senses i hope the ban never gets repealed . . . . . can you imagine the carnage? The british country side would be a horrible place.

 

atb Jai.

agree with most of that Jai, but not sure if a repeal would make the situation worse,I think alot of these new lurcherfolk wouldn,t get the same buzz if it was legal again and go and find something else to do, just a theory and maybe I,m talking shite,so I,ll apolagise in advance,sorry

[Gaz_1989 9,539]

No need to alologise Jai. Entitled to your opinion mate. Agree with most of your last post. As Roxy said I'm not sure what would happen if there was a repeal. I would like to think alot of the muppets are just in it for a buzz and would leave the sport once certain things are made legal. Interesting point roxy.

 

Gaz.

[Ideation 8,216]

No need to alologise Jai. Entitled to your opinion mate. Agree with most of your last post. As Roxy said I'm not sure what would happen if there was a repeal. I would like to think alot of the muppets are just in it for a buzz and would leave the sport once certain things are made legal. Interesting point roxy.

 

Gaz.

 

 

We can but hope!

[staffs riffraff 1,068]

totally agree when something is illegal it will attract a certain person that is not into it for the love just for the status n the extra buzz

[Rake aboot 4,936]

Aye

 

Couldn`t agree more,,, trackies tucked into socks anyone ???

 

just the image the sport needs

ATB