Government u turn

[Malt 379]

Malt - I see your point it ould be nice if they thought things through properly first time round BUT given that they (politicians) no idea about the real world - I would far rather they guessed and then changed their minds rather than insisted they are right. Sooner or later someone with some balls will shake it all up anyhow. Kind of feel like the country is treading water at the moment.

 

IMO politicians should be elected on the strengths of their beliefs and convictions & they should not be afraid to stick to them. They are supposed to be the ones who do our thinking for us, our peers who we elect to make the tough decisions in our stead.

[scothunter 12,609]

Exactly malt. Gone are the days when party members had a code of ethics which got them into politics in the first place. Yes there is loyalty to your party Abd it's leader, but these days with so many spin drs and party hard arses who demand blind loyalty.

There was a cpl who I admired in the labour party who stuck to thier guns and resigned. Robin cook being one of them.

[tilimangro 1,013]

seen several kites in guildford now,and buzzards are more common than crows

saw a few hobbys few years back down here

[Simoman 110]

You wait til the kites arrive!

 

They have arrived here this year! They have been nesting at a National Trust site about 10 miles away for a few years now and last weekend my friend was telling me he saw one in the village. In 10 years there will be thousands of them.

 

There was one soaring above the lake at the Belvoir show last sunday............

[trigger2 3,406]

theres a wood just down the road from my place and a few years ago you would see a pair of buzzards there, now its not uncommon to see half a dozen birds there at the same time in that area. the red kites have been on the radar too for the last 4 years aswell.

[Ratreeper 441]

which experts reckon there are too many buzzards in the UK, damaging the ecosystem? I thought it was about saving moor frickin game birds, so they can make even more money and keep paying taxes whilst shutting down the countryside to everyone else. I have no problem with game keeping but it really pisses me off with the double standards

 

What double standards? They aren't hiding the fact that the research is for the 'game industry'. So what is your point?

 

Well one example would be that apparently we can't hunt foxes with dogs anymore because it is considered cruel...unless you are protecting game birds. I consider that to be completely mental, why isn't it OK to hunt a fox for killing chickens or lambs or for sport? Then this example, no-one has raised any issues suggesting buzzards are too common and are in any way damaging the ecosystem and have been a protected species for years, with fines dealt for people killing them when they see them as a threat to pigeons etc. Yet to suggest it is OK for people to kill a protected bird because they might kill young game birds is a double standard again. It should not be one rule for those who are rich enough to release and shoot pheasants and another for those who don't own land. I don't want to stereotype pheasant hunters as all being upper class because that is bollocks, but there is so much money in the sport that they can evade the laws the rest of us get stumped with and I resent that. I would rather every single non-indigenous animal was wiped out of the UK than a single native have to die, I don't understand why a pheasant is important to the countyside.

[paulus 26]

which experts reckon there are too many buzzards in the UK, damaging the ecosystem? I thought it was about saving moor frickin game birds, so they can make even more money and keep paying taxes whilst shutting down the countryside to everyone else. I have no problem with game keeping but it really pisses me off with the double standards

 

What double standards? They aren't hiding the fact that the research is for the 'game industry'. So what is your point?

 

Well one example would be that apparently we can't hunt foxes with dogs anymore because it is considered cruel...unless you are protecting game birds. I consider that to be completely mental, why isn't it OK to hunt a fox for killing chickens or lambs or for sport? Then this example, no-one has raised any issues suggesting buzzards are too common and are in any way damaging the ecosystem and have been a protected species for years, with fines dealt for people killing them when they see them as a threat to pigeons etc. Yet to suggest it is OK for people to kill a protected bird because they might kill young game birds is a double standard again. It should not be one rule for those who are rich enough to release and shoot pheasants and another for those who don't own land. I don't want to stereotype pheasant hunters as all being upper class because that is bollocks, but there is so much money in the sport that they can evade the laws the rest of us get stumped with and I resent that. I would rather every single non-indigenous animal was wiped out of the UK than a single native have to die, I don't understand why a pheasant is important to the countyside.

because the countryside in part relies on the income they generate, the same as fishing,riding to hounds,stalking and various other money generating persuits.

[kenny14 656]

which experts reckon there are too many buzzards in the UK, damaging the ecosystem? I thought it was about saving moor frickin game birds, so they can make even more money and keep paying taxes whilst shutting down the countryside to everyone else. I have no problem with game keeping but it really pisses me off with the double standards

 

What double standards? They aren't hiding the fact that the research is for the 'game industry'. So what is your point?

 

Well one example would be that apparently we can't hunt foxes with dogs anymore because it is considered cruel...unless you are protecting game birds. I consider that to be completely mental, why isn't it OK to hunt a fox for killing chickens or lambs or for sport? Then this example, no-one has raised any issues suggesting buzzards are too common and are in any way damaging the ecosystem and have been a protected species for years, with fines dealt for people killing them when they see them as a threat to pigeons etc. Yet to suggest it is OK for people to kill a protected bird because they might kill young game birds is a double standard again. It should not be one rule for those who are rich enough to release and shoot pheasants and another for those who don't own land. I don't want to stereotype pheasant hunters as all being upper class because that is bollocks, but there is so much money in the sport that they can evade the laws the rest of us get stumped with and I resent that. I would rather every single non-indigenous animal was wiped out of the UK than a single native have to die, I don't understand why a pheasant is important to the countyside.

 

Do you include Rabbits and Hares, Fallow etc in that?

[Lab 10,979]

which experts reckon there are too many buzzards in the UK, damaging the ecosystem? I thought it was about saving moor frickin game birds, so they can make even more money and keep paying taxes whilst shutting down the countryside to everyone else. I have no problem with game keeping but it really pisses me off with the double standards

 

What double standards? They aren't hiding the fact that the research is for the 'game industry'. So what is your point?

 

Well one example would be that apparently we can't hunt foxes with dogs anymore because it is considered cruel...unless you are protecting game birds. I consider that to be completely mental, why isn't it OK to hunt a fox for killing chickens or lambs or for sport? Then this example, no-one has raised any issues suggesting buzzards are too common and are in any way damaging the ecosystem and have been a protected species for years, with fines dealt for people killing them when they see them as a threat to pigeons etc. Yet to suggest it is OK for people to kill a protected bird because they might kill young game birds is a double standard again. It should not be one rule for those who are rich enough to release and shoot pheasants and another for those who don't own land. I don't want to stereotype pheasant hunters as all being upper class because that is bollocks, but there is so much money in the sport that they can evade the laws the rest of us get stumped with and I resent that. I would rather every single non-indigenous animal was wiped out of the UK than a single native have to die, I don't understand why a pheasant is important to the countyside.

because the countryside in part relies on the income they generate, the same as fishing,riding to hounds,stalking and various other money generating persuits.

Your correct Paulus....a multi million pound industry and its being effected by the ever increasing Buzzard. I'm out as i cant be arsed argueing about the class war thing.....thats a load of shite...

[Ratreeper 441]

which experts reckon there are too many buzzards in the UK, damaging the ecosystem? I thought it was about saving moor frickin game birds, so they can make even more money and keep paying taxes whilst shutting down the countryside to everyone else. I have no problem with game keeping but it really pisses me off with the double standards

 

What double standards? They aren't hiding the fact that the research is for the 'game industry'. So what is your point?

 

Well one example would be that apparently we can't hunt foxes with dogs anymore because it is considered cruel...unless you are protecting game birds. I consider that to be completely mental, why isn't it OK to hunt a fox for killing chickens or lambs or for sport? Then this example, no-one has raised any issues suggesting buzzards are too common and are in any way damaging the ecosystem and have been a protected species for years, with fines dealt for people killing them when they see them as a threat to pigeons etc. Yet to suggest it is OK for people to kill a protected bird because they might kill young game birds is a double standard again. It should not be one rule for those who are rich enough to release and shoot pheasants and another for those who don't own land. I don't want to stereotype pheasant hunters as all being upper class because that is bollocks, but there is so much money in the sport that they can evade the laws the rest of us get stumped with and I resent that. I would rather every single non-indigenous animal was wiped out of the UK than a single native have to die, I don't understand why a pheasant is important to the countyside.

 

Do you include Rabbits and Hares, Fallow etc in that?

 

Yep, if we could replace them with what has already been wiped out. I would much rather see red squirrels than greys, even bears and wolves if it were practical but this is all just wishful thinking and I am very happy we have rabbits & hare

I understand pheasants create billions of pounds of revenue which is why they are granted such exceptions, that is just the way it is. But I don't think it correct that money can buy laws, everyone should be able to hunt a fox to protect any animal they care to. For example a flock of rare geese was just wiped out at the zoo my gf works and they can do absolutely f**k all about it. There is no way they can keep it out, nor use most methods for obvious reasons and no success with a live trap and it is a matter of time before something else is taken.

[Ratreeper 441]

which experts reckon there are too many buzzards in the UK, damaging the ecosystem? I thought it was about saving moor frickin game birds, so they can make even more money and keep paying taxes whilst shutting down the countryside to everyone else. I have no problem with game keeping but it really pisses me off with the double standards

 

What double standards? They aren't hiding the fact that the research is for the 'game industry'. So what is your point?

 

Well one example would be that apparently we can't hunt foxes with dogs anymore because it is considered cruel...unless you are protecting game birds. I consider that to be completely mental, why isn't it OK to hunt a fox for killing chickens or lambs or for sport? Then this example, no-one has raised any issues suggesting buzzards are too common and are in any way damaging the ecosystem and have been a protected species for years, with fines dealt for people killing them when they see them as a threat to pigeons etc. Yet to suggest it is OK for people to kill a protected bird because they might kill young game birds is a double standard again. It should not be one rule for those who are rich enough to release and shoot pheasants and another for those who don't own land. I don't want to stereotype pheasant hunters as all being upper class because that is bollocks, but there is so much money in the sport that they can evade the laws the rest of us get stumped with and I resent that. I would rather every single non-indigenous animal was wiped out of the UK than a single native have to die, I don't understand why a pheasant is important to the countyside.

because the countryside in part relies on the income they generate, the same as fishing,riding to hounds,stalking and various other money generating persuits.

Your correct Paulus....a multi million pound industry and its being effected by the ever increasing Buzzard. I'm out as i cant be arsed argueing about the class war thing.....thats a load of shite...

 

Are they really making a big problem for you? Most keepers I have spoken to admit to not being their biggest fan but hate poaching and cars infinitely more, or blaming other farms for trying to lure them away

[Ideation 8,217]

which experts reckon there are too many buzzards in the UK, damaging the ecosystem? I thought it was about saving moor frickin game birds, so they can make even more money and keep paying taxes whilst shutting down the countryside to everyone else. I have no problem with game keeping but it really pisses me off with the double standards

 

I suppose you would rather it was all sold off and built on, whatever you say about game estates, at least it remains countryside and usually has something to hunt on, with permission or not.

 

Malt i think you hit the nail on the head - in todays world, being an expert and wel qualified, means f**k all next to being able to run an emotive publicity campaign. Nothing is argued on logical grounds anymore, it's all daft emotion. Perfect case in point is folk thinking the hunting ban would save hares / foxes etc from getting killed, rather than just change the method, ultimatly increasing how many get killed. Daft folk everywhere matey.

[Ideation 8,217]

which experts reckon there are too many buzzards in the UK, damaging the ecosystem? I thought it was about saving moor frickin game birds, so they can make even more money and keep paying taxes whilst shutting down the countryside to everyone else. I have no problem with game keeping but it really pisses me off with the double standards

 

What double standards? They aren't hiding the fact that the research is for the 'game industry'. So what is your point?

 

Well one example would be that apparently we can't hunt foxes with dogs anymore because it is considered cruel...unless you are protecting game birds. I consider that to be completely mental, why isn't it OK to hunt a fox for killing chickens or lambs or for sport? Then this example, no-one has raised any issues suggesting buzzards are too common and are in any way damaging the ecosystem and have been a protected species for years, with fines dealt for people killing them when they see them as a threat to pigeons etc. Yet to suggest it is OK for people to kill a protected bird because they might kill young game birds is a double standard again. It should not be one rule for those who are rich enough to release and shoot pheasants and another for those who don't own land. I don't want to stereotype pheasant hunters as all being upper class because that is bollocks, but there is so much money in the sport that they can evade the laws the rest of us get stumped with and I resent that. I would rather every single non-indigenous animal was wiped out of the UK than a single native have to die, I don't understand why a pheasant is important to the countyside.

because the countryside in part relies on the income they generate, the same as fishing,riding to hounds,stalking and various other money generating persuits.

Your correct Paulus....a multi million pound industry and its being effected by the ever increasing Buzzard. I'm out as i cant be arsed argueing about the class war thing.....thats a load of shite...

 

Are they really making a big problem for you? Most keepers I have spoken to admit to not being their biggest fan but hate poaching and cars infinitely more, or blaming other farms for trying to lure them away

 

The largest problem we have are buzzards and goshawks. Imagine you have something like 10 birds around a release pen, and they take one poult each, everyday, even if only for the first month, thats something like 300 birds, from that pen . . . . . . which is crippling.

[Ideation 8,217]

which experts reckon there are too many buzzards in the UK, damaging the ecosystem? I thought it was about saving moor frickin game birds, so they can make even more money and keep paying taxes whilst shutting down the countryside to everyone else. I have no problem with game keeping but it really pisses me off with the double standards

 

What double standards? They aren't hiding the fact that the research is for the 'game industry'. So what is your point?

 

Well one example would be that apparently we can't hunt foxes with dogs anymore because it is considered cruel...unless you are protecting game birds. I consider that to be completely mental, why isn't it OK to hunt a fox for killing chickens or lambs or for sport? Then this example, no-one has raised any issues suggesting buzzards are too common and are in any way damaging the ecosystem and have been a protected species for years, with fines dealt for people killing them when they see them as a threat to pigeons etc. Yet to suggest it is OK for people to kill a protected bird because they might kill young game birds is a double standard again. It should not be one rule for those who are rich enough to release and shoot pheasants and another for those who don't own land. I don't want to stereotype pheasant hunters as all being upper class because that is bollocks, but there is so much money in the sport that they can evade the laws the rest of us get stumped with and I resent that. I would rather every single non-indigenous animal was wiped out of the UK than a single native have to die, I don't understand why a pheasant is important to the countyside.

 

Do you know how little game / wildlife there would be if you removed all non-indigenous animals???

 

And as a counter to your last question - how come a bird of prey is so important to the countryside, as to be offered total protection and immunity, same goes for badgers. Why is it ok to kill a deer, fox, rabbit etc, but not a BOP or stripey?

[Born Hunter 17,960]

which experts reckon there are too many buzzards in the UK, damaging the ecosystem? I thought it was about saving moor frickin game birds, so they can make even more money and keep paying taxes whilst shutting down the countryside to everyone else. I have no problem with game keeping but it really pisses me off with the double standards

 

What double standards? They aren't hiding the fact that the research is for the 'game industry'. So what is your point?

 

Well one example would be that apparently we can't hunt foxes with dogs anymore because it is considered cruel...unless you are protecting game birds. I consider that to be completely mental, why isn't it OK to hunt a fox for killing chickens or lambs or for sport? Then this example, no-one has raised any issues suggesting buzzards are too common and are in any way damaging the ecosystem and have been a protected species for years, with fines dealt for people killing them when they see them as a threat to pigeons etc. Yet to suggest it is OK for people to kill a protected bird because they might kill young game birds is a double standard again. It should not be one rule for those who are rich enough to release and shoot pheasants and another for those who don't own land. I don't want to stereotype pheasant hunters as all being upper class because that is bollocks, but there is so much money in the sport that they can evade the laws the rest of us get stumped with and I resent that. I would rather every single non-indigenous animal was wiped out of the UK than a single native have to die, I don't understand why a pheasant is important to the countyside.

 

You really haven't a clue have you. You're completely going off on a tangent and still have'nt explained why buzzard population management is double standards. The hunting act is a completely separate issue brought about for very different reasons.