What A Waste Of Hares !!!

[TOP POACHER!! 33]

it's okay for people to blast a hare to pieces with a shotgun. But you cant chase them with a Lurcher it don't make any sense to me

[Giro 2,648]

I'm a dog man end of..

 

Wether you or I agree or disagree about the morality of shooting hares is erelevent..

 

Its lawful and coursing is not..

[desertbred 5,490]

 

 

Been discussed to death

 

Hare shoot were killing thousands way before any ban.

 

They aren`t shot because of the ban

They aren`t shot to keep poachers away

They are shot because the estate need to control numbers.

 

Some of these places shoot that many every year or two. A few caught with lurchers wouldn`t even dent that number.

 

And complaining about someone elses sport because ours is banned doesn`t sit well, and doesn`t say much about the complainers.

 

 

 

Give me dogs any day mind. Never took a gun on a hare shoot and never will.

Some one elses sport? where is the sport blasting with a 12 bore? The subject is about hares and the different points of view as to why shoots take place, Shot to control numbers in which areas ? most farmers readily admit its to keep runners of the land , the police say that running encourages other types of rural crime and attracts , drug dealers, thieves gamblers to rural areas. Lac s and Treehuggers are very vocal on hunting with dogs yet reasonably quiet on shoots , could it be a money and status thing it certainly isnt only to control numbers its far more clandestine than that.as the Hunting with dogs act and proposed amendments seem to emphasise.

Antis are just anti and you tube is awash with vids of them disturbing grouse shoots , hare drives along with hunting with hounds..

 

The AWL support lawful lurcher work and have no objections to any legal feildsports be it shooting, trapping or any form of lawful dog work.

 

Your asking someone about someone's else opinion..

 

Why don't you contact the CA Dessert bread ??

 

Are you a member of the CA ??

 

The AWL represents the lurcher and long dogs on the Board of C/A and also on the Hunting Association so its not asking some one about someone elses opinion its asking the AWL who are supposed to be a conduit for lurcher and longdog owners to the C/A and H/A what is the vIew of C/A and H/A regarding the shooting of hares in large numbers. Would you sooner members and groups just join the AWL without facts or asking questions? in view of your links withC/A and H/A?

[Flynn 314]

It is what it is DB , the law is the law, You can ask the CA their stance, its up to You. the AWL as You so rightly pointed out is govened by the COHA , to which we are accountable.

 

We can only promote legal lurcher work.

 

On a day to day basis, issues come to our door, which we act on where needed or dont ,its that simple, but when the every day Lurcer man/ woman , cannot step out of his door, without being hounded, then its a much bigger problem , one we cannot fail to address, and Your connstant nit picking fuels the *IN* house problem that the Lurcher faces.

 

I had thought that came across quite clearly when Tim Bonner went to North Yorkshire.

 

Poaching well pre dates the Hunting Act, there was no justifcation for banning the hunting of hares with dogs.

 

The Hunting Act has been with us now for 11 years, we can only forge ahead for a full repeal.

End of.

[desertbred 5,490]

It is what it is DB , the law is the law, You can ask the CA their stance, its up to You. the AWL as You so rightly pointed out is govened by the COHA , to which we are accountable.

 

We can only promote legal lurcher work.

 

On a day to day basis, issues come to our door, which we act on where needed or dont ,its that simple, but when the every day Lurcer man/ woman , cannot step out of his door, without being hounded, then its a much bigger problem , one we cannot fail to address, and Your connstant nit picking fuels the *IN* house problem that the Lurcher faces.

 

I had thought that came across quite clearly when Tim Bonner went to North Yorkshire.

 

Poaching well pre dates the Hunting Act, there was no justifcation for banning the hunting of hares with dogs.

 

The Hunting Act has been with us now for 11 years, we can only forge ahead for a full repeal.

End of.

You are in the wrong position if you think asking legitimate questions is nit picking. Its because the " Leaders" of the appointed groups dont feel the need to answer bonafide questions and are evasive in policy as to all forms of hunting leads to lack of interest from the average dog lad and apathy as to what the future holds.The Hunting with dogs Act was passed under the watch of these organisations and now the Repeal of the Act in its entirety is being bandied about when the majority of rational folk know its not going to happen and coursing as it was preban days is never coming back . How ever that is not to say every reclamation of hunting rights no matter how small should not be attempted. Mp,s judges, Magistrates, CPS and the Police adequately point out illegality within the Hunting Act The Law is the Law until it is challenged and changed, Branding sections of a community or calling legitmate questions NIT picking is narrow minded and bigoted to say the least or are only certain opinions valid ?

[Giro 2,648]

 

It is what it is DB , the law is the law, You can ask the CA their stance, its up to You. the AWL as You so rightly pointed out is govened by the COHA , to which we are accountable.

 

We can only promote legal lurcher work.

 

On a day to day basis, issues come to our door, which we act on where needed or dont ,its that simple, but when the every day Lurcer man/ woman , cannot step out of his door, without being hounded, then its a much bigger problem , one we cannot fail to address, and Your connstant nit picking fuels the *IN* house problem that the Lurcher faces.

 

I had thought that came across quite clearly when Tim Bonner went to North Yorkshire.

 

Poaching well pre dates the Hunting Act, there was no justifcation for banning the hunting of hares with dogs.

 

The Hunting Act has been with us now for 11 years, we can only forge ahead for a full repeal.

End of.

You are in the wrong position if you think asking legitimate questions is nit picking. Its because the " Leaders" of the appointed groups dont feel the need to answer bonafide questions and are evasive in policy as to all forms of hunting leads to lack of interest from the average dog lad and apathy as to what the future holds.The Hunting with dogs Act was passed under the watch of these organisations and now the Repeal of the Act in its entirety is being bandied about when the majority of rational folk know its not going to happen and coursing as it was preban days is never coming back . How ever that is not to say every reclamation of hunting rights no matter how small should not be attempted. Mp,s judges, Magistrates, CPS and the Police adequately point out illegality within the Hunting Act The Law is the Law until it is challenged and changed, Branding sections of a community or calling legitmate questions NIT picking is narrow minded and bigoted to say the least or are only certain opinions valid ?

 

 

 

DB you know the answer to your question..

 

The CA Supports hunting and feild sports (All Legal )

 

You dont like the hares were shot ..

 

I cant see where you want to go with this and noboby is being evasive.

 

You intailly asked Tim Bonners Stance, which we dont know and it would not be right to persume.

[artic 595]

"They" say the hare is in decline, is it?

 

Now perhaps in certain areas, others not so. Now if the "Hare" is in decline why on earth is it legal to allow a slaughter to happen?

 

Now this process has been going on prior to the ban, so their exuse of "thinning them out" to prevent hare coursing is absolute rubbish.

 

The massacre of these hares are purely for money. Most restaurants serve hare, you wouldn't see it on a menu 12/13yrs ago.

 

Shoot 500 and earn a nice packet.

 

Conservation...what's that?

[Giro 2,648]

Game estates are about money they are a business..

[paulus 26]

"They" say the hare is in decline, is it?

 

Now perhaps in certain areas, others not so. Now if the "Hare" is in decline why on earth is it legal to allow a slaughter to happen?

 

Now this process has been going on prior to the ban, so their exuse of "thinning them out" to prevent hare coursing is absolute rubbish.

 

The massacre of these hares are purely for money. Most restaurants serve hare, you wouldn't see it on a menu 12/13yrs ago.

 

Shoot 500 and earn a nice packet.

 

Conservation...what's that?

do you honestly believe that hare shoots are anything more than an end of season bonus in terms of revenue for the shoot, no shoot will wipe out the hare population as it would be self defeating, if coursing was still legal and the money was better than they got for shooting them, maybe dogs would be welcome, conservation takes many forms, some unpalatable but there you go,

[paulus 26]

"They" say the hare is in decline, is it?

 

Now perhaps in certain areas, others not so. Now if the "Hare" is in decline why on earth is it legal to allow a slaughter to happen?

 

Now this process has been going on prior to the ban, so their exuse of "thinning them out" to prevent hare coursing is absolute rubbish.

 

The massacre of these hares are purely for money. Most restaurants serve hare, you wouldn't see it on a menu 12/13yrs ago.

 

Shoot 500 and earn a nice packet.

 

Conservation...what's that?

FFS where you been hiding, round mushes place

[cocker 2,654]

i simply think it is totally unethical to kill that many hares, by any means, it honestly makes me feel sick,

[low plains drifter 9,467]

it's okay for people to blast a hare to pieces with a shotgun. But you cant chase them with a Lurcher it don't make any sense to me

Like every other part of the hunting act, a cluster f**k drawn up by cluster fucks

[cocker 2,654]

if i was part of that gang who shot 500 hares i wouldn't be able to sleep at night, feeling sick with guilt, if there are that many hares and the landowner doesn't want them it would have been better to legally relocate them, to an appropriate place,

[Qbgrey 3,987]

Hares down here are rarer than pink rhinos

[two crows 3,342]

my position is for coursing. as a coursing man for close to fifty years. I have never been to or condoned hare shoots, however before the ban we coursed an estate in Lincolnshire that used to have two hare shoots on two consecutive weekend's and shot close to a thousand hares, these all going to the game dealer. we always went after this had happened and had several fantastic days sport. hares in these numbers cant be supported for long before they start to suffer, and the estate finances suffer also, no amount of dog work can keep this sort of a population in check, so hate it as I most certainly do I can see the need, it is however control not sport. atb two crows