GROUSE SHOOTING

jeffpeps

123kingarthur it is absolutely disgusting & should not be allowed , it’s a pity the grouse don’t carry guns 🇬🇧

frenchielove

baconbutty that’s about right 😂

claire1uk

One rule for the ‘hoitty toitty’ and another for everyone else.
Talk about looking after your own!

standardbearer

123kingarthur
Yes it is disgusting along with badger baiting hare coursing dog fighting etc etc .
Funny to choose that as being ok, I suppose its because you can keep distance from one another.
I’ve seen places where small farmers grow sweetcorn to purposely let a shoot take place to earn a few bucks.
There is of course always someone who thinks they are a sportsman and killing animals is a sport.
I also agree with an earlier post about those dreadful slaughter houses.

andishdi

standardbearer I also agree with an earlier post about those dreadful slaughter houses.

I was highlighting how shooting a wild animal for food was considerably better than a farmed one that is slaughtered mechanically - from your comment it doesn’t sound like you do agree with that.

4128334

standardbearer
Hi,
The raising osf a introduced species and then released to be be shot is not a sport.
It is detrimental to Birds of prey that are shot if seen by a Gamekeepers.
Also the stamping in of eggs or chicks that nest on or near a Grouse Moor.
Time this so called sport was banned.
Don’t bring out the old chestnut that Gamekeepers are the guardians of the Countryside, nothing is further from the truth.

mijthebarber

123kingarthur this is a joke can’t believe the new rules

revjonty

andishdi I was highlighting how shooting a wild animal for food was considerably better than a farmed one

Grouse are not wild animals, they are farmed.
Wild animals are killed (not for food) in order that they don’t compete with, or eat the grouse, which are farmed, in a very wasteful manner, using inordinate amounts of resources, so that well to do blood sports enthusiasts can shoot them for pleasure.

That some of them may get eaten is not the main aim of the endeavour, it is just a way of justifying it. Some people may be easily fooled, but nobody in their right mind would pay the exorbitant costs of going grouse shooting for the dubious pleasure of eating a bird full of shot.

standardbearer

andishdi I was highlighting how shooting a wild animal for food was considerably better than a farmed one that is slaughtered mechanically - from your comment it doesn’t sound like you do agree with that

Two wrongs dont make a right.
I was also highlighting how some small farmers grow a bit of sweetcorn and earn a few bucks for a shoot.
Nothing to do with mooreland just their bit of ploughed land .
Dont agree with any killing of animals for so called sport and the land should not be exclusive for so called shoots.
They restrict and kill other animals to allow grouse to flourish to be shot.
But then humans can be arrogant selfish beings sometimes.

jedsam56

Not sure about grouse, but in my part of the country, pheasants are specially bred and reared with great care, so that the privileged elite can pay £2000 or more to come down here in their Range Rovers with their mistresses for a jolly day, shooting the pheasants for fun!

k1300gt

This is a very emotive subject and of course everyone is entitled to their opinion and that opinion once made is rarely changed. However, consider the subject further. Heather moorland is rarer than rainforest, 75% of all heather moorland world wide is found in Britain and maintained because of grouse moor management. This in turn supports over 2500 full time jobs in areas where employment is hard to find. Almost £100 million is the estimated annual value of grouse shooting n England, Wales and Scotland. Red Grouse are wild birds and cannot be reared, they are only found in the U.K. and are closely linked with heather moorland as heather is their primary food source. Without the income from shooting, moorland management would not take place taking away the birds breading grounds. The countryside that we all love does not happen by accident, it is actively managed and that management costs. Take away the income and eventually you take away the birds.

navi51

k1300gt
That is true !
Seems we are still hunter gatherers at heart 😱

revjonty

k1300gt
I think you will find that the moorland would do perfectly well without this “management” and without it the natural wildlife might have a chance of recovering.

2500 jobs, over thousands of acres of land is hardly a good economic argument. Many more people could be employed through other uses, such as wildlife safaris (only shooting the wildlife with a camera).

bob_seabrook

k1300gt do you know if there is grouse shooting in the New Forest? There is lots of heather here and it seems to do well in the infertile acid soil. I would guess that with the New Forest being also a national park that it might be unsafe to let loose those who enjoy discharging their big guns there and in the many other heather covered heathlands nearby. But I understand there are those who would and did purlieu tracts of that land for their own pleasures.

k1300gt

revjonty Grouse are not wild animals, they are farmed.
As I said, an emotive subject that can be argued forever, but Red Grouse are not farmed they are wild birds.

revjonty

navi51 Seems we are still hunter gatherers at heart 😱

Hunter gatherers, pull the other one, more like shooting fish in a barrel.

standardbearer

4128334
I agree with your post

navi51

revjonty Hunter gatherers, pull the other one, more like shooting fish in a barrel.

Afraid so, just like our ancestors dug super sized bear pits to more easily catch and kill woolly mammoths.
Humans have always used their brain power to become more efficient.

No I am not an advocate of hunting, it should be banned 🚫 at every level and the current bans should be enforced.

msmon55

123kingarthur as usual, it’s seems the rich and influencial are exempt from the rules the rest of us have to abide by… At least that is the message that this is portraying. I know they are outdoors but all the same, the rule makers should consider how the rules are perceived before they implement them.

baconbutty

Anyway how come that a a mingling of grouse shooters are exempt from the rule of six it doesn’t make any sense.

revjonty

navi51 Humans have always used their brain power to become more efficient.

But it isn’t efficient.
These so called game birds are so tame that they could be caught in a butterfly net. They have to be persuaded to fly towards the guns by armies of beaters. If it was about efficiency then they would be trapped, like the poachers do.

Shooting game is so inefficient it’s farcical.

navi51

revjonty Shooting game is so inefficient it’s farcical.

Sorry I was thinking hunting in general rather than just shooting game birds.
What I’d really like to see is the so called big game trophy Hunters having to use their bare hands to catch and kill their big cats, let them have a fighting chance instead of the big hunting magnums they cheat with.

andishdi

standardbearer They restrict and kill other animals to allow grouse to flourish to be shot.
But then humans can be arrogant selfish beings sometimes.

You mean like when a farmer ploughs a wild meadow to plant crops or raise cattle…?

Bottom line is they’re food in the place of things that were NOT food… And I’m saying that we need to stop pretending that were this not happening that the land would be a lush paradise of biodiversity rather than the farmer simply just planting something else there instead and then there’d be no grouse any way… So what’s the difference?? It’s just basic logic…