Poachers

[Crouch valley]

Im a country man through and through but that i feel that is wrong i canot see any reason for it the deer will suffer immensely unlike a fox that gets killed in a shake ive never seen a dog that can do that to a deer. This subject realy puts my back up when I hear people talking about coarseing deer infact i will be getting rid of one of my beaters because he had pride in telling me about his lurcher tacking deer I have no time for it this chap has now lost out in a fair bit of shooting through that comment.

[Go Go Gadget]

LOl, do you think that the dog is left to kill the deer its self like. Break the neck and job done. No crueler than letting a dog shake a fox all over the field

[Crouch valley]

LOl, do you think that the dog is left to kill the deer its self like. Break the neck and job done. No crueler than letting a dog shake a fox all over the field

You have hit the nail on the head how long dose the deer have to suffer befour you can get to it to dispatch it. If its a minuet or two its to long as far as im concerned. A fox killed by hounds will be dead in a split second. Why is there any need to hunt such a regal animal with dogs when there is so many stalkers who can do a much neater job of doing it with a clean kill.

[Rasher]

Im a country man through and through but that i feel that is wrong i canot see any reason for it the deer will suffer immensely unlike a fox that gets killed in a shake ive never seen a dog that can do that to a deer. This subject realy puts my back up when I hear people talking about coarseing deer infact i will be getting rid of one of my beaters because he had pride in telling me about his lurcher tacking deer I have no time for it this chap has now lost out in a fair bit of shooting through that comment.

 

With you 101% Good to read you have got shot of the bragger.

 

I have seen 3 different species of deer coursed by thieving dog men over the years. None were over in 30 seconds as claimed and these thieves knew they job back wards.

I can tell you the end result is not a pretty sight to witness for any true countryman. Its a foul and bloody deed. I have often wondered what the quality of the venisdon must be, as the muscles will be pumped full of adrenalin and lactic acid. Delicious!

[Rasher]

You have hit the nail on the head how long dose the deer have to suffer befour you can get to it to dispatch it. If its a minuet or two its to long as far as im concerned. A fox killed by hounds will be dead in a split second. Why is there any need to hunt such a regal animal with dogs when there is so many stalkers who can do a much neater job of doing it with a clean kill.

 

Arrogance,ignorance, and a callous disregard for the law and the ethical considerations of a true sportsman are the main traits of your hardened deer courser. The more that get caught, charged and convicted the better. IMO

 

Fortunately our local police forces have been targeting them with a vengeance for the last 5 years. Removing and crushing their vehicles, destroying the dogs as well as putting the thieves thru the courts.

 

Its will come as no great surprise to those that know but they are usually charged with other criminal acts following being lifted by the police. Drug dealing, handling stolen goods, vehicle theft, firearms offences, VAT evasion, insurance and VRF offences to name just a few that the last 3 lots had on their list.

[Richie10]

With you 101% Good to read you have got shot of the bragger.

 

I have seen 3 different species of deer coursed by thieving dog men over the years. None were over in 30 seconds as claimed and these thieves knew they job back wards.

I can tell you the end result is not a pretty sight to witness for any true countryman. Its a foul and bloody deed. I have often wondered what the quality of the venisdon must be, as the muscles will be pumped full of adrenalin and lactic acid. Delicious!

 

Funny how people moan about it these days but in years gone by it was a regular practice.

There was no large calibre rifles, not long ago the .22 was seen as a suitable calibre.

Now the most natural way to take a deer is seen as the worst thing in the world. Shooting isn't always instant death with liver shots and low shots on deer. There is little difference in killing a deer either way, the result is death and both traumatic but to eat them it has to be done.

As for the meat tasting good, why do people hang deer?

Pretty sight? I guess watching a cheetah chase a Gazelle upsets you aswell? They even dub the sound to make sure people aren't upset by the noise of the gazelle being caught, its just as natural(man is part of nature).

You could argue any part of the sports of being cruel, even pigeon shooting, that's what Anti's are for.

 

Are you trying to fish for some cheap stalking after your last post about how stalking is too expensive?

How much experience do you have of deer stalking or any country pursuits?

[Rasher]

Lets deal with this one point at a time.

 

[Funny how people moan about it these days but in years gone by it was a regular practice.]

So was bear baiting, slavery, beating children with canes and burning catholics or protestents at the stake depending upon your religious conviction. Society had evolved, attitudes have changed and the error of our ways due to ignorance have become apparent

 

[There was no large calibre rifles, not long ago the .22 was seen as a suitable calibre.]

Large calibre rifles have been around for 150 years give or take a few years. The .22 is still considered suitable, it is perfectly legal t shoot roe in Scotland with a .22 calibre centerfire rifle and it is perfectly legal to shoot CWD and Muntjac with one in England and Wales. In many parts of the world the harvesting of deer with solid slug and a shotgun widely practised and well thought of. IIRC there was a recent report of an alaskan hunter shooting and killing a polar bear with a .22 r/f. Not ideal but if that's all you have and you life is in danger I guess you use what tools you have. Just because it can be done does not automatically infer that it should be done.

 

[Now the most natural way to take a deer is seen as the worst thing in the world.]

Natural? What natural about it? A house cat will play with a mouse or a small bird that it has caught, the cat doesn't need to eat it to stay alive as its well feed by its owner, people say its the cats natural instinct, but never the less it is still cruel.

 

[shooting isn't always instant death with liver shots and low shots on deer. There is little difference in killing a deer either way, the result is death and both traumatic but to eat them it has to be done.]

The big difference is no one deliberately sets out to liver shoot a deer. Deer courser deliberately set out to chase, distress and kill a deer. That makes for a huge difference. IMO

 

[As for the meat tasting good, why do people hang deer?]

Illegal deer coursers have to due to the distress caused, the adrenalin and lactic acid build up.

 

[Pretty sight? I guess watching a cheetah chase a Gazelle upsets you aswell? They even dub the sound to make sure people aren't upset by the noise of the gazelle being caught, its just as natural(man is part of nature).]

A cheetah chasing a gazelle is nature, No gazelle chasing means the cheetah starves. Illegal deer coursers wouldn't starve neither would their lurchers. Cheetahs do what comes naturally. The chasing deer with lurchers is done at the behest of the owner or owners, at time and place determined by that owner or owners for the pleasure of that owner or owner or for profitable gain. Apart from the fact that the pursued is chased by the pursuer I can see no commonality behind the two acts.

 

[You could argue any part of the sports of being cruel, even pigeon shooting, that's what Anti's are for.]

The setting out to caused deliberate distress thru the act of giving prolonged chase kind of sets coursing apart from other legitimate sports. Wouldn't you say?

The "sport" of coursing has always made great noise about the giving of "law" to a selected beast, in order for that quarry to be given a sporting chance. e.g. in order to prolong the chase! Where is the "sport" in that claimed blink of an eye dash and grab that some have now tried to use to justify their cruelty?

 

[Are you trying to fish for some cheap stalking after your last post about how stalking is too expensive?]

The relevance to this discusson of that rather facile question is what precisely? In short I have no need to go fish, I have plenty.

 

[How much experience do you have of deer stalking or any country pursuits?]

Would 50 years of stalking, country sports and professional employment experience be enough? How about 5 years ? An clear and unequivocal understanding of what is right and what is wrong, what is cruel, what is natural and what is acceptable in todays society requires how many years experience in your view?

Edited December 27, 2010 by Rasher

[Crouch valley]

well put Rasher at least there are some true country men about. My uncle was head keeper on a large estate in essex with a large amount of deer on we encountered many ****** coursing hares and deer they also thought it was ok fortunately the police are on our side. It seems you just carnt educate this type of person

[Richie10]

The evolution of society has come to a point where people have no connection and are totally ingnorant of the way meat is brought to the table. It is now at a point where people consider killing animals being cruel while themselves eating meat. Is that civilisation?

Nature is cruel, that's the way it works. Whether a stalking deliberately shoots a deer in the liver or not the intention is to bring the animal down, he isn't there to make sure he isn't being cruel.

 

We all make moral judgement and it based on individual ideals, people go game shooting for the challenging shots not for the welfare of harvesting the bird without cruelty, if they were worried about that they would shoot them on the ground.

 

All you doing is pick and choosing what you individually think is right.

 

When Deer and hare coursing were legal, which was in daytime, an animal has a sporting chance of escape.

 

I am not hypocrital to which Country pursuit I followed/follow, they can all be seen as wrong and cruel in each way.

Not sure how you cannot say working with a dog isn't natural, did humans arrive on this planet from Mars?

[Richie10]

well put Rasher at least there are some true country men about. My uncle was head keeper on a large estate in essex with a large amount of deer on we encountered many ****** coursing hares and deer they also thought it was ok fortunately the police are on our side. It seems you just carnt educate this type of person

 

I guess you cannot educate the upper classes either who considered coursing as noble sport or the Government that used to rise in parliment to hear the results of the Waterloo cup.

Funny how people talk about coursing as if it was only done by ****** when it was a big event in the calendar and was enjoyed by both men and women.

There was always an equal mix of women and men on the events I used to go in the eighties and always a vet on hand to care for injuries.

[Rasher]

It seems you just carnt educate this type of person

 

In order to be educated requires a number of things. Sufficient intellect, and a willingness to be eductated being just 2 of the requirements.

 

There none so blind as those who will not see...........

Edited December 27, 2010 by Rasher

[Rasher]

[The evolution of society has come to a point where people have no connection and are totally ingnorant of the way meat is brought to the table. It is now at a point where people consider killing animals being cruel while themselves eating meat.Is that civilisation?]

You're now confusing the illegal coursing of deer with the inevitable society consciousness changes that stem from western society's move from an agrarian based population to an urban based population. If you are going to try grasp at such slender staws to try and bolster your arguemnet then please at least attempt to under stand the mechanics behind those changes

 

[Nature is cruel, that's the way it works. Whether a stalking deliberately shoots a deer in the liver or not the intention is to bring the animal down, he isn't there to make sure he isn't being cruel.]

True nature is sometime cruel in the eyes of humans, It is also incredibly beautiful, complex, and interdependent. Its obvious that you have little or no idea behind the motivations of a legitimate deer stalker. First and foremost his considerations are for the welfare of his intended quarry. He there fore does everything in his powers to ensure that his quarry is dispatched in the quickest, cleanest manner possible. Unlike illegal deer coursers!

 

[We all make moral judgement and it based on individual ideals, people go game shooting for the challenging shots not for the welfare of harvesting the bird without cruelty, if they were worried about that they would shoot them on the ground.]

 

Seeking to justify you actions by wagging the finger at those who participate in legitimate sports such as game shooting and claiming that moral judgements require them to forgo their well defined ethical considerations in order to provide you with some life line of debate is both ridiculous and juvenile.

 

[All you doing is pick and choosing what you individually think is right.]

Wrong!Especially if that choice is founded on the total misunderstanding of the fundamental influencing criteria

 

[When Deer and hare coursing were legal, which was in daytime, an animal has a sporting chance of escape.]

Questionable ethics have lone been a matter of discussion. The giving of "law" to a chosen quarry does not detract from the fundamental considerations of whether the chosen method of hunting, capture and dispatch provides as stress free and as humane a means of securing that animals demise as possible.

 

[i am not hypocrital to which Country pursuit I followed/follow, they can all be seen as wrong and cruel in each way.

Not sure how you cannot say working with a dog isn't natural, did humans arrive on this planet from Mars?]

There is nothing hypocritical about the realisation that the coursing of deer causes stress, distress and cruelty to the deer.

[Rasher]

[i guess you cannot educate the upper classes either who considered coursing as noble sport or the Government that used to rise in parliment to hear the results of the Waterloo cup.]

As with all things. Society and those within that society move on, become more aware of the impact of their decisions, and choose to modify their views. We would still be sending childen to work down the mines if that were not so. Or stoning women to death having been falsely accused of adultery

 

[Funny how people talk about coursing as if it was only done by ****** when it was a big event in the calendar and was enjoyed by both men and women.]

Funny how its always the ***** types you see out poaching deer with dogs.

 

 

[There was always an equal mix of women and men on the events I used to go in the eighties and always a vet on hand to care for injuries.]

And your point is??

[Richie10]

We all make moral judgement and it based on individual ideals, people go game shooting for the challenging shots not for the welfare of harvesting the bird without cruelty, if they were worried about that they would shoot them on the ground.]

 

Seeking to justify you actions by wagging the finger at those who participate in legitimate sports such as game shooting and claiming that moral judgements require them to forgo their well defined ethical considerations in order to provide you with some life line of debate is both ridiculous and juvenile.

 

 

You are assuming that I do it, which I don't. I am just questioning your attack on something that less than a decade ago was totally legal.

When you actually make a point I will be able to discuss this with you. Well defined ethical considerations??? You are know clutching at straws, people that particpate in country sports would different considerations to people who refrain.

You atually just part of the Sheeple believing what is dictated to you must be correct.

 

There are no defined dynamics to the way people have changed as society have moved from the country to cities, it is defined by education. An example, my father was born on the Isle of Dogs and his parents used to keep goats, rabbits and chickens in their back garden to grow and eat. This was normal in the East End at that time, but not it isn't, nothing to do with moving to cities, it's the way education and media has swayed views.

Children these days are being taught by soft Lefties that bring their views to the classroom and you sound like one.

[Richie10]

[i guess you cannot educate the upper classes either who considered coursing as noble sport or the Government that used to rise in parliment to hear the results of the Waterloo cup.]

As with all things. Society and those within that society move on, become more aware of the impact of their decisions, and choose to modify their views. We would still be sending childen to work down the mines if that were not so. Or stoning women to death having been falsely accused of adultery

 

[Funny how people talk about coursing as if it was only done by ****** when it was a big event in the calendar and was enjoyed by both men and women.]

Funny how its always the ***** types you see out poaching deer with dogs.

 

 

[There was always an equal mix of women and men on the events I used to go in the eighties and always a vet on hand to care for injuries.]

And your point is??

 

 

The more you write the more you sound like an anti, comparing the way that people treat animals to the way they treat people?? How can you say hare coursing is the same as stoning a women? The Hare was born to run away from predators, why would they be stressed? Do pregnant Hares abort if chased by a fox?

You are equating animals as having the same intelligence and concepts as humans. Animals live their lives 'stressed' that is how they keep alive, we do not have that pressure and cannot equate their feelings to ours. So when you call it cruel you are basing it on your personal belief that humans and animals are the same.

 

'There is nothing hypocritical about the realisation that the coursing of deer causes stress, distress and cruelty to the deer.'

 

Therefore we should remove predators that cause this stress as well? Where has it been outlined to you that deer deserve more respect to them than a rat or fox?

Don't skirt round the issue, why is right to take sporting shots on Pheasants but not on Deer? Is one worth more to you than the other? Whether it being legal or not is not the question.

 

My point is that a wide spectrum of society enjoyed working their dogs from the Upper class and lower class, across sexes. Now Country pursuits are becoming more restricted to people that can afford it.

 

So now coursing is banned, I am sure you will go on to attack ferreting, I bet the rabbit must be stressed being chased by a ferret, also they don't kill them outright either....

[Rasher]

[We all make moral judgement and it based on individual ideals, people go game shooting for the challenging shots not for the welfare of harvesting the bird without cruelty, if they were worried about that they would shoot them on the ground.]

True! we all make moral judgements. Hopefully those judgements are based upon clear, well defined, and educated considerations. Poeple go game shooting for a wide number of reasons. Howevr not a single one of them goes with the desire or knowledge that they will deliberately set out to pursue the quarry by first causing it distress and then having to dispatching it by cutting its throat. Until deer coursing.

 

[You are assuming that I do it, which I don't. I am just questioning your attack on something that less than a decade ago was totally legal.]

I disagreed with it then just as I disagree with it now. The taking of deer with lurchers is cruel, unnecessary and barbaric. I disagree with bullfighting also, but its still legal in Spain and other latin american countries, But the growing tide of public discontent, and awareness of the cruelties involved will inevitably see its end.

 

[When you actually make a point I will be able to discuss this with you. Well defined ethical considerations??? You are know clutching at straws, people that particpate in country sports would different considerations to people who refrain.]

That would depend entirely upon the reason why they refrain. I participate in many country sports, yet I refrain for participating in several as well.

 

[You atually just part of the Sheeple believing what is dictated to you must be correct.]

Far from it. In fact its quite to opposite. However I'm not so blind or idiotic as to think that just because once something was legal that it necessarily made it moral or ethical.

 

[There are no defined dynamics to the way people have changed as society have moved from the country to cities, it is defined by education. An example, my father was born on the Isle of Dogs and his parents used to keep goats, rabbits and chickens in their back garden to grow and eat. This was normal in the East End at that time, but not it isn't, nothing to do with moving to cities, it's the way education and media has swayed views.]

Rubbish! It was all to do with necessity in your father and grand fathers time. Those individual needs have changed, society has changed. Education and the media don't divorce people from the realities of where meat comes from.

 

[Children these days are being taught by soft Lefties that bring their views to the classroom and you sound like one.]

If by that you mean that I sound like I have a clear and concise view of what formulates a modern ethical and moral view point in regards to the unnecessary distress and inevitable cruelty caused by the illegal taking of deer by dogs then I'm a soft leftie . Thank you. Perhaps you would do well to stop hankering for a return of the past and realise that errors in judgement happen and they happened to our predecessors more often than we care to acknowledge sometimes.

[Rasher]

{The more you write the more you sound like an anti, comparing the way that people treat animals to the way they treat people?? How can you say hare coursing is the same as stoning a women? The Hare was born to run away from predators, why would they be stressed? Do pregnant Hares abort if chased by a fox?]

But or cruel, are they not, both are illegal in this country, are they not, both have become so thanks to the enlighten decisions of a free society, have they not? Have you ever seen a fox chase a hare? It doesn't happen my fevered mind friend. The death due to stress of coursed but escaping hares has been well documented. However rest assured I am no anti field sports campaigner.

 

[You are equating animals as having the same intelligence and concepts as humans. Animals live their lives 'stressed' that is how they keep alive, we do not have that pressure and cannot equate their feelings to ours. So when you call it cruel you are basing it on your personal belief that humans and animals are the same.]If thru my chosen actions I cause or necessitate to happen cruelty whether the animal its elf is capable of determining that act as cruelty is neither here nor there. I and I along have the moral and ethical obligation to ensure that it doesn't happen. Its call freedom of choice.

 

'There is nothing hypocritical about the realisation that the coursing of deer causes stress, distress and cruelty to the deer.'

 

{Therefore we should remove predators that cause this stress as well? Where has it been outlined to you that deer deserve more respect to them than a rat or fox?]

All animals deserve our respect. Regardless of their species. Its hard to respect a cockroach that happens to live under your fridge I know!

 

[Don't skirt round the issue, why is right to take sporting shots on Pheasants but not on Deer? Is one worth more to you than the other? Whether it being legal or not is not the question.]

I'm not and never have said that its not right to taking sporting shots at pheasant or deer. I don't have a problem with the ethical or moral considerations in regards to sporting shots.

 

[My point is that a wide spectrum of society enjoyed working their dogs from the Upper class and lower class, across sexes. Now Country pursuits are becoming more restricted to people that can afford it.]

Fact.Country pursuits have never been more widely available. So I can see litlle of merit in your argument thus far.

 

[so now coursing is banned, I am sure you will go on to attack ferreting, I bet the rabbit must be stressed being chased by a ferret, also they don't kill them outright either....]

Oh dear! Now we are being overly dramatic. As with some of your previous observations and comments I am being to suspect that your views are based on little that might be deem of substance.

 

So lets get this thread back on track.

 

Do you support the illegal poaching of deer thru the use of dogs or by any other means?

 

A simple yes or no with suffice.

[Richie10]

'Education and the media don't divorce people from the realities of where meat comes from.'

 

Do you actually believe that? You have all your ideas wrapped up in concepts brought about some lecturer sitting about dreaming something up. We are shielded by the media from seeing death in nature, nature programs do not show the reality.

 

'True! we all make moral judgements. Hopefully those judgements are based upon clear, well defined, and educated considerations. Poeple go game shooting for a wide number of reasons. Howevr not a single one of them goes with the desire or knowledge that they will deliberately set out to pursue the quarry by first causing it distress and then having to dispatching it by cutting its throat.'

 

Beating pheasants out of the woods into a line of guns, based from your previous arguments, it would be driving people into a firing squad, is it the fact you believe that pheasants do not deserved the respect you give to deer?

People do go in the knowledge that there is cruelty involved otherwise they would be hypocritcal to shoot at birds in the first place. Dogs are brought in to pick up the runners(notice the concept here) which will either be killed by the dog or by a chap breaking their necks, i'm sure there is stress related to them being chased.

What you are saying is that it is OK to do it to one animal but not the other, I can imagine that being peppered by shot in the back end or wing shot off is not at all stressful.

You cannot argue the choice that one is cruel but the other isn't, so you admit to being a leftie and will be pushing for Labour to come back in and put the nail in the coffin of shooting as well.

 

So back to ferreting...

[Rasher]

[Do you actually believe that? You have all your ideas wrapped up in concepts brought about some lecturer sitting about dreaming something up.]

Yes I do believe that. I wouldn't have written it if I didn't! So the Kill it, Cook It ,eat it series was based upon what? I haven't attended a lecture in over 35 years. What you read is all my own work

 

[We are shielded by the media from seeing death in nature, nature programs do not show the reality.]

That would depend entirely upon the nature of the media t which you expose yourself or are exposed too. The Kill it, Cook It Eat it wild game meat and farmed meat series were based upon some fantasy where they?

 

[beating pheasants out of the woods into a line of guns, based from your previous arguments, it would be driving people into a firing squad, is it the fact you believe that pheasants do not deserved the respect you give to deer?

People do go in the knowledge that there is cruelty involved otherwise they would be hypocritcal to shoot at birds in the first place. Dogs are brought in to pick up the runners(notice the concept here) which will either be killed by the dog or by a chap breaking their necks, i'm sure there is stress related to them being chased.}

Ah I see the old lack of knowledge coming to the fore fromnt again. Don't let the terminologuy " runner" fool you into thinking that a merry chase is involved in their recovery into the game bag.

 

[You cannot argue the choice that one is cruel but the other isn't, so you admit to being a leftie and will be pushing for Labour to come back in and put the nail in the coffin of shooting as well.]

The agruemnet is regarding deliberate intent. Game shooter do not to the best of my knowledge set out with deliberate intent to cause stress or crulty unlike those who chose to course deer with dogs. That's the fundamental consideration that you have yet to address. All that you have posted so far is simply a smoke screen to divert attention away from your inability to address that consideration in an ethical and moral way.

 

So back to the illegal taking of deer with the use of dogs.....anything to say on that debate?

Edited December 27, 2010 by Rasher

[Richie10]

How can you say Country sports are more widely availiable when you have just been complaining about prices of deer stalking which infact restricts people from stalking? You are contradicting yourself. Where is pheasant shooting cheap? Ferreting permission is less these days as gassing rabbits is tax deductable.

 

How can you be a supporter of fieldsports, you are supporter of shooting only.

 

 

[so now coursing is banned, I am sure you will go on to attack ferreting, I bet the rabbit must be stressed being chased by a ferret, also they don't kill them outright either....]

Oh dear! Now we are being overly dramatic. As with some of your previous observations and comments I am being to suspect that your views are based on little that might be deem of substance.

 

You cannot seem to answer this, over dramatic?? Tell me what is the difference, is it just because is doesn't have the same impact as Deer?

So far you have only said nothing of substance to support your argument, you have said on is cruel because you personally think it is, but what you do is fine and because you don't mean to be cruel that's OK then.

The fact is in times of coursing there was more hares, you would have thought that they would have been extinct with your beliefs if they all died after being chased!

If you really believe that foxes don't take Hares then you are dreaming, I bet you think that foxes don't take fawns either.

Why do you think that Hare developed to live in the open and developed to run? That's it to drop dead after something chases it. You need to get your head out of the research done by lefties, there was more Hares when people were allowed to course, now they are trying to save them from dissappearing! Too many people shooting them, it's not sporting to shoot a Hare.

[Richie10]

Kill it Cook it was always put on at a late hour during the week, not prime time watching.

One series cannot be seen as bringing the public up to speed. It is not like America where these progammes are on regularly and people don't have to hide any shot game in case they upset the public.

 

The deliberate attempt to cause cruelty. Taking deer with dogs is about taking the deer down quickly, never about the chase, Hare coursing is about the chase, a hole in your limited argument.

People took deer with dogs for hundreds of years for meat and they didn't go out to deliberately cause cruelty but to get something to eat.

It was in practice until money has started to get involved with leases and paid stalking came in. I know people that have been in stalking for decades, they were paid to shoot deer on FC land in the highlands, they would be told to take down as many deer as possible, in and out of season. They would have to fire on many deer as possible, 'pinning' deer as well, I guess because it is with a gun it's fine and ethically moral because it is a government agency telling them to do it.

 

Tracking dogs for deer ares recommended, where it is legally allowed for the dog to take down deer it it is badly shot there is no issue with the dog killing the deer either. The reason is because bad shots are inevitable.

 

To deliberate cause cruelty would be baiting, people never baited deer, people took deer to eat the same as a deer stalker, who does it for the thrill, the meat and sometimes the trophy. People do not go into deer stalking because they believe that their calling in life is to control the deer population for the benefit of deer.

[Rasher]

[How can you say Country sports are more widely availiable when you have just been complaining about prices of deer stalking which infact restricts people from stalking? You are contradicting yourself. Where is pheasant shooting cheap? Ferreting permission is less these days as gassing rabbits is tax deductable.]

 

I say because its true! Regardless of the costs, regardless of the fact that gassing is tax deductible. More people have access to country sports that they did 10 years ago. BASC, the CA, the SACS all have growing membership numbers, the various Game Fairs and country shows all have growing attendances.Where are all of the people coming from if not from growing numbers of participants in field sports

 

[How can you be a supporter of fieldsports, you are supporter of shooting only.]

 

You tell me? I have never claimed to support only the shooting.

 

[You cannot seem to answer this, over dramatic?? Tell me what is the difference, is it just because is doesn't have the same impact as Deer?

So far you have only said nothing of substance to support your argument, you have said on is cruel because you personally think it is, but what you do is fine and because you don't mean to be cruel that's OK then.]

I suggest you look back thru my posts to yo on this thread you will see clearly that I have answered your question. Its not only me that says its cruel. A simple fact that you have yet to grasp.Trying to compare the coursing of deer to pheasant shooting on a moral or ethical comparison. Shows your lack of understanding and the futility of your arguement.

 

[The fact is in times of coursing there was more hares, you would have thought that they would have been extinct with your beliefs if they all died after being chased!

If you really believe that foxes don't take Hares then you are dreaming, I bet you think that foxes don't take fawns either.]

Again you lack of basic knowledge is making you make claims that are simply not true. During the late 70's thru the 80's and into the 90's the european brown hare was a very rare sight across many part of the british agricultural landscape In fact the was talk of a possible extinction in many parts of the country The GC even conducted an extensive field trail in order to try and determine why such a dramatic decline had take place. All this whilst hare coursing was legal. In fact I can recall a number of very prominent hare coursing meets having to be cancelLed due to the LACK OF HARES. there was even talk of the Waterloo cup having a shortage! I didn't say that foxes don't predate on hares. What I said is you'll never see a fox course one.There is a distinct difference between the first and the later.

 

[Why do you think that Hare developed to live in the open and developed to run? That's it to drop dead after something chases it. You need to get your head out of the research done by lefties, there was more Hares when people were allowed to course, now they are trying to save them from dissappearing! Too many people shooting them, it's not sporting to shoot a Hare.]

 

:lol: You obviously haven't got a clue, have you.

 

So Lets see how you fare with this one.

 

Do you support the illegal poaching of deer thru the use of dogs or by any other means?

 

A simple yes or no with suffice.

[Hezbear]

None were over in 30 seconds as claimed and these thieves knew they job back wards.

I can tell you the end result is not a pretty sight to witness for any true countryman.

I said the course can be over in as little as 30 seconds not they were over in 30 seconds. Seeing deer and fox wounded by incompetent shooters is not a pretty sight to witness either. I have old deer coursing footage where the courses have been over in less than 30 seconds but I wouldn't put it up on any forum. I only used to run deer during the day so they had a SPORTING chance of escape. I hate the people who course deer at night in the same way as I hate the crop drivers and farm thieves.

[Richie10]

I suggest you look back thru my posts to yo on this thread you will see clearly that I have answered your question. Its not only me that says its cruel. A simple fact that you have yet to grasp.Trying to compare the coursing of deer to pheasant shooting on a moral or ethical comparison. Shows your lack of understanding and the futility of your arguement.

 

It shows that you have no argument, tell me why it is ok to pursue one animal for food and not the other.

Pheasant shoots are for sporting shots, Deer coursing is for meat and control(when it was legal).

How can you argue is it that it is moral and ethical to breed a bird foreign to this land to put infront of guns for the purpose of a sporting shot but not to take a deer for meat which is seen as a pest?

 

I support LEGAL deer coursing, not ILLEGAL deer coursing.

 

So basically because other people think it is cruel so do you.

 

I have no problem with any shooting, but cannot see how one is justified over the other. It is fine to chase birds into a line of guns but cannot chase a deer which has got a good chance of escape without injury.

[Rasher]

[The deliberate attempt to cause cruelty. Taking deer with dogs is about taking the deer down quickly, never about the chase, Hare coursing is about the chase, a hole in your limited argument.}

So wheres the sport in attempting to take a deer down quickly? If the sport is in the chaes for one its in the chase for all surely? Otherwise the whole agruemnet in favour is based upon a flawed premise. You can't have your cake and eat .

 

[People took deer with dogs for hundreds of years for meat and they didn't go out to deliberately cause cruelty but to get something to eat.

It was in practice until money has started to get involved with leases and paid stalking came in. I know people that have been in stalking for decades, they were paid to shoot deer on FC land in the highlands, they would be told to take down as many deer as possible, in and out of season. They would have to fire on many deer as possible, 'pinning' deer as well, I guess because it is with a gun it's fine and ethically moral because it is a government agency telling them to do it.]

Your starting to clutch at straws again young man. Just because something was once done out of necessity or mistaken belief doesn't make that same thing anyless cruel or any the less unnecessary today. Just because some some acted in a said way in regards to a certain activity doesn't therefore automatically make your chosen activity justifiable , moral or ethical. You have to stand up and be counterd in your own right not try and hidde behingd what some else might have done or not done.

 

[Tracking dogs for deer ares recommended, where it is legally allowed for the dog to take down deer it it is badly shot there is no issue with the dog killing the deer either. The reason is because bad shots are inevitable.]

Reasonable and considerate stalkers always try to ensure the minimum of suffering to their intended quarry. Deer dogs are simpley part of that consideration. Bad shots are not inevitable. Cruelty thru the use of lurchers to take deer is. That is where the fundamental flaw in your argument lies.

 

[To deliberate cause cruelty would be baiting, people never baited deer, people took deer to eat the same as a deer stalker, who does it for the thrill, the meat and sometimes the trophy. People do not go into deer stalking because they believe that their calling in life is to control the deer population for the benefit of deer.]

Your talking rubbish yet again. The deliberate causing of cruelty does not rely upon the act of baiting. Neither is it negated because some people took deer by that method for eating. Stalkers stalk deer for a number of reason, none of which necessitate the chasing and pulling down of a deer by a dog. An act which is cruel!

So deer poachers poach deer because it is their calling in life and they do it for the benefit of the deer population? Where did you dream that one up or did you get it out of a Xmas cracker?

Edited December 27, 2010 by Rasher