achosenman Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 it's about time the bbc sent him off on a lone trip into Africa filming a documentary about lions with just a camera and an open topped vehicle with a low tank of diesel. while wearing a Zebra steak necklace...lets not take any chances Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShootingEgg Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 They are not putting boxes up for the alien dormouse are they? I know N.E. used to run a box scheme on some stalking I had down in Somerset for our native tiny dormouse. Are you confusing the two? They are legal to hunt in Slovenia. I have a friend out there who has a superb hat made from their skins. Not sure boxes are for the edibles but they definitely use them and are chipped and put back.... For an invasive species that is causing so much destruction to just get tagged and put back is insane.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 Thought the study was in a particular wood and the boxes specifically for the edibles? As usual, Mr P very subtly using the Beeb as a platform? The other two? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 To be blunt its widely available on the global net if anyone wishes to search for it. Packham is in fact quite wrong The WWF, AEWA, & the CMS have been researching and testing Bewick Swans for 40 years and over 50% of birds tested contain lead shot not 30%. Its illegal to hunt the bird on its migration route but it still happens as it does with hundreds of other migratory species. The proportion of ingested shot is unknown however. Regional reptile studies specifically of Adders have determined that young adders regularly fall prey to various species of birds particularly Galliformes which have a propensity to scratch clear feeding areas and are extremely omnivorous. I once saw a big cock pheasant consume a 12 ins slow worm on the garden lawn. New born adders are particularly vulnerable because they hatch in September. Saying that a Adder would not think twice about wiping out a clutch of Pheasant or Partridge eggs in one sitting and I've seen this as well. Edible Dormice should be eradicated and I believe they can be trapped legally under licence by land and woodland owners if they so wish. I don't want to get into another Packham spat, but I think some of us are a bit paranoid to be honest. Most bird orientated naturalists know that Pheasants will eat small Adders whether they are reared birds or not. Fair enough. I have no objection to anyone's claims if they can be verified.On the question of swans; as long as he isn't claiming they are shot at by UK shooters I have no qualms with that either. One mans swan is simply another's goose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 Fair enough. I have no objection to anyone's claims if they can be verified. On the question of swans; as long as he isn't claiming they are shot at by UK shooters I have no qualms with that either. One mans swan is simply another's goose. It's not so much what he says, it's what he doesnt say what he stays silent on, what he leaves out and what he implies by what he leaves out, that I object to! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShootingEgg Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 Hen harriers tonight, and ilegal persecution. Only small one liners, but still little digs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawkfanz Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 best thing to do is if its a program with packham on it i dont watch that way i dont get wound up by his constant misinformation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12gauge82 Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 I wouldn't worry about packham, most of the general public are more concerned with TOWIE and selfie sticks than wildlife protection, even if he was right most people are so self absorbed they wouldn't care anyway, don't let him wind you up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adge Cutler Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 Hen harriers tonight, and ilegal persecution. Only small one liners, but still little digs. To be fair no mention of grouse shooting...and that moorland in Cumbria looked very natural. The people who are interested enough in Hen Harrier preservation to do anything about it can find all the information they need about its persecution on line so I suspect it was generally missed by your average viewer. No real harm done and I thought it was a good programme tonight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShootingEgg Posted October 26, 2016 Report Share Posted October 26, 2016 To be fair no mention of grouse shooting...and that moorland in Cumbria looked very natural. The people who are interested enough in Hen Harrier preservation to do anything about it can find all the information they need about its persecution on line so I suspect it was generally missed by your average viewer. No real harm done and I thought it was a good programme tonight. I thought it was a good programme tonight, not disputing that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NatureBoy Posted October 27, 2016 Report Share Posted October 27, 2016 Really!? He was keen to point out shooting trapping and poisoning as the cause! Failed!!! Or chose not to mention! Other winged and ground predators, disturbance by walkers/dogs, weather, prey availability/diversity and poor/reduced gene pool, or other reasons. Is supplementary feeding really a good thing? Or disturbance by monitors? NB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted October 27, 2016 Report Share Posted October 27, 2016 I think Packham realises he's urinating in the wind in his support for the attempt to get driven grouse shooting banned, and he will soon turn his snide remarks and anti shooting campaigning efforts elsewhere! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penelope Posted October 27, 2016 Report Share Posted October 27, 2016 As he is with Woodcock, Snipe and Golden Plover. I think Packham realises he's urinating in the wind in his support for the attempt to get driven grouse shooting banned, and he will soon turn his snide remarks and anti shooting campaigning efforts elsewhere! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDog Posted October 27, 2016 Report Share Posted October 27, 2016 Packham is a threat to shooting of that there is no doubt. My other concern is his continued use of sexual innuendo, whether it be the 'red hot' parts of the mating Sika stags which got him very excited or the claim that he had seen Michaela Strachan's extra large pants. There are countless other examples too. I will not say that he is another BBC employee whose private activities may be called into question but he may be another BBC employee whose private activities may be called into question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adge Cutler Posted October 27, 2016 Report Share Posted October 27, 2016 Really!? He was keen to point out shooting trapping and poisoning as the cause! Failed!!! Or chose not to mention! Other winged and ground predators, disturbance by walkers/dogs, weather, prey availability/diversity and poor/reduced gene pool, or other reasons. Is supplementary feeding really a good thing? Or disturbance by monitors? NB I never heard Packham mention Hen Harriers once..it was his colleague M C-L narrating in the 36th Minute of the programme who said "Unfortunately here in the UK Hen Harriers are the victim of illegal persecution they are shot, poisoned, trapped and their nests destroyed" he didn't in fact mention by who, but to be blunt given the adverse press of the last 10 years or so that's pretty obvious to the discerning public anyway. I'm afraid like it or not its a fact which can be backed up with hard evidence. The young lady did in fact bring the viewers attention to other predators and human interference.. That's why they had a all night vigil. Supplementary feeding was necessary to keep that chick alive due to the inexperience of its parents. That particular moor was proliferate with Meadow Pipits this season so there was no shortage of food stuffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adge Cutler Posted October 27, 2016 Report Share Posted October 27, 2016 (edited) Packham is a threat to shooting of that there is no doubt. My other concern is his continued use of sexual innuendo, whether it be the 'red hot' parts of the mating Sika stags which got him very excited or the claim that he had seen Michaela Strachan's extra large pants. There are countless other examples too. I will not say that he is another BBC employee whose private activities may be called into question but he may be another BBC employee whose private activities may be called into question. The biggest threat to Grouse shooting is grouse shooting itself.. not Packham or people like him. I would be out hunting next week with the Berkeley if the Hunts had got their house in order 10 years ago instead of just denying the cruel practices which went on and burying their heads in the sand. Sexual innuendo ? ...this forum is full of it. Edited October 27, 2016 by Adge Cutler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDog Posted October 27, 2016 Report Share Posted October 27, 2016 Adge, That was a poor comparison between anonymous posters on a small forum like PW and a man who has access to many millions of TV viewers through his work on the BBC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewluke Posted October 27, 2016 Report Share Posted October 27, 2016 Packham is a threat to shooting of that there is no doubt. My other concern is his continued use of sexual innuendo, whether it be the 'red hot' parts of the mating Sika stags which got him very excited or the claim that he had seen Michaela Strachan's extra large pants. There are countless other examples too. I will not say that he is another BBC employee whose private activities may be called into question but he may be another BBC employee whose private activities may be called into question. didn't you hear him ask if there was any "spooning" going on,he sounds like a sex starved pervert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digger Posted October 27, 2016 Report Share Posted October 27, 2016 He's a fool. A latter day Simon King who wears country gear and there fore being clad in drab green and gaiters becomes an expert. Simon King always wanted to film a stag shedding it's antlers. Never been done as far as I'm aware. So he asked the deer keeper at a famous park what the chances os a successful shot from a rifle were. ye gods Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12gauge82 Posted October 28, 2016 Report Share Posted October 28, 2016 I wouldn't worry about packham, most of the general public are more concerned with TOWIE and selfie sticks than wildlife protection, even if he was right most people are so self absorbed they wouldn't care anyway, don't let him wind you up. I take back what I said, grouse shooting might have a bigger problem than I thought https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/oct/28/grouse-shooting-estates-shored-up-by-millions-in-subsidies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canis Posted October 28, 2016 Report Share Posted October 28, 2016 Sat here in a satyrical frame of mind this morning contemplating how: Packham and the loony left will moan when a we release pheasants, a non native species into this country ( although first introduced nearly 2000 years ago )on the basis that it is detrimental to the existing species. Yet when aplied to humans it is the same loony left that wants to release millions of immigrants into this country ( and has been doing so for the last 50 years or so) despite the fact that it is detrimental to the existing species. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted October 28, 2016 Report Share Posted October 28, 2016 Sat here in a satyrical frame of mind this morning contemplating how: Packham and the loony left will moan when a we release pheasants, a non native species into this country ( although first introduced nearly 2000 years ago )on the basis that it is detrimental to the existing species. Yet when aplied to humans it is the same loony left that wants to release millions of immigrants into this country ( and has been doing so for the last 50 years or so) despite the fact that it is detrimental to the existing species. A wonderful comparison! :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVB Posted October 28, 2016 Report Share Posted October 28, 2016 I take back what I said, grouse shooting might have a bigger problem than I thought https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/oct/28/grouse-shooting-estates-shored-up-by-millions-in-subsidies The amount of subsidy is tiny in the overall scheme of things. But I am sure it will be picked upon by the anti's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
islandgun Posted October 28, 2016 Report Share Posted October 28, 2016 (edited) Removal of subsidies and grouse shooting would result in more of our native moorland being taken for forestry, (forestry would be the only land use that paid) this non native mono culture would harbour predators which in turn would predate on the dwindling upland bird species, resulting in a call from all the concerned conservationists to restore our native moorland, control predators and re-introduce upland birds sourced in Scandinavia to replenish our almost extinct grouse etc, Edited October 28, 2016 by islandgun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penelope Posted October 28, 2016 Report Share Posted October 28, 2016 Ah, but don't you see, eco-tourism would pay for all this and everything will be right with the world (Avery's one). Removal of subsidies and grouse shooting would result in more of our native moorland being taken for forestry, (forestry would be the only land use that paid) this non native mono culture would harbour predators which in turn would predate on the dwindling upland bird species, resulting in a call from all the concerned conservationists to restore our native moorlandm control predators and re-introduce upland birds sourced in Scandinavia to replenish our almost extinct grouse etc, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.