**** ******* Facebook bad news?

[markm]

Let me start by saying I’m not a fan, but I do follow him on Facebook.  Just wonder if anyone had heard any ‘factual information’ in the things below.

 

He has a discussion running relating to ‘big bags’.  Apparently, so the claims go the BBC is preparing a programme on a big estate in wales who have bought an incinerator  and another claim is they have spent a year with a ‘big bag’ shoot in Yorkshire.  

[Ultrastu]

Well I'm lost 

[ant.mass]

Me To

[ShootingEgg]

Not hard guys.. 

  Cp on shot birds being burned or buried.. Hence why this months basc mag had an article about big bags.. 

 

Also matkm is right, there are rumours about panarama filming it happening. God help us if true

[Snoozer]

Yep count me in, Clear as MUD

[Dougy]

Heard about it in the local pub.

I think he's  on about Phil Taylor getting knocked out of the darts.

[Lloyd90]

17 minutes ago, Dougy said:

Heard about it in the local pub.

I think he's  on about Phil Taylor getting knocked out of the darts.

It's all fun until they show hundred's of birds burned or thrown in a pit... then get it all over the media asking for a ban 

[Tford]

The big commercial shoots will ruin our sport unless they have an effective way of using all shot game.

I can’t think of a more pointless sport than shooting so many birds on one day that you can’t remember the spectacular shots and awful misses at the end of the shoot. Yet alone the detrimental impact on pub banter!

[Mungler]

I understand the message. I just don’t like the ‘do as I say, not as I do’ preaching from the chap in question.

 

[simjakcal]

is this the guy who has the initials M Y ?

[Mungler]

I would guess so 

[Hamster]

Yes I do follow him on FB, don't agree with everything he says but with shooting matters more often than not he's on the money. If these reports about an impending "investigative piece" (demonising) on game shooting are true then brace yourselves, just as I had warned. 

If they manage to uncover actual footage of incinerators burning creatures  then those who said things such as "it's a business so what" will need to start sharpening their debating skills. 

Edited January 9, 2018 by Hamster

[wymberley]

There's going to be trouble at t' mill.

[Salopian]

Can I just say that I am totally against 'BIG' days . I have loaded on many and it really is no fun watching idiots shooting unsporting birds just because they are in the air .

But if commercial shoots rear the birds and present them and the Guns are prepared to shoot them and pay for them what is the solution?

Better promotion of healthy food , marketing and advertising will go a long way to showing the consumer the benefits of healthy eating , but we need to do that ourselves , The Green Party will not be doing it for us .

Do you have any idea how many chickens are incinerated in the production of chicken for the Supermarkets ? A vast amount . But it is not publicised . 

Chicken are not shot by 'Sportsmen' and that is the real issue in society .

 Pheasant and Game shooting pursued by  chinless toffs rampaging through the countryside with guns is how the Press portray us .

On a brighter note perhaps any programme aired may mention the number of jobs created in rural communities by shooting sports .

One in mid Wales employs many in its local community , rearing staff , gamekeepers, beaters , pickers up , loaders , hotel staff , chefs , maids, building trade workers for property building and renovation,  owns a Pub and staffs it , Country store , General store . Thank you Gwynn.

[Mungler]

It’s all about the demonisation of Shooting and the underlying class war against Shooting - we all live in castles, ride horses, drive range rovers and chase foxes don’t you know.

There’s plenty of PETA clips flying round the internet of KFC-esque raised chickens that don’t make the grade going into industrial shredders but no one cares because the majority like a cheeky Kentucky. 

This is different because of the perception of shooters and shooting.

 

[grrclark]

Slightly off topic, but related.

Despite the obvious anti shooting agenda of some very vocal public faces and the associated emotionally driven baying mob behind them that either have class prejudice or see nature through Disney tinted glasses our law makers are never particularly keen on yielding to the demands of baying mobs.

If you give in to one baying mob then it sets a very big precedent and also emboldens the other groups with agendas that are maybe much less to the government's taste to legislate against.

Despite the rhetoric and emotional diatribe by the anti shooting community, and that is all it really is, there are very many sound economic and conservation arguments in favour of shooting and that is ultimately what drives policy.  There may well come a time when there is some policy interference and that might impact upon the big bag days, but I absolutely cannot see any active move to outlaw game shooting in entirety.

[Dunkield]

This in some ways harks back to the anti foxhunting debates, where the vast majority of the general public see the 'sport' as just toffs on horseback.

Driven game shooting is expensive, there is no getting away from that, but it isn't just the aristocracy who have money these days. 

Like Mungler has already said breaking this down for driven shooting is one of the first challenges.

I beat on a commercial shoot and have done for years, so like Salopian I have seen all sorts come and shoot, sure some less able guns take birds that to an experienced shot would be considered a bit low or unsporting, but if that is the limit of their capability, the shot is safe and the bird is still edible I don't see any issue with it. I have seen hundreds of guns have their first ever day in the field and they have all gone away to spread the word to friends and family about what a great time they had. They are now sent away with oven ready birds from the previous weeks shoot  (in simple terms) this provides the link between what they have been doing and the end result. Little touches like that help, in my opinion very few people having their first foray into game shooting want birds in feather to deal with when they get home.

 

[grrclark]

29 minutes ago, Dunkield said:

This in some ways harks back to the anti foxhunting debates, where the vast majority of the general public see the 'sport' as just toffs on horseback.

It is a similar argument in many respects, but I think there is a considerable difference in terms of the defendable position of driven game shooting, even big bag days, versus mounted fox hunting.

I am entirely ambivalent about mounted fox hunts, but I confess I have not seen a comprehensive compelling argument in favour of it, however game shooting in general is a rural industry with demonstrable economic and positive social impact benefits that extend far beyond those wielding the guns.

For the government banning mounted fox hunting, aside from upsetting and possibly alienating a chunk of the electorate, provided a bigger public perception win than any meaningful negative impact as a consequence.  I don't believe the same would be true for game shooting.

[wymberley]

1 hour ago, grrclark said:

Slightly off topic, but related.

Despite the obvious anti shooting agenda of some very vocal public faces and the associated emotionally driven baying mob behind them that either have class prejudice or see nature through Disney tinted glasses our law makers are never particularly keen on yielding to the demands of baying mobs.

If you give in to one baying mob then it sets a very big precedent and also emboldens the other groups with agendas that are maybe much less to the government's taste to legislate against.

Despite the rhetoric and emotional diatribe by the anti shooting community, and that is all it really is, there are very many sound economic and conservation arguments in favour of shooting and that is ultimately what drives policy.  There may well come a time when there is some policy interference and that might impact upon the big bag days, but I absolutely cannot see any active move to outlaw game shooting in entirety.

If the general population was as gullible as is often inferred on here, could someone explain to me why when given the opposing evidence from both sides they are deemed capable of coming to such a conclusion which provides a sufficient base on which to provide a decision of guilt or innocence. Our problem is that the jury seldom, if ever, is presented fairly with our case.

[grrclark]

17 minutes ago, wymberley said:

If the general population was as gullible as is often inferred on here, could someone explain to me why when given the opposing evidence from both sides they are deemed capable of coming to such a conclusion which provides a sufficient base on which to provide a decision of guilt or innocence. Our problem is that the jury seldom, if ever, is presented fairly with our case.

Indeed.  The good thing is that those in the government are very well aware of the socioeconomic benefits of shooting and very much less likely to be swayed by emotive argument.

To put that into context, our folks in government make what is ultimately a financial decision on who might get to live or die via prescription drug policy, i.e. deeming that certain anti-cancer medicines are too expensive to be put on general prescription, carries a far greater emotional and moral weight than whether some pheasants get incinerated after a shoot instead of being eaten.

Unless the banning of game shooting would make sufficient difference to the voting intention to a big enough people to make a difference for a single party, then the economic case will always win out.

The anti shooting mob will always be baying in the background, but in truth that noise is massively drowned out by far far bigger issues.

[Fatcatsplat]

I disagree with the professional shotgun reviewer on so many issues (and believe me, he has issues!), but he's right on this one, unless they can legitimately turn the game shot into the food chain, we are going to be stuffed.

 

One of the chinless wonders I work with was ever so proud to tell me they'd bagged up by the second drive last week. He basically sees the shooting as something to do in between feasting and drinking with his chums and can afford to do it. 

[Harnser]

It’s not looking good at the moment for game shooting thanks to the greedy profit orientated big shoots . Shame on them . I don’t think any government would have the nuts to ban shooting outright . They would be more subtle by imposing bag limits (not always a bad thing ) or worst banning the rearing of game birds for shooting .  That would close the big boys down overnight . Maybe not a bad thing .

 

Harnser

[Penelope]

1 minute ago, Harnser said:

It’s not looking good at the moment for game shooting thanks to the greedy profit orientated big shoots . Shame on them . I don’t think any government would have the nuts to ban shooting outright . They would be more subtle by imposing bag limits (not always a bad thing ) or worst banning the rearing of game birds for shooting .  That would close the big boys down overnight . Maybe not a bad thing .

 

Harnser

That would also close the little boys down too. The 16 men who release 500 on my shoot would be scuppered and you say that might not be a bad thing?

[matone]

6 hours ago, Mungler said:

It’s all about the demonisation of Shooting and the underlying class war against Shooting - we all live in castles, ride horses, drive range rovers and chase foxes don’t you know.

There’s plenty of PETA clips flying round the internet of KFC-esque raised chickens that don’t make the grade going into industrial shredders but no one cares because the majority like a cheeky Kentucky. 

This is different because of the perception of shooters and shooting.

 

Good post & there lies the real issue !

[sako751sg]

4 hours ago, Fatcatsplat said:

I disagree with the professional shotgun reviewer on so many issues (and believe me, he has issues!), but he's right on this one, unless they can legitimately turn the game shot into the food chain, we are going to be stuffed.

 

One of the chinless wonders I work with was ever so proud to tell me they'd bagged up by the second drive last week. He basically sees the shooting as something to do in between feasting and drinking with his chums and can afford to do it. 

 

Spot on.

We have always at least managed to stay our ground by claiming they all get eaten but when this is no longer the case and can be proven we are on shaky legs,and rightly so.

Loads of people out there will take but they need to be found prior to the shooting.Hate seeing things going to waste and even just breasting would suffice.