Isn’t shooting part of our living heritage?

[Scully]

3 hours ago, PeterHenry said:

The exception proves the rule though, doesn't it. The fact that it could be done (and still can be done in Scotland) means there was that opportunity. Maybe not on the same scale, but it was there nevertheless. I also understand that you use to be able to pay a small fee to shoot on land owned by the railway (even after nationalisation) - so again, everymans shooting on state owned land.

Like I said before,  just because you have to pay for something doesn't make it non working class.

To top it off, what about all those old single barelled shotguns - greener gp's or argyle's and the like? They existed to provide affordable guns for the working man.

Jorrocks was a cockney grocer for a reason - because there was a very strong tradition of working class sportsmen in the east end - hence all the cockney sportsman prints.

But that’s not tradition, regardless of class, nor anything even to do with heritage or culture. 

You’re talking about shooting/hunting by consent, which isn’t traditional in any sense. 
There is a tradition of hunting and fishing in North America, Canada and some other countries in mainland Europe, where ANYONE who had an inkling could hunt on ANY land. That freedom to do so has never been available to us, and in reality is becoming less and less available to those I’ve just mentioned. 
The only people who had the freedom to hunt shoot and fish unhindered in this country were those sections of society I’ve already mentioned. 
My Dad and his brothers especially pre WW2 ( and for some years after ) all had rifles, shotguns with which they supplemented their diets, but they had to do so by poaching because they owned no land other than their gardens. 🤷‍♂️

Again, Jorrocks was a fictional character who wanted to become a ‘squire‘. Ask yourself why he wanted to be a squire. 
 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Thanks for all the viewpoints. From reading comments received from all sources against the criteria for listings I think wildfowling and British gun-making could make a good case for a UK list for shooting when it gets to that stage of implementation. Outside of shooting there could be a good case for other fieldsports. 

Here is the global listing for falconry (that is a global listing not a country specific one)

https://ich.unesco.org/en/RL/falconry-a-living-human-heritage-01708

Here is the UK consultation:

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/2003-unesco-convention-for-the-safeguarding-of-the-intangible-cultural-heritage/consultation-on-the-2003-unesco-convention-for-safeguarding-of-the-intangible-cultural-heritage

 

[Dougy]

4 hours ago, old man said:

Absolutely Dougy.

And the most annoying thing is. Our sports don't need the likes of Packam. We are doing a good enough job ourselves to end the whole lot. 

[PeterHenry]

6 hours ago, Scully said:

But that’s not tradition, regardless of class, nor anything even to do with heritage or culture. 

You’re talking about shooting/hunting by consent, which isn’t traditional in any sense. 
There is a tradition of hunting and fishing in North America, Canada and some other countries in mainland Europe, where ANYONE who had an inkling could hunt on ANY land. That freedom to do so has never been available to us, and in reality is becoming less and less available to those I’ve just mentioned. 
The only people who had the freedom to hunt shoot and fish unhindered in this country were those sections of society I’ve already mentioned. 
My Dad and his brothers especially pre WW2 ( and for some years after ) all had rifles, shotguns with which they supplemented their diets, but they had to do so by poaching because they owned no land other than their gardens. 🤷‍♂️

Again, Jorrocks was a fictional character who wanted to become a ‘squire‘. Ask yourself why he wanted to be a squire. 
 

Fieldsports are the traditions, and there are working class strains within them - that's my argument.

Putting aside the issue of the foreshore for a moment, you've said yourself, entirely correctly from a practical perspective, that historically and up until this day, all land is owned in this country - that's part of our cultural tradition as a country. The fact that historically fieldsports have happend on that land over centuries by the consent of the owners is traditional in itself - it might not be 'traditional' in the sense of 'traditional' hunting in America or France - but its nevertheless traditional from a British perspective. And again, the fact that it happens by consent, doesn't fundamentally prevent it from being working class. Coarse fishing is by consent and is widely viewed as a working class sport. 

If you look at America, where vast swaths are owned by the state (and on a tangent, actually all of our land is owned by the Crown in an ultimate sense....) its still hunted over by consent - consent of the owner, who just happens to be the state - which is the same situation as the foreshore in Scotland (and historically in England).

And yes, I know Jorrocks was a fictional character - but he was caricature / stereotype of a certain sort of working class sportsman. Hence the whole genre of cockney sportsman prints and books. These types of people existed - and in good enough numbers to be written about and caricatured. Anyway, who wouldn't rarther be a Squire than a Grocer (except perhaps Messrs Fortnum and Mason) - it might not be your argument, buts it is mine that there were sportsmen drawn from the ranks of both, and others besides.

I have a feeling that we are not going to agree on this, so in the spirit of good faith and good humour, I'll bow out now - but I grant you the fact that other counties have broader egalitarian hunting traditions - its just not the case that we didn't have them either.

[Scully]

6 hours ago, PeterHenry said:

Fieldsports are the traditions, and there are working class strains within them - that's my argument.

Putting aside the issue of the foreshore for a moment, you've said yourself, entirely correctly from a practical perspective, that historically and up until this day, all land is owned in this country - that's part of our cultural tradition as a country. The fact that historically fieldsports have happend on that land over centuries by the consent of the owners is traditional in itself - it might not be 'traditional' in the sense of 'traditional' hunting in America or France - but its nevertheless traditional from a British perspective. And again, the fact that it happens by consent, doesn't fundamentally prevent it from being working class. Coarse fishing is by consent and is widely viewed as a working class sport. 

If you look at America, where vast swaths are owned by the state (and on a tangent, actually all of our land is owned by the Crown in an ultimate sense....) its still hunted over by consent - consent of the owner, who just happens to be the state - which is the same situation as the foreshore in Scotland (and historically in England).

And yes, I know Jorrocks was a fictional character - but he was caricature / stereotype of a certain sort of working class sportsman. Hence the whole genre of cockney sportsman prints and books. These types of people existed - and in good enough numbers to be written about and caricatured. Anyway, who wouldn't rarther be a Squire than a Grocer (except perhaps Messrs Fortnum and Mason) - it might not be your argument, buts it is mine that there were sportsmen drawn from the ranks of both, and others besides.

I have a feeling that we are not going to agree on this, so in the spirit of good faith and good humour, I'll bow out now - but I grant you the fact that other counties have broader egalitarian hunting traditions - its just not the case that we didn't have them either.

As you say, we’ll have to agree to disagree. We obviously have different ideas of what we regard as traditional. 
The way I see it is from the perspective of a freedom or right to hunt.
The indigenous tribes of North America and Canada, Siberia and Africa and South America had a tradition of hunting; it was part of their culture which with few exceptions they no longer have. Even the immigrants to N. America and Canada enjoyed that freedom for a while. 
In this country that freedom was only available to those who owned the land, such as aristocracy, the church and landed gentry. The rest of us were only allowed by consent, and this is why the fictional Jorrocks had aspirations to be a squire. 
Hunting by consent isn’t ‘traditional’ in my opinion. 
Any ‘heritage’ we had hangs by a thread, and is slowly being whittled away. 

[old man]

14 hours ago, Dougy said:

And the most annoying thing is. Our sports don't need the likes of Packam. We are doing a good enough job ourselves to end the whole lot. 

Certainly true, that coupled with the unspoken aims of all factions in mainstream politics? The removal of all independence of thought and means ensuing total compliance. 

Flyboys quote  "rats and cheese, nibble, nibble. One day all gone."

[Penelope]

I'd argue it goes beyond National culture, hunting is part of human culture. We simply would not be where we are now as a species without it.

[Scully]

1 hour ago, Penelope said:

I'd argue it goes beyond National culture, hunting is part of human culture. We simply would not be where we are now as a species without it.

Now you’re talking. 
Everything we have today, and I mean EVERYTHING, is down to man being an apex predator. 
 

[Dougy]

1 hour ago, Penelope said:

I'd argue it goes beyond National culture, hunting is part of human culture. We simply would not be where we are now as a species without it.

That's true, but it's being bred out of humans these days via evolution. 

[Feltwad]

Hungerford opened its doors to most what we see today  shooting organisations should have been united under one roof to fight what was to come  not with a attitude if it does not involve me  and not treating it like a bad smell hoping it would go away You will always find that a shooters worst enemy is  his fellow shooter .

UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL  

Feltwad

[islandgun]

1 hour ago, Dougy said:

That's true, but it's being bred out of humans these days via evolution. 

Its very fast evolution, with most of it happening in my lifetime, many people now, have never seen a dead animal, even less would know how to dress it whilst fewer still have killed anything for food. this lack of knowledge has led to a disconnection from the real world where people will be baying to ban field sports while simultaneously stuffing their faces with processed meat 

Edited January 29 by islandgun

[Dougy]

3 hours ago, Feltwad said:

Hungerford opened its doors to most what we see today  shooting organisations should have been united under one roof to fight what was to come  not with a attitude if it does not involve me  and not treating it like a bad smell hoping it would go away You will always find that a shooters worst enemy is  his fellow shooter .

UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL  

Feltwad

shooting organisations should have been united under one roof to fight

Ive been saying this for years but always been given a reason/excuse why it would never work, but i think the bigger reason is why Morrisons and Tesco's would never combine. MONEY. 

Either one would end up loosing out. 

UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL  

Unfortunately we dont stand united, i see Pheasant shoots falling out with each other with shoots ending for good, i still see the divide between the rough shooter shooting rats with a pellet gun and the driven Grouse shooter, the course fishermen and salmon fishermen. 

Regardless of where you stand on the country sports ladder there's a target on your back with the anti's securely locked onto it. 

 

 

 

[oowee]

9 hours ago, Dougy said:

shooting organisations should have been united under one roof to fight

 

 

Let's do the same with political parties. Oooops I forgot they have different agendas. 

[Penelope]

15 hours ago, Dougy said:

That's true, but it's being bred out of humans these days via evolution. 

No, it's being forced out by ideology, we as a species have not changed.

15 hours ago, Scully said:

Now you’re talking. 
Everything we have today, and I mean EVERYTHING, is down to man being an apex predator. 
 

Of course it is. Even our closest relative, the chimpanzee, hunts for the thrill and enjoyment of it.

 

Well worth a watch.

 

[Vince Green]

On 26/01/2024 at 21:27, islandgun said:

Gun making is certainly part of our heritage.......... Which is a very good reason to make lead shot concessions for older guns

In Birmingham the gun trade and the jewellery trade defined the city a hundred years ago. The spin off industries of car making and motorcycle making evolved from the engineering skills brought to the city by the gun trade.

Today Birmingham  promotes its jewellery trade history a great deal. There are signs saying Jewellery Quarter, a museum and tours etc.

The gun trade history however has been totally whitewashed out of the city's records.

[Yellow Bear]

11 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

The gun trade history however has been totally wokewashed out of the city's records

Sorry but I thought this might be nearer the mark

[Vince Green]

7 minutes ago, Yellow Bear said:

Sorry but I thought this might be nearer the mark

You are exactly right

[Penelope]

37 minutes ago, Yellow Bear said:

Sorry but I thought this might be nearer the mark

Sadly, you are dead right.

[old man]

On 29/01/2024 at 17:31, Dougy said:

That's true, but it's being bred out of humans these days via evolution. 

And loads of behind the scenes fiddling with cash abundant?

On 30/01/2024 at 06:46, oowee said:

Let's do the same with political parties. Oooops I forgot they have different agendas. 

Mm, not so sure about that?

 

[spanj]

On 25/01/2024 at 23:17, Smudger687 said:

Having a rifle above the fireplace used to be part of our cultural heritage too. Didn't seem to make much difference, our overlords want us unarmed and docile.

Unless they think they themselves may have to fight off Putins rabble

[Ratlegs]

I think in the early 1900s a member of parliament stood up and said he would laud the day when every house had a rifle

At the other end of the stick I read on Shooting UK   big issue have a page trying to ban all shooting funded by the usual

[wymberley]

On 25/01/2024 at 21:22, Conor O'Gorman said:

The government is consulting on its approach to a global convention on safeguarding cultural heritage, and falconry is already recognised, so what about a case for shooting?

If we're going to base this decision on what is in fact two historically minority activities, then there's a good case to be made for any activity which is far more representative of the population as a whole. I'll start us off and toss in pigeon racing and hare coursing. Not forgetting Morris Dancing.

[PeterHenry]

41 minutes ago, wymberley said:

If we're going to base this decision on what is in fact two historically minority activities, then there's a good case to be made for any activity which is far more representative of the population as a whole. I'll start us off and toss in pigeon racing and hare coursing. Not forgetting Morris Dancing.

If you follow Conors link, it has to be an extant activity- so hare coursing is out. Morris dancing did spring to mind - but off the top if my head, I'd bet there are more game shooters than morris dancers in the UK.

I know very little about pigeon racing, so can't help with that sorry.

[Yellow Bear]

56 minutes ago, wymberley said:

Not forgetting Morris Dancing.

Which has already been "Wokewashed" by "outlawing" the tradition of disguise by blackfacing.

[spanj]

On 26/01/2024 at 09:59, Penelope said:

Good post, as usual.

I have always said that coarse angling can easily be argued as the 'cruelest' of field sports.

This sort of division WILL spell the end of fieldsports