This is going to ruffle a few feathers but lets keep it civil!
Given the recent posts & comments it got me thinking are we realy hypocrites and as entrenched in our views as being right as the ANTI's are?
We think that our way & best practice is the only right & proper way to kill animals, but many of us travel to other countries & use methods that would be frowned upon or are even illegal here such as bow hunting, or shooting under lamps in Africa, etc etc.
We want the antis to compromise & see that shooting has a place for the greater good of wildlife but we do not always extend the same ethos when we condemmed something, we accept that the Stag hounds, & Buck hounds exsist and are part of our heratige, but then condemmed the dog boys & travellers for what amounts to the same & is no more or less humane, we criticise those who shoot deer with a lamp but accept the FC can do it, we preach the use of legal calibres then use different calibres when abroard or under the AOLQ rule for boar as .270 is merely a guideline, & many treat foxes with contempt and just shoot them allowing them to run away & die without a follow up shot or tracking to ensure a clean kill or dispatch, where we should treat all quarry equally if we are realy ethical but many don't.
But we don't seem to be able to compromise and see that other methods are acceptable to some in the UK, but it is ok for some to do it if they have a bit of paper or are hunt members, or have a licence, dosent all these things make us a tad like the antis or RSPB we allow it if it's on our terms & people but condemm it if it's a minority view and not acceptable or known to us.
PLEASE DON'T RANT THIS IS JUST TO PROVOKE THOUGHT WE SHOULD REALY LOOK AT OURSELVES BEFORE WE CRITICISE OTHERS!