What wouldn’t you shoot?

[25 Sharps]

I think what the chaps saying is that an invasive tag is one thing ,here to stay is another and authorities really couldn’t care less about the damage caused or we would get on top the invasion straight away .
I understand his sentiments totally .
All these invasive animals seemed to have blended in quite well tbh and our country would be a poorer place without them .
Apart from signal crayfish ,Asian hornets and African bees can anyone state a species that had a prolonged effect on another species .Mink were supposed to obliterate fisheries but that never happened and now the otter will regulate their numbers apparently .
Sika deer have hybridised with the reds but there are still plenty of reds showing full characteristics .
Muntjac filled a void or they wouldn’t be doing so well .
Plant life might be a good case ,Jap knotweed ,giant hogweed ,rhododendrons, green alkanet
Im talking shite I know but sounded good to start with

Mate, the list is far, far too long.

To take your example of red deer, just because a red shoes red characteristics it doesn’t make it a red deer, if it has sika genes it is most definitely not a red deer. Look at the Scottish wildcat, they are literally on the brink of extinction due primarily to interbreeding with domestic cats (a non native).

Plants and animals can cause huge issues as they are in ecosystems that they have not evolved in and they can eat, outcompete, or spread diseases to native species and wreak havoc, up to and including extinction.

 

[25 Sharps]

That tag “invasive species”means nothing, its used as an excuse by some people to treat some species with a lack of respect and by officialdom to justify a lack of policy.
Once something is established, ineradicable and breeding in the wild its no longer a non native, its now part of our wildlife.

How is it ridiculous to point out that policy towards “non native and invasive“ species begins and ends with the designation?

The first part in bold is ridiculous, it is used to identify species that have potential to do a huge amount of harm to other species.

The second part in bold is ridiculous because it factually incorrect.

 

[foxdropper]

Your right ,I jumped in without giving it much thought .I stand by the fact our country would be poorer without quite a few introductions though and I know some native species have changed to adapt in dealing with introductions .

 

[25 Sharps]

Your right ,I jumped in without giving it much thought .I stand by the fact our country would be poorer without quite a few introductions though and I know some native species have changed to adapt in dealing with introductions .

Even muntjac do a lot of damage to woodland plants mate.

 

[foxdropper]

How long does an animal actually have to be here to be natives though ,hundred ,two hundred ,a thousand years as in rats ?

 

[willie_gunn]

Here in Wilts mate the voles are thriving .For something with very few natural predators before the mink ,numbers are back to where they should be ,at least here .I can go right now to our canal and see maybe 20 along a two mile stretch where they have lost all fear of humans .
Control of anything is important I agree and maybe a trapping campaign has been undertaken locally under the radar but I’ve seen mink along that stretch too as well as an otter only two weeks ago .
Moderation is the key to any wildlife numbers .
Along a stretch of the local river /stream through our village ,there is a spot that did have a good head of voles but people started feeding the ducks resulting in rats moving in ,breeding and taking over the vole buries .
The brown rat displaced the vole ,now it’s not unusual to see mink working the place in daylight after the rats .
I used to trap mink for the local fishing club years ago and yes certain times of the year ,movement is very obvious but other times they travel a huge expanse of territory .
Id agree that locally any predator can be a pest and needs dealing with .

IIRC mink are being controlled in Wiltshire, with the support of both the local Wildlife Trust and by the Canal & River Trust.

Unlike over the border in Oxon, the WWT doesn't publicise it's support of mink control like it used to, but the Canal & River Trust has a nice page on their Rogues Gallery of Invasive Species.

In Cornwall the water voles were wiped out by mink but, as in other areas like Northumberland, they are now being re-introduced alongside continued mink control, see Water voles return to southern Cornwall after 30 years

The good news (at least in part) is that the otter are now displacing mink around here.

 

[foxdropper]

Even muntjac do a lot of damage to woodland plants mate.

I know mate but without them yours and my life would be all the more duller .Control as with anything is paramount .
Whats not going to happen is eradication which some want .The door is well and truly closed on that issue with all the introductions I’m sure you would agree .The time for action is when it’s first discovered not allowing to see how things pan out which has happened for every single introduction we’ve had .
Introductions have widened the quarry list for sure in my lifetime and I’d say we will see more .
Nothing seems to be taken seriously until a negative impact is associated with an introduction .
I remember native crayfish at Calston near us Scott, where now the chalk stream is rife with bloody signals .Fish don’t eat them but the mink do as well as otters .
One door opens as another closes as with most things in nature .
Signals arnt so fussy about water quality as is evident in that slurry pit that passes for a fishery at Wyatts .

 

[willie_gunn]

How long does an animal actually have to be here to be natives though ,hundred ,two hundred ,a thousand years as in rats ?

Sounds like the same length of time you have to live in our village to be viewed as a "local"

 

[Stalker62]

Sounds like the same length of time you have to live in our village to be viewed as a "local"

Used to beat on a ground where one of the cottages was "Mary's Cottage".

She had died in the 1920s and the latest family were the fourth since her death - it was still "Mary's Cottage".

 

[25 Sharps]

I know mate but without them yours and my life would be all the more duller .Control as with anything is paramount .
Whats not going to happen is eradication which some want .The door is well and truly closed on that issue with all the introductions I’m sure you would agree .The time for action is when it’s first discovered not allowing to see how things pan out which has happened for every single introduction we’ve had .
Introductions have widened the quarry list for sure in my lifetime and I’d say we will see more .
Nothing seems to be taken seriously until a negative impact is associated with an introduction .
I remember native crayfish at Calston near us Scott, where now the chalk stream is rife with bloody signals .Fish don’t eat them but the mink do as well as otters .
One door opens as another closes as with most things in nature .
Signals arnt so fussy about water quality as is evident in that slurry pit that passes for a fishery at Wyatts .

With Muntjac as a non native I'd happily see them wiped out tomorrow I'm afraid, same as signals, Dalgetys is teaming with them!

Dutch elm disease is caused by a non native species . . . . .

 

[25 Sharps]

How long does an animal actually have to be here to be natives though ,hundred ,two hundred ,a thousand years as in rats ?

"In biogeography, a native species is indigenous to a given region or ecosystem if its presence in that region is the result of only local natural evolution ..."

Introduced species can become naturalised, they can never become native

 

[foxdropper]

And yet a whole new industry has been set up around trapping signals mate ,something we never had with natives .I must get up to Dalgetys

 

[foxdropper]

With Muntjac as a non native I'd happily see them wiped out tomorrow I'm afraid, same as signals, Dalgetys is teaming with them!

Dutch elm disease is caused by a non native species . . . . .

I can’t remember any difference in our local flora from years back when there were very few muntjac to present day where we have plenty though mate .All this talk of impacts yet the very orchids etc that are under so called threat are still here and in places thriving .
Impacts to a certain extent are made up by those people it suits to just moan .
Environmental issues are often blamed on introductions when it’s man kind that’s at fault .

 

[Dunwaters]

The first part in bold is ridiculous, it is used to identify species that have potential to do a huge amount of harm to other species.

The second part in bold is ridiculous because it factually incorrect.

Not true, the designation has nothing to do with the potential for harm, it is used to designate any species not deemed to be a part of our historical flora or fauna database which manages to successfully colonise and breed regardless of its impact.
Other than the designation, there is no official policy or plan to deal with the new arrivals.
Just to use them as an example, muntjac are now endemic and naturalised across a large swathe of the UK, if the official position is that they are non native, invasive and damaging to the local habitat, the logical policy is total elimination, you already did it with coypu.
But that’s not happening is it?
As for your second point, once a species is established, breeding and has a population level that makes it impossible or impracticable to exterminate, then its here to stay, a naturalised part of our environment and both us and the rest of creation are going to have to get used to dealing with it.

 

[25 Sharps]

I can’t remember any difference in our local flora from years back when there were very few muntjac to present day where we have plenty though mate .All this talk of impacts yet the very orchids etc that are under so called threat are still here and in places thriving .
Impacts to a certain extent are made up by those people it suits to just moan .
Environmental issues are often blamed on introductions when it’s man kind that’s at fault .

Mainly because the introduction is mankind’s own fault.

Its not necessarily orchids that are effected

(PDF) Impact of muntjac deer (Muntiacus reevesi) at Monks Wood National Nature Reserve, Cambridgeshire, Eastern England

PDF | Muntjac deer ( Muntiacus reevesi ) were first reported at Monks Wood National Nature Reserve, Cambridgeshire, in the early 1970s. By 1985, they... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate

www.researchgate.net

 

[25 Sharps]

Not true, the designation has nothing to do with the potential for harm, it is used to designate any species not deemed to be a part of our historical flora or fauna database which manages to successfully colonise and breed regardless of its impact.
Other than the designation, there is no official policy or plan to deal with the new arrivals.
Just to use them as an example, muntjac are now endemic and naturalised across a large swathe of the UK, if the official position is that they are non native, invasive and damaging to the local habitat, the logical policy is total elimination, you already did it with coypu.
But that’s not happening is it?
As for your second point, once a species is established, breeding and has a population level that makes it impossible or impracticable to exterminate, then its here to stay, a naturalised part of our environment and both us and the rest of creation are going to have to get used to dealing with it.

See above for the definition of non native.

As for wiping out muntjac that ship has sailed, however they have now banned releasing them which acknowledges the damage they can do

 

[Dunwaters]

Mate, the list is far, far too long.

To take your example of red deer, just because a red shoes red characteristics it doesn’t make it a red deer, if it has sika genes it is most definitely not a red deer. Look at the Scottish wildcat, they are literally on the brink of extinction due primarily to interbreeding with domestic cats (a non native).

Plants and animals can cause huge issues as they are in ecosystems that they have not evolved in and they can eat, outcompete, or spread diseases to native species and wreak havoc, up to and including extinction.

What you’re complaining about is evolution, as far as the deer are concerned it doesn’t matter whether they’re red or sika, what matters is that they thrive in the available habitat and the hybrids do very well in both forest and open ground. Same thing with the cats, there are so few real wild cats left that its hybridise or die a lonely old moggy.
You can’t pickle the environment in aspic or kill off every plant or animal you don’t like, theres too many of them.

 

[25 Sharps]

What you’re complaining about is evolution, as far as the deer are concerned it doesn’t matter whether they’re red or sika, what matters is that they thrive in the available habitat and the hybrids do very well in both forest and open ground. Same thing with the cats, there are so few real wild cats left that its hybridise or die a lonely old moggy.
You can’t pickle the environment in aspic or kill off every plant or animal you don’t like, theres too many of them.

It isn't evolution, that is where a species becomes distinct over time due to an inherited characteristic providing an advantage, it is just hybridisation.

Hybridisation of the wildcat will lead to wildcats becoming extinct, that is the very opposite of evolution.

 

[timbrayford]

I was holidaying on a Greek island recently when my daughter (7) and I stumbled upon a chicken coop not far from the villa. Hung up above the coop were two eagles, they’d been shot and strung up as deterrents.
My instant reaction was one of anger, and when we got back to the holiday home I wanted to report the owners of the house. My daughter isn’t a fan of me shooting and pointed out my obvious double standards. My wife pointed out that the same is done in the UK with crows, which are more intelligent birds.
The whole thing got me thinking. I’ve often felt a little like an imposter in the shooting community. I remember waiting in a gun shop and the chap in front relayed a story of how he opened his kitchen door and shot a load of garden birds and a squirrel in one go that morning, and I just stood there thinking that was pretty off.
There’s very little I’d rather be doing than stalking deer or shooting rabbits, and when we’ve livestock that needs to be slaughtered I do it myself, so I’m not anti-hunting, but I’ve always had a mental list of animals I’m comfortable killing and those I’m not. Probably based on how common they are and if I can eat them.
There’s something about hunting trips to Africa which make me feel uncomfortable. I certainly wouldn’t want to shoot big game.
But, I’m in no way blind to my double standards. I have a line I’m comfortable with, and I’d guess everyone does - except Buddhists perhaps.

I was just curious; are there any animals you wouldn’t shoot?

Nothing illegal but regarding lawful quarry hares, and I'd rather not shoot a roe doe either.

 

[foxdropper]

It isn't evolution, that is where a species becomes distinct over time due to an inherited characteristic providing an advantage, it is just hybridisation.

Hybridisation of the wildcat will lead to wildcats becoming extinct, that is the very opposite of evolution.

Yes but the reason there are so few wildcats isn’t down to feral cat hybridisation is it .Persecution in the past by man has a huge part to play as well as encroaching land use .I’m not a cat lover but can’t imagine there are large numbers of ferals wandering prime wildcat habitat .
Native species have evolved around imports though mate .