Pothunter
Well-Known Member
I dont mean it at all argumentatively, but curious about why? Banned on our shoot, and nobody seems to mind.
Why some deer stalkers are their own worst enemies!!!
- Thread starter Jelendeer
- Start date
I dont mean it at all argumentatively, but curious about why? Banned on our shoot, and nobody seems to mind.
Aslong as the photos don't include gaping exit wounds and eyes popping out of animals heads I can't see the problem with it. The guy who said he gets angry about Americans shooting bears with bows, how come? Perfectly humain and somewhat more ethical than pheasant shooting. I for one put all of my trophy pics on Facebook I don't see why I shouldn't?
he would have been told take the hare out of the brambles and take it home, if not don't bother coming again pal
what a cock!!!
this is a typical case of shooters being there own worst enemy!!
atb
kjf
Crosshair243
Well-Known Member
Scots_stalker
Well-Known Member
I've heard hearsay that the police take a very dim view of pictures of guns being used /shown on FB .ie that your advertising you have guns and are leaving yourself open to burglary ,
any truth in this ?
any truth in this ?
Crosshair243
Well-Known Member
But you said ANY pics of shot animals are crude and thoughtless. I just wondered if you thought magazine articles should exclude them too as they're equally in the public domain.
Is the European practice of laying out the days bag for all to see crude and thoughtless? What about butchers displaying their wares in the shop window?
What about road kill? Should council workers patrol the dawn roads removing mangled-muntjac and headless-hares from the poor public and their sensitive dispositions?
I think there is a line to be drawn on the basis of taste and context but hiding from the reality of what 'we' do is a ticking time bomb for the future.
scotlanddeerstalking
Well-Known Member
I have a few photos on sd and I like to see the client or others with there stag or hind roe etc. as long as there is no blood and guts, certainly no eyes hanging out. as long as you capture the moment after a day out its nice, my opinion only. atb I do tent to agree with you there crosshair243
Last edited:
no point in photographing deer for the sake of it. I like to take a picture if it's a special memory or there are people there that made it a special day. Pictures of me (or without me) with a random deer would just look weird in my photo album. I do have the odd 'special memory' picture glued into my game diary here and there. and when I say game diary, no, I don't pretend to be writing pages about each outing and talking about the weather, flowers, smells in the air and pretending to be a modernisation of romantic african hunters,..whilst that would be nice, I'm a cr*p writer and really don't have the time to fill epic volumes of note books that someone will just throw in the bin when I one day fall over...Nor do I mean game diary on a computerized excel spreadsheet recording enless details about the deers anatomy in the vague hope I will be able to conduct an in depth review of how good my management plan is on a measly 400 acres..LOL..once you get a bit experienced with your ground you'll quickly from year to year be able to ascertain the rough deer numbers and how many should come off (give or take) and in what proportions, it's relatively simple and if you know your ground and have seen the deer numbers over a few years, it's a 5 minute decision whilst enjoying a cup of coffee. call me crazy..
Last edited:
Because the majority of my rough shooting clients are Italian, and hares are highly prized by Italians , an Italian as a rule would rather shoot a hare than a dozen pheasants the only thing they seem to prize higher than a hare are woodcock which fortunately we have plenty of.
Its more acceptable to them to put a limit on them than ban them altogether, they are quite happy
knowing they may shoot a couple if they wish even if they choose not to, where as they would not be if there was a complete ban.
I have a good hare population which requires a light cull to keep tenant farmers happy but it needs to be carefully monitored and adjusted as necessary especially as its an island and there is no immigration or emigration.
So it's a bit of a conjuring act trying to keep everyone happy.
Last edited:
Pothunter
Well-Known Member
Ahhh, Italians. Makes perfect sense (and interesting reading) in that case.
More chance of seeing a capercaillie than an Italian on our shoot, so everybody's quite happy to leave the odd hare alone.
I should think they have better things to do than monitor FB, stealing guns is not a high priority for burgulars, easier to sell a TV set.
I take photos of every male deer head, just for my own reference,
I agree with the first part of your last sentence - I actually think thats what I said. It is equally reasonable to suggest that not being sensitive about what we do, concerning images of the slain, will bring an end to our sport quicker than anything as most of the 'public' never see a dead animal/bird.
I once stopped to dispatch a severely injured woodpigeon hit by a car,. The driver responsible wanted me to take it to the vets as she couldnt touch it. Most non shooting folk and those who live 'in towns' are a significant majority. My thoughts are therefore - go quietly and inconspicuously about what you do and be sensitive, it is after all a very personal pursuit ?
I once stopped to dispatch a severely injured woodpigeon hit by a car,. The driver responsible wanted me to take it to the vets as she couldnt touch it. Most non shooting folk and those who live 'in towns' are a significant majority. My thoughts are therefore - go quietly and inconspicuously about what you do and be sensitive, it is after all a very personal pursuit ?
If your on a closed shooting site with like minded shooting folk then its fine to post whatever you want, in saying that I hardly ever post pictures. If people get offended on these sites or join these sites for other reasons then that can't be helped. People that drive around with BASC or SACS stickers in their windows are advertising even more that there is a good chance a gun could be in that vehicle.
I can see the value photos for recording purposes, disease, unusual deformity, poaching evidence etc. But I rarely carry a camera. I've got enough stuff in my pockets already. And I don't see the point in photographing an unremarkable carcase. As far as I'm concerned the moment an animal is dead it becomes food. I don't photograph my shopping.
What does make me cringe is videos posted on social media of people shooting small vermin with big rifles and whooping and laughing when they explode. Long range varminting is exhilarating and certainly effective but turning it into a laugh-a-minute spectator sport isn't helpful.
What does make me cringe is videos posted on social media of people shooting small vermin with big rifles and whooping and laughing when they explode. Long range varminting is exhilarating and certainly effective but turning it into a laugh-a-minute spectator sport isn't helpful.
Last edited:
There are many who make a very very good living from deer being shot. I wonder if Shiekh whoever , merchant banker wads of cash , lord Flinton Olay Biscuit barrel was to want a photo with the deer they had just culled ...would the smell of cash make a difference ? Maybe a new course should be started ....the ethical deer photo level 1 ....kerrrrrrching .. I agree , deer stalkers are indeed their worst enemy but it a far far bigger picture than photos on the net.
It would appear that the smell of cash may make the difference to yourself? Money doesn't buy morals or personal ethics, sure it can sway some folks choice but at the end of the day these are still "free" choices.
Yes, deer hunters can be their own worst enemies, particularly those with an agenda to make it all about class instead of an egalitarian pursuit. My guess is that you were having a go at one particular group & in doing so supported the OP's premise. I was just discussing the Dunning Kruger effect yesterday in a similar context to that of this thread.
Sharkey
Not at all Sharkey, certainly not having a pop at anyone. What I am commenting is the fact some will flout beliefs for cash, it happens and it is sad. A classic example happened to myself a few years ago when I registered with my local council to handle deer in order to be above board and legal. The inspector had never had anyone approach her to do this. This next thing I knew was the lady from the council had called a local deer accreditation company who informed her that I was not allowed to sell deer and I must attend their level 2 course.....what a load of old rubbish! ...yet another cash earner for them. She was duly informed I had my level 1 and meat hygiene course and was able to handle and sell deer.
As regards to the smell of cash , well I have very little money in my life. I once had a successful business, nothing to do with deer stalking and I signed the whole business over to my former partner for nothing, I never saw a penny from what was my business, just unhappiness, lies and the corruption of cash .....my former partner is now a multi millionaire....but I still have my morals intact. More to life than money.
With regards to the OP.....I am not having a pop at him either , I actually have a very good friend who did his level 1 there and it was leaps and bounds better than the appalling course I attended with another company which was just a cash earner with very little consideration for those who paid for the course who were treated like dirt at times by the instructors. The same instructors used language of a disgusting nature in the pub where we retired for lunch in the company of families with children and pensioners. Would they do that in front of rich clients?
As the original post said....own worst enemies and not just photos....my apologies if my experiences upset some but if people don't bring such things to the forefront it just goes on.
Last edited:
"Man can not live on bread alone".
I have no doubt that within the "stalking" or "management' industry up there, there will be some try hards, but one bad experience for yourself does not a stereotype make. There isn't going to be that much money in deer there, especially not as you guys are more interested in resolving conflict (pest management) rather than game management (thats where the big money is). My guess is that most of the folk involved in "deer management" up there will rely upon their reputation & good name for access & see their social capital as their most valuable asset & will not be trying to dog on each other.
'Value' is important (more so than just money, there is a big difference). We need to understand how this concept applies to our activities (deer hunting) & to deer. Value does not have to involve money, but unfortunately it usually it ends up being qualified or quantified by a cash value. Keep in mind that for us to preserve/conserve deer hunting, gun ownership, or anything else which we "value" we must argue that it has a value (yes, I'm sorry, I'm a utilitarian). Conservation is the things we do to preserve the things we consider "valuable". Therefore, the more value we place upon deer the more we can conserve deer hunting & the more valuable we are as deer hunters, stalkers, managers, etc. If deer are merely pests, then we are just pest exterminators. The value placed upon "trophy deer " is just one end of the spectrum, but there are many other colours & flavours of deer hunting which are equally important even if they don't have the obvious cash value (these can be seen as the collateral benefits of trophy hunting if you like).
All the various interests & stakeholders can add to the value of deer. To say that one is more important (I didn't say valuable) than the others is in accordance with the premise that "some deer stalkers are their own worst enemies". I like to think that all stakeholders are important.
Sharkey
I have no doubt that within the "stalking" or "management' industry up there, there will be some try hards, but one bad experience for yourself does not a stereotype make. There isn't going to be that much money in deer there, especially not as you guys are more interested in resolving conflict (pest management) rather than game management (thats where the big money is). My guess is that most of the folk involved in "deer management" up there will rely upon their reputation & good name for access & see their social capital as their most valuable asset & will not be trying to dog on each other.
'Value' is important (more so than just money, there is a big difference). We need to understand how this concept applies to our activities (deer hunting) & to deer. Value does not have to involve money, but unfortunately it usually it ends up being qualified or quantified by a cash value. Keep in mind that for us to preserve/conserve deer hunting, gun ownership, or anything else which we "value" we must argue that it has a value (yes, I'm sorry, I'm a utilitarian). Conservation is the things we do to preserve the things we consider "valuable". Therefore, the more value we place upon deer the more we can conserve deer hunting & the more valuable we are as deer hunters, stalkers, managers, etc. If deer are merely pests, then we are just pest exterminators. The value placed upon "trophy deer " is just one end of the spectrum, but there are many other colours & flavours of deer hunting which are equally important even if they don't have the obvious cash value (these can be seen as the collateral benefits of trophy hunting if you like).
All the various interests & stakeholders can add to the value of deer. To say that one is more important (I didn't say valuable) than the others is in accordance with the premise that "some deer stalkers are their own worst enemies". I like to think that all stakeholders are important.
Sharkey
Wise words Sharkey and yes one bad experience should not tarnish other and if it came across that way it wasn't meant to. I know many many great deer stalkers who I can only aspire to be like.
Cheers
P
