Nickb
Well-Known Member
The new law changes from Liebour have nothing to do with animal welfare its purely political.
Shooting hares to be banned for 9 months of the year.
- Thread starter 12gsnapcaps
- Start date
Pellet Pinger
Well-Known Member
This, its just a class war.
I agree with that. My 3 year old could make better decisions than the current shower of **** that have somehow ended up in charge. I still don't think it's a good look to unthinkingly object to all changes to wildlife legislation though. Even if they've done it by mistake I dont think it's a bad change. There's plenty worse to come though I suspect
Nickb
Well-Known Member
Death by a thousand cuts.
Perhaps. Or perhaps we should pick and choose our battles so we fight what needs fighting and work with stuff that makes logical sense. They are blinkered, no need for us to be too
oo taking hares under lights at night eh ? when did that law change ? Absolutely no sport in it they are as likely to come in to the light as they are to run away , though history until a mistake was made Hare could not be killed at night . I don't really care what the numbers on here say - Hare are game and not vermin and balance is now put back in their rightful place again !
Hares will if you stay still are as likely to come up to you not run away in daylight , must be a poor hunter who needs to shoot them at night with a lamp ( a crime you just admitted ) Real clever
Yes, they need to be flexible.
Trouble is, they never are.
It would be fair enough for protection to be switched on and off as populations wax and wane, but in reality once a species is given protection it never again gets relaxed, even when the numbers once again reach high levels. And that's a problem.
That is exactly the problem as I see it. Management should be science (genuine science) based. Species that are struggling should be given a break and species that are over populated need knocking back a bit. I dont think closed seasons that take into account breeding season are contrary to that ideal. The shooting / hunting community seem, from the outside, so opposed to change of any sort that we are then not taken seriously when we object to things that really are bad management practice
shakey jake
Well-Known Member
Can you post the law, id like to report my self to crime stoppers.
And its not hunting just pest control
Smellydog
Well-Known Member
So capitulate for capitulation sake.
Utter nonsense.
Your trying to appease dickheads just like chamberlain did and it didn't work then nor will now.
The hare status with existing law/s is fine.
This is typical dictatorial tyranny masquerading as socialism . Urbanites judging overlords of rural people. Utter bull**** like normal. May those that voted hang their heads in shame.
Putin must be so proud of us.
Not sure you are actually reading my posts and you seem to be getting a bit emotional.
I think a close season that gives protection during a time when the majority of the species are breeding isn't a bad idea. That's my opinion. If you'd rather have no close season that's fine, it's your opinion.
Not sure what Putin has to do with any of it?
Nickb
Well-Known Member
You won't be told will you , its not a crime
Smellydog
Well-Known Member
Because I disagree I'm being emotional.
Idiot.
Hare numbers are rising despite no close season.
Most folk don't want them so they don't get shot. Therefore self regulated.
However, a large lettuce grower may enjoy the no close season or would you rather, like the labours, all our food imported and put the lettuce grower out of business? Maybe a solar panel farm to charge your electric car with instead.
Why are people so thick....
Read through your last few posts and then have a think about who's coming across as emotional and a bit of an idiot.
I've already said that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, I just have a different one to you. That has somehow enraged you and set you off on a rant about Putin, Chamberlain, solar farms and lettuce growers?
I'm not going to argue with you any more as it's getting silly and very little of what you are saying even makes sense.
And where are the "voice of shooting" asking then for a quid pro quo and the return to the quarry list of the Brent Goose? A species now listed as of "least concern" by the IUCN? Indeed what, at all, on this topic....hares...is their position?
www.iucnredlist.org
The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
Established in 1964, the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species has evolved to become the world’s most comprehensive information source on the global conservation status of animal, fungi and plant species.
Mr Tree
Well-Known Member
If I wanted to control Hares, I would definitely do it at night. Its safer, you can get closer to them, they aren't moving, you can take your time, its more humane. As I stated earlier, I was about to shoot a hare at night this year, when I noticed a small heat source near the hare, it turned out to be a small leveret that ran to its mother & started suckling. I was relieved I didn't take the shot. If it was legal, I would say the same about deer.
Smellydog
Well-Known Member
No, wrong again.
Your opinion, that you are entitled to has been questioned by me.
I have questioned your opinion because it is wrong.
Your opinion was formed on quote, " I think is a good thing" or in that context. You also based your opinion on how things look.
Your opinion is fundamentally based on fear of others.
Your opinion does not consider all the facts.
I have given you an example of a lettuce grower and it went completely over your head.
Thus your opinion is flawed and I certainly do not want anyone remotely representing or handing anything on a plate to those that seek to clearly oppress again and again anyone, not just me, but anyone that participates in any kind of field sports.
If i was scared of others I would hardly be disagreeing with you would I? You don't take it well at all.
I am not opposed to closed season, the same as we have for deer. I also think that seasons should be brought for species which are currently protected.
Wildlife management should be dynamic and based based on current populations and their impacts on agriculture, environment and on welfare.
I dont agree with you. That's doesn't make me an idiot or wrong or flawed.
My last post on this. Enjoy your day
Woodenbeam
Well-Known Member
You really don’t have a clue do you?
One size does not fit all. Hare numbers in certain area’s are unsustainably high, a quote about nature culling excess numbers has been made & is quite right.
Hares coming to the light - what a crock of
We originally trimmed up hare numbers to keep coursing vehicles & knobs out of the fields (I have no issue with the previous legitimate ‘sport’ of coursing at all). That moment has now passed in the main which is good. Numbers are now just trimmed up due to excess, it’s nothing to see 30/40/50 on a field in the evening - thermal reveals all.
