Oh dear
Why shoot the foxes?
- Thread starter AlexD
- Start date
Oh dear
Nickb
Well-Known Member
Dear oh dear .
Mr Tree
Well-Known Member
There is another aspect to good animal husbandry, mainly Cattle, for keeping fox numbers down on pastureland. Neosporosis, causes abortion of foetus in cattle, transmitted by dogs & foxes. It is important to keep foxes away, particularly at calving time when they are out on fresh grazing. Afterbirth is like a Fox magnet, they can get Neosporisis by eating afterbirth, it is transmitted by dog & fox excrement, picked up ny grazing animals, & the cycle continues.Fox control is relatively easy at calving time, they seem too be preoccupied with sniffing around for the cleanings. Afterbirth is best disposed of by burning same with fox carcasses. Its much harder to keep dogs away particularly if there is a footpath nearby. A sign at entrance explaining this to the public & asking folks to use doggy bags goes a long way!
Nickb
Well-Known Member
Every day is a school day
Are you saying you don't remove magpies when they are pecking your animals or doing other damage within the general licence conditions (in our case attacking song thrushes, and what are possibly some of most northerly nutcrackers in the UK)?
Last edited:
No im more worried that you only shoot magpies where their excess causes a problem that you see
It is the law, which I try to obey no matter how daft the law may appear to be.
I would like to reduce magpie numbers greatly, but the law only allows for them to be removed to protect wild birds, animals and a few other special conditions.
That requires one to witness a problem, determine there are no alternatives, before shooting them or trapping. Even then I am loathe to touch them in nesting season because Magpies pair for life and mourn the passing of their mate, so if removing, best to remove their mate as well. Both are partners to the problem usually, that one is using the general licence for.
Same applies for deer or anything else on licence: e.g if one needs to shoot a deer out of season to avoid undue suffering, take photos before and after. For example, there was a doe in early May that was pregnant but so obviously and seriously ill that it could not care for a fawn, not could it be consumed. Without evidence of good intent and cause, one would be committing a crime. I also checked with NatureScot after first spotting that deer to ensure the evidence trail is there and ensure that the conditions observed come within the permission.
Last edited:
Nickb
Well-Known Member
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
I don’t live in Disneyland but I no longer control corvids, fox or mustelides unless they actually cause me problems.Your wasting your time mate
Iive in a Disney world.
It makes very little difference unless you’re dealing with a population that’s particularly susceptible to the effects of predation.
If you believe that you are doing some good and enhancing livestock, songbird and wildlife survival rates by slaughtering vermin , knock yourself out.
With respect, I strongly suspect that you don’t have the statistics to back your claims up, and that you are not actually achieving anything.
Threads like this are filled with people claiming that their own personal predator pogroms are benefiting both wildlife and farming, precious few supply evidence to support that claim.
There are exceptions, primarily during the nesting season, but not enough to justify the “any fox is a bad fox”or “any crow is a bad crow” and the “shoot on sight” policy whenever possible so many of you seem to espouse.
A magpie is just a magpie, it’s trying to make a living, so is a fox, a stoat or a mink, admittedly they do cause problems at certain times of the year or in certain places.
So control them then, you’ll be far more effective and save yourself a shedload of work besides.
Most of the time they do no harm and if we left them alone their population would settle down at the level the ecosystem can sustain
Let them off.
If their population is actually out of control as many of you claim, that’s because WE, the shooters and farmers, are pumping excess protein into the environment.
Game shooting and farming is the pump that delivers that protein, you can’t blame the wildlife, all the wildlife, for taking advantage of our largesse.
Last edited by a moderator:
I honestly wonder if some of the people on here ever go outside
I dont want an argument with you Dunwater - but what a load of total tosh - even the RSPB now acknowledges how important predator control is
I do keep record
I do try and exterminate all vermin
I am PROUD of the the results we are achieving
Nickb
Well-Known Member
Probably not , seeing the world with rose tinted specs. We know predator control is essential pity they can't see that.
Carry on culling with our heads held high.
I know the local Curlew, Lapwing and Partridge appreciate it.
Overlay
Well-Known Member
@VSS
Hi VSS
A while back you done a write up on foxes V sheep losses
Your calculations of lambs lost to natural causes the cold, wet, disease bad shepherding etc I gotta say I found pretty dismal and a huge eye opener to me in particular the huge amount itself and made me wonder if there is a way to reduce the dreadful loss each and every year on year
I remove a considerable amount foxes a year, ( By my own making I dont or very very rarely take pics ) but over many years have seen countless times foxes have harassed, seperated, or just snatch or bite to wound lambs have shot them in the act not just lambs, live piglets, goats, chicken, turkeys and of course game birds
And will take carrion as well
One hand you could say on the carrion side a dead lamb goes as statistic but if it’s missing it goes down as predator loss from whatever course it disappears, how do you quantify natural death losses as against live fox predation
I still favour 100% fox control for vunerable livestock using firearms as it is about reducing about bit on an unknown quantity, although you won’t get a correct figure
Any reduction in live loss can be reduced additional proofing works etc but removal does help, Will there come a time whereupon high. Mortality stock will be destined to internal permanent sheep pens like factory units to reduce natural mortality rates or will the cost see traditionally sheep turf-turned over to arable
Cheers
Phil
Hi VSS
A while back you done a write up on foxes V sheep losses
Your calculations of lambs lost to natural causes the cold, wet, disease bad shepherding etc I gotta say I found pretty dismal and a huge eye opener to me in particular the huge amount itself and made me wonder if there is a way to reduce the dreadful loss each and every year on year
I remove a considerable amount foxes a year, ( By my own making I dont or very very rarely take pics ) but over many years have seen countless times foxes have harassed, seperated, or just snatch or bite to wound lambs have shot them in the act not just lambs, live piglets, goats, chicken, turkeys and of course game birds
And will take carrion as well
One hand you could say on the carrion side a dead lamb goes as statistic but if it’s missing it goes down as predator loss from whatever course it disappears, how do you quantify natural death losses as against live fox predation
I still favour 100% fox control for vunerable livestock using firearms as it is about reducing about bit on an unknown quantity, although you won’t get a correct figure
Any reduction in live loss can be reduced additional proofing works etc but removal does help, Will there come a time whereupon high. Mortality stock will be destined to internal permanent sheep pens like factory units to reduce natural mortality rates or will the cost see traditionally sheep turf-turned over to arable
Cheers
Phil
Your statement suggests that those who don't agree with your view are in some way inexperienced, naive, sheltered, when in reality those members seem to be among the oldest and most experienced with wildlife in this debate.
If you disagree, facts are useful as counter-arguments, but slurs are unworthy.
You are likely to disagree because you rear pheasants, and manage a pheasant shoot, or did in the past. Those in that line of business, need to eliminate foxes. Those involved in arable farming may not. If you have a lot of arable farming experience, then contributing your facts and analysis on fox control would be pertinent, but just disparaging those whose experience has found a different solution is not the way to convince anyone.
You dont listen Alex - you have your views and as i say i do keep records - and it is more complex than just predator control as touched on above with the 3 legged stool
But, if you spend time in the countryside, respectfully its so blindingly obvious the damage done by generalist predators that i should never need to try and convince anyone - a newbie yes - a seasoned wildlife enthusiast - no
Used to service a farm in Dodleston regularly, foxes crapping in the feed rails, dropped calves went off to Neston Uni for testing I think, Neospora.
The advent of commonly available quality thermal optics has been an eye opener on what is predating what.
Absolutely Fin - the things we see ... incredible
In 2021, on one Forest area important for breeding curlew, the new wildlife manager responsible for the beat carried out intensive fox and carrion crow control during the nesting season, and six curlew chicks fledged from his beat alone: so more than twice the number of chicks that fledged from the entire New Forest area in 2020.
I'm not going to insult your intelligence by taking that comment seriously.
I think you know better. At least, you ought to.
That's excellent justification for predator control
In 2021, on one Forest area important for breeding curlew, the new wildlife manager responsible for the beat carried out intensive fox and carrion crow control during the nesting season, and six curlew chicks fledged from his beat alone: so more than twice the number of chicks that fledged from the entire New Forest area in 2020.
Similar threads
