john

Splendid
Aug 25, 2003
3,819
0
22,780
Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

Hi all,

I was just wondering what the groups opinions are over the fox hunting
bill that looks to be pushed through parliament shortly.
Could fox hunting on horse back be banned in England and Wales before
next February?
Will the ban effect ownership of horses in general (increased feed costs
etc.)?
Could such a ban be enforced? Many people who ride with the hunt claim
they will ignore a ban.
Would a ban secure the future of firearms used for vermin control or
would this lead to more statutory qualifications run by the shooting
organisations?
It has surprised me how much the DSC1 has become statutory and is
required by the police and most stalking syndicates, would any further
“vermin shooting qualifications” pose a threat to shooting or simply
increase our public image?
If fox hunting is banned, then hare coursing and stag hunting will also
be banned. Would a ban on hare coursing increase hare numbers? If so, is
that a good thing or a bad thing and how would they be controlled? Would
there be less tolerance of low land deer on agricultural land?

John
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

John <zero_one34@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:Xns9562576E683AAOEcopyremovedheaders@130.133.1.4:

> Hi all,
>
> I was just wondering what the groups opinions are over the
> fox hunting bill that looks to be pushed through parliament
> shortly. Could fox hunting on horse back be banned in
> England and Wales before next February?

There must surely be exceptions for vermin control? If so, it is
going to be very difficult to prove whether hunting is "for
sport" or for control.

> Will the ban effect ownership of horses in general
> (increased feed costs etc.)?

In hunting country, undoubtedly.

> Could such a ban be enforced?

It is a legal requirement that all game shooters (and falconers)
have a game licence. How many do so and how many times is this
checked? That is something that is relatively easy to check --
but isn't. How are the police going to check what happens on
private land and how do they prove intent? Can they enter
without a warrant? What distinguishes a drag hunt from a fox
hunt and how does a copper tell the difference from the confines
of his patrol car?

Many people who ride with the
> hunt claim they will ignore a ban.
> Would a ban secure the future of firearms used for vermin
> control or would this lead to more statutory qualifications
> run by the shooting organisations?

If it did, would this be a bad thing? I meet far too many
shooting men who cannot identify common birds. I have always
felt a legal requirement for some sort of qualification would be
a good idea.

> It has surprised me how much the DSC1 has become statutory
> and is required by the police and most stalking syndicates,
> would any further “vermin shooting qualifications” pose a
> threat to shooting or simply increase our public image?

The latter. Although I am not certified!<G>

> If fox hunting is banned, then hare coursing and stag
> hunting will also be banned. Would a ban on hare coursing
> increase hare numbers?

No.

If so, is that a good thing or a bad
> thing and how would they be controlled?

It was not unusual for us to shoot 600 (white/blue) hares a day
on the Grampians. (That's the limit as more than that won't
fit into two Land Rovers). That is better control than could
ever be achieved by coursing. But I doubt whether shooting is as
humane as coursing.

Would there be less
> tolerance of low land deer on agricultural land?

In Devon, less. The social pressures to leave the deer for the
hunt and tolerate some crop damage will be removed.

>
> John
>
As I understand it, hunting with a pack of hounds for sport in
Scotland has been banned. But vermin control is OK. So you add a
couple of people on atvs with shotguns and lurchers and call it
vermin control. Hey presto, you are now legal. But I stand to be
corrected.

Remove the hunts and there will be a dramatic increase in
unsatisfactory alternative methods of control. Illegal use of
terriers, snares, poisons, and shooting would be my bet as
owners become exasperated by predation. I took three wheelbarrow
loads of corpses out of my game pen when a fox got in -- an
experience like that does not encourage a benign attitude to
dear old Renard! (He died, by the way).

Just my opinions but I do have an entry in Bailey's Hunting
Directory. Also, note the Labour Government's priorities. Fox
hunting is "more important than the pensions bill"....

Derry
 

john

Splendid
Aug 25, 2003
3,819
0
22,780
Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

Derry Argue <derry(delete)@adviegundogs.co.uk> wrote in
news:Xns956262D7B1A28derryadviegundogscou@130.133.1.4:

> There must surely be exceptions for vermin control? If so, it is
> going to be very difficult to prove whether hunting is "for
> sport" or for control.

I don’t think hunting is generally effective in keeping fox numbers
down.
A few years back the hunt master complained that I was shooting all the
foxes, her husband told me to carry on. So from my experience most
people ride for the sport and not the job of vermin control but there
are some areas where shooting isn’t practical and horse back hunting is
the only really practical method of fox control. How common are these
areas?, I don’t know.

>
>> Will the ban effect ownership of horses in general
>> (increased feed costs etc.)?
>
> In hunting country, undoubtedly.

I live on the boundary of two hunts and my thought is that if the hunts
stop taking carcass to feed the hounds the cost of the equestrian hobby
will have already started to rise.

>
>> Could such a ban be enforced?
>
> It is a legal requirement that all game shooters (and falconers)
> have a game licence. How many do so and how many times is this
> checked? That is something that is relatively easy to check --
> but isn't. How are the police going to check what happens on
> private land and how do they prove intent? Can they enter
> without a warrant? What distinguishes a drag hunt from a fox
> hunt and how does a copper tell the difference from the confines
> of his patrol car?

Yes, I agree.

>
> Many people who ride with the
>> hunt claim they will ignore a ban.
>> Would a ban secure the future of firearms used for vermin
>> control or would this lead to more statutory qualifications
>> run by the shooting organisations?
>
> If it did, would this be a bad thing? I meet far too many
> shooting men who cannot identify common birds. I have always
> felt a legal requirement for some sort of qualification would be
> a good idea.

I personally think that qualifications are a double headed sword which
can just as easily be turned on the user.
IMHO the DSC1 is a farce; the qualification is made void because of the
vast differences in courses. Compare the DMQ HQ to the WJEC and you
would be comparing chalk and cheese.

>
>> It has surprised me how much the DSC1 has become statutory
>> and is required by the police and most stalking syndicates,
>> would any further “vermin shooting qualifications” pose a
>> threat to shooting or simply increase our public image?
>
> The latter. Although I am not certified!<G>

Would you pay £300 to take a qualification that would teach you how to
set snares, shoot foxes or lamp rabbits?

>
>> If fox hunting is banned, then hare coursing and stag
>> hunting will also be banned. Would a ban on hare coursing
>> increase hare numbers?
>
> No.

I don’t think it would either.

>
> If so, is that a good thing or a bad
>> thing and how would they be controlled?
>
> It was not unusual for us to shoot 600 (white/blue) hares a day
> on the Grampians. (That's the limit as more than that won't
> fit into two Land Rovers). That is better control than could
> ever be achieved by coursing. But I doubt whether shooting is as
> humane as coursing.
>
> Would there be less
>> tolerance of low land deer on agricultural land?
>
> In Devon, less. The social pressures to leave the deer for the
> hunt and tolerate some crop damage will be removed.

How would you expect this to effect deer numbers?

> Just my opinions but I do have an entry in Bailey's Hunting
> Directory. Also, note the Labour Government's priorities. Fox
> hunting is "more important than the pensions bill"....

:)

John
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

John <zero_one34@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:Xns95634824EF611OEcopyremovedheaders@130.133.1.4:

> Derry Argue <derry(delete)@adviegundogs.co.uk> wrote in
> news:Xns956262D7B1A28derryadviegundogscou@130.133.1.4:
>
>> There must surely be exceptions for vermin control? If so,
>> it is going to be very difficult to prove whether hunting
>> is "for sport" or for control.
>
> I don’t think hunting is generally effective in keeping fox
> numbers down.

Try snaring in sheep country.
Try lamping in forestry.
In some areas, hunting with hounds IS the only effective way of
controlling foxes, albeit with the addition of lurchers and
shotguns. These packs are generally referred to as "gun packs"
and, this far north, are often followed on foot because it would
be impossible to take a horse, let alone an ATV, on much of the
terrain. Much of the time these packs operate on "call out" to
deal with a specific problem and charge for their services. When
you get into defining what a pack of hounds is, things get
complicated.

> A few years back the hunt master complained that I was
> shooting all the foxes, her husband told me to carry on. So
> from my experience most people ride for the sport and not
> the job of vermin control but there are some areas where
> shooting isn’t practical and horse back hunting is the only
> really practical method of fox control. How common are
> these areas?, I don’t know.

But such areas undoubtedly exist. Take a look at a map of
the UK. Laws should apply universally. When there are
exceptions, the courts have to decide. Where there are too many
exceptions, it is called "bad law" as it cannot be enforced.

>
>>
>>> Will the ban effect ownership of horses in general
>>> (increased feed costs etc.)?
>>
>> In hunting country, undoubtedly.
>
> I live on the boundary of two hunts and my thought is that
> if the hunts stop taking carcass to feed the hounds the
> cost of the equestrian hobby will have already started to
> rise.

Ah, something I actually know about! The Animal By-Products
Regulations! The EU Parliament wants to see all fallen stock
incinerated. Period. It will be the owner who has to foot the
bill for disposal as already happens over much of Scotland,
except "remote areas" where burying is still allowed. I now need
a licence (with inspections, outrageous requirements, record
keeping, etc. and draconian fines if I put a foot wrong) to
allow me to feed beef tripe to my dogs.

>
>>
>>> Could such a ban be enforced?
>>
>> It is a legal requirement that all game shooters (and
>> falconers) have a game licence. How many do so and how
>> many times is this checked? That is something that is
>> relatively easy to check -- but isn't. How are the police
>> going to check what happens on private land and how do
>> they prove intent? Can they enter without a warrant? What
>> distinguishes a drag hunt from a fox hunt and how does a
>> copper tell the difference from the confines of his patrol
>> car?
>
> Yes, I agree.
>
>>
>> Many people who ride with the
>>> hunt claim they will ignore a ban.
>>> Would a ban secure the future of firearms used for vermin
>>> control or would this lead to more statutory
>>> qualifications run by the shooting organisations?
>>
>> If it did, would this be a bad thing? I meet far too many
>> shooting men who cannot identify common birds. I have
>> always felt a legal requirement for some sort of
>> qualification would be a good idea.
>
> I personally think that qualifications are a double headed
> sword which can just as easily be turned on the user.
> IMHO the DSC1 is a farce; the qualification is made void
> because of the vast differences in courses. Compare the DMQ
> HQ to the WJEC and you would be comparing chalk and cheese.

So it is up to the shooting organizations to get in there first.
I think government policy is to pass on the responsibility for
such tests to private organizations. As a sporting agent, it
horrified me how many "informed" shooting men did not know the
difference between a sparrowhawk and a kestrel, etc.

>
>>
>>> It has surprised me how much the DSC1 has become
>>> statutory and is required by the police and most stalking
>>> syndicates, would any further “vermin shooting
>>> qualifications” pose a threat to shooting or simply
>>> increase our public image?
>>
>> The latter. Although I am not certified!<G>
>
> Would you pay £300 to take a qualification that would teach
> you how to set snares, shoot foxes or lamp rabbits?

No, but then there is nothing to stop me offering such courses
at £150 if yours costs £300!<G> Presumably both courses would
need to be "approved" by some authoritative body but I would
definitely be against the BASC or other single organization
having a monopoly. I am no longer a member of any. They seem to
be appallingly managed. I asked for membership details of the
Countryside Alliance months ago -- and I'm still waiting! But it
is nice to know they don't need my money.

>
>>
>>> If fox hunting is banned, then hare coursing and stag
>>> hunting will also be banned. Would a ban on hare coursing
>>> increase hare numbers?
>>
>> No.
>
> I don’t think it would either.
>
>>
>> If so, is that a good thing or a bad
>>> thing and how would they be controlled?
>>
>> It was not unusual for us to shoot 600 (white/blue) hares
>> a day on the Grampians. (That's the limit as more than
>> that won't fit into two Land Rovers). That is better
>> control than could ever be achieved by coursing. But I
>> doubt whether shooting is as humane as coursing.
>>
>> Would there be less
>>> tolerance of low land deer on agricultural land?
>>
>> In Devon, less. The social pressures to leave the deer for
>> the hunt and tolerate some crop damage will be removed.
>
> How would you expect this to effect deer numbers?

An increase up to a level that will be tolerated by farmers.
The new agricultural grant structure may have a major
influence, when grants are paid on acreage and not on
production. As a small farmer, I am expecting to go from
livestock production to forestry. Unless I can control deer
myself, I will (reluctantly) have to pay someone to do it in
the establishment years. After that, I'll probably do nothing
due to old age!

>> Just my opinions but I do have an entry in Bailey's
>> Hunting Directory. Also, note the Labour Government's
>> priorities. Fox hunting is "more important than the
>> pensions bill"....
>
>:)
>
> John
>

It is interesting that no one else has replied to this question.
Is that an indicator of the level of concern?

Derry
 

keith

Distinguished
Mar 30, 2004
1,335
0
19,280
Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

"John" <zero_one34@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns95634824EF611OEcopyremovedheaders@130.133.1.4...
> Derry Argue <derry(delete)@adviegundogs.co.uk> wrote in
> news:Xns956262D7B1A28derryadviegundogscou@130.133.1.4:
>
> > There must surely be exceptions for vermin control? If so, it is
> > going to be very difficult to prove whether hunting is "for
> > sport" or for control.
>
> I don't think hunting is generally effective in keeping fox numbers
> down.
> A few years back the hunt master complained that I was shooting all the
> foxes, her husband told me to carry on. So from my experience most
> people ride for the sport and not the job of vermin control but there
> are some areas where shooting isn't practical and horse back hunting is
> the only really practical method of fox control. How common are these
> areas?, I don't know.
>

Hunts generally get huffy when they hear of foxes getting shot, nature of
the beast I suppose.
Around here the mounted pack clears up a few, but most are shot.
I do not follow (only on my land) or subscribe to the pack (other than an
annual fee for dead sheep collection) but I will be in London on Wednesday
to show my support.
There is a buzz in seeing the hounds work and foxes hunted are either dead
or alive, no wounding. I've shot hundreds of foxes and deer with a near 100%
clean kill...........but not 100%

> >
> >> Will the ban effect ownership of horses in general
> >> (increased feed costs etc.)?
> >
> > In hunting country, undoubtedly.
>
> I live on the boundary of two hunts and my thought is that if the hunts
> stop taking carcass to feed the hounds the cost of the equestrian hobby
> will have already started to rise.

It is a service that would be greatly missed.

>
> >
> >> Could such a ban be enforced?
> >
> > It is a legal requirement that all game shooters (and falconers)
> > have a game licence. How many do so and how many times is this
> > checked? That is something that is relatively easy to check --
> > but isn't. How are the police going to check what happens on
> > private land and how do they prove intent? Can they enter
> > without a warrant? What distinguishes a drag hunt from a fox
> > hunt and how does a copper tell the difference from the confines
> > of his patrol car?
>
> Yes, I agree.

Read in the papers at the weekend that the police are thinking of putting
CCTV in the hedgerows to catch hunters if the bill is passed :))

>
> >
> > Many people who ride with the
> >> hunt claim they will ignore a ban.
> >> Would a ban secure the future of firearms used for vermin
> >> control or would this lead to more statutory qualifications
> >> run by the shooting organisations?
> >
> > If it did, would this be a bad thing? I meet far too many
> > shooting men who cannot identify common birds. I have always
> > felt a legal requirement for some sort of qualification would be
> > a good idea.
>
> I personally think that qualifications are a double headed sword which
> can just as easily be turned on the user.
> IMHO the DSC1 is a farce; the qualification is made void because of the
> vast differences in courses. Compare the DMQ HQ to the WJEC and you
> would be comparing chalk and cheese.

A simple multiple choice on wildlife/farming would weed out many. Should be
made compulsory for anyone leaving cities for a life or walk in the country

>
> >
> >> It has surprised me how much the DSC1 has become statutory
> >> and is required by the police and most stalking syndicates,
> >> would any further "vermin shooting qualifications" pose a
> >> threat to shooting or simply increase our public image?
> >
> > The latter. Although I am not certified!<G>
>
> Would you pay £300 to take a qualification that would teach you how to
> set snares, shoot foxes or lamp rabbits?
>
> >
> >> If fox hunting is banned, then hare coursing and stag
> >> hunting will also be banned. Would a ban on hare coursing
> >> increase hare numbers?
> >
> > No.
>
> I don't think it would either.

Most Pikeys can't read, and if they could they wouldn't take any notice of
the law.

>
> >
> > If so, is that a good thing or a bad
> >> thing and how would they be controlled?
> >
> > It was not unusual for us to shoot 600 (white/blue) hares a day
> > on the Grampians. (That's the limit as more than that won't
> > fit into two Land Rovers). That is better control than could
> > ever be achieved by coursing. But I doubt whether shooting is as
> > humane as coursing.

Again, dead or alive, no peppered arses........., Few years back went
coursing for an afternoon just south of Tommatin (sp), 20 or so were caught,
but I can see where your 600 came from! The hillsides were alive with them.

> >
> > Would there be less
> >> tolerance of low land deer on agricultural land?
> >
> > In Devon, less. The social pressures to leave the deer for the
> > hunt and tolerate some crop damage will be removed.
>
> How would you expect this to effect deer numbers?

Numbers reduced, stands to reason, unlike Scotland where a stalker has
1000's of acres of land under his control, Devon is made up of small farms
all with different ideas of an ideal deer population. With hunting, they
had a collective interest, without it who knows?

>
> > Just my opinions but I do have an entry in Bailey's Hunting
> > Directory. Also, note the Labour Government's priorities. Fox
> > hunting is "more important than the pensions bill"....
>

Too bloody right

Keith.
 

keith

Distinguished
Mar 30, 2004
1,335
0
19,280
Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

"Derry Argue" <derry(delete)@adviegundogs.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Xns956359C45719Bderryadviegundogscou@130.133.1.4...
> John <zero_one34@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:Xns95634824EF611OEcopyremovedheaders@130.133.1.4:
>
> > Derry Argue <derry(delete)@adviegundogs.co.uk> wrote in
> > news:Xns956262D7B1A28derryadviegundogscou@130.133.1.4:
> >
> >> There must surely be exceptions for vermin control? If so,
> >> it is going to be very difficult to prove whether hunting
> >> is "for sport" or for control.
> >
> > I don't think hunting is generally effective in keeping fox
> > numbers down.
>
> Try snaring in sheep country.
> Try lamping in forestry.
> In some areas, hunting with hounds IS the only effective way of
> controlling foxes, albeit with the addition of lurchers and
> shotguns. These packs are generally referred to as "gun packs"
> and, this far north, are often followed on foot because it would
> be impossible to take a horse, let alone an ATV, on much of the
> terrain. Much of the time these packs operate on "call out" to
> deal with a specific problem and charge for their services. When
> you get into defining what a pack of hounds is, things get
> complicated.
>

That's the trouble, our media only shows the mounted packs, usually Prince
Charles Baufort hunt, never show footage of the foot packs in Wales and
northern England. Went out with the Conninstan foot pack (no guns, only
hounds and terriers) in the Lake district a while back, real fox control
over country that horses and ATV's can't get too.
Hard as nails and bloody fit.

Keith.
 

john

Splendid
Aug 25, 2003
3,819
0
22,780
Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

Derry Argue <derry(delete)@adviegundogs.co.uk> wrote in
news:Xns956359C45719Bderryadviegundogscou@130.133.1.4:

>> I don’t think hunting is generally effective in keeping fox
>> numbers down.
>
> Try snaring in sheep country.
> Try lamping in forestry.
> In some areas, hunting with hounds IS the only effective way of
> controlling foxes, albeit with the addition of lurchers and
> shotguns.

From a management point of view, controlling foxes with hounds isn’t
very efficient and in my experience isn’t the definitive purpose.
I totally agree that there are places where alternative control methods
are limited but there are many more places where hounds would cause more
damage than the fox. My point of view is that horse back fox hunting is
low on the scale of efficiency and low on the scale of effectiveness but
high on the scale of humanity. This is where I think the fox hunters
have gone wrong. They have been long to scared to admit that they enjoy
the chase, which in my opinion has unbalanced public opinion and made
the hunts look bad.
Many people get adrenaline rushes from far worse.


>>there are some areas where
>> shooting isn’t practical and horse back hunting is the only
>> really practical method of fox control. How common are
>> these areas?, I don’t know.
>
> But such areas undoubtedly exist. Take a look at a map of
> the UK. Laws should apply universally. When there are
> exceptions, the courts have to decide. Where there are too many
> exceptions, it is called "bad law" as it cannot be enforced.

It would be folly to say that there isn’t an area where the only means
of control is by a pack of hounds. I think that this is a very important
subject for all.
When I take my dog out lamping, he is effective only because of the
large numbers of rabbits contained in a small area. The big picture
would show that my dog isn’t really that effective at rabbit control, I
am sure disease and cars are more effective but where is the line drawn.
If people can not hunt foxes with a pack of hounds, then is it okay for
me to hunt rabbits with one dog? Two? Three? Or Four?
I think we are getting into dangerous territory here; surly hunting with
dogs is just that, no matter how many K9’s are involved.


> Ah, something I actually know about! The Animal By-Products
> Regulations! The EU Parliament wants to see all fallen stock
> incinerated. Period. It will be the owner who has to foot the
> bill for disposal as already happens over much of Scotland,
> except "remote areas" where burying is still allowed. I now need
> a licence (with inspections, outrageous requirements, record
> keeping, etc. and draconian fines if I put a foot wrong) to
> allow me to feed beef tripe to my dogs.

Is it now illegal for hunts to take carcasses?
A friend of mine feeds green tripe to his collies but I know he doesn’t
have a licence. Can you point me in the direction of some information,
so that I can make him aware of the current situation?


> It is interesting that no one else has replied to this question.
> Is that an indicator of the level of concern?

IMHO it is of concern to every one of us, we all know what will come
next if these anti’s get a victory.
Breeding birds for targets is already fast becoming a well used phrase.

John
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

John <zero_one34@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:Xns9563A2078AB88OEcopyremovedheaders@130.133.1.4: I
totally agree that there are places
> where alternative control methods are limited but there are
> many more places where hounds would cause more damage than
> the fox.

I used to go out with Nicky McNicol who was a well known
character in the Highlands. He kept a few lurchers and terriers.
I grumbled about the foxes in the large areas of gorse scrub
behind my house. He came over with a couple of lurchers and two
terriers. We casually walked the outer edge of the gorse. Very
soon there was barking, then they dogs had the fox. Never seen
anything more efficient in my life. I saw a lot more like that,
too.

> When I take my dog out lamping, he is effective only
> because of the large numbers of rabbits contained in a
> small area. The big picture would show that my dog isn’t
> really that effective at rabbit control, I am sure disease
> and cars are more effective but where is the line drawn.

Granted. But dogs can be highly efficient at controlling
rabbits. May I suggest you don't do it for a living?<G> When
rabbits were worth money, the tinks around here were into it in
a big way as they were required for the pet food trade and
commanded a premium only if they containmed no lead shot. The
price of lurchers went through the roof! Latterly, they
discovered it was cheaper to import them from China.

> If people can not hunt foxes with a pack of hounds, then is
> it okay for me to hunt rabbits with one dog? Two? Three? Or
> Four? I think we are getting into dangerous territory here;
> surly hunting with dogs is just that, no matter how many
> K9’s are involved.

Absolutely! And if hunting with dogs is cruel, what about
ferrets? Falconry?
>
>
>> Ah, something I actually know about! The Animal
>> By-Products Regulations! The EU Parliament wants to see
>> all fallen stock incinerated. Period. It will be the owner
>> who has to foot the bill for disposal as already happens
>> over much of Scotland, except "remote areas" where burying
>> is still allowed. I now need a licence (with inspections,
>> outrageous requirements, record keeping, etc. and
>> draconian fines if I put a foot wrong) to allow me to feed
>> beef tripe to my dogs.
>
> Is it now illegal for hunts to take carcasses?

No, but I am prepared to bet the hygiene requirements make the
sanitary conditions higher than your local hospital! If they are
licenced to take carcasses, they must have an approved means of
disposing of Specified Risk Material (heads, spinal column,
guts, etc) which means installing an approved incinerator and
washing down everything within sight with an approved
disinfectant every five minutes. OK, I exaggerate, but it seems
that way.

> A friend of mine feeds green tripe to his collies but I
> know he doesn’t have a licence. Can you point me in the
> direction of some information, so that I can make him aware
> of the current situation?

I am sorry to say he will find out soon enough. The abattoir is
breaking the law if they sell it to him without his being
licenced as a "Final User" for Category 2 beef tripe. He will
still be able to get washed tripe, suitably bagged, but he will
probably find he can get newspaper cheaper and if he soaks it
over night it will certainly be more nutritious. The abattoir
must be licenced to sell washed tripe to the public as "pet
food".

BTW, in my opinion, there is less risk in the spread of disease
from unwashed tripe than the washed product. Washed sounds
cleaner but it removes the natural stomach acids that preserve
the meat. Leave washed tripe in the bag over night and next day
it is stinking. The unwashed material will keep for ages if hung
up in the dry where the wind can get at it.
>
>
>> It is interesting that no one else has replied to this
>> question. Is that an indicator of the level of concern?
>
> IMHO it is of concern to every one of us, we all know what
> will come next if these anti’s get a victory.
> Breeding birds for targets is already fast becoming a well
> used phrase.

Aren't there some fairly severe restictions on rearing game
birds in fellow EU countries? It was almost taxed out of
existence in Italy years ago. My local game dealer says the
costs of disposing of unwanted "trim" now almost makes the
business unviable, let alone the regulations.

>
> John
>
>
Derry
>
>
 

john

Splendid
Aug 25, 2003
3,819
0
22,780
Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

Derry Argue <derry(delete)@adviegundogs.co.uk> wrote in
news:Xns9563C4F2D9677derryadviegundogscou@130.133.1.4:

> John <zero_one34@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:Xns9563A2078AB88OEcopyremovedheaders@130.133.1.4: I
> totally agree that there are places
>> where alternative control methods are limited but there are
>> many more places where hounds would cause more damage than
>> the fox.
>
> I used to go out with Nicky McNicol who was a well known
> character in the Highlands. He kept a few lurchers and terriers.
> I grumbled about the foxes in the large areas of gorse scrub
> behind my house. He came over with a couple of lurchers and two
> terriers. We casually walked the outer edge of the gorse. Very
> soon there was barking, then they dogs had the fox. Never seen
> anything more efficient in my life. I saw a lot more like that,
> too.

A vastly different scenario than 30 odd hounds, 20 odd riders and 10 odd
terrier men.

>
>> When I take my dog out lamping, he is effective only
>> because of the large numbers of rabbits contained in a
>> small area. The big picture would show that my dog isn’t
>> really that effective at rabbit control, I am sure disease
>> and cars are more effective but where is the line drawn.
>
> Granted. But dogs can be highly efficient at controlling
> rabbits. May I suggest you don't do it for a living?<G> When
> rabbits were worth money, the tinks around here were into it in
> a big way as they were required for the pet food trade and
> commanded a premium only if they containmed no lead shot. The
> price of lurchers went through the roof! Latterly, they
> discovered it was cheaper to import them from China.

I sell my fair share of bunnies to the highest payer. £1.50 is what I
get in the skin.
There is a premium price for ferreted rabbits but I’ve never bother
selling any rabbits my dogs have caught due to bruising, these are
frozen for the dogs’ dinner.

>
>> If people can not hunt foxes with a pack of hounds, then is
>> it okay for me to hunt rabbits with one dog? Two? Three? Or
>> Four? I think we are getting into dangerous territory here;
>> surly hunting with dogs is just that, no matter how many
>> K9’s are involved.
>
> Absolutely! And if hunting with dogs is cruel, what about
> ferrets? Falconry?

They will be next!
If I can recall I’ve seen a report from some MP or another decrying the
use of ferrets. The report was amusing due to the writer making
reference to the US ferrets and US laws.
I’ll see if I still have it on file, the report that is.

>> A friend of mine feeds green tripe to his collies but I
>> know he doesn’t have a licence. Can you point me in the
>> direction of some information, so that I can make him aware
>> of the current situation?
>
> I am sorry to say he will find out soon enough. The abattoir is
> breaking the law if they sell it to him without his being
> licenced as a "Final User" for Category 2 beef tripe. He will
> still be able to get washed tripe, suitably bagged, but he will
> probably find he can get newspaper cheaper and if he soaks it
> over night it will certainly be more nutritious. The abattoir
> must be licenced to sell washed tripe to the public as "pet
> food".

I’ll not say too much about my friend because I know he is still getting
tripe. The Abattoir owner is a good friend and at a guess would turn a
blind eye to reg’s.
My friend will not feed bleached tripe to his dogs.

>
> BTW, in my opinion, there is less risk in the spread of disease
> from unwashed tripe than the washed product. Washed sounds
> cleaner but it removes the natural stomach acids that preserve
> the meat. Leave washed tripe in the bag over night and next day
> it is stinking. The unwashed material will keep for ages if hung
> up in the dry where the wind can get at it.

I totally agree.

> Aren't there some fairly severe restictions on rearing game
> birds in fellow EU countries? It was almost taxed out of
> existence in Italy years ago. My local game dealer says the
> costs of disposing of unwanted "trim" now almost makes the
> business unviable, let alone the regulations.

They will stop game shooting eventually be it by tax, rules or law.

John