Forum home Wildlife gardening

Pheasants

12467

Posts

  • debs64debs64 West Midlands, on the edge of the Black Country Posts: 3,076
    If people genuinely just killed pheasants to eat they could be farmed and slaughtered in abattoirs. People want the enjoyment of shooting them dead. They are not vermin and do not prey on other animals so it’s not a “job” to kill them it’s for fun. They are bred in vast numbers so people can kill them. Of course it makes money for farmers but that doesn’t mean it’s acceptable and I wouldn’t fish either. Killing for food is acceptable killing for pleasure is not. Just my opinion. 
  • PosyPosy Isle of Wight.Posts: 2,302
    There's a difference between conservation and blood sports. My personal issue is with enjoying dealing out death. I accept entirely that in our unbalanced world some animals are culled. What I can't come to terms with is that it should be done for pleasure. Many birds in particular,  are bred and released purely to enable people to shoot them. 
  • PosyPosy Isle of Wight.Posts: 2,302
    And I cannot accept that you can be proud of doing something well if what you are doing is killing things for sport.
  • KiliKili Posts: 482
    dave125 said:
    I wasn't going to wade in but the last poster used the word "inexcusable"
    I grew up in the 70's, we were poor and the only occasions on which we ate well was when my Dad or myself shot a Pheasant, Woodpigeon or Rabbit. I was an excellent shot with a 12 bore at age 6 and yes today I would never hurt anything but you're saying subsistence shooting is inexcusable - you've had it way too easy
    Dave
    Making assumptions there Dave, you have no idea of what kind of life I've had and I can assure you I wouldn't have called it easy but, I grew up with mates who were farmers and none of them shoot unless its to control vermin but, you go ahead and assume all you want if that justifies it for you. 

    Who needs subsistence shooting in the UK in this day and age! If your hungry there are plenty of charities that can help with subsistence maybe not in the 70's but its inexcusable in 2020.

    'The power of accurate observation .... is commonly called cynicism by those that have not got it.

    George Bernard Shaw'

  • GemmaJFGemmaJF Posts: 2,286
    edited July 2020
    Then of course the impact on ecosystems of releasing millions of non-native birds into the wild. Huge impacts on native reptile populations have been known about for a while, pheasants simply gobble up the young as tasty snacks.

    It's one of those things I grew up with. Know people who shoot, know more people who don't. Don't mind a bit of pheasant, not my thing to go and blast one with a shot gun or have strong associations with those who do. Not hugely critical of those who defend it. Won't be upset at all if it is in activity that dwindles away in time.
  • strelitzia32strelitzia32 Posts: 767
    Just to note about being misinformed, as mentioned before I watch people on shoots for months on end, straight from my house and garden. I can see for myself exactly what happens, so there's no misinformation.

    I'll repeat my previous point. Many supporters of shoots would have us believe that only crack shot marksmen turn up, birds are humanely and instantly killed, and it's all necessary. 

    Fact is, it's not. If just 1 person in every shoot in the UK is less than perfect, that equates to thousands of birds being cruelly injured. And the reality is that, as I said, people on these shoots are hardly military trained expert snipers.

    If they were, this quote from @Dovefromabove wouldn't be necessary, which perfectly describes a bird shot, fatally injured, but in pain and not yet dead until the dog finds and retrieves it. Hardly humane, certainly not swift, and nothing to take pride in.

    gundog is of a breed with a ‘soft mouth’ and is trained to find and pick up shot birds and take them back to his handler who will check that they are dead. If they are not they will have their neck wrung to swiftly dislocate and sever the spinal cord causing instant death
  • strelitzia32strelitzia32 Posts: 767
    And to add, the argument of "if you eat meat, you should kill the animal at least once" is a fallacy.

    We're (supposedly) an intelligent and compassionate species, but we're also omnivorous by nature. Leaving the necessary food chain killing of animals to those with the tools to do it humanely isn't wrong or avoiding, it's simply a fact of modern life.

    Otherwise we can apply the same argument to war (if you want peace, you should join the military and fight) or your smartphone (if you want technology, you should work in a cobalt mine in Africa), your clothes (labor factory in the far East) and so forth. It's a subtle ad-hominem attack.
  • GemmaJFGemmaJF Posts: 2,286
    edited July 2020
    And to add, the argument of "if you eat meat, you should kill the animal at least once" is a fallacy.

    We're (supposedly) an intelligent and compassionate species, but we're also omnivorous by nature. Leaving the necessary food chain killing of animals to those with the tools to do it humanely isn't wrong or avoiding, it's simply a fact of modern life.

    Otherwise we can apply the same argument to war (if you want peace, you should join the military and fight) or your smartphone (if you want technology, you should work in a cobalt mine in Africa), your clothes (labor factory in the far East) and so forth. It's a subtle ad-hominem attack.
    It's a bit like saying, if you want dental treatment, you should pull out at least one of your own teeth first. Or if you want to drive a car, design one from scratch. It's not the way the world works.

    It's something I have a dilemma with. I eat meat, though I could never kill something I fed every day, so I would happily keep chickens for eggs but I could never wring the neck of hen that I had nurtured (though having had a country upbringing, I'm well versed with technique). I clearly remember my Mum plucking and gutting chickens and pheasants, would be a bloody (literally) awful mess in modern household kitchen.

    Call me soft, but I form a bond with animals quite quickly and have a lot of compassion for them and wouldn't want to desensitise myself in that way.

    There are those and definitely some I respect such as the late great John Seymour, author of fantastic books on self-sufficiency that would call me a hypocrite for it. 

    I can't though say that continuing to eat meat that was given to me since childhood, really means I should be fine about picking up an animal I've formed a bond with and wringing it's neck. It's just not me.

    In a survival situation would I kill for food? If pushed to it, yes I think I would. 

    To do it to prove a point, or for pleasure, no.


  • FlyDragonFlyDragon Greater ManchesterPosts: 650
    edited July 2020
    And to add, the argument of "if you eat meat, you should kill the animal at least once" is a fallacy.

    We're (supposedly) an intelligent and compassionate species, but we're also omnivorous by nature. Leaving the necessary food chain killing of animals to those with the tools to do it humanely isn't wrong or avoiding, it's simply a fact of modern life.

    Otherwise we can apply the same argument to war (if you want peace, you should join the military and fight) or your smartphone (if you want technology, you should work in a cobalt mine in Africa), your clothes (labor factory in the far East) and so forth. It's a subtle ad-hominem attack.
    Just to point out, we are historically omnivorous, but in 2020 there is absolutely no need for humans in the developed world to eat any animal product and actually a fair amount of evidence that we're healthier if we don't.  (and of course its much healthier for the animals and the planet too!) 

    Eating meat/dairy/eggs is a choice, not a necessity. 

    I don't judge anyone for making that choice, as that's what most of us were brought up with and consider normal, and I ate meat myself for more than 30 years.  But it is still a choice, especially with all the information and alternatives available now. 
  • wild edgeswild edges The north west of south east WalesPosts: 5,629
    If anyone thinks shooting a bird is less humane than sending farmed animals to an abattoir then they must be blissfully unaware of how our slaughter system works. It's largely a pointless debate though when it comes to the shooting of captive bred birds as the activity can never be sustainable in its current form. It's part of a series of much wider problems that need addressing before shooting can become ethically defendable. The UK is an overpopulated and massively nature depleted country with an odd culture of land ownership and class structure that makes what we think of as hunting quite laughable to the rest of the world. Add to that our laws regarding gun ownership, reputation as a nation of hypocritical animal lovers and the fact that taxpayers have to subsidise this 'sport' whether they like it or not and the activity will never be widely accepted by most of the population. Small scale farm shoots have their place but the big estates need to work much harder to justify their existance now IMO.



Sign In or Register to comment.