other hobbies???

[IDB1]

Suggesting that you grow up is hardly an insult.

Of course there is some pleasure derived otherwise nobody would do it. You are just misunderstanding the source of the pleasure.
It's not from the animal dying, that's for sure. I can assure you I am not afflicted with 'blood lust' (otherwise I'd take my rifle out and shoot the vermin instead - much higher success rate and volume of blood spilled too)..

Just because you believe it's wrong doesn't make it so.. you claimed there were less cruel methods of pest control. Twice you have been asked for some examples, so??

Oh.. foxes are still hunted, the Hunting Act is unworkable and flawed.
Only now they are flushed out of their homes by dogs to face a shotgun or lamped at night and shot from a distance with a high-power rifle.

Have you aired your 'anti' opinions to the fishermen too?

 

[IDB1]

You know those people, like, um, pest control experts?.

Dude.. you really need to get a clue if you are going to engage in a debate of this nature.

How do you think the pest controllers despatch vermin?
They snare, gas, shoot, ferret, lamp etc. etc. etc.
No way on this earth would I gas or snare vermin.. leaving a warren full of dying rabbits to suffocate and rot underground or a rabbit, caught in a snare, to writhe in agony until it died.

 

[crud]

nice try neil but we are not talking about foxes I am not interested in a fox hunting debate.

We are specifically talking about Rabbits.

I eat meet, beef, lamb, pork. That doesnt mean I agree eating Dog, Horse or Whale. Get it? things can be similar and totally different at the same time.

This is the problem of Rabbits

All farmers have a duty under law to keep the rabbit population under control on their own property. Until now, if a neighbour fails to do so and crops on an adjacent farm are at risk, any aggrieved farmers could apply to the Government for an order compelling the dispatch of the rabbits.
Anyone who ignored the order from Natural England would be liable to criminal prosecution.

the attached pictures are traditional methods for controlling numbers. mass murder. Where the rabbit has no chance.

Hunting with dogs, is natural. Infact it is natural selection. The fittest strongest cleverist rabbits survive. Strengthening the population whilst keeping the numbers at substainable level.

I will repeat myself. You don't understand the problem, you have no better solution to offer.

 

[Neil]

Suggesting that you grow up is hardly an insult.

It's called ad hominem.

It's what happens in an argument, where rationale and logic are ignored, in favour of attacking the person.

Of course there is some pleasure derived otherwise nobody would do it. You are just misunderstanding the source of the pleasure.
It's not from the animal dying, that's for sure. I can assure you I am not afflicted with 'blood lust' (otherwise I'd take my rifle out and shoot the vermin instead - much higher success rate and volume of blood spilled too)..

I've not accused you personally of enjoying the animal dying - although I suspect some that are involved in similar pursuits do actually enjoy that.

ALL I've said is that my personal opinion (yes, that's right, that's all I wrote, which I'm still entitled to, because that's how it works) is that it's wrong to kill things for entertainment. And I stand by that - that's my personal opinion, it's not a crusade, I just aired my opinion, like we're all entitled to.

 

[The Ken]

Snares - not very nice,
Clipped with a shotgun and crawl into a bush to die over hours - not very nice,
Poisoned - crawl into a bush to die over hours or days - not very nice.
Caged and fed till bursting and dispatched by a machine or cleaver - not very nice - (referring to chickens here, and yes I still eat them)

Some of these methods are banned now (thank goodness) but some are not, in fact the last one is an industry we seem happy with or ignorant of.

These animals are being eaten and are too abundant, plus it is fairer as it is not a pack of dogs running an animal into ground over miles purely for fun (like fox hunting).

I think as the animal is vermin and it is eaten (and this is key) it is fine, especially as it had a "free range" existence before it's demise. I would rather live like this as a rabbit than be farmed like a caged pig or chicken.

On a side note, my cat used to bring in rabbits, he loved it, it was entertainment for him, they lived for hours unless I got to them first.

 

[Neil]

nice try neil but we are not talking about foxes I am not interested in a fox hunting debate.

I raised fox hunting, because the exact same rationale is used for it's defence.

We are specifically talking about Rabbits.

And given the problem you are citing, the radical difference between them as an animal, to those involved in fox hunting, are?

I eat meet, beef, lamb, pork. That doesnt mean I agree eating Dog, Horse or Whale. Get it? things can be similar and totally different at the same time.

How so?

Other cultures would find it normal to eat those other things.

Ignoring protected / threatened species, for a minute, where does one become acceptable, and one not?

That's right - YOUR value system.

This is the problem of Rabbits

All farmers have a duty under law to keep the rabbit population under control on their own property. Until now, if a neighbour fails to do so and crops on an adjacent farm are at risk, any aggrieved farmers could apply to the Government for an order compelling the dispatch of the rabbits.
Anyone who ignored the order from Natural England would be liable to criminal prosecution.

the attached pictures are traditional methods for controlling numbers. mass murder. Where the rabbit has no chance.

In those instances - like when cattle was slaughtered because of foot and mouth, there's a significant underlying reason, compared with them being killed simply for the purposes of entertainment.

Do you think that coursing is an effective means of population control for rabbits? Do you think that's why it's done?

Or is it done for entertainment. As a consequence, it can then be said that the population needs controlling as a defence - oh and guess what - that bit you said was irrelevant that I raised, fox hunting, the same arguments were made in defence of it when the hunting ban was introduced.

Hunting with dogs, is natural. Infact it is natural selection. The fittest strongest cleverist rabbits survive. Strengthening the population whilst keeping the numbers at substainable level.

And I'd have no problem with animals in their natural environemnt, organically hunting others.

But in most situations we're talking about, they're "trained" to do so.

I will repeat myself. You don't understand the problem, you have no better solution to offer.

So it's an effective means, then, of addressing the problem?

Coursing and fox hunting dealt / deals with all the needs of population control of rabbits or foxes, does it?

 

[velomaniac]

Cats, cold blooded viscious killers with a sadistic side but oh aren't they cute. We get bent out of shape about what people do but get all gooey about the monster lounging by the fire :roll:

 

[IDB1]

It's called ad hominem.

It's what happens in an argument, where rationale and logic are ignored, in favour of attacking the person..

My arguments on this topic are full of logic, rationale and - most importantly - FACT.
I repeat (just this once) that my suggesting you grow up is a result of my opinion that you are displaying immaturity in your argument. Not an insult.

I've not accused you personally of enjoying the animal dying - although I suspect some that are involved in similar pursuits do actually enjoy that..

Yes, they do. And, truth be told (again), it's quite unsavoury and I do my best not to associate with those people.

my personal opinion (yes, that's right, that's all I wrote, which I'm still entitled to, because that's how it works) is that it's wrong to kill things for entertainment. And I stand by that - that's my personal opinion, it's not a crusade, I just aired my opinion, like we're all entitled to.

Of course you are entitled to an opinion, nobody is suggesting you aren't.
But opinions that oppose fact are flawed.
It's like me saying that, in my opinion, it is night-time right now.
I am entitled to that opinion but, since it is factually incorrect, I would expect someone to call me on it.

 

[IDB1]

But in most situations we're talking about, they're "trained" to do so.

Most, but not this...

My dogs (and ferrets) hunt because they are genetically predisposed to do so.

It's in their genes, they cannot help it.

In fact.. most dogs will chase things naturally.. even those bred from generations of pet and show dogs.

 

[Neil]

my personal opinion (yes, that's right, that's all I wrote, which I'm still entitled to, because that's how it works) is that it's wrong to kill things for entertainment. And I stand by that - that's my personal opinion, it's not a crusade, I just aired my opinion, like we're all entitled to.

Of course you are entitled to an opinion, nobody is suggesting you aren't.
But opinions that oppose fact are flawed.

1. My opinion that it's cruel to kill animals for entertainment or sport, can't be countered by fact, since it's an emotional judgement that doesn't get trumped.

2. What facts have been presented, here? Are you contended that coursing (and fox hunting) were effective as sole means of controlling the population of rabbits (or foxes)? 'cos I'm just not seeing the facts rolling in.