Off Topic The Cecil should not have done one thread

The Law in the Falklands is fundamentally UK Law, as you would expect if it is deemed to belong to the UK - the UK does not preside over anywhere were the Law is the opposite of what we have here - on the other hand Denmark has agreed to protect the whale and ban / limit whaling as part of its membership of the EU- Denmark has come under mounting criticism for stance with the Faroes and rightly so - you can't say one thing and do something else

 

I witness the damage to our oceans and seas, every time I dive. I see the results of over fishing and fish farming. I have been fortunate to see sea horses, shoals of thousands of fish, rays and sharks. I dearly want to dive with or near whales. At the same time I want to see remote and traditional communities survive without having a MacDonalds and Tesco. Our seas are a dumping ground and I generally finish a dive with a collection of rubbish found on the sea bed. Sea Sheppard and Greenpeace do a very good job, but the pilot whale population is not under threat and the activists are simply using emotions to further a bigger cause.

 

please log in to view this image

hardly - this was my avatar about 3 or 4 years ago - I've always been very vocal/ active regarding whales and foxes - I absolutely abhor animal bloodlust

 

What do you make of sharks when they kill and eat marine mammals, seals and sea lions etc etc. Or how about a lion ripping apart a gazelle or wildebeest?

 

I don't doubt your commitment, I simply do not share all of your views.

 

Seems to me you are saying a lot but missing the point. I am not talking about the other grouse, I'm talking about the ones killed for sport. They are not particularly good eating, it is simply their flight style that makes them a challenging shot. Of course, 'if the rich folk did not wish to shoot them their numbers would be far less', but to what end, just to shoot them for sport - that's the whole point of this thread.

Your whole concept on moving targets is deeply flawed and totally out of tune with reality. There are hunters who stake out their prey, shoot over clear, open ground and from a very favourable range, but just what is the point? Yes, these guys should hit the mark and make a clean kill, but not all do and your acquaintances should be asked about spooked animals as the trigger is squeezed. But what about hunting quick prey over difficult terrain, in woods with light and wind variations? Your local knowledge excludes so much wider scope it is unbelievable you are pushing it so vigorously. Try watching Yukon Men or one of those types of programs and you will see professional hunters shooting at moving targets (and static ones) and missing, then following the animal to try and finish it - not always possible. These people do it for food or defence, which I find totally acceptable.

 

I would hope that society (civilisation) would help whale hunters realise that there are now other options; just as Indonesian head-hunters have changed their ways, so, perhaps can they. Someone else used the term blood-lust and the spectacle of the whale slaughter is unpalatable, slaughter might be necessary, but it should not be a spectacle in this day and age.
I am pleased for you that your relatively new hobby of diving is giving you such a good insight to the sorry state of our oceans. I was swimming in the sea yesterday and was taken short so had a piss, the guilt will be with me for sometime.

 

I think Australian Aboriginals ask these question too!

 

Do any of these anti-hunting extremists own a cat? Cats like to hunt for sport. Likewise dogs. In fact a dog off the lead tore up an entire production run of cygnets at my local park the other week.

Hunting for sport is natural. There should be responsibility, and endangered species should be left to recover, but it's an entirely natural pass time which many predators partake in. So long as it's humane and not barbaric, why should there be a problem?

In fact, many of these illegal 'sport' kills do get sold for produce. People like the Chinese love making medicine out of things like tigers and elephants.

 

In the animal kingdom,so is public ****ting, shagging and being 'naked', and in some situations infanticide.

 

And are those all things that entire race has done for thousands of years as per normal?

 

I did my first scuba dive about 8 years ago so if that is relatively new, fine. I will be diving (if the weather holds) on Sunday. I have a limited UK dive season as I wait until July when the water temp is up and I dive until October when it drops. As I do not have a season card this year, I may get more dives in. I dive on holiday and I take all of my own gear with me. The whole narrative around scuba diving in the UK has changed, taking one for the pot was acceptable before, but it isn't the done thing now. The advent of affordable underwater cameras has helped this and now everyone wants to record anything that moves.
For the second time, I do not know anyone who hunts who would target a moving animal. What happens on reality tv may mirror life, but if someone said to me that they had shot at an animal on the move I would slate them for it, it is not acceptable.
Your quote "These people do it for food or defence, which I find totally acceptable." The Faroe Islanders kill pilot whales for food, for them it is a harvest.
Game shoots manage populations, sometimes by breeding, but without that management many species would be extinct just like the Passenger Pigeon. Domestic animals are in fact commercially conserved. Selected for their qualities and bred to satisfy commercial factors. There is no difference between farm animals and game shoots. The market dictates the whole process. Whilst there is a desire to kill either for sport or for food, there will be people who supply the stock. The argument for Big Game management is that it stops poaching and controls the killing. I may not agree with it, but in the case of lions, there can be too many young male lions on a reserve and they may be culled at some point in order to preserve the balance. The reserves can earn huge amounts of money by letting Big Game hunters do the killing. If you read the reports about Cecil, licences are issued for this purpose.

 

In public? Still?

Do you live in Leicester?

 

I thought this was going to be a thread about the old Cecil cinema., at which I was going to enthusiastically agree having had to sit through Pixars latest flick at the Odeon with a strong stench of vomit coming from somewhere and watching it on a screen that was not much bigger than my TV.

 

I'm not sure it is, its almost always for food, dominance or territory.

There's no biological reason for an animal to hunt for sport, in fact its counter intuitive to survival as it expends energy on something without benefit.

I'm willing to be wrong but I can't think of any animals that hunt for sport in the true sense of the word.

 

Hunting for food or pest control (foxes, moles) isn't sport - but I do sometimes wonder when something becomes a pest.

 

I think it would be more realistic to use practice (training) , as opposed to sport.

 

Few years ago I had a fox get into my hen house, it killed the lot but didn't eat, or take away, any of what it had killed - I don't know if that's the fox equivalent of sport, it certainly wasn't for food, dominance or territory.

 

I suppose your right, but even then that's an essential part of their survival rather than doing it for fun.