Shooting ban, could we next?

steve2

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 4, 2010
Messages
4,651
Reaction score
1,782
Location
Worcestershire
With the ban on shooting ‘pest’ birds by Natural England after giving in and bowing down to a challenge by environmentalists can we still consider that fishing will never be banned.
Environmentalists / bunny huggers see things in different way when it comes to animals.
 
Last edited:

sam vimes

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
12,242
Reaction score
1,913
Location
North Yorkshire.
I think it's rather inevitable that they'll go for angling once they've won the easier battles. Hunting with dogs/foxhunting was first. Shooting is the ongoing battle (which isn't done with yet). I suspect they might have other targets before angling, but it'll be on their list.

An otherwise indifferent, increasingly urban, population is quite easily swayed.
 

daniel121

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2016
Messages
960
Reaction score
3
Unfortunately and I said this years ago when fox hunting was banned, we should stand shoulder to shoulder with these people to stop this decay of social liberty
 

mikench

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
27,413
Reaction score
17,776
Location
leafy cheshire
An otherwise indifferent, increasingly urban, population is quite easily swayed.

Until rats and foxes destroy their bins, moles and badgers damage their manicured lawns, crows and magpies chase away the cute little tits and finches on their feeders , mink kill their free range hens and pet rabbit and gulls nest on the roofs! Then the hypocrites turn!
 

Philip

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
5,759
Reaction score
3,166
Angling is ultimately doomed and its just a question of timescale.

For the time being Hunting will always be ahead of us..however is angling for "sport" worse than hunting for "food" in the eyes of the general public ?

I have a feeling the answer is yes which could be very bad indeed for us.
 

rich66

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
891
Reaction score
492
Location
Leicestershire
Their already altering the licenses to shoot vermin in response to these idiots, hopefully we’ll see some sense from the Gov
Not holding my breath though
 

108831

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2017
Messages
8,761
Reaction score
4,193
I'd like to know who is going to stop you,let's be honestly could go fishing on some rivers and not see a soul...
 

theartist

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 27, 2010
Messages
4,179
Reaction score
1,735
Location
On another planet
By the time angling is banned (Throw the huge sea fishing and fly fishing fraternity in as well) society would have already melted down to anarchy due to current so called ethical, many would argue hypocritical, political values trending in the major urban areas around the world.

Unless you have great grandchildren I wouldn't worry, and even then fishing would be mighty low down on the list of priorities when the population is so huge and so driven by monetary greed or racial division
 

sam vimes

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
12,242
Reaction score
1,913
Location
North Yorkshire.
I'd like to know who is going to stop you,let's be honestly could go fishing on some rivers and not see a soul...

It's a fair point, but one that applies equally to foxhunting/hunting with dogs or shooting birds that were previously on the general licence.
 

bennygesserit

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 26, 2011
Messages
6,046
Reaction score
360
Location
.
Not all lefties are bad , as a raving PC loony I feel qualified to speak "for my people"

I think the right wing press stir up a lot of ***t about things like and try to get people excited about not being allowed to say blackboard

Shooting doesn't bother me , I had a lot of mates who used to shoot , fishing doesn't bother me , TBH not even foxhunting which I think generates a lot of income , or used to , for some people

What I really think is the extremes on the left and the right manipulate the media in order to get a reaction , and they use facebook and all kinds of things to do so
So while the Daily Mail shrieks that immigrants cause cancer and the left shrieks that baa baa black sheep is racist I say **** em most people are quite sensible - live and let live
 

steve2

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 4, 2010
Messages
4,651
Reaction score
1,782
Location
Worcestershire
No government in their right mind would sacrifice this..

Recreational angling puts PS1.4bn into English economy - GOV.UK

Without going into politics £1.4bn is not a lot to lose when other groups jump on the bandwagon.

Can’t think for one moment farmers and landowners expected to be told they can’t shoot vermin on their own land without having to apply for a licence and only after trying non lethal methods to control them.
After all shooting also puts millions of pounds into the countryside.
 

peter crabtree

AKA Simon, 1953 - 2022 (RIP)
Joined
Oct 8, 2008
Messages
8,304
Reaction score
3,263
Location
Metroland. SW Herts
They aren't banning the profitable side of shooting such as game birds. Farmers and landowners will still be able to carry on with their businesses.
Ban fishing and apart from the loss of income the gov would also land an enormous compensation bill for fishery owners plus unemployment benefits for redundant workers.
It won't happen.
 

mikench

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
27,413
Reaction score
17,776
Location
leafy cheshire
I agree it won't happen period! If there is one thing Donald Trump and I can agree on its fake news! I have virtually given up on newspapers particularly the drivel put out in the rags like the Mail, Express, sun etc.
 
Last edited:

steve2

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 4, 2010
Messages
4,651
Reaction score
1,782
Location
Worcestershire
They aren't banning the profitable side of shooting such as game birds. Farmers and landowners will still be able to carry on with their businesses.
Ban fishing and apart from the loss of income the gov would also land an enormous compensation bill for fishery owners plus unemployment benefits for redundant workers.
It won't happen.

I do believe that some are missing the point, the bunny huggers have won a victory with this part ban.
What some of will ask is what is the difference between this type of shooting and other types of shooting of birds.
Then will come the question of using all animals for sport.

Why would the government give fishery owners compensation they don’t give it to other business owners that have closed down?
 

no-one in particular

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
7,592
Reaction score
3,330
Location
australia
They get bored, fox hunting not much media attention anymore, Badger cull, drifting out of the news. this is thier new one, Chris Packham gets plastered all over the news again, thought he would, doesn't miss a trick that one. Fishing will come round and have it's day and I think we will lose the argument.
 

mikench

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
27,413
Reaction score
17,776
Location
leafy cheshire
Fox hunting continues to this day despite the ban! If you take the arguments for a ban on using animals for sport you must include horse racing, show jumping, greyhound racing, crufts, pigeon racing and so on!

If these activities are replaced by politician and tree hugger baiting then things won't be so bad.

We have a lot of pessimists on here. I repeat don't give them ideas and contribute to fake news.
 

nottskev

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 3, 2016
Messages
5,903
Reaction score
7,913
Dismissing all environmentalists as "bunny huggers" is throwing the baby out with the bathwater, both in terms of lumping people together and blinding ourselves to the need for a positive environmentalist support for things we want, as people and as anglers.

In this case, I understand that the legal challenge, pre-empted by Natural England, was about the automatic renewal of a license to shoot that covered sacred ibis, parakeets, and jays as well as crows and pigeons, and there will be a different system in place before long. Hardly apocalypse now.

I don't buy into a simple distinction between environmentalists (boo!) and those trustworthy guardians of traditional countryside values, landowners and the shooting industries(hooray!).


To give just one example: grouse moors - those profitable playgrounds of the rich – are a Bermuda Triangle where birds of prey disappear and a heather monoculture induced to feed young birds. They are owned by a tiny elite who receive public subsidy for their contribution to environmental damage.

To mention another, the pheasant shooting industry sees some 40 million pheasants released each year, to impact on native species via competition for food, prompting further predator suppression and, as roadkill when the over-eating, stuffed pheasants wander into the road, providing a useful food source for “pest” species. Those who rear them bear no responsibility for them when released. It has also secured state-sponsored persecution of a protected species – the buzzard – to satisfy some of our richest fellow citizens.

I’m afraid that dividing us up into ignorant tree-huggers and savvy country folk misses that point that a lot of damage to our environment is actually caused by those who own the land and milk it for profit – and often with the aid of public subsidy. We rely on environmentalists to inform us about the threats to our countryside, and to expose the murky politics around those who threaten it.

True, there are idiots out there who would raid a zoo and liberate the animals etc, but there are idiots in every walk of life. The Daily Mail takes a "tree-hugger" view of environmentalists - but don't forget long-term former editor Pauk Dacre owns a grouse moor. Opposing environmental politics is a step backwards.
 
Top