I don’t advocate banning hunting
I do wish hunters would be a bit more honest about why they do it, the kill gives them a primitive pleasure rush (admittedly admitting this may get it banned)
Just in the same way I have got a pleasure adrenaline rush from parachuting, paragliding, ski racing, ski jumping, rock climbing, potholing and I’m ashamed to say in my youth illegal speed trials in a car through welsh mountain roads

I have never seen an animal shoot itself voluntarily. All of these activities require the participant's consent.

That and death isn't the actual objective of the activity.

So why not just stick to clay pigeon shooting, than blasting some creature out of the sky - which I suspect is so full of shot afterwards, it's too difficult to use as viable food?

Are these rich city types there to honestly assist culling a pest or maintain a natural order of balance? Nah, they wanna shoot summ't !

I used to live and work for Holkham Estate in Norfolk, and part of their conservation was to host shoots (ok mainly for the wealthy townie folks to come and kill stuff) but the reason for this is that they can raise funds for ongoing care and preservation (seems weird using that word when you are killing off stuff!) of the wildlife.

Yes most of them would stay at my hotel and guffaw about their daily exploits, but as I said before it serves a purpose and raises funds.

Heres the link to their page about how and why they do it for anyone interested.

Pheasant shoots , certainly in England, are on managed land. There is a game keeper whose job it is is to allow enough pheasants to breed etc and provide the conditions for that and then these are shot. They definately eat pheasants after shooting them. Anyone on a pheasant shoot has nothing to do with culling, they are really there for the number they can shoot, which they will also eat. In some ways its no different to any farming, in that a lot of the birds wouldn't be there unless they had been fostered (and foxes culled etc). Its certainly not my thing at all, but it does at least provide for some local employment.

I went to NY last september and in the US immigration queue in Calgary were a load of US hunters. One couple of rednecks had shot 40 canadian goose per morning. Not sure what the point was- they certainly didn't carry them back to US.

My step dad used to wood pigeon shoot and as a teenager I would get all worked up about it, until I realised he never ever actually managed to shoot one the entire time I knew him. I reckon he just wanted to get away from his three step-daughters for long stretches at a time!

Still have no understanding of how anyone can shoot a caribou. They are so beautiful and have a hard time surviving..............
Gryph

Load chamber. Aim. Pull trigger. If aim is good, bullet hits target.

Not quite right. The full sequence should be:

Remove Brain. Load chamber. Aim. Pull trigger. If aim is good, bullet hits target.

The Bulls are participants and do not consent.

Again the running of the bulls is a seasonal prelude to the Bull fights, where indeed the death of the bull is(was?) an objective.

I know I'm going off topic here, BUT we have animal rights activists complaining (predominantly) about calf roping (or as we now in an increasingly PC world call it Tie Down Roping), Steer Wrestling and the 'Bucking Events'. So far at the Stampede NO animals have died (or been destroyed) as a result of these 'events'. However, TWO horses have died as a result of being used in the 'sport' of Chuckwagon Racing.

Have no fear the animal rights activists are just as vehemently against the Chuck's.

Oi...on yer bike.

I'm trying, I'm trying.

At the beginning of this thread and discussion my opinion was that hunting was ok if it was for food and conservation. I imagined that the hunters were decent people who respected the animal and the environment.

I now have different picture in my head of groups of testoterone fuelled "buddies" out for a fun time showing off how macho they can be by killing. I looked up some statistics and info on hunting, there are many many more people who want to shot and kill a bear or a moose. 11 hunters for one moose. If it was all about food supplies and culling then the queues/lottery for bear and moose tags wouldn't happen. The whole trophy aspect appalls me, glorifying killing. It's far removed from humane husbandry.

I have a very good friend who hunts deer annually, he hunts alone no alcohol fuelled mayhem for him.

I am the grateful recipient of what is left in his freezer from the previous year.

Sorry if I get you wrong here Fled but I think you have contradicted yourself.

If it weren't for the culling aspect an just for the out and out lets go gun em down aspect, then there would be NO tags.

The tags are limited, so it limits the amount of animals that are killed - or culled.

So if there are 11 x more hunters want a moose than there are tags issued surely that shows that the relevant authorities that issue the tags, are keeping numbers to how many they want killed.

And you can't just go and shoot any old moose either, you may be issued a cow or a bull tag depending on what you apply for and are drawn for.

You eat the female and you mount the male (if you can afford it!) if not you keep the antlers.

I can completely see how it would appall some people and i'll reinstate tht I don't believe anyone is right or wrong.

Just wanted opinions.

Yes was watching it last night when a horse got tangled, luckily the other outriders that were there leapt to the defence of the team.