# Stop the badger cull..



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*" Over 70% of the badger population in large areas of the country will be killed, many of them healthy.

Independent scientific studies have shown that culling would be of little help in reducing bovine TB, and even suggest that it could make things worse in some areas. "

Please sign...thank you.*
Stop the badger cull - e-petitions


----------



## thedogsmother (Aug 28, 2008)

Signed, and I'll share it on fb too.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

thedogsmother said:


> Signed, and I'll share it on fb too.


*Thank you very much.*


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Bless your heart for posting this, dear Janice.

Some background information on the issue
http://www.badgertrust.org.uk/_Attachments/Resources/534_S4.pdf


----------



## suewhite (Oct 31, 2009)

Done it Jan,poor creatures suffer enough I am in the local badger watch and round here they take them for badger baiting:incazzato:


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

I don't know if it's just me, but this keeps surfacing along with dangerous dogs and the repeal of the Fox Hunting ban when governments are trying to get something through under cover.

Out local council does exactly the same 
Say they are building in the green belt, when all the time planning a huge house building elsewhere.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Repealing the fox hunting ban and approving a badger cull were two things that Cameron pledged he would do once he was in power.

Two excellent reasons not to have voted for him IMO - in fact, if my memory serves me correctly I think we did point this out on here before the election, didn't we Jan?


----------



## Bobbie (May 3, 2008)

I know your heart might be in the right place but have you ever witnessed a farmers distress when his animals are affected? and he loses them all. I have. But on the same note if you go down to our beach very early the badgers are there sometimes with their young. So I have a foot in both camps.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Signed ............


----------



## lozzibear (Feb 5, 2010)

Signed. 

I know it must be hard for farmers, but what is the point in killing the poor badgers? There is no scientific evidence that it will work... so are all those lives worth it? Sorry, but for me it is a big NO. 

This is exactly why my dad always says that people who choose not vote cannot complain when the government do things that they oppose to. And that is why I always vote, and I didn't vote for Cameron...


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Spellweaver said:


> Repealing the fox hunting ban and approving a badger cull were two things that Cameron pledged he would do once he was in power.
> 
> Two excellent reasons not to have voted for him IMO - in fact, if my memory serves me correctly I think we did point this out on here before the election, didn't we Jan?


*We sure did..
Thank you to all that have signed,much appreciated.*


----------



## Starlite (Sep 9, 2009)

so there is no evidence the badgers are carrying the TB to cattle then is that right? Whats the reasoning behind the cull then?


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Mindless violence?


----------



## RockRomantic (Apr 29, 2009)

have signed


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

I think we have all known the badger cull is a load of b*ll*cks from the off. I hoped it had gotten forgotten about


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Signing petitions is good, but if you really want to make a statement against the proposed badger cull the best thing you can do is to stop buying dairy produce!

Try soya milk, rice milk or almond milk instead.


----------



## Kirkland (Aug 28, 2012)

Signed and shared on FB


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

* Thank you again to those that have signed and shared on fb.*


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

ive already signed but just wanted to give this a bump


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> ive already signed but just wanted to give this a bump


*Thank you noushka for the bump.*


----------



## Ninedogs (Sep 15, 2012)

I agree, there is bovine TB here in Spain and as far as I know there are no badgers here.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *Thank you noushka for the bump.*


youre welcome Janice,

if it goes ahead it will be a travesty! its not even based on sound science,...& i think they say seven out of every 10 badgers will be killed in two areas both the size of the isle of white...this Government sicken me with their disrespect for wildlife & their blood lust!...they'll never opt for humane solutions...when they can kill it


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Ninedogs said:


> I agree, there is bovine TB here in Spain and as far as I know there are no badgers here.


 and on the other hand there are badgers in Germany but no bovine TB...could it be farmers have better methods of managing their cattle over there than some of our farmers over here


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> youre welcome Janice,
> 
> if it goes ahead it will be a travesty! its not even based on sound science,...& i think they say seven out of every 10 badgers will be killed in two areas both the size of the isle of white...this Government sicken me with their disrespect for wildlife & their blood lust!...they'll never opt for humane solutions...when they can kill it


*I hope to god it doesn't go ahead.And if it does i bet in a few years time you will having people moaning that our wildlife is in decline.
I'm with you where this government is concerned,blood thirsty crowd of twats.*


----------



## cazbah (Nov 2, 2009)

I can't believe it is going ahead, I don't understand why there isn't more opposition to it, do we really want crazed people with guns out in our countryside what if our cats and dogs get caught in the crossfire? I have joined the badger trust in the hope that they can do something but so far their legal challenges have fallen flat, so distressing.


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2012)

wouldn't let me. Not a uk cit or resident


----------



## Kitty_pig (Apr 9, 2011)

signed and shared x


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

signed :yesnod:


----------



## Sled dog hotel (Aug 11, 2010)

Signed...................


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*Thank you to all that have signed.*


----------



## Sled dog hotel (Aug 11, 2010)

Have also added on facebook, oddly enough my daughter had posted about the cull but doesnt look as if she knew about the petition, so with details on there too hopefully be more signatures still.


----------



## fire-siamesekitty (Jun 8, 2010)

Ive done it :thumbup1:


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Apparently this video is on FB as well

Badger Cull: Opposition To Pilot Increasing With David Attenborough And Brian May Backing Appeal


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

signed....
barbaric thing to do , poor badgers...wish i were near and could join the demos...


----------



## xxwelshcrazyxx (Jul 3, 2009)

JANICE199 said:


> *" Over 70% of the badger population in large areas of the country will be killed, many of them healthy.
> 
> Independent scientific studies have shown that culling would be of little help in reducing bovine TB, and even suggest that it could make things worse in some areas. "
> 
> ...


How you doing Janice, nice to see you around, have missed ya. will sign for you. I think it is disgusting to cull them. xx


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Well you can't please all of the people all of the time and if you bring in certain legislation, incentives, ecology organisations and try to do the best for one thing you end up crippling another so taking from Peter to feed Paul means peter does starve for a while as Paul gets incredible fat and develops gout from the riches.

To say the government has done nothing but bring in legislation to feed the blood thirsty crowds of the UK is absolute garbage. What about the wildlife and conservation act 1981, the hunting act 2005, the SSSIs that have been put aside under EU regs and law, the protection of badgers act 1992, the Countryside and Rights of Way act 2000, the hedgerow Incentive Scheme which was introduced to encourage the reintroduction and population increase of various species but also allow unbroken corridors for species to travel in order to allow populations of species to spread which meant that wildlifeproof fencing was effectively being ripped down for government grants which lead to more wildlife coming into contact with domestic livestock and not helping the situation we are now discussing. It can't work both ways so when you start to protect certain species you create issues for other species due to the high populations and freedom of movement of such species. We carry all manner of living organisms with our Right to Roam which also has a knock-on effect.

Despite whatever policies come in to satisfy the British public's unsavoury demand for everything to be in balance it is always going to create issues elsewhere because policies and protective legislation create unbalance themselves.

Yes, I would like to see a more humane solution but having seen the section on Countryfile (I am sure half of you did as well) there was no mention of any form of record being kept to ensure that the inoculated badger that was live trapped had been given the bTB inoculation jab so what is there to make sure that they are not injecting the same badgers over and over meaning that there is still a roaming population of badgers infected with bTB. A cull of the numbers would certainly make inoculating the reduced population easier and more robust in its approach to inoculating all live badgers instead of sporadic wing and a prayer schemes with random trapping, no recording or marking of inoculated badgers.

Don't forget that there are other animals that help spread bTB with another main one being Deer, and guess what, there is a Deer Act 1991 which brought in the close season hunting of all but one species of deer. This has led to an explosion in deer numbers with the regs of the act stating what can and can't be shot legally. There are only two native species of deer to the UK but other species have been introduced over time to provide sport and meat. If you were to look at the price of venison 20years ago and look at it now it has seen the same dramatic price drop as salmon. We, man introduced these alien species and so it is up to us to ensure that they are managed appropriately and sensibly for the benefits of the actual species the species their population numbers have an impact on and the age long issue of crop or commodity damage. In the last year or two the number of the deer cull quota has increased by an extra 250K so you can see the impact affording just a limited protection on these species is having on other wildlife species, domestic stock and industry.

A heard of cattle with bTB can't be sold. The infected animals are culled on site almost immediately of testing positive. The remaining herd cannot be sold, moved or bred from which effectively shuts the farmer's business down for six months at a cost of approx £30k with £10k of that falling on the farmer's shoulders and the remaining £20k coming from the public's pockets. Could you afford to lose £10k every six months? Would you be happy with this despite having to jump through loop after loop after fiery loop to meet directives, legislation and best practice policies? Would you be happy if you tried to recoup some of this money by pulling down protective fencing and planting hedgerows to support government incentives and the British Public's demands for greater freedom to the British wildlife only to find that after a few years you now find bTB on your land without a single occurrence of the issue for the last three or four generations of your family? Would you be happy to see certain breeds vanish due the issues and restrictions that come with the shutting down of production on a bTB positive farm? What is the cost of food sky rocketed as the farmers had to make up the difference in their losses they incurred during the shutdown of a bTB positive period in their herds? What if the whole farming industry had taken as much as they can and they all shut down for the last time and we had to start importing produce from countries that do not have the same strict animal welfare policies we enforce on our farming industry so we can rest assured the animal has not suffered as it may have if it was produced on the continent?

A few pilot tests to see what effect losing a couple of hundred badgers out of a 56K(est) population to not see if the management and control of this industry crippling issue can be improved but also the badger population can be improved in health as well. IT has its drawbacks but it also has much greater benefits for all species involved.

Yes they have bTB in Spain and yes they also have badgers.

If you go out most nights there will be folk walking about with guns from air pistols and rifles to large calibre rifles. Some are hobbyists (me) and some will be trained professionals who have to pass strict programmes in order to obtain a licence for carrying out such work as wild life control and it is these guys that will be doing the badger cull, not some Have A Go Harry so your pets are quite safe from such incidents. Your pets however are not safe from contracting bTB.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Badgers in Spain


----------



## alan g a (Feb 23, 2011)

Done it.
It has taken millions of year to evolve to where it is now, what gives man the right destroy it. When you think about it man was one of the last to evolve. It is not mans world to do with as he pleases, it belong everything that lives in it. All things have the right to live.


----------



## Staysee (Oct 19, 2009)

alan g a said:


> Done it.
> It has taken millions of year to evolve to where it is now, what gives man the right destroy it. When you think about it man was one of the last to evolve. It is not mans world to do with as he pleases, it belong everything that lives in it. All things have the right to live.


here here!

Its what i've always said and said before on here and been shot down for it [tho not in those exact words, but the same jist]


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Saw Brian May on BBC Breakfast News this morning - respect for that man!

Check out Brian's Team Badger website

Team Badger is a coalition of groups united to stop the badger cull


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*So pleased that so many of you have signed.Again thank you all.*


----------



## suzy93074 (Sep 3, 2008)

Signed Jan xxx


----------



## Staysee (Oct 19, 2009)

All signed!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

If you cant stomach non dairy alternatives lol then all you badger lovers buy your dairy from the co-op  their farms dont support the cull.

The Co-operative Group statement on proposed badger cull | Nature Conservation | The Co-operative


----------



## takerbabe (Jul 20, 2012)

I have signed the petition. I think it's horrible what they're doing to those poor animals.


----------



## RockRomantic (Apr 29, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> If you cant stomach non dairy alternatives lol then all you badger lovers buy your dairy from the co-op  their farms dont support the cull.
> 
> The Co-operative Group statement on proposed badger cull | Nature Conservation | The Co-operative


thank god for that! only decent shop near me is Co-op, that or a small asda, but thats rubbish!


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*Bump, and thank you again to all who have signed.*


----------



## jenniferx (Jan 23, 2009)

Just bumping again- want to keep this high up! 

The numbers are growing now. In two days it's gone from 23k to 58k. Hopefully it will get to 100k soon.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

I hope so too...


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Re the preliminary cull: I hear a list of supermarkets that sell milk supplied from the dairy farms involved in the said preliminary cull has been made available i.e. so people who still consume dairy but object to the badger cull can boycott them.
Does anyone here have the link?


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> If you cant stomach non dairy alternatives lol then all you badger lovers buy your dairy from the co-op  their farms dont support the cull.
> 
> The Co-operative Group statement on proposed badger cull | Nature Conservation | The Co-operative


What are they thinking? I am really worried about the two farms they have in the areas that produce dessert apples, cider apples, honey and cereals could be severly impacted by bTB with having badgers in their area. OH, hang on a minute, they don't have any dairy farms in that area.

They do however partner Robert Wiseman Dairies (owned by Muller) that were looking to slash 1.7p per litre off of the price they would pay British Farmers which would have put many of them out of business. The proposed price changes ould have meant the farers being paidf 25p per litre with an actual production cost of 30p per litre. At least the Co-Operative are in favour od sustainable dairy farming Fortunately they have agreed to pay 29ppl with the Co-Op paying 30ppl so the farmers are either 1ppl out of pocket or they are breaking even. Happy Christmas.

So the Co-Op get 75% of their milk through Wiseman Dairies who have a distribution centre in the proposed area, vast tracts of pasture land and numerous farmers that supply them with milk in that area. It's going to be difficult to trace JUST where the milk has come from. You might want to stop buying Muller products from every shop too as they own the Wiseman Dairies and there is no statement which lends itself to Muller/Wiseman being against the cull.

The other 25% of milk the Co-Op sells come through Dairy Crest who also have dairy farms and processing plants in the areas that the cull will take place. Dairy Crest Severnside pack/manufacture cream and FRijj frsh milk products. Dairy Crest rome, Somerset pack/manufacture Cathedral City and Davidstow cheddars. Other Dairy Crest products include:
Clover Lighter
Utterly Butterly
Vitalite
Country Life 
Willow Brand
Alcoholic and retailer branded creams.

No mention on the Dairy Crest website in the Press & Media section of anything about the cull and it's opposition.

I am sorry if I am covering old ground with people because as avid opposers to the cull you will have no doubt fully reserached such details and be fully aware of the products and suppliers of your consumables that may have had badger blood shed in their production to keep your custom and loyalty and be fully aware of the politics and pricing wars these companies have been involved with by trying to put farmers out of business, move milk production to an intensive schemes which will then cause your young or future children asking "Where aren't there any cows in that field?", "I don't know, now enjoy your milk, it was a bargain price" 

So that is 100% of the Co-Operative's dairy suppliers not mentioning anything about being opposed to the cull and yet the Co-Operative state they will not be selling milk produced from farmers in the areas of the cull. How can they 100% guarantee this to their ultra conscious customers?

ETA: Having a quick browse around you might also want to look into their meat suppliers and the products they sell that have animal by-products in the which have come from the farms in that area again. You'll need to do this with all products from every supermarket remember and even general stores. You also need to take into account that badgers will be shot on land that surrounds diary/beef herds and other farms that produce animal products that come from animals that can contract bTB so some could even be shot on the land where the Co-Operative grow their apples, honey and cereals for produce, pork and lamb.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> What are they thinking? I am really worried about the two farms they have in the areas that produce dessert apples, cider apples, honey and cereals could be severly impacted by bTB with having badgers in their area. OH, hang on a minute, they don't have any dairy farms in that area.
> 
> They do however partner Robert Wiseman Dairies (owned by Muller) that were looking to slash 1.7p per litre off of the price they would pay British Farmers which would have put many of them out of business. The proposed price changes ould have meant the farers being paidf 25p per litre with an actual production cost of 30p per litre. At least the Co-Operative are in favour od sustainable dairy farming Fortunately they have agreed to pay 29ppl with the Co-Op paying 30ppl so the farmers are either 1ppl out of pocket or they are breaking even. Happy Christmas.
> 
> ...


i never touch anything that comes off a cow Hutch..so it doesnt really affect me...but to those who do, Co-ops 'own brand' dairy comes from 'their own' farms and they do Not support the cull nor will they allow one on their land...i already phoned them to get conformation of this & dont believe i was lied to.... I will give them another ring to see if the same applies to their meat products...im sure people who care about the badgers would rather try their best to boycott pro-cull farmers than knowingly support them.

.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> i never touch anything that comes off a cow Hutch..so it doesnt really affect me...but to those who do, Co-ops 'own brand' dairy comes from 'their own' farms and they do Not support the cull nor will they allow one on their land...i already phoned them to get conformation of this & dont believe i was lied to.... I will give them another ring to see if the same applies to their meat products...im sure people who care about the badgers would rather try their best to boycott pro-cull farmers than knowingly support them.
> 
> .


Never said you did and it wasn't a statement applied to any individual in particular.

The part you need clearing up is number two on that statement:

"We can also confirm that none of the Co-operative Dairy Group farmers who provide us with a dedicated supply of own-brand milk are located in the proposed cull zones. "

They state they don't have any actual dairy farms in the propsed areas so the statement is a bit of a redundant one anyway "We won't support the cull, but we don't have any affected farms there anyway" - well done you. But their other milk suplliers do so are they going to refuse to shelve the milk supplied from these dairy companies knowing that any proportion of the milk contained within the package could have been sourced from farms that are supporting the cull or where the cull is taking place? Are they going to place labels up on their shelves in front of these products if they are going to shelve them so the consumer is fully aware that these products are potentially sourced from the cull sites? If they are not supporting the cull and are against it then they should be doing either of these actions or they are not supporting the cull at all. If they are coming out with their statement just because their farms aren't in the area then really they are asking for customer loyalty without the full picture being put in place.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> Never said you did and it wasn't a statement applied to any individual in particular.
> 
> The part you need clearing up is number two on that statement:
> 
> ...


i get what youre saying & theres a hell of lot of things in supermarkets that are unethical for one reason or another but its all about having a choice...and a lot of people want to be able to buy products assured that no badger has suffered for them.

even in those tb hot spots there are farmers who oppose the cull, i'd like to believe if, god forbid, cattle on co-op farms were affected with btb they would stick to their principles.. but who knows.


----------



## Big bully (Aug 7, 2012)

I agree! its called Bovine TB not Badger TB!!!!


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Big bully said:


> I agree! its called Bovine TB not Badger TB!!!!


Fantastic post. Take a bow.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

noushka05 said:


> 1) i never touch anything that comes off a cow Hutch..so it doesnt really affect me...2) but to those who do, Co-ops 'own brand' dairy comes from 'their own' farms and they do Not support the cull nor will they allow one on their land...i already phoned them to get conformation of this & dont believe i was lied to.... I will give them another ring to see if the same applies to their meat products...im sure people who care about the badgers would rather try their best to boycott pro-cull farmers than knowingly support them.


1) Neither do I

2) Great post, dear Noushka.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> i get what youre saying & theres a hell of lot of things in supermarkets that are unethical for one reason or another but its all about having a choice...and a lot of people want to be able to buy products assured that no badger has suffered for them.
> 
> even in those tb hot spots there are farmers who oppose the cull, i'd like to believe if, god forbid, cattle on co-op farms were affected with btb they would stick to their principles.. but who knows.


Which is why they need to have it clearly marked that their two major milk suppliers and their related products are marked to show that they are either void of products fromt eh culling area or may contain if they are to still be shelved.

If the Co-Op was fully behind opposing the cull they would withdraw supply but then Joe Public needs it's milk from somewhere now doesn't it.

Isn't bTB killed off in the pasturisation process anyway so it's not a major issue for dairy farmers unless they are selling stock instead of just culling week old bullocks or keeping the hefers for future stock?


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Yes, petitions are good but stopping buying dairy produce is the most effective way of getting the message across.
And why not stop anyway?! Consumption of dairy produce is linked to all manner of ailments and diseases, including breast cancer (Jane Plant's 'Your Life In Your Hands' is a must read) prostate cancer and ovarian camcer.

Here's a good site worth a look
The NOTMILK Homepage! (MILK is a bad-news substance!)


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Signed, I was impressed to notice that in the time it took for me to confirm my email, there were 100 more signatures added to the list!



Knightofalbion said:


> Re the preliminary cull: I hear a list of supermarkets that sell milk supplied from the dairy farms involved in the said preliminary cull has been made available i.e. so people who still consume dairy but object to the badger cull can boycott them.
> Does anyone here have the link?


I'd be interested in this link, I'm not ready to give up dairy just yet, but I want to be able to make a more ethical choice


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> Yes, petitions are good but stopping buying dairy produce is the most effective way of getting the message across.
> And why not stop anyway?! Consumption of dairy produce is linked to all manner of ailments and diseases, including breast cancer (Jane Plant's 'Your Life In Your Hands' is a must read) prostate cancer and ovarian camcer.
> 
> Here's a good site worth a look
> The NOTMILK Homepage! (MILK is a bad-news substance!)


There is no solid evidence to support the claim that consuming dairy produce increases the risk of cancer. For every study that suggests there is an increased risk, there is one which suggests that calcium intake through dairy produce has a protective effect....it's inconclusive.

ETA: I've looked at the link, at the MS section, because it's what I have most knowledge of. It's *seriously* bad science. The only link between milk consumption and MS is that the countries mentioned are Northern Hemisphere countries - sun exposure, or lack of it, and vitamin D deficiency is what neurologists agree is the risk factor. The fact that milk is drank more in northern hemisphere countries is what proper scientists recognise as a non-causal link.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> 1) Neither do I
> 
> 2) Great post, dear Noushka.


Do you own a business or have a job for this example KOA?

If you do how would you feel if you were told to stop trading or moving stock for 6months for, let's say a sparrow being found on the roof of your business? How about if you were told that because you had brought some dirt from outside into your place of work that you were to leave immediately and stay at home without pay for six months?

Now after the six months has passed you return to work or your busines sbut yet again you ahve been foudn to have dirt on your shoes or a sparrow on your property and again you are shut down or sent home immediately without any income. A full year without income.

How about if your business produced somethign that was of a high quality, had been in the family for generations, had taken decades to finely tune with only the best products being sourced and used and then due to this sparrow you had to have all of your stock destroyed , the patent burned and made obsolete and your whole family brand was wiped out?

How about because you couldn't work a year you lost everything you had worked 18hr days for over the last 50+ years of your life, your dad's 60+ years and your grandad's 60+ years? Your whole family investment, hardwork and future gone.

Now you could put up netting around the business to keep the sparrow out but that costs a small fortune, is looked up by the RSPB and various other groups that are applying pressure to both you and the government to prevent your from doing this. If you don't put up the netting and allow the sparrows the freedom to rest on your business roof if they so wish then the government and the rest of society will thing you're decent all round kind of guy plus you actually like sparrows, you have nothing against them but if they land on your roof you are prevented from trading anything for six months.

You could wrap something on your shoes to stop them bringing dirt in, you could get a motorbike or drive the car to work but this costs money, is not environmentally friendly and then you can actully claim money back for walking anyway. Bring dirt in though and you are off work unpaid for six months at a time.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> Yes, petitions are good but stopping buying dairy produce is the most effective way of getting the message across.
> And why not stop anyway?! Consumption of dairy produce is linked to all manner of ailments and diseases, including breast cancer (Jane Plant's 'Your Life In Your Hands' is a must read) prostate cancer and ovarian camcer.
> 
> Here's a good site worth a look
> The NOTMILK Homepage! (MILK is a bad-news substance!)


Going off topic a bit here but I'll entertain it.

I have lived for roughly 13000 days. In that time I reckon on average I have consumed 1pint of milk every day. Some days I drink two pints other I have drunk many more which will make up for the lack of cow's m,ilk I was fed as a baby so I thuink it evens out at 1pint every day I have been alive. Oh and then there's the cheese to take into consideration oh and the cream with my blackberry and apple pie addiction.

For consuming 13000pints of milk, or 7387ltrs for those who use new money, what can I expect to be feeling like? What should I be going through illness-wise? Should I have come into work today? Should I start a bucketlist ASAP or is it just too late?


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

myshkin said:


> 1) There is no solid evidence to support the claim that consuming dairy produce increases the risk of cancer. For every study that suggests there is an increased risk, there is one which suggests that calcium intake through dairy produce has a protective effect....it's inconclusive.
> 
> 2) ETA: I've looked at the link, at the MS section, because it's what I have most knowledge of. It's *seriously* bad science. The only link between milk consumption and MS is that the countries mentioned are Northern Hemisphere countries - sun exposure, or lack of it, and vitamin D deficiency is what neurologists agree is the risk factor. The fact that milk is drank more in northern hemisphere countries is what proper scientists recognise as a non-causal link.


1) 'There is now consistent and substantial evidence that the higher the milk consumption of a country the greater their breast and prostate cancer risk.
The highest risk of cancer death is found in Switzerland, Norway, Iceland and Sweden, countries with the biggest consumption of milk'

'A high dairy intake is also linked to increased ovarian cancer risk. This link, however, is thought to be more due to the way that the milk sugar, lactose, breaks down in the body. Lactose breaks down into another sugar called galactose, which appears to be able to damage the ovary. A review in 2006 found that for every 10g of lactose consumed (the amount in one glass of milk), ovarian cancer risk increased by 13 per cent' (From 'Say No To Cancer' by Patrick Holford)

Cure Breast Cancer By Avoiding All Milk Products

2) Cows Milk MS Connection | Overcoming Multiple Sclerosis


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> Going off topic a bit here but I'll entertain it.
> 
> I have lived for roughly 13000 days. In that time I reckon on average I have consumed 1pint of milk every day. Some days I drink two pints other I have drunk many more which will make up for the lack of cow's m,ilk I was fed as a baby so I thuink it evens out at 1pint every day I have been alive. Oh and then there's the cheese to take into consideration oh and the cream with my blackberry and apple pie addiction.
> 
> For consuming 13000pints of milk, or 7387ltrs for those who use new money, what can I expect to be feeling like? What should I be going through illness-wise? Should I have come into work today? Should I start a bucketlist ASAP or is it just too late?


I'd go easy on the mockery if I were you. Most prostate cancers occur in the 40 - 70 age group.

According to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) 19 out of 23 studies have shown a positive association between dairy intake and prostate cancer. "This is one of the most consistent dietary predictions for prostate cancer in the published literature...In these studies men with the highest dairy intakes had approximately double the risk of total prostate cancer, and up to a fourfold increase in risk of metastatic or fatal prostate cancer relative to low consumers'.

According to Professor Jeff Holly, from Bristol University's Faculty of Medicine, one of the world's leading experts in IGF-1 (A naturally occuring growth hormone) 'those in the top quarter for blood IGF-1 have approximately a three to fourfold increase in risk of breast, prostate or colorectal cancer'

Two other major Harvard studies have shown that milk-drinking men have a 30 to 60 per cent greater prostate cancer risk than men who generally avoid dairy products' (From 'Say No To Cancer' by Patrick Holford)

"Milk is a food designed for baby cows, but not for you" - Patrick Holford


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Knightofalbion said:


> I'd go easy on the mockery if I were you. Most prostate cancers occur in the 40 - 70 age group.
> 
> According to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) 19 out of 23 studies have shown a positive association between dairy intake and prostate cancer. "This is one of the most consistent dietary predictions for prostate cancer in the published literature...In these studies men with the highest dairy intakes had approximately double the risk of total prostate cancer, and up to a fourfold increase in risk of metastatic or fatal prostate cancer relative to low consumers'.
> 
> ...


Tell that to the nomadic mongols and various other tribes, who utilise milk as part of their diet. Are you saying it provides no nutritional value at all? Milk in various forms from different animals is utilised all over the world, I personally prefer to buy local, and support farmers, I think it's an awful thing to suggest boycotting dairy farmers because of the proposed badger cull, what a great way to support our local farmers and producers!


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> Do you own a business or have a job for this example KOA?
> 
> If you do how would you feel if you were told to stop trading or moving stock for 6months for, let's say a sparrow being found on the roof of your business? How about if you were told that because you had brought some dirt from outside into your place of work that you were to leave immediately and stay at home without pay for six months?
> 
> ...


The cows are kept in an endless cycle of pregancy and lactation.... Their baby calfs are forcibly taken away from them - much to the mother cows distress -after only a day or two, most of them will end up as veal.... The milk that was destined for the calves ends up being drunk by people like you.... When the cows are physically broken and worn out, they're packed off to the slaughterhouse...It's an endless cycle of abuse, exploitation and slaughter. I should feel sympathy for dairy farmers? I feel no sympathy for dairy farmers.

Bovine TB has risen, yes, but so has intensive farming (Many cows never see a blade of grass or feel the sun on their back.) cross breeding and the demand to produce ever bigger yields of milk. Yet somehow the poor badger is to blame - and now they want to kill them as well!

If the National Herd is riddled with bovine TB then it is because of the same reason its riddled with mastitis and laminitis - bad husbandry.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Knightofalbion said:


> The cows are kept in an endless cycle of pregancy and lactation.... Their baby calfs are forcibly taken away from them - much to the mother cows distress -after only a day or two, most of them will end up as veal.... The milk that was destined for the calves ends up being drunk by people like you.... When the cows are physically broken and worn out, they're packed off to the slaughterhouse...It's an endless cycle of abuse, exploitation and slaughter. I should feel sympathy for dairy farmers? I feel no sympathy for dairy farmers.
> 
> Bovine TB has risen, yes, but so has intensive farming (Many cows never see a blade of grass or feel the sun on their back.) cross breeding and the demand to produce ever bigger yields of milk. Yet somehow the poor badger is to blame - and now they want to kill them as well!
> 
> If the National Herd is riddled with bovine TB then it is because of the same reason its riddled with mastitis and laminitis - bad husbandry.


The cows are kept in an endless cycle of pregnancy and lactation - how long does it take for a chicken to reach maturity so they can be sent for slaughter?

I'm not sure if you live in the UK, of course I'm guessing you do with the Albion reference, but there are no dairy factories in the UK such as the ones that exist in the US, planning was requested for one, I think it was turned down, but no such facility exists here. There is no National Herd, there are various herds across the UK, in some areas, TB is more prevalent, in others it isn't.

I would truly love to know how many people voted because badgers are *cute and fluffy* without really knowing or having some involvement in the countryside. I haven't voted, because I do not have enough knowledge or information. I won't vote one way or the other on the petition for that reason. It amazes me how many experts there are though!


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> 1) 'There is now consistent and substantial evidence that the higher the milk consumption of a country the greater their breast and prostate cancer risk.
> The highest risk of cancer death is found in Switzerland, Norway, Iceland and Sweden, countries with the biggest consumption of milk'
> 
> 'A high dairy intake is also linked to increased ovarian cancer risk. This link, however, is thought to be more due to the way that the milk sugar, lactose, breaks down in the body. Lactose breaks down into another sugar called galactose, which appears to be able to damage the ovary. A review in 2006 found that for every 10g of lactose consumed (the amount in one glass of milk), ovarian cancer risk increased by 13 per cent' (From 'Say No To Cancer' by Patrick Holford)
> ...


Quotes from a website with a clear alternative medicine agenda do not constitute evidence - just because someone made a website to promote their beliefs, doesn't make it factual.

And the second link states that the evidence is inconclusive - the studies cited "speculated" and showed nothing more than a correlation - that is not the same as a causal link.

I think I'll stick with the opinion of my neurologist at what's widely held to be the best MS centre in the UK.....his opinion being based on a real understanding of scientific research. It's a maverick choice, I know, but I'll risk it


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Tell that to the nomadic mongols and various other tribes, who utilise milk as part of their diet. Are you saying it provides no nutritional value at all? Milk in various forms from different animals is utilised all over the world, I personally prefer to buy local, and support farmers, I think it's an awful thing to suggest boycotting dairy farmers because of the proposed badger cull, what a great way to support our local farmers and producers!


I think you'll find the Mongols drink fermented yaks milk which is not quite the same as pasteurized cow's milk. Not many Holstein cross breds on the Mongol Steppes!

Milk promotes rapid cell growth which is why it is the ideal food...if you're a baby.

Did you read the piece on Jane Plant? It was the natural growth hormones in the dairy produce she was consuming that was fuelling her breast cancer. 
She was branded as "terminal", given up on by her doctors as without hope. This was in 1993 if my memory is correct. 2012; she is still alive, fighting fit.

I recommend you do some further reading. The book I quoted from 'Say No To Cancer' is a tremendous book. Well worth reading.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Knightofalbion said:


> I think you'll find the Mongols drink fermented yaks milk which is not quite the same as pasteurized cow's milk. Not many Holstein cross breds on the Mongol Steppes!
> 
> Milk promotes rapid cell growth which is why it is the ideal food...if you're a baby.
> 
> ...


I think you'll find the Mongols drink mares milk, some of them drink camels milk as well. And if you read my post, I didn't say all societies drink cows milk but asked for evidence that milk in it's various forms does not provide nutrition. Can you tell me there is no nutrition at all in milk from whatever animal?

All the produce we eat battles against us, plants are toxic to varying degrees, and yet they also have benefits, the toxicity is a natural defense mechanism. I am past scare mongering about eating foods, all things in the wrong proportions are bad for us, the more free range, the better, but deliberately campaigning against dairy farmers is just despicable. They are struggling to survive as it is, if you had your way, then we would be looking at the US factory milking systems being introduced.

I'll carry on supporting local dairy producers thank you, and try to put off the factory farming of dairy herds for as long as possible. If that involves badger culls, so be it, they're not endangered and do not have any natural predators in this country. As long as they are controlled and not eradicated, the same with any other species that has no natural predator.

Forgot to add, much of the soya produce is currently produced at the expense of rain forest being destroyed. So, don't support local farmers, but please do support deforestation!


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> The cows are kept in an endless cycle of pregancy and lactation.... Their baby calfs are forcibly taken away from them - much to the mother cows distress -after only a day or two, most of them will end up as veal.... The milk that was destined for the calves ends up being drunk by people like you.... When the cows are physically broken and worn out, they're packed off to the slaughterhouse...It's an endless cycle of abuse, exploitation and slaughter. I should feel sympathy for dairy farmers? I feel no sympathy for dairy farmers.
> 
> Bovine TB has risen, yes, but so has intensive farming (Many cows never see a blade of grass or feel the sun on their back.) cross breeding and the demand to produce ever bigger yields of milk. Yet somehow the poor badger is to blame - and now they want to kill them as well!
> 
> If the National Herd is riddled with bovine TB then it is because of the same reason its riddled with mastitis and laminitis - bad husbandry.


But it's not a national issue.

Pasturisation deals with the milk but what it affects the most is beef farms whose only income is made through the movement of cattle. If you've got bTB then your cows aren't going anywhere for six months minimum.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Forgot to add, much of the soya produce is currently produced at the expense of rain forest being destroyed. So, don't support local farmers, but please do support deforestation!


The soya milk I use (UK market leader) is ethically sourced, GM-free and doesn't contribute to deforestation

Alpro | FAQ


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

I've just checked the Team Badger website and can report that the e-petition to force a debate on the cull in Parliament is approaching 72,000 signatures...


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> I'm not sure if you live in the UK, of course I'm guessing you do with the Albion reference, but there are no dairy factories in the UK such as the ones that exist in the US, planning was requested for one, I think it was turned down, but no such facility exists here.


It might not be here now but it's coming. The UK's dairy cows have been pushed and pushed for higher yields but at the same time fertility and longevity has been on a constant downward trajactory. The cows need more and more money putting in, can't be pushed much further genetically and if the industry is going to keep up with demand, it has to intensify. You only have to look at the herd size to see the change, the average herd size in 1990 was 67 cows and this year it is 117 with fewer overall cows and dairy farms in the UK.



Sleeping_Lion said:


> I would truly love to know how many people voted because badgers are *cute and fluffy* without really knowing or having some involvement in the countryside. I haven't voted, because I do not have enough knowledge or information. I won't vote one way or the other on the petition for that reason. It amazes me how many experts there are though!


Or maybe some of the people against the cull have actually bothered to look at the science. The Independent Scientific Group on cattle TB found that badgers definately do spread TB to cattle (and vice versa) but for a cull to be effective you would have to practically erradicate the badger population in a particular area. It also found that less severe culls increase the spread as badger groups disperse and take their bTB with them. Now I think wiping out a native british mammal in big sections of the countryside is an extremely severe thing to do without very good reason. Not wiping them out is likely to make things worse for badgers and farmers alike.

The ISG report also found that cattle to cattle transmission is still a major issue and that other wildlife reservoirs (mainly deer) could act to reinfect cattle and badgers.

I might not support farming but I do understand the connection that farmers have with their stock and how soul destroying bTB can be. I'd encourage anyone wanting to see it from the farmers point of view to watch this film about a man loosing much of his longhorn herd Mayday at Heolfawr Cross - a film by Chris Chapman - YouTube (contains some upsetting scenes) . But as much as I can understand people wanting to protect their herd, the science just isn't there and alternatives haven't yet been properly explored. A cull isn't a magic bullet and it won't stop bTB.



Sleeping_Lion said:


> Forgot to add, much of the soya produce is currently produced at the expense of rain forest being destroyed. So, don't support local farmers, but please do support deforestation!


The vast majority of soy produced goes into animal feed. Dairy cows eat masses of soy because they have such a big need for rumen undegradable protein. 100% grass fed beef (and dairy if you can find it) are the most eco friendly cattle products but increasingly difficult to find.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> Which is why they need to have it clearly marked that their two major milk suppliers and their related products are marked to show that they are either void of products fromt eh culling area or may contain if they are to still be shelved.
> 
> If the Co-Op was fully behind opposing the cull they would withdraw supply but then Joe Public needs it's milk from somewhere now doesn't it.
> 
> Isn't bTB killed off in the pasturisation process anyway so it's not a major issue for dairy farmers unless they are selling stock instead of just culling week old bullocks or keeping the hefers for future stock?


I'd be more than happy if they withdrew milk from other suppliers who were non badger friendly, just like i'd love them to withdraw all tuna that wasnt caught with a line & pole...but hey ho we cant have everything we want can we lol..and at least co-op are giving us a choice.

it is a major issue for dairy and beef farmers alike Hutch the cows are still slaughtered.



Knightofalbion said:


> The soya milk I use (UK market leader) is ethically sourced, GM-free and doesn't contribute to deforestation
> 
> Alpro | FAQ


i drink Alpro aswell, unsweetened is my favourite, im trying to find someone who sells their new almond milk, i LOVE almonds!, but i havent found anyone locally selling it:cryin:...have you tried it K.O.A??


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> I'dit is a major issue for dairy and beef farmers alike Hutch the cows are still slaughtered.


I never said they weren't.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> I never said they weren't.


no i know, i was just pointing it out anyway lol


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

noushka05 said:


> i drink Alpro aswell, unsweetened is my favourite, im trying to find someone who sells their new almond milk, i LOVE almonds!, but i havent found anyone locally selling it:cryin:...have you tried it K.O.A??


Funny you should say that, but I just found a shop that sells Alpro almond milk this morning and I bought one! Not tried it yet, but it looks very good.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

I just checked the Team Badger e-petition site again.....

Over 78,000 signatures now!


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

lennythecloud said:


> Or maybe some of the people against the cull have actually bothered to look at the science. The Independent Scientific Group on cattle TB found that badgers definately do spread TB to cattle (and vice versa) but for a cull to be effective you would have to practically erradicate the badger population in a particular area. It also found that less severe culls increase the spread as badger groups disperse and take their bTB with them. Now I think wiping out a native british mammal in big sections of the countryside is an extremely severe thing to do without very good reason. Not wiping them out is likely to make things worse for badgers and farmers alike.


I never said everyone voting hadn't I merely asked the question I wonder how many actually looked at and studied the evidence before voting?

I've looked at the evidence, and haven't voted one way or the other. Wiping out a native mammal, are you sure that's what is going to happen, or are you simply stating what's being posted on the fluffy badger websites? For goodness sakes, badgers have been allowed to increase in numbers for many years, rightly so at first, but their numbers do now need controlling.

Hedgehogs are struggling to survive in some areas, and that is down to the sheer number of badgers, which prey on hedgehogs. So come on all those who believe that all wildlife willl equal itself out in some way, tell me how the badgers in hard hit hedgehog areas are gonna suddenly decide to eat something else?

One good thing badgers have done is destroy wasp nests, they are pretty good at it, however, I'd rather see hedgehogs in abundance, and deal with the wasp problem.

The cull isn't about eradicating a species, it's about controlling it, and, as you've aptly pointed out, this already happens with deer. Are we looking at the extinction of deer any time soon, oh no, they are very well controlled and maintained as a species. So, why the scare mongering over the control measures for badgers, well I'll leave that to the ever increasing imaginations......


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> I've looked at the evidence, and haven't voted one way or the other. Wiping out a native mammal, are you sure that's what is going to happen, or are you simply stating what's being posted on the fluffy badger websites?


The Independent Scientific Group on cattle TB culled over 11,000 badgers over 10 years during the krebs trials - clearly not fluffy badger people but they still concluded culling to be at best ineffective. They said this ineffectiveness comes about because both proactive and reactive culling disrupts badger territories and makes them spread bTB even further. The only way to stop badgers moving out of an area is to kill all of them in that area. So the only way for a cull to be at all EFFECTIVE is to wipe out populations in the cull area.

The government, who you'd expect to be most optimistic about their cull, predict that it might cause the incidence of tb in cattle to fall by 9-16% in 9 years time. Not very promising.

The ISG report can be read here, summerised conclusions on page 13 - http://archive.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/farmanimal/diseases/atoz/tb/isg/report/final_report.pdf



> For goodness sakes, badgers have been allowed to increase in numbers for many years, rightly so at first, but their numbers do now need controlling.


Why do they need controlling? Because that's what's happened in the past? Look how far the unscientific approach got us with sea eagles, red kites and very nearly badgers.



> Hedgehogs are struggling to survive in some areas, and that is down to the sheer number of badgers, which prey on hedgehogs. So come on all those who believe that all wildlife willl equal itself out in some way, tell me how the badgers in hard hit hedgehog areas are gonna suddenly decide to eat something else?


There is absolutely no evidence that badgers are significantly responsible for the hedgehog decline. There is an correlation between the increase in badgers and a decline in hedgehogs but I imagine the same correlation could be found between the increase computer ownership and a decline in hedgehogs - correlation doesn't equal causation. Badgers do eat hedgehogs and eat the same food but the two species have evolved side by side for millions of years with no issues. Most explanations for hedgehog decline surround road fatilities, sterile gardens, habitat loss and intensive farming.



> The cull isn't about eradicating a species, it's about controlling it, and, as you've aptly pointed out, this already happens with deer. Are we looking at the extinction of deer any time soon, oh no, they are very well controlled and maintained as a species. So, why the scare mongering over the control measures for badgers, well I'll leave that to the ever increasing imaginations......


For someone who claims to know about the countryside you seem to know very little about ecology. The argument for controlling deer is stronger because we've removed their primary predator (the wolf). There is no natural predator that has ever impacted on the badger population (even wolves are reluctant to take them), they have never been controlled prior to human interference.

If you are culling badgers to control bTB then only picking off the old and obviously sick like they do in deer culling will actually spread the disease. The only effective way to cull badgers for bTB is to kill nearly all of them in a particular area.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

noushka05 said:


> i drink Alpro as well, unsweetened is my favourite, im trying to find someone who sells their new almond milk, i LOVE almonds!, but i havent found anyone locally selling it:cryin:...have you tried it K.O.A??


Tried it! Can't really describe it, but absolutely delicious!


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Team Badger update:

Just gone through the 80,000 signatures mark! House of Commons here we come!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> I never said everyone voting hadn't I merely asked the question I wonder how many actually looked at and studied the evidence before voting?
> 
> I've looked at the evidence, and haven't voted one way or the other. Wiping out a native mammal, are you sure that's what is going to happen, or are you simply stating what's being posted on the fluffy badger websites? For goodness sakes, badgers have been allowed to increase in numbers for many years, rightly so at first, but their numbers do now need controlling.
> 
> ...


again you use your same scapegoating and scaremongering tactics to try to turn people against an animal, notably always the ones at the top of food chains... you prove time and again you understand nothing of predator/prey relationships. Lenny has said it all really, but far more eloquently than i ever could lol, but i'd just like to reiterate..hedgehogs are struggling to survive everywhere, and as ever its down to us!, loss of hedgerows,pesticides,cars! are the primary reasons, of course when numbers are low badger predation can add to the pressures, but they have Always preyed upon hedgehogs!, (though their diet is largely earthworms!!)....they arnt the cause of hedgehog decline!!, its no reason to be 'controlling' their numbers!!...blimey is it not enough for you that they are being made the scapegoats for bTB?? No to help our hedghogs we shouldnt be culling our badgers! we should be planting hedgerows, leaving wood piles and undegrowth, stop using slug pellets and other dangerous pesticides etc, not much we can do about the hazard of our roads, except taking more care, we have stopped on quite a few occasions to remove live hedgehogs,and other creatures, off the road to safety. ...so you will never see an abundance of hedgehogs unless WE get our house in order!!!

& how very 'pink & fluffy' of you! lol.. i love wasps...amazing little animals and they do a great job pollinating:thumbup:



lennythecloud said:


> The Independent Scientific Group on cattle TB culled over 11,000 badgers over 10 years during the krebs trials - clearly not fluffy badger people but they still concluded culling to be at best ineffective. They said this ineffectiveness comes about because both proactive and reactive culling disrupts badger territories and makes them spread bTB even further. The only way to stop badgers moving out of an area is to kill all of them in that area. So the only way for a cull to be at all EFFECTIVE is to wipe out populations in the cull area.
> 
> The government, who you'd expect to be most optimistic about their cull, predict that it might cause the incidence of tb in cattle to fall by 9-16% in 9 years time. Not very promising.
> 
> ...


rep for this Fantastic post

.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> Tried it! Can't really describe it, but absolutely delicious!


well im even more determined now to track me some down


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> I never said everyone voting hadn't I merely asked the question I wonder how many actually looked at and studied the evidence before voting?
> 
> I've looked at the evidence, and haven't voted one way or the other. Wiping out a native mammal, are you sure that's what is going to happen, or are you simply stating what's being posted on the fluffy badger websites? For goodness sakes, badgers have been allowed to increase in numbers for many years, rightly so at first, but their numbers do now need controlling.
> 
> ...


*I love the way the word "controlling" is used when people find it eceptable (sp) to kill when they choose to.
I haven't voted just because i love our wildlife or because i think they are cute.I'm sick of out wildlife being targeted.
As for hedgehogs,i was listening to a debate about the lack of them,it was on the radio.The main reason that was stated was that we now use far more slug pellets in our gardens.The slugs eat the pellets and the hedgehogs eat the poisoned slugs.
Hand on heart,we have stopped using slug pellets and for the first time in years we now have at least 1 hedgehog thats coming into the garden.*


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> again you use your same scapegoating and scaremongering tactics to try to turn people against an animal, notably always the ones at the top of food chains... you prove time and again you understand nothing of predator/prey relationships. Lenny has said it all really, but far more eloquently than i ever could lol, but i'd just like to reiterate..hedgehogs are struggling to survive everywhere, and as ever its down to us!, loss of hedgerows,pesticides,cars! are the primary reasons, of course when numbers are low badger predation can add to the pressures, but they have Always preyed upon hedgehogs!, (though their diet is largely earthworms!!)....they arnt the cause of hedgehog decline!!, its no reason to be 'controlling' their numbers!!...blimey is it not enough for you that they are being made the scapegoats for bTB?? No to help our hedghogs we shouldnt be culling our badgers! we should be planting hedgerows, leaving wood piles and undegrowth, stop using slug pellets and other dangerous pesticides etc, not much we can do about the hazard of our roads, except taking more care, we have stopped on quite a few occasions to remove live hedgehogs,and other creatures, off the road to safety. ...so you will never see an abundance of hedgehogs unless WE get our house in order!!!
> 
> & how very 'pink & fluffy' of you! lol.. i love wasps...amazing little animals and they do a great job pollinating:thumbup:.


Really? You love wasps? I love them in the right situation, unfortunately we have an influx of a foreign species which is too successful for it's own good. Badgers thankfully seem not to mind being stung for the reward of eating their pupae, but if you want a foreign species of wasp to take over and be successful in the English countryside, well you root for that.

I had quoted Janice as well, but with respect to Noushka's above posts, the loss isn't just down to pesticides and slug pellets, badgers are a known predator, and in areas where badgers are successful, hedgehog numbers are down. For a species which is also subject to other pressures, ie pesticides and slug pellets etc, having a predator which is incredibly successful, is putting far too much pressure on this species. I would prefer to see a balance between the two, and badgers returned to the numbers where they do not restrict the numbers of animals they prey upon.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> the loss isn't just down to pesticides and slug pellets, badgers are a known predator, and in areas where badgers are successful, hedgehog numbers are down. For a species which is also subject to other pressures, ie pesticides and slug pellets etc, having a predator which is incredibly successful, is putting far too much pressure on this species. I would prefer to see a balance between the two, and badgers returned to the numbers where they do not restrict the numbers of animals they prey upon.


Hedgehog numbers are down EVERYWHERE. Man is the main cause with the motor car causing most fatalities.
None of the hedgehog charities/trusts, who surely are a lot better qualified to speak with authority on the issue, are calling for badgers to be killed to protect hedgehog numbers.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Update: The Team Badger e-petition has now passed 85,000 signatures...


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Knightofalbion said:


> Hedgehog numbers are down EVERYWHERE. Man is the main cause with the motor car causing most fatalities.
> None of the hedgehog charities/trusts, who surely are a lot better qualified to speak with authority on the issue, are calling for badgers to be killed to protect hedgehog numbers.


Everybody's more qualified as far as you're concerned unless something fluffy has to die.

So, when are you stopping driving?


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Everybody's more qualified as far as you're concerned unless something fluffy has to die.
> 
> So, when are you stopping driving?


The fact that you have to resort to personal insults only shows the weakness of your argument.

I walk/hike everywhere.


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

Signed! 

Trapping, tagging and vaccinating may be more expensive but these are supposed to be a protected species ffs!  Typical barbaric act of mankind, kill it and sod the consequences. All our species have a role to play, take away a major portion of one and it will have a knock on effect some where along the line and you know they'll likely get carried away with this cull - frightening!

Sickening to think one minute they're protected and the next murdered!


----------



## pogo (Jul 25, 2011)

have signed


----------



## Guest (Sep 23, 2012)

Just checked, over 87000 sigs.


----------



## ozrex (Aug 30, 2011)

Signed.

I might live in Oz but I'm still a British Citizen.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Malmum said:


> Signed!
> 
> Trapping, tagging and vaccinating may be more expensive but these are supposed to be a protected species ffs!  Typical barbaric act of mankind, kill it and sod the consequences. All our species have a role to play, take away a major portion of one and it will have a knock on effect some where along the line and you know they'll likely get carried away with this cull - frightening!
> 
> Sickening to think one minute they're protected and the next murdered!


They're only protected as a means to make badger baiting and illegal act. It states very clearly under the Badger Protection Act that an individual or group can apply for and obtain a licence to kill badgers if they are deemed to be a threat to livestock, causing damage to land and property etc. If you are out with your dog and it goes to ground in a badger set and someone sees you then good luck to you because the chances are you'll be prosecuted regardless if you were just out for a walk. It has happened.

I don't know who was on about natural predators but cubs will be killed by foxes. Other than that they don't have any so once a cub makes it through it's first year then it's pretty much untouched.

I'd like to see the vaccination scheme come into play but as I've said before they don't tag them or mark them to give a clear indication as to which one has just been vaccinated. Given that the minimum numbers in a set are around 4-5 how do you know you're not re-vaccinating the same one or two continuously leaving the others to become infected and die a slow horrible death over many years with the potential to pass on the illness to any new cubs or other badgers in the area?

The cull, as bad as it sounds, allows the numbers to decrease the odds of vaccinating the same badgers over and over meaning a healthy species in those areas within a couple of years. Sure some will have to be killed but the benefits to the species ongoing are a lot more manageable.

The same applies to the huge increase in the deer cull numbers. Less deer (most of which aren't meant to be here) means more trees. More trees means more opportunities for other species and that food chain includes badgers.

It's a sad thing to have to happen but it makes the whole cycle a great deal easier and therefore more likely to be successful for every species involved.

Look at how many species bTB affects, why effect it has and how easily it is spread and then start using words like 'ecology'. How can you hbe a healthy ecological system when you have a debilitating decease like bTB running through it, what benefits does it bring to the eco system?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

[


> QUOTE=Sleeping_Lion;1062294768]Really? You love wasps? I love them in the right situation, unfortunately we have an influx of a foreign species which is too successful for it's own good. Badgers thankfully seem not to mind being stung for the reward of eating their pupae, but if you want a foreign species of wasp to take over and be successful in the English countryside, well you root for that


.

yes i do love wasps, but i suppose you would find that rather incredulous when you even seem to find it hard to believe that people care passionately about 'fluffy' wildlife lol...i find wasp ecology fascinating, particulary of the social species, a nuisance they may be but they are infact very beneficial to us, they do a fab job pollinating and keeping down aphid numbers and in return are an important food source for other wildlife...like badgers(at least you find badgers useful for something lol)...like other invertabrates this awful wet summer will have another bad year for wasps...our native common and german wasp species are sadly already in decline.

err by the way, where on earth did i give you the impression i wanted foreign wasp species to take over the english countryside?

.



> I had quoted Janice as well, but with respect to Noushka's above posts, the loss isn't just down to pesticides and slug pellets, badgers are a known predator, and in areas where badgers are successful, hedgehog numbers are down. For a species which is also subject to other pressures, ie pesticides and slug pellets etc, having a predator which is incredibly successful, is putting far too much pressure on this species. I would prefer to see a balance between the two, and badgers returned to the numbers where they do not restrict the numbers of animals they prey upon.


its pontless tying to argue this point with you, but just what exactly should the number of badgers be 'returned to'????


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> They're only protected as a means to make badger baiting and illegal act. It states very clearly under the Badger Protection Act that an individual or group can apply for and obtain a licence to kill badgers if they are deemed to be a threat to livestock, causing damage to land and property etc. If you are out with your dog and it goes to ground in a badger set and someone sees you then good luck to you because the chances are you'll be prosecuted regardless if you were just out for a walk. It has happened.
> 
> I don't know who was on about natural predators but cubs will be killed by foxes. Other than that they don't have any so once a cub makes it through it's first year then it's pretty much untouched.
> 
> ...


that would be Lenny excellent post Hutch.



lennythecloud said:


> The Independent Scientific Group on cattle TB culled over 11,000 badgers over 10 years during the krebs trials - clearly not fluffy badger people but they still concluded culling to be at best ineffective. They said this ineffectiveness comes about because both proactive and reactive culling disrupts badger territories and makes them spread bTB even further. The only way to stop badgers moving out of an area is to kill all of them in that area. So the only way for a cull to be at all EFFECTIVE is to wipe out populations in the cull area.
> 
> The government, who you'd expect to be most optimistic about their cull, predict that it might cause the incidence of tb in cattle to fall by 9-16% in 9 years time. Not very promising.
> 
> ...


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

I know what badgers do to hedgehogs, saw it first hand one night I'm my street and it was awful  so it may help increase those numbers in that particular area as hedgehogs too are in decline.

I'm just glad badgers are protected from baiting because that is a wicked way of catching them but according to a programme on radio four in the week people were saying their protection status was because they too are in decline, they never said it was purely down to baiting!

http://www.badgerwatch.com/law.htm


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Malmum said:


> I know what badgers do to hedgehogs, saw it first hand one night I'm my street and it was awful  so it may help increase those numbers in that particular area as hedgehogs too are in decline.
> 
> I'm just glad badgers are protected from baiting because that is a wicked way of catching them but according to a programme on radio four in the week people were saying their protection status was because they too are in decline, they never said it was purely down to baiting!
> 
> uk law


You've seen what a badger can do - but under what circumstances? A mother badger with cubs in the sett cannot leave them for very long. A mother badger under those circumstances will eat things she wouldn't touch at any other time of the year.

Remember too that badgers largely eat the same food as hedgehogs, so a larger and more efficient forager is likely to edge out the smaller so that could account for it.

That being said a hundred years ago the British countryside had a large population of both badgers and hedgehogs and most other things besides.
It is man that has impacted on numbers and the natural balance.

Speaking from memory, 50,000 hedgehogs are killed by traffic every year. No species can sustain that rate of loss without a serious impact on population numbers.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> 1) If you are out with your dog and it goes to ground in a badger set and someone sees you then good luck to you because the chances are you'll be prosecuted regardless if you were just out for a walk. 2) It has happened.
> 
> 3) I don't know who was on about natural predators but cubs will be killed by foxes. 4) Other than that they don't have any so once a cub makes it through it's first year then it's pretty much untouched.
> 
> ...


1) Good luck to the dog!

2) Can you supply the link(s) to substantiate that claim?

3) Badger cubs stay underground in the sett nursery for some time. They usually emerge about May/June, and are a fair size by then and too big for a fox to take, and then they never leave their mothers side. And I can assure you, no fox is going to take on a badger! Certainly not a mother defending her cubs.

4) That's ridiculous! Tens of thousands of badgers are killed on the roads every year. Many are shot by farmers and dumped on the roadside to make it look like road kill. And badger baiting is still prevalent in parts of the country.

5) Mark them then! Anyway, its the cows that need vaccinating.

6) The minimum number is 2.

7) Ridiculous! The great majority of badgers are completely TB free. The Governments own official figures confirm this because road kill is collected and tested.

8) Aren't they proposing to reduce by 70%? To reduce by 70% you need to know the 100% figure. What is the 100% figure? They haven't got a clue! What is 70% of 'haven't got a clue'?

9) Sounds good on paper, but most tree planting is evergreen (cypress, pine etc.) for fast growing timber. The needles turn the soil acidic, no native plants grow in such an environment. It may provide cover but other than that its no good for wildlife either.

10) As everyone concedes most bovine TB is spread from cattle to cattle. If every badger in the UK was wiped and every other wild animal they accuse of spreading it, it wouldn't reduce bovine TB numbers by even so much as a fifth.
There used to be a human TB problem here at one time, till it was eradicated by better housing and hygiene. 
The main cause of bovine TB is poor husbandry, pure and simple.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Team Badger e-petition....

90,000+


----------



## mummyschnauzer (Sep 30, 2008)

keep signing please


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> 1) Good luck to the dog!
> 
> 2) Can you supply the link(s) to substantiate that claim?
> 
> ...


1) What do you think most terrier breeds were used for?

2) join a few hunting/lurcher forums, you'll see stories of folk out walking with a deerx lurcher and a terrier being accused, having the old bill called on them and even their dogs and cars seized because they are 'deemed' to have been baiting.

3) I very much beg to differ. I've seen two badger sets being overturned into dens the following week. A lot of dens were previously sets and its not uncommon for the two to share a rather spacious dwelling.

4) No, what's ridiculous is you seem to think a car is a natural predator. I mentioned predators and you brought cars into it. Do they hunt in packs? Are aeroplanes natural predators of birds? Are speedboat natural predators of manatees? Are vehicles even natural? And I'm supposed to have said something ridiculous.
As the farmers doing this would face serious charges can you post links to this evidence? I can give you the contact number of a farmer that uses sympathetic methods towards his four setts on his pasture as we've often sat out and watched them.

5) Next time I vaccinate a badger I will but unfortunately I'm not the one doing the vaccinating so it's up to the conservation societies that deal with it to think outside the box a little.
There isn't a 100% vaccine available for cattle (BCG isn't 100%), why do you think farmers are still having bTB outbreaks and cattle slaughtered for contamination? More effort was put into a badger vaccine to help the species.

6) So if it's a new sett then you're still tossing a coin as to which badger you get to vaccinate after trapping.

7) You state "the vast majority" and then in your next little bit you say you don't know the 100% figure so how can you have a vast majority of an unknown entity?

9) Are you aware of what deer do to deciduous trees? Have you ever been in a pine forest and seen deer feeding? Do they eat the dead branches etc? No they don't, they eat the fauna in the clearings which is a whole micro climate in itself. I can show you sapling after sapling that has been chomped by deer on my local moor. I can also show you a very clear line in the forests where deer have munched everything up to a certain height, the damage their raking does, the hundreds of hardwood trees killed by bark stripping and then there is the road hazards.

10) I have a large scar on my upper left arm from where my TB jab got infected, it looks like I've been shot, but you're saying that because the shops sell anti-bacterial stuff I didn't need to have that jab and neither dud every kid in my school that day and every kid in schools across Great Britain that year and the next and the next and even my sister who us five years older and my parents?

I can't be arsed with this anymore. Some see it one way and some see it another. I might be on my own on here with the way I see it but I'm certainly not alone across the uk population. 
Well done for getting about 0.15% of the Uk population onboard though.

7)


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Team Badger e-petition currently stands at 94,836

We should top the crucial 100,000 mark sometime on Tuesday...


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> 1) What do you think most terrier breeds were used for?
> 
> 2) join a few hunting/lurcher forums, you'll see stories of folk out walking with a deerx lurcher and a terrier being accused, having the old bill called on them and even their dogs and cars seized because they are 'deemed' to have been baiting.
> 
> ...


1) The original members of the breed were bred to hunt and kill 'vermin'. Though nowadays they're bred to be happy, loving family pets. In most cases anyway. Hard hearted owners excluded.

2) Join a few hunting/lurcher forums? I would, but somehow I doubt they'd appreciate being told that all cruelty has its comeback and suffering can only be requited by suffering.

The Police wouldn't have done so without firm evidence.

3) Only your word on that...

4) "...once a cub makes it through its first year its pretty much untouched" That's what you said.

Farmers killing badgers and throwing them out into the roads to make it look like road kill, that's common knowledge down here. A lot of farmers take the 'law' into their own hands and have done for years.

5) Successive Governments have been tinkering round the edges and killing badgers on and off since the 70s. Hasn't made any difference. If the efforts and funding had been put into finding a cattle vaccine, it surely would have been found by now.

6) Kind of makes it a bit easier if there were only two of them wouldn't you say?

7) Government testing of killed badgers (road kill/TB outbreaks) have shown conclusively, from the Governments own figures, that the vast majority of badgers do not have TB.

8)As to how many badgers there actually are in the country or even a particular region, they don't know, because nobody has ever carried out even a rough survey. So it is a case of 70% of 'haven't got a clue'.

9) This country was pretty much covered in deciduous woodland at one point. The fact that most of it has disappeared since is down to man not deer.
There are pine forests in Scotland, but England's ancient woodlands were exclusively deciduous. Our native woodland flora has evolved to exist exclusively in a deciduous woodland environment. Such plants can't and don't grow in evergreen woodland. 
Deer 'graze' saplings, yes, which is why it is standard practice to fit every new planted sapling with a 'deer guard' protector.

10) No idea what you're going on about...

11) Charming!


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

A trip down memory lane....

1994: An outbreak of bovine TB at Highgrove, home of Prince Charles.... A large badger sett in the centre of the farmland at Highgrove...
What happens next?????

Environmentalists Badger Prince Charles In Deaths - Orlando Sentinel


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> 1) The original members of the breed were bred to hunt and kill 'vermin'. Though nowadays they're bred to be happy, loving family pets. In most cases anyway. Hard hearted owners excluded.
> 
> 2) Join a few hunting/lurcher forums? I would, but somehow I doubt they'd appreciate being told that all cruelty has its comeback and suffering can only be requited by suffering.
> 
> ...


If you want to have the last word and take it as a victory against someone who has a different view then fine, I have no issue with that and couldn;t care less but please don't miss-quote me and take what I have said to whole new context.

As for you number 3 point - "Only your word on that..." - have a read of these articles:

"Badger setts are often used by other animals as well as badgers. Rabbits often live in badger setts. Foxes will also rear their young in setts. These animals live in small setts, or parts of larger setts, which are not being used by badgers at the time."
Setts

"Remember that foxes will sometimes co-habit or shelter in badger setts, and this may cause problems to gamekeepers and farmers intent on fox control."
Fox Control

"The traditional fox den is usually a solitary entrance hole that may originally have been made by a badger. A good way to tell if a fox is at home is to smell the air around the entrance hole. The harsh musty smell of a fox is often overpowering. It's not unusual for foxes to share a badger's sett, so don't be surprised if you see both species emerging from the same hole."
Knowledge of the animal in the countryside

"The only other thing I can think of is a fox. Foxes do bring food back to their den and were in the peak time for the birth of fox cubs now, so there may be a lady fox underground. It may be that you have a fox den rather than a badger sett. Just to confuse us, foxes will use old badger setts (and enlarge old rabbit holes) so their dens can be tricky to recognise. A couple of years ago I even had a family of foxes, complete with cubs, living in one of the unused holes of the main badger sett I watched, and the foxes and badgers seemed to get along fine as neighbours."
How to Recognise a Badger Sett « Tales from the Wood - The Diary of a Badger Watching Man

"The main sett will show signs of continuous badger activity all the year round and, if a large sett, may house more than badgers at certain times of the year (foxes, rabbits, mice, rats, wasps, bees and so on). Foxes with cubs have been known to occupy a section of a large main sett, just a few meters from badger occupied holes at a time when doubtless there were badger cubs below ground."
Welcome to Scottish Badgers

"Fox Control
Foxes may sometimes use badger setts either as
permanent homes, where badgers are no longer in
residence, or for temporary refuge."
page 4 of 5
http://www.sybadgergroup.f9.co.uk/tan_22.pdf

"The Polish biologists observed that the same setts were visited by foxes and badgers, which tallies with previous observations by Ernest Neal that various species -- including woodmice, bank voles, brown rats, rabbits, weasels and cats (feral and wild) -- may 'share' setts with badgers. Although foxes may share setts with (and even raise their cubs in setts occupied by) badgers, it is generally considered that the faeces, urine and food remains that have frequently been found in fox dens are odious to badgers, which will often move to another sett if they aren't breeding." 
Wildlifeonline - Natural History of the European Badger

I didn't write any of these so they are nothing to do with me rather first-hand evidence from professionals in the field of badger behaviour and conservation. Funny that, isn't it?.

You can come back with your response now and have the last word because I clearly have no idea what I am on about, I'm only a blood-thirsty monster who is intent on the demise of a species, have no interest in ecology, conservation and sustaining healthy populations of species; I don't have a clue about the subject in question and I come out with ridiculous and ficticious statements. Go for it.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

You performed the dying swan act in your previous post. Now you're back with this bordering on the hysterical post. All rather undignified, wouldn't you say?

You may demonstrate a lack of compassion, but nobody has called you a 'bloodthirsty monster', nor anything of that ilk, at least as far as I am aware.

I'm not going to respond to that post, what would be the point? It would only trigger further misquoting and outburst. 

Thanks for the lecture on badgers! Check my profile. What does it say? 'Glastonbury, Somerset' that's what it says. I live in the country. There is a badger sett just across the way. I observe badgers at close quarters 365 days a year. I don't need any lectures on badgers. Thanks all the same.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Knightofalbion said:


> Team Badger e-petition currently stands at 94,836
> 
> We should top the crucial 100,000 mark sometime on Tuesday...


I may have got it wrong!!!!!!

Currently 98,661...Could well be sometime soon.

Brock the nation!


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> You performed the dying swan act in your previous post. Now you're back with this bordering on the hysterical post. All rather undignified, wouldn't you say?
> 
> You may demonstrate a lack of compassion, but nobody has called you a 'bloodthirsty monster', nor anything of that ilk, at least as far as I am aware.
> 
> ...


I've presented you with facts, hardly hysterical or undignified. You challenged what I said and I backed it up, then I questioned your theory on better hygiene or the vaccination being responsible for the decline of human TB. It may have been the wrong thing to do but I'm certainly not wrong in what I said. 
So what if you live where you do, how does that make a difference to colour red or how much you know about badgers? I live just outside the dales a stones throw from open moorland and large tracts of ancient woodland, I don't use that as any basis for debate.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Team Badger Update:

We've reached and passed the 100,000 signature mark!!!


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> I've presented you with facts, hardly hysterical or undignified. You challenged what I said and I backed it up, then I questioned your theory on better hygiene or the vaccination being responsible for the decline of human TB. It may have been the wrong thing to do but I'm certainly not wrong in what I said.
> So what if you live where you do, how does that make a difference to colour red or how much you know about badgers? I live just outside the dales a stones throw from open moorland and large tracts of ancient woodland, I don't use that as any basis for debate.


Oh hello. Come back for another go?

Not so, deaths from TB in this country started to decline back in the 1840s, over a hundred years before the regime of vaccinations and anti-TB drugs came in. Social records confirm this.
Poor social conditions/poor housing & overcrowding are breeding grounds for TB and instrumental in the spread of TB. Depleted immune system function hugely increases susceptibility to TB. You see where this is leading?....

Badgers are God's creatures. They've got as much right to be here as anybody else. 
"There's room for us all" as Gandhi said.

The badgers are being made a scapegoat for decades of bad husbandry and shameless abuse and exploitation.

As we've already discussed cow's milk is linked to numerous ailments and diseases, incl. breast, prostate and ovarian cancer. Healthy and delicious plant milk alternatives are available. I would like to hope people here, if they're not doing it already, will stop supporting the rotten dairy industry and adopt the humane, healthy alternatives instead.


----------



## Etienne (Dec 8, 2010)

Signed with pleasure :thumbup:


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> Oh hello. Come back for another go?
> 
> Not so, deaths from TB in this country started to decline back in the 1840s, over a hundred years before the regime of vaccinations and anti-TB drugs came in. Social records confirm this.
> Poor social conditions/poor housing & overcrowding are breeding grounds for TB and instrumental in the spread of TB. Depleted immune system function hugely increases susceptibility to TB. You see where this is leading?....
> ...


Oh I'm not having a go at all, just giving you some facts you didn't know about but are quite basic, debating opinions and questioning statements. I've been luckily enough to see both sides of the tracks when it comes to wildlife and what goes on in the countryside so I'm quite openminded about it all despite the post code area I live in.

I only recently found out that my parents wouldn't let me have a pen knife or an air rifle as a young man nit because they were worried I would cause damage or have an accident but they were worried I'd becom self sufficient and not have any reason to come home. Instead I used to spend almost every night and my weekends down in the woods or up on the moors hiding and watching. I've had some incredible encounters with wildlife and seen some pretty amazing stuff from catching a wild rabbit with my hands, having a deer lick my shoes, a vixen bark right in my ear before her two cubs came over for a sniff and even had a badger look me in the eyes from about three feet. The scariest things I've had happen is an adder slithered over my hand from seemingly nowhere and the one and only time I picked up a squirrel, those vicious little critters. Not bad for a Bradford post code.
Now I'm able to put food on my table with a clear conscience and very steady moral compass which allows me to sleep at night knowing what happens when the lights go out and the sun goes down. As long as you can do the same then that's just fine and dandy.

I can clearly see both sides of the argument for and against a cull, but I clearly see a benefit to everything in having the trial cull. If it doesn't work then a few badgers have been sacrificed, it could've been a heck of a lot worse and if that was the case then I'd be out standing in front of guns at feeding stations.

As far as dairy vs soya goes I can see the fields of cows where my milk comes from when i walk my hounds and as I shoot on them I know they are not vast acres, hectares, square miles of wildlife deserts. I could scoop it straight from the filtration tank. There is a river that runs alongside the fields so no nitrates or chemical fertilisers are used and the only thing I will ever take pleasure in shooting rather than doing it for an actual use is the mink that are supposed to wander the banks. Luckily for them they haven't had my crosshairs on them yet.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> Oh I'm not having a go at all, just giving you some facts you didn't know about but are quite basic, debating opinions and questioning statements. I've been luckily enough to see both sides of the tracks when it comes to wildlife and what goes on in the countryside so I'm quite openminde
> 
> I can clearly see both sides of the argument for and against a cull, but I clearly see a benefit to everything in having the trial cull. If it doesn't work then a few badgers have been sacrificed, it could've been a heck of a lot worse and if that was the case then I'd be out standing in front of guns at feeding stations.
> 
> .


'a few':scared: we arnt talking a couple of badgers being killed here ...we are talking thousands! & killed for what??!..purely to appease the farmers!........

'I think the most interesting observation was made to me by a senior politician who said, "fine John we accept your science, but we have to offer the farmers a carrot. And the only carrot we can possibly give them is culling badgers".' 
Professor John Bourne 
(Chair of the Independent Scientific Group (ISG) on bTB

Chris Packham


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> Oh I'm not having a go at all, just giving you some facts you didn't know about but are quite basic, debating opinions and questioning statements. I've been luckily enough to see both sides of the tracks when it comes to wildlife and what goes on in the countryside so I'm quite openminded about it all despite the post code area I live in.
> 
> I only recently found out that my parents wouldn't let me have a pen knife or an air rifle as a young man nit because they were worried I would cause damage or have an accident but they were worried I'd becom self sufficient and not have any reason to come home. Instead I used to spend almost every night and my weekends down in the woods or up on the moors hiding and watching. I've had some incredible encounters with wildlife and seen some pretty amazing stuff from catching a wild rabbit with my hands, having a deer lick my shoes, a vixen bark right in my ear before her two cubs came over for a sniff and even had a badger look me in the eyes from about three feet. The scariest things I've had happen is an adder slithered over my hand from seemingly nowhere and the one and only time I picked up a squirrel, those vicious little critters. Not bad for a Bradford post code.
> Now I'm able to put food on my table with a clear conscience and very steady moral compass which allows me to sleep at night knowing what happens when the lights go out and the sun goes down. As long as you can do the same then that's just fine and dandy.
> ...


I know what goes on in the countryside, because I live there, but unlike you I've seen but one side of the track. You see in my family we don't believe in setting dogs on defenceless creatures, nor blasting defenceless creatures to Kingdom come. We'd consider that sick, cruel and evil. But hey, it'll all come out in the wash.

I'm sure I don't need to go over the animal lovers stance on the proposed cull becuase that is self-evident. You support a cull....which even badger enemy Lord Krebs branded as "crazy"
BBC News - Science advisor says badger cull plan is a 'crazy scheme'
Bad science. Mad science.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

noushka05 said:


> 'a few':scared: we arnt talking a couple of badgers being killed here ...we are talking thousands! & killed for what??!..purely to appease the farmers!........
> 
> I think the most interesting observation was made to me by a senior politician who said, fine John we accept your science, but we have to offer the farmers a carrot. And the only carrot we can possibly give them is culling badgers.
> Professor John Bourne
> ...


Great post, dear Noushka. Yes, the whole thing is nothing but a fraud.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> I know what goes on in the countryside, because I live there, but unlike you I've seen but one side of the track. You see in my family we don't believe in setting dogs on defenceless creatures, nor blasting defenceless creatures to Kingdom come. We'd consider that sick, cruel and evil. But hey, it'll all come out in the wash.
> 
> I'm sure I don't need to go over the animal lovers stance on the proposed cull becuase that is self-evident. You support a cull....which even badger enemy Lord Krebs branded as "crazy"
> BBC News - Science advisor says badger cull plan is a 'crazy scheme'
> Bad science. Mad science.


Oh here we go, it's post code relates to knowledge time again. You might live there but from your question of things with "there's only your word for that" shows you have no idea what really goes on as I've had to explain situations. You probably don't give poachers the time of day and therefore miss out on vast amounts of knowledge and animal behaviour because in order to catch stuff you need to know exactly how it lives hence why you use the word "defenceless". Every creature that successfully breeds for generations has to have defences or it doesn't last very long at all. Even the humble earthworm has defences. I've never been for using dogs on anything such as foxes, otters, badgers, deer or hare. Rabbits yes but I don't hide that fact and it's done very quickly and the rabbit has several defences in it's favour to combat a dog.
How much of your property is being damaged by wildlife? How much money have you lost in the last year due to wildlife? What would you do if let's say something as simple as rabbits started burrowing under the corner of your house or garage or shed causing subsidence? As you clearly live in the country then the chances are you might have an open fire, what happens when your chimney gets blocked by birds or wasps? I know, I'll ask a related question which due to your 365 days a year experience you should be able answer, how many individual badgers live in the sett over your road?

If you've only ever seen something from one side then how can you claim to have a wider knowledge of it?


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> 'a few':scared: we arnt talking a couple of badgers being killed here ...we are talking thousands! & killed for what??!..purely to appease the farmers!........
> 
> I think the most interesting observation was made to me by a senior politician who said, fine John we accept your science, but we have to offer the farmers a carrot. And the only carrot we can possibly give them is culling badgers.
> Professor John Bourne
> ...


Ah yes, Mr Packham. Better keep your moggies in after 6pm or he'll not be best pleased with you despite him having two dogs that he feeds the produce from decimated ecosystems, probably has zero idea of where that came from and the methods used to obtain it. He's a good egg.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> Ah yes, Mr Packham. Better keep your moggies in after 6pm or he'll not be best pleased with you despite him having two dogs that he feeds the produce from decimated ecosystems, probably has zero idea of where that came from and the methods used to obtain it. He's a good egg.


lol Mr Packham is only quoting that, Professor John Bourne said it.

.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> lol Mr Packham is only quoting that, Professor John Bourne said it.
> 
> .


  Ooops!! Saw the name and it hits a nerve with me. He knows his beans but he does make me cringe a bit when goes on about the effects of this and that and you think "hang on mate, those poodles you love wouldn't be here if it wasn't for x, y and z. Have a think!"


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> Oh here we go, it's post code relates to knowledge time again. You might live there but from your question of things with "there's only your word for that" shows you have no idea what really goes on as I've had to explain situations. You probably don't give poachers the time of day and therefore miss out on vast amounts of knowledge and animal behaviour because in order to catch stuff you need to know exactly how it lives hence why you use the word "defenceless". Every creature that successfully breeds for generations has to have defences or it doesn't last very long at all. Even the humble earthworm has defences. I've never been for using dogs on anything such as foxes, otters, badgers, deer or hare. Rabbits yes but I don't hide that fact and it's done very quickly and the rabbit has several defences in it's favour to combat a dog.
> How much of your property is being damaged by wildlife? How much money have you lost in the last year due to wildlife? What would you do if let's say something as simple as rabbits started burrowing under the corner of your house or garage or shed causing subsidence? As you clearly live in the country then the chances are you might have an open fire, what happens when your chimney gets blocked by birds or wasps? I know, I'll ask a related question which due to your 365 days a year experience you should be able answer, how many individual badgers live in the sett over your road?
> 
> If you've only ever seen something from one side then how can you claim to have a wider knowledge of it?


My experience is from one side - compassion, not the other side - cruelty.
Though I've encountered plenty of it. There are some sick, cruel people about and no mistake.

The subject is badgers, no? I know exactly how they live. In your earlier posts you seemed to be implying that you knew all about the countryside and badgers/wild animals, and everyone else was an ignorant townie who couldn't recognise one end of a badger from the other!

The badgers across the way (there are about 8 or so) like all animals respond to human kindness. I've fed wild badgers by hand, touched and stroked wild badgers, played with wild badgers, had wild badgers turn their back on me and roll over on their backs totally trusting, I've even broken up a badger punch up! So I don't need any lectures on badgers.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

PS: Thanks for keeping the debate active and the thread at the top of the listings. Just what we want!


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Embarrassing Doctor!

Time to stop milking it!

Time to stop milking it - Health & Beauty - Life & Style - Evening Standard


----------



## alan g a (Feb 23, 2011)

Has anyone considered the possible impact that the badger cull may have on the local ecology?. If you take away 70% of the badgers in a given area then 70% more of their would be prey would survive. This means that the vegetation that they feed on would be reduced by 70%. Why can't we leave nature to do what it does best. The badgers don't cause problems deliberately . They don't know any better. The cull will only reduce the risk, not wipe it out altogether.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Number of signatures:
112,441

*Well done and lets keep those signatures coming please.*


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> Embarrassing Doctor!
> 
> Time to stop milking it!
> 
> Time to stop milking it - Health & Beauty - Life & Style - Evening Standard


He truly is an embarrassing doctor, especially when it comes to giving out misleading information which is likely to put mothers off breastfeeding:

Christian Jesson Closer magazine

His twitter comments about health visitors being "breast-feeding bullies" makes it look like he has a major issue with breast feeding.....So, if Dr. Chris disapproves of cow's milk being fed to children and isn't happy with breast milk either, what _are_ mothers supposed to feed their children?


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

JANICE199 said:


> Number of signatures:
> 112,441
> 
> *Well done and lets keep those signatures coming please.*


That's amazing. I thought things make peter out once we hit 100,000, but the campaign is gathering even more momentum...

Thanks for all your good work, Janice and for starting this thread. You're a star.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> That's amazing. I thought things make peter out once we hit 100,000, but the campaign is gathering even more momentum...
> 
> Thanks for all your good work, Janice and for starting this thread. You're a star.


*Thank you so much for your kind words they are much appreciated,but the thanks must go to all that have signed...Hugs to all,and a big thank you to all.xx*


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> Ooops!! Saw the name and it hits a nerve with me. He knows his beans but he does make me cringe a bit when goes on about the effects of this and that and you think "hang on mate, those poodles you love wouldn't be here if it wasn't for x, y and z. Have a think!"


lol numpty! see this is why i never scan posts:aureola: 

and as for Chris Packham :001_wub: lol


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> The subject is badgers, no? I know exactly how they live. In your earlier posts you seemed to be implying that you knew all about the countryside and badgers/wild animals, and everyone else was an ignorant townie who couldn't recognise one end of a badger from the other!


Holy St Mustelid. Where did I imply everyone was an ignorant townie? I believe it was your good self that implied they knew more than most about the country simply by the post code you live in.


Knightofalbion said:


> Check my profile. What does it say? 'Glastonbury, Somerset' that's what it says. I live in the country.


As for keeping the thread on top of the billing it matters not. As much as nobody wants to see the cull it is going ahead unless you want to go and stand in front of rifles all night. I'm just looking at the bright side of it and hoping for a positive outcome.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> 1) Holy St Mustelid. Where did I imply everyone was an ignorant townie? 2) I believe it was your good self that implied they knew more than most about the country simply by the post code you live in.
> 
> 3) As for keeping the thread on top of the billing it matters not. 4) As much as nobody wants to see the cull it is going ahead unless you want to go and stand in front of rifles all night. I'm just looking at the bright side of it and hoping for a positive outcome.


1) I'm afraid you do give that impression.

2) I stated that I don't need a lecture on badgers and their behaviour because I have first hand, close quarter experience of them 365 days a year.

3) It all helps and we badger lovers are grateful for your help. Back to the top of the list again. Thanks.

4) Dairy farmers are only concerned about money, politicians are only concerned about votes and the badger is Britain's best loved animal. Don't underestimate people power.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

E-petition update:

118,500+


----------



## Staysee (Oct 19, 2009)

And yet people for the cull will still say there isnt enough support, yeah cos over 100,000 people dont matter XD haha i love this, just goes to show the love for the badgers!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

over 120,000 now!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

My MP is against the badger cull( i knew he would be)...where does your MP stand ? If there is no information given please write to them to find out their view on the badger cull ... You can contact your MP via WriteToThem - Email or fax your Councillor, MP, MEP, MSP or Welsh, NI, London Assembly Member for free

FTC=For The Cull 
ATC=Against The Cull
RTA= Refuses To Answer

Constituency Surname, First name
A
Aberavon Francis, Hywel (Lab) ATC
Aberconwy Bebb, Guto (Con)
Aberdeen North Doran, Frank (Lab) ATC
Aberdeen South Begg, Anne (Lab) ATC
Airdrie and Shotts Nash, Pamela (Lab) ATC
Aldershot Howarth, Gerald (Con)
Aldridge-Brownhills Shepherd, Richard (Con)
Altrincham and Sale West Brady, Graham (Con)
Alyn and Deeside Tami, Mark (Lab) ATC
Amber Valley Mills, Nigel (Con)
Angus Weir, Mike (SNP)
Arfon Williams, Hywel (PC)
Argyll and Bute Reid, Alan (LD)
Arundel and South Downs Herbert, Nick (Con)
Ashfield De Piero, Gloria (Lab)
Ashford Green, Damian (Con)
Ashton-under-Lyne Heyes, David (Lab) ATC
Aylesbury Lidington, David (Con)
Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock Osborne, Sandra (Lab) ATC
B
Banbury Baldry, Tony (Con)
Banff and Buchan Whiteford, Eilidh (SNP)
Barking Hodge, Margaret (Lab)
Barnsley Central Jarvis, Dan (Lab) ATC
Barnsley East Dugher, Michael (Lab)
Barrow and Furness Woodcock, John (Lab /Co-op)
Basildon and Billericay Baron, John (Con)
Basingstoke Miller, Maria (Con)
Bassetlaw Mann, John (Lab) ATC
Bath Foster, Don (LD) ATC
Batley and Spen Wood, Mike (Lab) ATC
Battersea Ellison, Jane (Con)
Beaconsfield Grieve, Dominic (Con)
Beckenham Stewart, Bob (Con)
Bedford Fuller, Richard (Con)
Belfast East Long, Naomi (Alliance)
Belfast North Dodds, Nigel (DU)
Belfast South McDonnell, Alasdair (SDLP)
Belfast West Maskey, Paul (SF)
Bermondsey and Old Southwark Hughes, Simon (LD)
Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk Moore, Michael (LD)
Berwick-upon-Tweed Beith, Alan (LD)
Bethnal Green and Bow Ali, Rushanara (Lab)
Beverley and Holderness Stuart, Graham (Con)
Bexhill and Battle Barker, Gregory (Con)
Bexleyheath and Crayford Evennett, David (Con)
Birkenhead Field, Frank (Lab) ATC
Birmingham, Edgbaston Stuart, Gisela (Lab)
Birmingham, Erdington Dromey, Jack (Lab)
Birmingham, Hall Green Godsiff, Roger (Lab) ATC
Birmingham, Hodge Hill Byrne, Liam (Lab)
Birmingham, Ladywood Mahmood, Shabana (Lab)
Birmingham, Northfield Burden, Richard (Lab) ATC
Birmingham, Perry Barr Mahmood, Khalid (Lab)
Birmingham, Selly Oak McCabe, Steve (Lab) ATC
Birmingham, Yardley Hemming, John (LD) ATC
Bishop Auckland Goodman, Helen (Lab)
Blackburn Straw, Jack (Lab)
Blackley and Broughton Stringer, Graham (Lab)
Blackpool North and Cleveleys Maynard, Paul (Con)
Blackpool South Marsden, Gordon (Lab) ATC
Blaenau Gwent Smith, Nick (Lab) ATC
Blaydon Anderson, David (Lab)
Blyth Valley Campbell, Ronnie (Lab) ATC
Bognor Regis and Littlehampton Gibb, Nick (Con)
Bolsover Skinner, Dennis (Lab) ATC
Bolton North East Crausby, David (Lab) ATC
Bolton South East Qureshi, Yasmin (Lab) ATC
Bolton West Hilling, Julie (Lab)
Bootle Benton, Joe (Lab)
Boston and Skegness Simmonds, Mark (Con)
Bosworth Tredinnick, David (Con)
Bournemouth East Ellwood, Tobias (Con)
Bournemouth West Burns, Conor (Con)
Bracknell Lee, Phillip (Con)
Bradford East Ward, David (LD) ATC
Bradford South Sutcliffe, Gerry (Lab)
Bradford West Galloway, George (Respect) ATC
Braintree Newmark, Brooks (Con)
Brecon and Radnorshire Williams, Roger (LD)
Brent Central Teather, Sarah (LD) RTA
Brent North Gardiner, Barry (Lab)
Brentford and Isleworth Macleod, Mary (Con)
Brentwood and Ongar Pickles, Eric (Con) FTC
Bridgend Moon, Madeleine (Lab)
Bridgwater and West Somerset Liddell-Grainger, Ian (Con) RTA
Brigg and Goole Percy, Andrew (Con)
Brighton, Kemptown Kirby, Simon (Con) FTC
Brighton, Pavilion Lucas, Caroline (Green) ATC
Bristol East McCarthy, Kerry (Lab) ATC
Bristol North West Leslie, Charlotte (Con)
Bristol South Primarolo, Dawn (Lab)
Bristol West Williams, Stephen (LD) ATC
Broadland Simpson, Keith (Con)
Bromley and Chislehurst Neill, Robert (Con)
Bromsgrove Javid, Sajid (Con)
Broxbourne Walker, Charles (Con)
Broxtowe Soubry, Anna (Con)
Buckingham Bercow, John (Spk)
Burnley Birtwistle, Gordon (LD) ATC
Burton Griffiths, Andrew (Con)
Bury North Nuttall, David (Con)
Bury South Lewis, Ivan (Lab)
Bury St Edmunds Ruffley, David (Con)
C
Caerphilly David, Wayne (Lab)
Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross Thurso, John (LD)
Calder Valley Whittaker, Craig (Con)
Camberwell and Peckham Harman, Harriet (Lab)
Camborne and Redruth Eustice, George (Con) FTC
Cambridge Huppert, Julian (LD)
Cannock Chase Burley, Aidan (Con) FTC
Canterbury Brazier, Julian (Con)
Cardiff Central Willott, Jenny (LD) ATC
Cardiff North Evans, Jonathan (Con)
Cardiff South and Penarth Michael, Alun (Lab /Co-op) ATC
Cardiff West Brennan, Kevin (Lab)
Carlisle Stevenson, John (Con)
Carmarthen East and Dinefwr Edwards, Jonathan (PC)
Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire Hart, Simon (Con) FTC
Carshalton and Wallington Brake, Tom (LD)
Castle Point Harris, Rebecca (Con)
Central Ayrshire Donohoe, Brian H. (Lab)
Central Devon Stride, Mel (Con) FTC
Central Suffolk and North Ipswich Poulter, Daniel (Con)
Ceredigion Williams, Mark (LD)
Charnwood Dorrell, Stephen (Con)
Chatham and Aylesford Crouch, Tracey (Con) FTC
Cheadle Hunter, Mark (LD
Chelmsford Burns, Simon (Con) FTC
Chelsea and Fulham Hands, Greg (Con)
Cheltenham Horwood, Martin (LD)
Chesham and Amersham Gillan, Cheryl (Con)
Chesterfield Perkins, Toby (Lab)
Chichester Tyrie, Andrew (Con)
Chingford and Woodford Green Duncan Smith, Iain (Con)
Chippenham Hames, Duncan (LD)
Chipping Barnet Villiers, Theresa (Con)
Chorley Hoyle, Lindsay (Lab)
Christchurch Chope, Christopher (Con)
Cities of London and Westminster Field, Mark (Con)
City of Chester Mosley, Stephen (Con)
City of Durham Blackman-Woods, Roberta(Lab)
Clacton Carswell, Douglas (Con)
Cleethorpes Vickers, Martin (Con)
Clwyd South Jones, Susan Elan (Lab)
Clwyd West Jones, David (Con)
Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill Clarke, Tom (Lab) ATC
Colchester Russell, Bob (LD) ATC
Colne Valley McCartney, Jason (Con) FTC
Congleton Bruce, Fiona (Con)
Copeland Reed, Jamie (Lab)
Corby Mensch, Mrs (Con)
Coventry North East Ainsworth, Bob (Lab)
Coventry North West Robinson, Geoffrey (Lab) ATC
Coventry South Cunningham, Jim (Lab) ATC
Crawley Smith, Henry (Con) ATC
Crewe and Nantwich Timpson, Edward (Con)
Croydon Central Barwell, Gavin (Con) FTC
Croydon North Wicks, Malcolm (Lab)
Croydon South Ottaway, Richard (Con)
Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East McClymont, Gregg (Lab)
Cynon Valley Clwyd, Ann (Lab) ATC
D
Dagenham and Rainham Cruddas, Jon (Lab) ATC
Darlington Chapman, Jenny (Lab) ATC
Dartford Johnson, Gareth (Con)
Daventry Heaton-Harris, Chris (Con)
Delyn Hanson, David (Lab)
Denton and Reddish Gwynne, Andrew (Lab) ATC
Derby North Williamson, Chris (Lab) ATC
Derby South Beckett, Margaret (Lab)
Derbyshire Dales McLoughlin, Patrick (Con)
Devizes Perry, Claire (Con)
Dewsbury Reevell, Simon (Con)
Don Valley Flint, Caroline (Lab)
Doncaster Central Winterton, Rosie (Lab) ATC
Doncaster North Miliband, Edward (Lab)
Dover Elphicke, Charlie (Con)
Dudley North Austin, Ian (Lab) ATC
Dudley South Kelly, Chris (Con)
Dulwich and West Norwood Jowell, Tessa (Lab)
Dumfries and Galloway Brown, Russell (Lab)
Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale Mundell, David (Con)
Dundee East Hosie, Stewart (SNP)
Dundee West McGovern, Jim (Lab) ATC
Dunfermline and West Fife Docherty, Thomas (Lab)
Dwyfor Meirionnydd Llwyd, Elfyn (PC)
E
Ealing Central and Acton Bray, Angie (Con)
Ealing North Pound, Stephen (Lab) ATC
Ealing, Southall Sharma, Virendra (Lab) ATC
Easington Morris, Grahame M. (Lab) ATC
East Antrim Wilson, Sammy (DU)
East Devon Swire, Hugo (Con)
East Dunbartonshire Swinson, Jo (LD)
East Ham Timms, Stephen (Lab)
East Hampshire Hinds, Damian (Con)
East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow McCann, Michael (Lab)
East Londonderry Campbell, Gregory (DU)
East Lothian ODonnell, Fiona (Lab)
East Renfrewshire Murphy, Jim (Lab)
East Surrey Gyimah, Sam (Con)
East Worthing and Shoreham Loughton, Tim (Con)
East Yorkshire Knight, Greg (Con)
Eastbourne Lloyd, Stephen (LD) ATC
Eastleigh Huhne, Chris (LD)
Eddisbury OBrien, Stephen (Con)
Edinburgh East Gilmore, Sheila (Lab) ATC
Edinburgh North and Leith Lazarowicz, Mark (Lab /Co-op)
Edinburgh South Murray, Ian (Lab)
Edinburgh South West Darling, Alistair (Lab
Edinburgh West Crockart, Mike (LD) ATC
Edmonton Love, Andrew (Lab /Co-op)
Ellesmere Port and Neston Miller, Andrew (Lab) ATC
Elmet and Rothwell Shelbrooke, Alec (Con)
Eltham Efford, Clive (Lab)
Enfield North de Bois, Nick (Con)
Enfield, Southgate Burrowes, David (Con) FTC
Epping Forest Laing, Eleanor (Con)
Epsom and Ewell Grayling, Chris (Con)
Erewash Lee, Jessica (Con)
Erith and Thamesmead Pearce, Teresa (Lab)
Esher and Walton Raab, Dominic (Con)
Exeter Bradshaw, Ben (Lab)
F
Falkirk Joyce, Eric (Ind) ATC
Fareham Hoban, Mark (Con)
Faversham and Mid Kent Robertson, Hugh (Con)
Feltham and Heston Malhotra, Seema (Lab /Co-op)
Fermanagh and South Tyrone Gildernew, Michelle (SF)
Filton and Bradley Stoke Lopresti, Jack (Con)
Finchley and Golders Green Freer, Mike (Con)
Folkestone and Hythe Collins, Damian (Con
Forest of Dean Harper, Mark (Con) FTC
Foyle Durkan, Mark (SDLP) ATC
Fylde Menzies, Mark (Con)
G
Gainsborough Leigh, Edward (Con)
Garston and Halewood Eagle, Maria (Lab)
Gateshead Mearns, Ian (Lab) ATC
Gedling Coaker, Vernon (Lab) ATC
Gillingham and Rainham Chishti, Rehman (Con)
Glasgow Central Sarwar, Anas (Lab) ATC
Glasgow East Curran, Margaret (Lab)
Glasgow North McKechin, Ann (Lab)
Glasgow North East Bain, William (Lab)
Glasgow North West Robertson, John (Lab) ATC
Glasgow South Harris, Tom (Lab) ATC
Glasgow South West Davidson, Ian (Lab /Co-op) ATC
Glenrothes Roy, Lindsay (Lab) ATC
Gloucester Graham, Richard (Con) FTC
Gordon Bruce, Malcolm (LD)
Gosport Dinenage, Caroline (Con)
Gower Caton, Martin (Lab) ATC
Grantham and Stamford Boles, Nick (Con)
Gravesham Holloway, Adam (Con)
Great Grimsby Mitchell, Austin (Lab) ATC
Great Yarmouth Lewis, Brandon (Con)
Greenwich and Woolwich Raynsford, Nick (Lab)
Guildford Milton, Anne (Con)
H
Hackney North and Stoke Newington Abbott, Diane (Lab) ATC
Hackney South and Shoreditch Hillier, Meg (Lab /Co-op)
Halesowen and Rowley Regis Morris, James (Con)
Halifax Riordan, Linda (Lab /Co-op) ATC
Haltemprice and Howden Davis, David (Con) FTC
Halton Twigg, Derek (Lab)
Hammersmith Slaughter, Andy (Lab)
Hampstead and Kilburn Jackson, Glenda (Lab) ATC
Harborough Garnier, Edward (Con)
Harlow Halfon, Robert (Con)
Harrogate and Knaresborough Jones, Andrew (Con)
Harrow East Blackman, Bob (Con)
Harrow West Thomas, Gareth (Lab /Co-op)
Hartlepool Wright, Iain (Lab)
Harwich and North Essex Jenkin, Bernard (Con)
Hastings and Rye Rudd, Amber (Con)
Havant Willetts, David (Con
Hayes and Harlington McDonnell, John (Lab) ATC
Hazel Grove Stunell, Andrew (LD)
Hemel Hempstead Penning, Mike (Con)
Hemsworth Trickett, Jon (Lab)
Hendon Offord, Matthew (Con)
Henley Howell, John (Con)
Hereford and South Herefordshire Norman, Jesse (Con) FTC
Hertford and Stortford Prisk, Mark (Con)
Hertsmere Clappison, James (Con)
Hexham Opperman, Guy (Con) FTC
Heywood and Middleton Dobbin, Jim (Lab /Co-op) ATC
High Peak Bingham, Andrew (Con)
Hitchin and Harpenden Lilley, Peter (Con)
Holborn and St Pancras Dobson, Frank (Lab) ATC
Hornchurch and Upminster Watkinson, Angela (Con)
Hornsey and Wood Green Featherstone, Lynne (LD)
Horsham Maude, Francis (Con)
Houghton and Sunderland South Phillipson, Bridget (Lab)
Hove Weatherley, Mike (Con) ATC
Huddersfield Sheerman, Barry (Lab /Co-op)
Huntingdon Djanogly, Jonathan (Con)
Hyndburn Jones, Graham (Lab)
I
Ilford North Scott, Lee (Con)
Ilford South Gapes, Mike (Lab /Co-op) ATC
Inverclyde McKenzie, Iain (Lab)
Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey Alexander, Danny (LD)
Ipswich Gummer, Ben (Con) FTC
Isle of Wight Turner, Andrew (Con)
Islington North Corbyn, Jeremy (Lab) ATC
Islington South and Finsbury Thornberry, Emily (Lab)
Islwyn Evans, Chris (Lab /Co-op)
J
Jarrow Hepburn, Stephen (Lab) ATC
K
Keighley Hopkins, Kris (Con)
Kenilworth and Southam Wright, Jeremy (Con)
Kensington Rifkind, Malcolm (Con)
Kettering Hollobone, Philip (Con)
Kilmarnock and Loudoun Jamieson, Cathy (Lab /Co-op)
Kingston and Surbiton Davey, Edward (LD)
Kingston upon Hull East Turner, Karl (Lab)
Kingston upon Hull North Johnson, Diana (Lab)
Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle Johnson, Alan (Lab) ATC
Kingswood Skidmore, Chris (Con)
Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath Brown, Gordon (Lab)
Knowsley Howarth, George (Lab) ATC
L
Lagan Valley Donaldson, Jeffrey M. (DU) ATC
Lanark and Hamilton East Hood, Jim (Lab) ATC
Lancaster and Fleetwood Ollerenshaw, Eric (Con)
Leeds Central Benn, Hilary (Lab) ATC
Leeds East Mudie, George (Lab)
Leeds North East Hamilton, Fabian (Lab) ATC
Leeds North West Mulholland, Greg (LD)
Leeds West Reeves, Rachel (Lab)
Leicester East Vaz, Keith (Lab)
Leicester South Ashworth, Jonathan (Lab)
Leicester West Kendall, Liz (Lab)
Leigh Burnham, Andy (Lab) ATC
Lewes Baker, Norman (LD)
Lewisham East Alexander, Heidi (Lab)
Lewisham West and Penge Dowd, Jim (Lab) ATC
Lewisham, Deptford Ruddock, Dame Joan (Lab) ATC
Leyton and Wanstead Cryer, John (Lab) ATC
Lichfield Fabricant, Michael (Con)
Lincoln McCartney, Karl (Con)
Linlithgow and East Falkirk Connarty, Michael (Lab) ATC
Liverpool, Riverside Ellman, Louise (Lab /Co-op)
Liverpool, Walton Rotheram, Steve (Lab)
Liverpool, Wavertree Berger, Luciana (Lab /Co-op)
Liverpool, West Derby Twigg, Stephen (Lab /Co-op) ATC
Livingston Morrice, Graeme (Lab) ATC
Llanelli Griffith, Nia (Lab) ATC
Loughborough Morgan, Nicky (Con)
Louth and Horncastle Tapsell, Peter (Con)
Ludlow Dunne, Philip (Con)
Luton North Hopkins, Kelvin (Lab) ATC
Luton South Shuker, Gavin (Lab /Co-op)
M
Macclesfield Rutley, David (Con)
Maidenhead May, Theresa (Con)
Maidstone and The Weald Grant, Helen (Con)
Makerfield Fovargue, Yvonne (Lab) ATC
Maldon Whittingdale, John (Con) FTC
Manchester Central Lloyd, Tony (Lab) ATC
Manchester, Gorton Kaufman, Gerald (Lab) ATC
Manchester, Withington Leech, John (LD) ATC
Mansfield Meale, Alan (Lab) ATC
Meon Valley Hollingbery, George (Con)
Meriden Spelman, Caroline (Con) FTC
Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney Havard, Dai (Lab) ATC
Mid Bedfordshire Dorries, Nadine (Con)
Mid Derbyshire Latham, Pauline (Con) FTC
Mid Dorset and North Poole Brooke, Annette (LD) ATC
Mid Norfolk Freeman, George (Con)
Mid Sussex Soames, Nicholas (Con)
Mid Ulster McGuinness, Martin (SF)
Mid Worcestershire Luff, Peter (Con)
Middlesbrough Bell, Stuart (Lab)
Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland Blenkinsop, Tom (Lab) ATC
Midlothian Hamilton, David (Lab)
Milton Keynes North Lancaster, Mark (Con)
Milton Keynes South Stewart, Iain (Con)
Mitcham and Morden McDonagh, Siobhain (Lab)
Mole Valley Beresford, Paul (Con)
Monmouth Davies, David T. C. (Con)
Montgomeryshire Davies, Glyn (Con)
Moray Robertson, Angus (SNP)
Morecambe and Lunesdale Morris, David (Con)
Morley and Outwood Balls, Ed (Lab /Co-op)
Motherwell and Wishaw Roy, Frank (Lab)
N
Na h-Eileanan an Iar MacNeil, Angus Brendan (SNP)
Neath Hain, Peter (Lab)
New Forest East Lewis, Julian (Con)
New Forest West Swayne, Desmond (Con) FTC
Newark Mercer, Patrick (Con)
Newbury Benyon, Richard (Con)
Newcastle upon Tyne Central Onwurah, Chi (Lab)
Newcastle upon Tyne East Brown, Nicholas (Lab)
Newcastle upon Tyne North McKinnell, Catherine (Lab)
Newcastle-under-Lyme Farrelly, Paul (Lab)
Newport East Morden, Jessica (Lab)
Newport West Flynn, Paul (Lab) ATC
Newry and Armagh Murphy, Conor (SF)
Newton Abbot Morris, Anne Marie (Con)
Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford Cooper, Yvette (Lab) ATC
North Antrim Paisley, Ian (DU)
North Ayrshire and Arran Clark, Katy (Lab) ATC
North Cornwall Rogerson, Dan (LD) FTC
North Devon Harvey, Nick (LD)
North Dorset Walter, Robert (Con)
North Down Hermon, Lady (Ind)
North Durham Jones, Kevan (Lab) ATC
North East Bedfordshire Burt, Alistair (Con) FTC
North East Cambridgeshire Barclay, Stephen (Con)
North East Derbyshire Engel, Natascha (Lab)
North East Fife Campbell, Menzies (LD)
North East Hampshire Arbuthnot, James (Con)
North East Hertfordshire Heald, Oliver (Con) FTC
North East Somerset Rees-Mogg, Jacob (Con)
North Herefordshire Wiggin, Bill (Con)
North Norfolk Lamb, Norman (LD)
North Shropshire Paterson, Owen (Con) FTC
North Somerset Fox, Liam (Con)
North Swindon Tomlinson, Justin (Con)
North Thanet Gale, Roger (Con)
North Tyneside Glindon, Mary (Lab) ATC
North Warwickshire Byles, Dan (Con)
North West Cambridgeshire Vara, Shailesh (Con) FTC
North West Durham Glass, Pat (Lab)
North West Hampshire Young, George (Con
North West Leicestershire Bridgen, Andrew (Con) FTC
North West Norfolk Bellingham, Henry (Con)
North Wiltshire Gray, James (Con)
Northampton North Ellis, Michael (Con)
Northampton South Binley, Brian (Con)
Norwich North Smith, Chloe (Con)
Norwich South Wright, Simon (LD) ATC
Nottingham East Leslie, Chris (Lab /Co-op)
Nottingham North Allen, Graham (Lab) ATC
Nottingham South Greenwood, Lilian (Lab)
Nuneaton Jones, Marcus (Con)


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

O
Ochil and South Perthshire Banks, Gordon (Lab) ATC
Ogmore Irranca-Davies, Huw (Lab)
Old Bexley and Sidcup Brokenshire, James (Con)
Oldham East and Saddleworth Abrahams, Debbie (Lab)
Oldham West and Royton Meacher, Michael (Lab) ATC
Orkney and Shetland Carmichael, Alistair (LD)
Orpington Johnson, Joseph (Con)
Oxford East Smith, Andrew (Lab) ATC
Oxford West and Abingdon Blackwood, Nicola (Con)
P
Paisley and Renfrewshire North Sheridan, Jim (Lab)
Paisley and Renfrewshire South Alexander, Douglas (Lab)
Pendle Stephenson, Andrew (Con)
Penistone and Stocksbridge Smith, Angela (Lab)
Penrith and The Border Stewart, Rory (Con)
Perth and North Perthshire Wishart, Pete (SNP)
Peterborough Jackson, Stewart (Con)
Plymouth, Moor View Seabeck, Alison (Lab)
Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport Colvile, Oliver (Con)
Pontypridd Smith, Owen (Lab)
Poole Syms, Robert (Con)
Poplar and Limehouse Fitzpatrick, Jim (Lab)
Portsmouth North Mordaunt, Penny (Con)
Portsmouth South Hancock, Mike (LD) ATC
Preseli Pembrokeshire Crabb, Stephen (Con)
Preston Hendrick, Mark (Lab /Co-op)
Pudsey Andrew, Stuart (Con)
Putney Greening, Justine (Con) FTC
R
Rayleigh and Wickford Francois, Mark (Con)
Reading East Wilson, Rob (Con)
Reading West Sharma, Alok (Con
Redcar Swales, Ian (LD) ATC
Redditch Lumley, Karen (Con)
Reigate Blunt, Crispin (Con)
Rhondda Bryant, Chris (Lab)
Ribble Valley Evans, Nigel (Con)
Richmond (Yorks) Hague, William (Con)
Richmond Park Goldsmith, Zac (Con) ATC
Rochdale Danczuk, Simon (Lab)
Rochester and Strood Reckless, Mark (Con)
Rochford and Southend East Duddridge, James (Con)
Romford Rosindell, Andrew (Con)
Romsey and Southampton North Nokes, Caroline (Con)
Ross, Skye and Lochaber Kennedy, Charles (LD) ATC
Rossendale and Darwen Berry, Jake (Con)
Rother Valley Barron, Kevin (Lab) ATC
Rotherham MacShane, Denis (Lab)
Rugby Pawsey, Mark (Con)
Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner Hurd, Nick (Con)
Runnymede and Weybridge Hammond, Philip (Con)
Rushcliffe Clarke, Kenneth (Con)
Rutherglen and Hamilton West Greatrex, Tom (Lab /Co-op)
Rutland and Melton Duncan, Alan (Con
S
Saffron Walden Haselhurst, Alan (Con)
Salford and Eccles Blears, Hazel (Lab)
Salisbury Glen, John (Con)
Scarborough and Whitby Goodwill, Robert (Con)
S****horpe Dakin, Nic (Lab) ATC
Sedgefield Wilson, Phil (Lab)
Sefton Central Esterson, Bill (Lab) ATC
Selby and Ainsty Adams, Nigel (Con)
Sevenoaks Fallon, Michael (Con)
Sheffield Central Blomfield, Paul (Lab) ATC
Sheffield South East Betts, Clive (Lab) ATC
Sheffield, Brightside and Hillsborough Blunkett, David (Lab) ATC
Sheffield, Hallam Clegg, Nick (LD)
Sheffield, Heeley Munn, Meg (Lab /Co-op)
Sherwood Spencer, Mark (Con)
Shipley Davies, Philip (Con)
Shrewsbury and Atcham Kawczynski, Daniel (Con)
Sittingbourne and Sheppey Henderson, Gordon (Con)
Skipton and Ripon Smith, Julian (Con)
Sleaford and North Hykeham Phillips, Stephen (Con) FTC
Slough Mactaggart, Fiona (Lab)
Solihull Burt, Lorely (LD) FTC
Somerton and Frome Heath, David (LD)
South Antrim McCrea, William (DU)
South Basildon and East Thurrock Metcalfe, Stephen (Con)
South Cambridgeshire Lansley, Andrew (Con)
South Derbyshire Wheeler, Heather (Con)
South Dorset Drax, Richard (Con)
South Down Ritchie, Margaret (SDLP)
South East Cambridgeshire Paice, James (Con) FTC
South East Cornwall Murray, Sheryll (Con)
South Holland and The Deepings Hayes, John (Con)
South Leicestershire Robathan, Andrew (Con)
South Norfolk Bacon, Richard (Con)
South Northamptonshire Leadsom, Andrea (Con)
South Ribble Fullbrook, Lorraine (Con)
South Shields Miliband, David (Lab)
South Staffordshire Williamson, Gavin (Con)
South Suffolk Yeo, Tim (Con)
South Swindon Buckland, Robert (Con) FTC
South Thanet Sandys, Laura (Con)
South West Bedfordshire Selous, Andrew (Con)
South West Devon Streeter, Gary (Con) FTC
South West Hertfordshire Gauke, David (Con
South West Norfolk Truss, Elizabeth (Con)
South West Surrey Hunt, Jeremy (Con)
South West Wiltshire Murrison, Andrew (Con)
Southampton, Itchen Denham, John (Lab)
Southampton, Test Whitehead, Alan (Lab)
Southend West Amess, David (Con)
Southport Pugh, John (LD) ATC
Spelthorne Kwarteng, Kwasi (Con)
St Albans Main, Anne (Con)
St Austell and Newquay Gilbert, Stephen (LD) ATC
St Helens North Watts, Dave (Lab) ATC
St Helens South and Whiston Woodward, Shaun (Lab)
St Ives George, Andrew (LD) ATC
Stafford Lefroy, Jeremy (Con)
Staffordshire Moorlands Bradley, Karen (Con)
Stalybridge and Hyde Reynolds, Jonathan (Lab /Co-op)
Stevenage McPartland, Stephen (Con)
Stirling McGuire, Anne (Lab)
Stockport Coffey, Ann (Lab)
Stockton North Cunningham, Alex (Lab) ATC
Stockton South Wharton, James (Con)
Stoke-on-Trent Central Hunt, Tristram (Lab
Stoke-on-Trent North Walley, Joan (Lab) ATC
Stoke-on-Trent South Flello, Robert (Lab)
Stone Cash, William (Con)
Stourbridge James, Margot (Con)
Strangford Shannon, Jim (DU)
Stratford-on-Avon Zahawi, Nadhim (Con)
Streatham Umunna, Chuka (Lab)
Stretford and Urmston Green, Kate (Lab) ATC
Stroud Carmichael, Neil (Con) FTC
Suffolk Coastal Coffey, Thérèse (Con)
Sunderland Central Elliott, Julie (Lab)
Surrey Heath Gove, Michael (Con)
Sutton and Cheam Burstow, Paul (LD)
Sutton Coldfield Mitchell, Andrew (Con)
Swansea East James, Siân C. (Lab)
Swansea West Davies, Geraint (Lab /Co-op)
T
Tamworth Pincher, Christopher (Con)
Tatton Osborne, George (Con)
Taunton Deane Browne, Jeremy (LD)
Telford Wright, David (Lab)
Tewkesbury Robertson, Laurence (Con
The Cotswolds Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey (Con)
The Wrekin Pritchard, Mark (Con)
Thirsk and Malton McIntosh, Anne (Con)
Thornbury and Yate Webb, Steve (LD)
Thurrock Doyle-Price, Jackie (Con)
Tiverton and Honiton Parish, Neil (Con) FTC
Tonbridge and Malling Stanley, John (Con)
Tooting Khan, Sadiq (Lab)
Torbay Sanders, Adrian (LD) ATC
Torfaen Murphy, Paul (Lab)
Torridge and West Devon Cox, Geoffrey (Con)
Totnes Wollaston, Sarah (Con) FTC
Tottenham Lammy, David (Lab)
Truro and Falmouth Newton, Sarah (Con)
Tunbridge Wells Clark, Greg (Con)
Twickenham Cable, Vince (LD) FTC
Tynemouth Campbell, Alan (Lab)
U
Upper Bann Simpson, David (DU)
Uxbridge and South Ruislip Randall, John (Con)
V
Vale of Clwyd Ruane, Chris (Lab) ATC
Vale of Glamorgan Cairns, Alun (Con)
Vauxhall Hoey, Kate (Lab)
W
Wakefield Creagh, Mary (Lab) ATC
Wallasey Eagle, Angela (Lab)
Walsall North Winnick, David (Lab)
Walsall South Vaz, Valerie (Lab)
Walthamstow Creasy, Stella (Lab /Co-op)
Wansbeck Lavery, Ian (Lab) ATC
Wantage Vaizey, Edward (Con)
Warley Spellar, John (Lab)
Warrington North Jones, Helen (Lab)
Warrington South Mowat, David (Con)
Warwick and Leamington White, Chris (Con)
Washington and Sunderland West Hodgson, Sharon (Lab)
Watford Harrington, Richard (Con)
Waveney Aldous, Peter (Con)
Wealden Hendry, Charles (Con)
Weaver Vale Evans, Graham (Con)
Wellingborough Bone, Peter (Con)
Wells Munt, Tessa (LD)
Welwyn Hatfield Shapps, Grant (Con) FTC
Wentworth and Dearne Healey, John (Lab)
West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine Smith, Robert (LD)
West Bromwich East Watson, Tom (Lab) ATC
West Bromwich West Bailey, Adrian (Lab /Co-op) ATC
West Dorset Letwin, Oliver (Con) FTC
West Dunbartonshire Doyle, Gemma (Lab /Co-op)
West Ham Brown, Lyn (Lab)
West Lancashire Cooper, Rosie (Lab) ATC
West Suffolk Hancock, Matthew (Con)
West Tyrone Doherty, Pat (SF)
West Worcestershire Baldwin, Harriett (Con)
Westminster North Buck, Karen (Lab)
Westmorland and Lonsdale Farron, Tim (LD) FTC
Weston-super-Mare Penrose, John (Con)
Wigan Nandy, Lisa (Lab)
Wimbledon Hammond, Stephen (Con)
Winchester Brine, Steve (Con)
Windsor Afriyie, Adam (Con)
Wirral South McGovern, Alison (Lab) ATC
Wirral West McVey, Esther (Con)
Witham Patel, Priti (Con)
Witney Cameron, David (Con
Woking Lord, Jonathan (Con)
Wokingham Redwood, John (Con) ATC
Wolverhampton North East Reynolds, Emma (Lab) ATC
Wolverhampton South East McFadden, Pat (Lab)
Wolverhampton South West Uppal, Paul (Con)
Worcester Walker, Robin (Con)
Workington Cunningham, Tony (Lab) ATC
Worsley and Eccles South Keeley, Barbara (Lab)
Worthing West Bottomley, Peter (Con) ATC
Wrexham Lucas, Ian (Lab) ATC
Wycombe Baker, Steve (Con)
Wyre and Preston North Wallace, Ben (Con)
Wyre Forest Garnier, Mark (Con)
Wythenshawe and Sale East Goggins, Paul (Lab) ATC
Y
Yeovil Laws, David (LD)
Ynys Môn Owen, Albert (Lab)
York Central Bayley, Hugh (Lab) ATC
York Outer Sturdy, Julian (Con)


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Top posts, dear Noushka!

Over 122,000 signatures now...Leading all the other e-petitions by a country mile!


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> 1) I'm afraid you do give that impression.
> 
> 2) I stated that I don't need a lecture on badgers and their behaviour because I have first hand, close quarter experience of them 365 days a year.
> 
> ...


I may come across to you that way because I had to fill in the gaps of your knowledge that's all, every day's a learning day if you pay attention.

Dasiry framers are only interested in money are they? Considering it is their livelyhood I should hope the money comes into their thoughst every so often but as they are getting stuffed on pricing (as stated earlier in this thread) then wouldn't you be interested in the financial side of things if you were working for a loss? You must have also missed to depressing news reports during the F&M crisis where entire herds that had taken decades to build and were some of the best genetically bred herds of certain species were being destroyed. But how did the farmers react? Did they jump around for joy at the windfall of becoming a millionaire through compensation? No. They were in floods of tears and inconsolable at their loss because despite your ignorant view of dairy farmers they do actualy care for their animals, they have to by law and they do so by conscience. Why would a farmer become a farmer if they didn't care about animals and want to make sure the livestock they kept was in tip top condition and order? I could take you to various farms I know and have helped out on, get you to point to any cow and the farmer will be able to tell you it's licence tag number and also it's pet name they have for them without batting an eyelid. What's you view on beef farming as it affects their buiness more than it does the dairy? You have one dairy cow test positive and you can still keep the milk flow moving (even if volume restrictions are applied) but if you're a beef farmer you are stuffed for 6months until the next test, no movement, no selling just a dead cow and bit of compo from Joe Public.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

hutch6 said:


> I may come across to you that way because I had to fill in the gaps of your knowledge that's all, every day's a learning day if you pay attention.
> 
> Dasiry framers are only interested in money are they? Considering it is their livelyhood I should hope the money comes into their thoughst every so often but as they are getting stuffed on pricing (as stated earlier in this thread) then wouldn't you be interested in the financial side of things if you were working for a loss? You must have also missed to depressing news reports during the F&M crisis where entire herds that had taken decades to build and were some of the best genetically bred herds of certain species were being destroyed. But how did the farmers react? Did they jump around for joy at the windfall of becoming a millionaire through compensation? No. They were in floods of tears and inconsolable at their loss because despite your ignorant view of dairy farmers they do actualy care for their animals, they have to by law and they do so by conscience. Why would a farmer become a farmer if they didn't care about animals and want to make sure the livestock they kept was in tip top condition and order? I could take you to various farms I know and have helped out on, get you to point to any cow and the farmer will be able to tell you it's licence tag number and also it's pet name they have for them without batting an eyelid. What's you view on beef farming as it affects their buiness more than it does the dairy? You have one dairy cow test positive and you can still keep the milk flow moving (even if volume restrictions are applied) but if you're a beef farmer you are stuffed for 6months until the next test, no movement, no selling just a dead cow and bit of compo from Joe Public.


I completely agree. we used to stay on farm in Cornwall (beef cattle) & the animals were treated very well. The farmer stayed up all night several nights in a row as a couple of the calves were ill, he was truly gutted when they didnt make it & not because it was money lost.

But ultimatelyf arms are businesses & they need to make money - I don't understand why some posts seem to insinute that this is a bad thing  I go to work to earn money & pay bills, if my wages were being cut then I would leave & go elsewhere.

I am not in favour of the cull but do understand why farmers are not happy with the badger situation. I don't think the vaccination programme has been well thought out & can see this being an expensive failure tbh.


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Cleo38 said:


> I completely agree. we used to stay on farm in Cornwall (beef cattle) & the animals were treated very well. The farmer stayed up all night several nights in a row as a couple of the calves were ill, he was truly gutted when they didnt make it & not because it was money lost.
> 
> But ultimately arms are businesses & they need to make money - I don't understand why some posts seem to insinute that this is a bad thing  I go to work to earn money & pay bills, if my wages were being cut then I would leave & go elsewhere.
> 
> I am not in favour of the cull but do understand why farmers are not happy with the badger situation. I don't think the vaccination programme has been well thought out & can see this being an expensive failure tbh.


Likewise, I have friends who I've seen put themselves through financial hell when the welfare of their herd is at stake....and physical hell to ensure the weak and fragile are looked after, when it wouldn't be the "sensible" option financially.

For the record, I'm not in favour of the cull either, but the demonisation of farmers here in the UK isn't the answer to me. And it won't have a good long term effect on animal welfare if farming in the UK becomes an unworkable option.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

myshkin said:


> Likewise, I have friends who I've seen put themselves through financial hell when the welfare of their herd is at stake....and physical hell to ensure the weak and fragile are looked after, when it wouldn't be the "sensible" option financially.
> 
> For the record, I'm not in favour of the cull either, but the demonisation of farmers here in the UK isn't the answer to me. *And it won't have a good long term effect on animal welfare if farming in the UK becomes an unworkable option*.


I completely agree. It also worries me that more livestock will be kept indoors & ultimately have to suffer less favourable conditions if farmers are constantly battling against diseases.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> 1) I may come across to you that way because I had to fill in the gaps of your knowledge that's all, every day's a learning day if you pay attention.
> 
> Dasiry framers are only interested in money are they? Considering it is their livelyhood I should hope the money comes into their thoughst every so often but as they are getting stuffed on pricing (as stated earlier in this thread) then wouldn't you be interested in the financial side of things if you were working for a loss? You must have also missed to depressing news reports during the F&M crisis where entire herds that had taken decades to build and were some of the best genetically bred herds of certain species were being destroyed. But how did the farmers react? Did they jump around for joy at the windfall of becoming a millionaire through compensation? No. They were in floods of tears and inconsolable at their loss because despite your ignorant view of dairy farmers they do actualy care for their animals, they have to by law and they do so by conscience. Why would a farmer become a farmer if they didn't care about animals and want to make sure the livestock they kept was in tip top condition and order? I could take you to various farms I know and have helped out on, get you to point to any cow and the farmer will be able to tell you it's licence tag number and also it's pet name they have for them without batting an eyelid. What's you view on beef farming as it affects their buiness more than it does the dairy? You have one dairy cow test positive and you can still keep the milk flow moving (even if volume restrictions are applied) but if you're a beef farmer you are stuffed for 6months until the next test, no movement, no selling just a dead cow and bit of compo from Joe Public.


1) If you are anyone's teacher, Heaven help them.

2) Yes, the Foot & Mouth epidemic. Before that there was BSE, then there is laminitis and mastititis, and of course bovine TB.
All caused by bad husbandry.

3) They care for ther animals? But have no qualms about packing them off to the slaughterhouse the moment they're too worn out to continue serving the milk supply, no qualms about taking calves from their mothers at just a day or two old to be packed off to the veal trade.
It's a cycle of callous exploitation and killing.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Cleo38 said:


> I completely agree. we used to stay on farm in Cornwall (beef cattle) & the animals were treated very well. The farmer stayed up all night several nights in a row as a couple of the calves were ill, he was truly gutted when they didnt make it & not because it was money lost.
> 
> 
> > That's as may be, but what would have happened if they had made it? The same farmer would have packed the same calves off to the slaughterhouse to have their throats slit. A scene too distressing for me to be allowed to post images of. Images you'd be too squeamish to look at even if I was.
> > You don't see a strand of hypocrisy in all of this?


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Team Badger e-petition update:

Over 125,000 signatures...


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Deleted. Fundamentalistshmundamentalist


----------



## Guest (Sep 27, 2012)

You do get some small scale family farms where animals are cared for well, until slaughter, but more and more huge corporations are taking over, they are called factory farming for a reason. Stock are units. Sow crates, battery hens, barn raised free range CAN be as bad as battery. Most of the people speaking of farmers are speaking of a farming style disappearing, unless converting to organic, free range, for premium prices. That is a very small part of farming now.

I live in a sheep farming area in Oz . Very rarely do you find a gentle, caring, environmentally aware farmer. The good farmers care for their money making units. They treasure their bloodlines, if prize winning, or for fetching better money. At best, they are callous, the worst, thugs and greedy, overstocking morons, stocking poor quality stock, not caring about them. I spent $3000 a year, feeding a neighbours sheep, who didn't care at all, during the last drought.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> That's as may be, but what would have happened if they had made it? The same farmer would have packed the same calves off to the slaughterhouse to have their throats slit. A scene too distressing for me to be allowed to post images of. Images you'd be too squeamish to look at even if I was.
> You don't see a strand of hypocrisy in all of this?


Yes, they would have been sent to slaughter eventually, that's what the (beef) farming industry is about  That still doesn't mean the farmer is not concerned for their welfare.

As for patronising me with by telling me I would be too squeamish to look at scenes of slaughter  I can inform you that I have witnessed this myself & yes I agree that is was far from pleasant but part of life if people choose to eat meat (I don't btw!)

I don't see any hypocrisy tbh but sdo find your views very b&w which is very unfortunate as the world just isn't like that!


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

househens said:


> You do get some small scale family farms where animals are cared for well, until slaughter, but more and more huge corporations are taking over, they are called factory farming for a reason. Stock are units. Sow crates, battery hens, barn raised free range CAN be as bad as battery. Most of the people speaking of farmers are speaking of a farming style disappearing, unless converting to organic, free range, for premium prices. That is a very small part of farming now.
> 
> I live in a sheep farming area in Oz . Very rarely do you find a gentle, caring, environmentally aware farmer. The good farmers care for their money making units. They treasure their bloodlines, if prize winning, or for fetching better money. At best, they are callous, the worst, thugs and greedy, overstocking morons, stocking poor quality stock, not caring about them. I spent $3000 a year, feeding a neighbours sheep, who didn't care at all, during the last drought.


Great post!


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Cleo38 said:


> 1) Yes, they would have been sent to slaughter eventually, that's what the (beef) farming industry is about  That still doesn't mean the farmer is not concerned for their welfare.
> 
> 2) As for patronising me with by telling me I would be too squeamish to look at scenes of slaughter  I can inform you that I have witnessed this myself & yes I agree that is was far from pleasant but part of life if people choose to eat meat 3) (I don't btw!)
> 
> 4) I don't see any hypocrisy tbh but sdo find your views very b&w which is very unfortunate as the world just isn't like that!


1) Maybe not, but it still displays a hardness of heart and it is no notion of 'caring' I can relate to.

2) Seems I overestimated you.

3) Or maybe I didn't. Respect to you for that.

4) When you hold that animals have souls just as we do and when you believe in reverence for all creation it becomes decidedly black and white.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

The price of milk...

End Factory Farming


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Cleo38 said:


> Yes, they would have been sent to slaughter eventually, that's what the (beef) farming industry is about  That still doesn't mean the farmer is not concerned for their welfare.
> 
> As for patronising me with by telling me I would be too squeamish to look at scenes of slaughter  I can inform you that I have witnessed this myself & yes I agree that is was far from pleasant but part of life if people choose to eat meat (I don't btw!)
> 
> I don't see any hypocrisy tbh but sdo find your views very b&w which is very unfortunate as the world just isn't like that!


Rather more coherent in response than my after pub attempt....darned country pubs with their relaxed approach to closing time!

The messiah complex-enlightening the mere mortals on a lesser spiritual plane-routine comes across as incredibly condescending. The genuinely quite sad part is that one so keen to evangelise to others about how to live their life actually comes across as quite ill-equipped to deal with the messy realities of life.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> That's as may be, but what would have happened if they had made it? The same farmer would have packed the same calves off to the slaughterhouse to have their throats slit. A scene too distressing for me to be allowed to post images of. Images you'd be too squeamish to look at even if I was.
> You don't see a strand of hypocrisy in all of this?


If they had made it they would have 2years minimum of grazing depending on breed. They would have had medical treatment if it was required and been brought in from the worst of the weather, again breed dependent.
Beef calves are not slaughtered and they are certainly not slaughtered by just having their throats slit as it goes against UK and EU law. The animal is rendered unconscious or is pretty much brain dead from either captive bolt gun or electrocution. 
The slaughter of animals is carried out as quickly and humanely as possible with the slaughter men taking great pride in their skills to end things quickly for the animals they are dealing with. I was taught the most important things in an abattoir are accuracy, efficiency and a razor sharp edge. The guys that did the cutting would have their own blades that nobody was allowed to touch as having the sharpest edge was the honour amongst them.
The sights, the sounds, the scents and the feel of things will far outweigh any images you can post. Ever spoken to a slaughter man about his job and what he takes pride in?
The poor practice abattoirs are what folk put out as "what really goes on" but these practices are not the norm. They are frowned upon not only by parliaments, animal supporters and Joe Public but also by BMPA and other abattoirs.

I have a very clear idea of what goes on in animal slaughter having reared and slaughtered my own produce, seen and actively taken the main role on friend's farms when livestock is being born, helped care for the livestock and been there when it has been slaughtered, heck, I've been the person doing the deed so I could learn how it was done. My grandma's brother bought an abattoir after the war and it was in the family until about 10yrs ago so I've been and seen it all happen from a young age.
I like to know where my food comes from. I like to be able to see the conditions the animal was raised, I like to see the stockman with the animals for not only how he treats them but to pick his brains about methods and processes. I'd rather eat farm reared meat occasionally and pay a premium price to support the farming ways I agree with and I don't see it as a right to have to have meat from a farm with every meal. A piece of meat in my house goes a very long way because I like to get the most out of it after paying such a premium price. I want to be able to see animals in fields and pass on the knowledge I have gained to my nieces and hopefully any children I have in the future. 
I don't give a toss if I come across as a "food snob" just because I buy organic because I know that the feed and the animal have not had a serious impact on the natural environment they mix with on a daily basis by having the use of pesticides, nitrates and all manner of hormones pumped in to them which has a detrimental effect on the rest of the environment. I have a Gardner's World handbook, not because I like pretty flower beds and hanging baskets but because I like to know which vegetables are in season so I am not putting consumer demand on the environment to rape the soil in the thirst for yield after yield of produce just so I can have a summer salad in winter. The run off from the nitrates required to try and inject some kind of nutrient into the empty earth has catastrophic effects on the local wildlife and has more than likely put many species on the endangered list without ever seeing a human being, some may have become extinct simply without us knowing of them in the first place and all of this puts strains on the higher rungs in the food chain ladder leading to the demise of more commonly known animals where the dangers are recognised in the species numbers or overall health but the back handers given to governments by the mass food producers for a consumer driven world pay for scapegoats and false reporting to take the focus away from the actual cause.

My garden is undergoing a major overhaul to allow me to grow my own veg again and keep a few ex-battery chickens despite the f-ing post code I live in.

The more demand the public places on the supplier and cries out to their governments that food is too expensive the more demand it puts on the suppliers. The more demand it puts on the suppliers the more demand it puts on the growers and of course this then causes the cheapest methods to be employed in order to raise profits, increase the yield and force faster growth. 
If it takes a farmer 10years to raise a cow for quality beef or 18months to raise the perfect chicken and all consumers want is the "low price, eat it three times a week" prices that fuels the intensive systems then their prices have to increase in order to cover the costs and low demand. 
You go to a restaurant and have people comment on "How good the meat was", well it will be good meat because it has been taken from womb to plate correctly, sustainably and with the sun on its back. The planet raping, supply and demand perpetuating hovels that are supermarkets have meat flying off of the shelves because they are willing to put a badge on something that leads the consumer to have a self-proclaimed clear conscience. A butcher doesn't have the same ability to demand the prices the giant branded poopermarkets do but they can choose the more ethical suppliers hence why the meat might be a tad more expensive but you pay the price for the craft that has gone in to rearing such a piece of meat from the family owned farm that has been going for generations with pride in their genes of their herds which you can see picking up rosettes at country fairs, to the family run abattoir that have done the job for generation after generation without losing a single shred of pride and respect for their profession and then to the family run butchers that have honed their craft to a fine art and they still do onsite butchery rather than everything being bought from a pre-processed wholesalers. The poopermarkets state "Our on-site butchers" but they learn their craft in a matter of weeks or months rather than years, the meat is field to nice plastic tray cellophane wrapped gift in a matter of days. It is not treated with the knowledge of a butcher that lives and breathes meat. Whatever consumers want it is in stock in a supermarket every day, no matter what the product. There are no seasons in a poopermarket, there are no breed names on the packaging, if it's not on the shelf you ask and the badged person will ask you to wait as they go in the vast expanse of a the warehouse out back and comes back with your product. Go to somewhere whose sole trade is meat and the quality of the product they pride themselves on and they might not have the product but they will put you on a list and call you when the 28day longhorn brisket is ready, they'll put you your 25 3/4inch chops order together after they have rung their supplier (who happens to be the pig farmer) and gets a date on when the numbers will be ready.

It is bad husbandry to keep animals in confined areas and it is a dreaded time of year when the livestock has to be brought in out of the weather because it is a breeding ground for disease and virus. Intensive farming methods that are used to feed the consumer's insatiable appetite for their portion of animal protein on their plate every other day accentuates and accelerates the spread of disease. The impacts of bTB, BSE and F&M are all drivers for farming methods to change to intensive systems in order to still have some form of farming industry in this country. As we are an island we have to have some form of self-sufficiency or we just add to the global traffic of goods travelling needless miles to feed expecting mouths. As a soya consumer you actually support this and cause just as much if not more damage to wildlife and the health of the planet than a farting cow or a sugar beet consuming pig.

I can't remember the last piece of meat I actually bought for my consumption at home. At a guess I would say it was about 9months ago. You may think it cruel or the scummy side of the human race but I hunt and shoot to provide for myself, friends and family. The produce I eat is a by-product of farming, wildlife. Rabbits were introduced as a food stuff many many moons ago, trout were here a long time before that and so were the wood pigeons and the farmers maintain our countryside very nicely with their efforts allowing many species to live, thrive and survive in our beautiful spaces.
I am proud of my accuracy with a rifle and the training of my dog to make her a very efficient hunter. My actions impact nobody as I don't wipe out populations of rabbits and try and kill as many as possible in one go as it would ruin the enjoyment of these creatures for the like of yourself who like to see them hopping about. I effectively farm them to keep them from expanding too rapidly which not only puts them at risk of myxi but it means they need to cause more and more damage to property, crops and pasture in order to survive. The land around my shoot has had myxi in the last few months which spread from other areas but my area has stayed clear fingers crossed and I like to think I have had some input into keeping the population healthy. The meat I eat was born in the wild, grew up in the wild, ate, drank and played with the sun on its back, had sex in the wild, gave birth in the wild and then died in the wild. If there were no gun laws I could walk to and from my shoots making it even less of an environmental impact. I only take a shot when I have a clear one and I can guarantee a clean and instant kill. Nothing of the rabbits goes to waste.
At any point a rabbit can hear me, feel the vibrations from my movements, see me or smell me so they have plenty of defences I have to overcome so it is not as straightforward as killing livestock. The same defences come into play with the dog except the rabbit also uses speed and knowledge of the land to outrun the dog so it's not at all in the dog's favour. Not the same with livestock though is it?
When I fish I either practice catch and release or if I want to take one for the pot then I only take stocked trout and not wild trout.
If friends and family ask me for produce then I either give it to them free of charge or for a small fee so that they at least try it and perhaps it might make them think twice about buying the cheap intensively raised meat from the poopermarket.
An old guy that owns some of the land I shoot on for him asks me to sort moles out on his garden and in exchange for this I get a box of fruit and veg every other week. He was a farmer but has now retired and grows organic with rotation beds so no need for added fertilisers other than some of the dung that comes from his daughter's horses. I effectively eat for free most of the time and have zero impact on the planet, some would argue a positive impact, yet because I want to see a healthy balance between wildlife and farming methods without the need to move to horrible intensive units which will not only have a detrimental effect on the animal welfare but also on the countryside because if there is no need to have a field because there is no livestock to put it in then why not put some houses on it and ease the housing pressures? Goodbye badgers for good then that area and hello more badger deaths on the new roads or expanded roads to allow traffic to flow to these developments from areas far and wide.

So would I rather see badgers reduced and monitored for a few years or an industry that directly impacts, nay, governs our countryside wiped out never to return with new housing developments popping up in all manner of quiet country idylls? Even if the results show that the cull did not have a direct impact on bTB cases in cattle then the proof is there for all to see clear and wide and the badgers can be left to repopulate and even setts split and relocated to fill the gaps. If the scientific reports on the impact badgers have on bTB are correct then the badgers don't have anything to worry about long term and everybody can move on from blaming them once and for all. It is a win win situation for badgers and the ones that are culled will be martyred I am sure.


----------



## Guest (Sep 27, 2012)

Before you embrace any and every slaughterman into your band of professional, ethical, well meaning respecters of animal life, there have been a number of recent exposes of slaughter house brutality, in approved and inspected slaughterhouses, in Australia. The government is being lobbied to bring in 24 hour monitoring. The gov't depts are decrying the demand, as bleeding heart liberals (NOT, in this case, referring to the Liberal Party of Oz, which is Tory/Republican, in the compassion stakes), saying that their inspections are all that is needed. Given that they exposed NONE of the truly heinous behaviours, clearly the system as it stands, is a joke.

There has even been a report on the exportation of prize breeding stock being sent to the middle east as great bases for, in this particular expose, dairy herds, where the animals were left to die, appallingly, quite irrationally and with NO interest in their welfare, at all. No care about the sums involved, either. Guess they were insured. We won't even start on the live export trade.

It may be that KOA is referring to male dairy calves, bobby calves, or may have referred to the calves dying, in their future. Unless a male calf has an extraordinary lineage and great conformation, temperament and money increasing traits, it is the walking dead.

PS I believe in Oz, and I suspect Britain, religious slaughter is exempted from the stun/electrocution first. Both Halal and jewish kosher meat MUST be LIVING at the moment of having it's throat cut. Certainly a senior Jewish official in Australia, who inspects and approves Jewish butcheries, was adamant. The animal must be live, the heart must beat, to push the blood out, if it is to be kosher and approved. He at least was adamant. NO STUN/electrocution first, or strict, practising Jews can't eat it.

I hope if you slaughter from the wild, you at least feed the animals you kill, when conditions are grim.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

househens said:


> Before you embrace any and every slaughterman into your band of professional, ethical, well meaning respecters of animal life, there have been a number of recent exposes of slaughter house brutality, in approved and inspected slaughterhouses, in Australia. The government is being lobbied to bring in 24 hour monitoring. The gov't depts are decrying the demand, as bleeding heart liberals (NOT, in this case, referring to the Liberal Party of Oz, which is Tory/Republican, in the compassion stakes), saying that their inspections are all that is needed. Given that they exposed NONE of the truly heinous behaviours, clearly the system as it stands, is a joke.
> 
> There has even been a report on the exportation of prize breeding stock being sent to the middle east as great bases for, in this particular expose, dairy herds, where the animals were left to die, appallingly, quite irrationally and with NO interest in their welfare, at all. No care about the sums involved, either. Guess they were insured. We won't even start on the live export trade.
> 
> ...


There is no market in the UK for veal because of the reports a few years back about the conditions calves were taken to slaughter on the continent so it became about as bad as eating unicorn mince on social scenes. They used to be sold to hunts to feed the hounds but as these have decline following the huntin ban and the installation of EU food laws then this has dried up demand too.

If there was more awareness of the meat not being processed as it is on the continent and that standards are a lot better they were, not saying they are great, then the demand will increase and thus the conditions for the animals concerned because it would be worth investment for the return. It's pretty simple business practice and would be an improvement allround.

The Halal/Kosher slaughter techniquers vary in that the voltage used is weaker to cause unconsciousness rather than actual death.

I ma sure that the wild animals I take for the table do not fall on lean times with plenty of bark and heather kicking about if the snow falls and loads of grass and clover all year round if it doesn't and there is always the feed stores.
I'm not shy to buying a bale or two and taking it down to the woods for the little pocket of roe deer that are down there. I take it down with a huge load of fat cakes I make for the birds and it's a walk the dogs love.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

househens said:


> Before you embrace any and every slaughterman into your band of professional, ethical, well meaning respecters of animal life, there have been a number of recent exposes of slaughter house brutality, in approved and inspected slaughterhouses, in Australia. The government is being lobbied to bring in 24 hour monitoring. The gov't depts are decrying the demand, as bleeding heart liberals (NOT, in this case, referring to the Liberal Party of Oz, which is Tory/Republican, in the compassion stakes), saying that their inspections are all that is needed. Given that they exposed NONE of the truly heinous behaviours, clearly the system as it stands, is a joke.
> 
> There has even been a report on the exportation of prize breeding stock being sent to the middle east as great bases for, in this particular expose, dairy herds, where the animals were left to die, appallingly, quite irrationally and with NO interest in their welfare, at all. No care about the sums involved, either. Guess they were insured. We won't even start on the live export trade.
> 
> It may be that KOA is referring to male dairy calves, bobby calves, or may have referred to the calves dying, in their future. Unless a male calf has an extraordinary lineage and great conformation, temperament and money increasing traits, it is the walking dead.


I agree & have read several stories regarding animal cruelty at slaughter houses which is absoltuely sickening & can never be justified. However I can't help feeling that farming is changing & it has been pointed out that the supermarkets are constantly putting too much presuure on smaller farmers making it impossible for them to compete & ultimately it will be the animals that suffer for our need to get everything as cheap as possible.

I hate the throught of mass produced, factory farmed milk/meat but this will increase if smaller, more traditional farmers livelihoods are put in jeopardy. We should be supporting our farmers & listening to their concerns not battling against them.

As for male calves, IMO we should be supporting/buying rose veal which would see them being kept in this country so therefore having better welfare standards. People eat lambs so why not calves - no difference really.

If these animals are a 'by product' of the milk industry then we owe it to them to use them here rather than put them through the stress of transportation.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*Brian May speaks about the badger cull..
Brian May urges public to sign anti-badger cull petition | ITV News

Please sign if you haven't already done so...ty*


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Hutch6:
You do like going off topic don't you. And why is that? Because you've well and truly lost the argument. You stand alone in your hard heartedness. Not even the spiteful one supports the badger cull.

How naive! And you make yourself out to be some an authority!
There has been a campaign to get CCTV installed in slaughterhouses after many incidences of maltreatment. And a lot of meat sold and eaten in this country is halal, that is not declared as being halal, and that isn't even stunned at all.
Some links:
(All members: These links may contain images of slaughterhouses. If that sort of thing distresses you...)

Animal Aid: The 'Humane Slaughter' Myth

Halal meat served in schools, hospitals and pubs: Vets say Islamic slaughter is cruel | Mail Online

Halal Britain: Famous institutions routinely serve the public ritually slaughtered meat | Mail Online


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

househens said:


> Before you embrace any and every slaughterman into your band of professional, ethical, well meaning respecters of animal life, there have been a number of recent exposes of slaughter house brutality, in approved and inspected slaughterhouses, in Australia. The government is being lobbied to bring in 24 hour monitoring. The gov't depts are decrying the demand, as bleeding heart liberals (NOT, in this case, referring to the Liberal Party of Oz, which is Tory/Republican, in the compassion stakes), saying that their inspections are all that is needed. Given that they exposed NONE of the truly heinous behaviours, clearly the system as it stands, is a joke.
> 
> There has even been a report on the exportation of prize breeding stock being sent to the middle east as great bases for, in this particular expose, dairy herds, where the animals were left to die, appallingly, quite irrationally and with NO interest in their welfare, at all. No care about the sums involved, either. Guess they were insured. We won't even start on the live export trade.
> 
> ...


Another great post, dear Househens.

Thank you.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> Hutch6:
> You do like going off topic don't you. And why is that? Because you've well and truly lost the argument. You stand alone in your hard heartedness. Not even the spiteful one supports the badger cull.
> 
> How naive! And you make yourself out to be some an authority!
> ...


*Some times it's easier for people to go off topic,then they don't have to face the REAL facts.*


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Soya v dairy

Jane Plant suffered from "terminal" breast cancer, was told by her top notch doctors that they couldn't do anything more for her and sent her home to die. That was nearly twenty years ago - and she is still alive and fighting fit.

Cancer Active -


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> Hutch6:
> You do like going off topic don't you. And why is that? Because you've well and truly lost the argument. You stand alone in your hard heartedness. Not even the spiteful one supports the badger cull.
> 
> How naive! And you make yourself out to be some an authority!
> ...


How can I lose anything when I am putting forward an opinion in a discussion? If you have seen it as anything else then fair enough and the source of your links by the way speaks volumes. What's next? PETA?

Gone off topic? I don't see I have at all. The whole badger cull is happening because it has a direct impact on the human food chain. I merely gave my view of consumer choice effects on farming methods and how that all interacts. It was yourself that set the seed by blabbing on about how you are so brave in looking at pictures of things that everyone else on here would find terrible (go see the raw feeding thread for a few more if you so wish). 
I think your comment about being hard hearted is a bit harsh given that my post was all about a happy medium where animal welfare was the top priority in everything I choose or did you fail to understand the meaning behind what I wrote? 
Not once have I said "my way is the only way". As I have stated before I have experienced things from both sides of the record rather than just one side and soak up all the bull that is drip fed to keep the mind thinking otherwise. You can only know what truly goes on if you get off your backside and experience it for yourself and then you can see it from the other side.

You seem to be so hell bent on shouting down others believing you are taking the higher moral ground that you have even failed to understand the basic concept of what I am posting, in between explaining the basic to you, so let me spell i out very clearly for you my stand point on the cull:

*I am against the cull but there is nothing to stop it as numerous petitions have already been thrown out and I believe that the outcome will not show any change in bTB cases so after that the badger can be left wel alone. Either way I hope for a positive outcome.*

Do you need that in clearer english?

I haven't even brought up the damaging effects the soya plantations have had on wildife and the environment but then they aren't just over the road in a field that's probably owned by a farmer is it so it's out of sight out of mind no animal cruelty happened for soya production did it? How's that rainforest looking? Give me a break.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> Soya v dairy
> 
> Jane Plant suffered from "terminal" breast cancer, was told by her top notch doctors that they couldn't do anything more for her and sent her home to die. That was nearly twenty years ago - and she is still alive and fighting fit.
> 
> Cancer Active -


Oh because soya is the way forward.

The Soy Deception - How Palm Oil is Protecting the Amazon Rain Forest

In the Name of Progress: how soya is destroying the Amazon rainforest | Greenpeace UK

Save the Cerrado - WWF UK

Forest conversion - WWF UK

Yes soya is fed to livestock but surely my argument for wiser buying of food to keep animals outside where they can graze on naturally occuring food instead of being cooped up in vast sheds and having to be fed soya based meal makes a little more sense to you.

How I choose to live my life and feed myself uses far less everything than what is needed to provide you with a soya based product. I don't need insecticides and pesticides that cripple the local ecology to an extent that the pesticides have been known to kill humans they are used to cause such widespread distruction. I don't need to lay waste to astronomical amounts of land to create a plantation. I don't need to indescriminently wipe out all of the wildlife in the area to produce food, just one or two rabbits here and there is fine by me.


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> Hutch6:
> You do like going off topic don't you. And why is that? Because you've well and truly lost the argument. You stand alone in your hard heartedness. *Not even the spiteful one *supports the badger cull.
> 
> How naive! And you make yourself out to be some an authority!
> ...


Bit harsh. It looks nothing like me!

The Spiteful One

Maybe in 30 years time....

Schiele The Spiteful One


----------



## tashax (Jun 25, 2011)

I read an article in a newspaper a little while ago. A farmer who is against the cull put antibiotics out for the badgers in peanuts (apparently a fave treat of theirs) they were eaten and none of his cows have ever had tb.

Instead of funding a mass cull why not fund a mass cure??


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> Hutch6:
> You do like going off topic don't you. And why is that? Because you've well and truly lost the argument. You stand alone in your hard heartedness. Not even the spiteful one supports the badger cull.
> 
> How naive! And you make yourself out to be some an authority!
> ...


LOL, do you not see the irony of your post? You accuse Hutch of going off topic & then post link regarding Halal meat :confused1:

Completely different arguement .... & for the record I'm not against Halal meat as I have read various veterinary paper regarding suffering & stress of animals, how death occurs in the varying methods, etc so have made my kind up based on facts


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> Oh because soya is the way forward.
> 
> The Soy Deception - How Palm Oil is Protecting the Amazon Rain Forest
> 
> ...


You neglected to mention that the great majority of Amazoniam deforestation was/is down to cattle ranching.

As already mentioned, the UK market leader of soya milk and the brand I use is farmed responsibly on non-deforested land
Alpro | FAQ

Using land for meat production is infinitely more wasteful and destructive than using it for growing crops
Fact Sheet - Why its Green - Land Use

"Enough grain is squandered every day in raising American livestock for meat to provide every human being on earth with two loaves of bread"
- John Robbins


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

hutch6 said:


> So would I rather see badgers reduced and monitored for a few years or an industry that directly impacts, nay, governs our countryside wiped out never to return with new housing developments popping up in all manner of quiet country idylls? Even if the results show that the cull did not have a direct impact on bTB cases in cattle then the proof is there for all to see clear and wide and the badgers can be left to repopulate and even setts split and relocated to fill the gaps. If the scientific reports on the impact badgers have on bTB are correct then the badgers don't have anything to worry about long term and everybody can move on from blaming them once and for all. It is a win win situation for badgers and the ones that are culled will be martyred I am sure.


So to prove a point you would risk going against the good hard science science that says that the proposed cull has a great potential to be ineffective or actually spread bTB? You would risk more farms becoming infected, waste masses of money that could be spent on research and controls, risk human life when sabs come into contact with armed farmers and risk severly disrupting the eco system involved? And you think that the only thing that will stand in the way of the countryside being paved over is culling badgers? You can't be serious.

You seem to be under the illusion that culling badgers can stop bTB on it's own. The government estimate that at best the cull would cause a 16% reduction in cases within 9 years.



hutch6 said:


> The Halal/Kosher slaughter techniquers vary in that the voltage used is weaker to cause unconsciousness rather than actual death.


To say you know about slaughter you got this very wrong. Electrical stunning or stunning with a captive bolt is not designed to kill in any kind of slaughter, it is designed to render the animal unconcious and it is killed by bleeding out. Some halal/kosher abbatoirs allow stunning with a particular make of captive bolt or voltage as long as all the other rituals are performed. However many religious abbatoirs still use only a cut to the throat with no stunning and this is perfectly legal under UK law.



hutch6 said:


> Yes soya is fed to livestock but surely my argument for wider buying of food to keep animals outside where they can graze on naturally occuring food instead of being cooped up in vast sheds and having to be fed soya based meal makes a little more sense to you.


100% grass fed is very rare today and in some species non-existant. I would guess that all commercially produced monogastrics (pigs and poultry) consume large amounts of grain and soya. The modern dairy cattle need grain and soya or fish meal to stop them all keeling over from ketosis. With beef - some originate from dairy crosses so there is a link with the soya in the dairy diets, most cows are fed grain/soya in pregnancy and even if they spend a good period on grass most beef is finished on hard feed (particularly bull beef). Lamb is probably involves the least soya and grain consumption but even then ewes are often fed during pregnancy and lambs are increasingly being fattened on corn (particularly in lowland systems). It's not the 1600's anymore and we have nowhere near the amount of land needed to support masses of animals as well as the fact that our high yielding animals a) cannot comfortably live outside for much of the year b) NEED extra feeding with grains and soya. Most soya is produced for animal feed and the portion that goes for human consumption mostly ends up in general processed food. The percentage of soya that goes into meat and dairy substitutes is tiny.



hutch6 said:


> How I choose to live my life and feed myself uses far less everything than what is needed to provide you with a soya based product. I don't need insecticides and pesticides that cripple the local ecology to an extent that the pesticides have been known to kill humans they are used to cause such widespread distruction. I don't need to lay waste to astronomical amounts of land to create a plantation. I don't need to indescriminently wipe out all of the wildlife in the area to produce food, just one or two rabbits here and there is fine by me.


That's very nice for you but it is unrealistic for most of the population to replace their current meat consumption with wild rabbits. There are around 40-45 million rabbits wild in the uk and 62 million people - you'd be out of rabbits within a week. So how do we produce animal products for 6 billion people wordwide without severely impacting the environment? If you have the answer then the fao of the united nations is desperate to hear from you.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Cleo38 said:


> 1) LOL, do you not see the irony of your post? You accuse Hutch of going off topic & then post link regarding Halal meat :confused1:
> 
> 2)...for the record I'm not against Halal meat as I have read various veterinary paper regarding suffering & stress of animals, 3) how death occurs in the varying methods, etc so have made my kind up based on facts


1) I take your point, but answering points raised/misinformation. It's all good.

2) Just as well, as you've probably been eating it. And as all halal meat is blessed in the name of Allah, good job you're not a Christian.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Team Badger e-petition update:

Over 131,000 signatures...


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Thousands of male dairy calves get packed off to the veal trade. Many thousands more don't even get that far...

One day old....shot in the head. (Over 90,000 meet the same fate every year.)

The Price of Milk:
Viewers' outrage over harrowing scenes of day-old calves being shot | Mail Online


----------



## Guest (Sep 27, 2012)

The recent expose of halal and kosher meat in Oz, made it clear, from church heads, that they do NOT stun bolt to head/electrocution. The jewish chap was quite clear and unapologetic. He appeared to have no interest in animal welfare. Just meat slaughtered for strict Jews. The halal chap knew it was going to give anti islamists a free kick, and tried to weazel word around it, but in the end, that was what he said.

There is an Oz comedian, brought up in a very working class, very, 'this is the real world', no middle class sensibilities, who worked in a slaughter house, and said what he saw there made him vegetarian. His name is Dave Hughes. He looks as tho he'd be cringeingly ocker and insensitive, but his experiences made him a confirmed vegetarian. I think it must be for between 10 and 20 years

Sadly, there is an answer to the badger problem, completely humane, ethical, kindly and logical, but the huge swag of, 'kill it whatever the problem,' brigade jump in and shriek, Too Hard!!!/Too expensive!!! Too hard to catch, mark, release over months of concerted efforts yet those who spend their weekends stalking animals to kill, many paying large sums of money to do so, say the effort to save lives is unaffordable. Many of those paying to hunt, would spend 5 or 10, 50 times the cost per head to simply treat the badgers, in one long liquid lunch.

Our veal is not the true and ghastly veal of Europe. By law you can't treat calves as you do for 'real' veal. Our veal is older and has a slightly more kindly, pitifully short life. Tho most bobby calves are killed within days, and are rarely wanted, they are really not much more than sad little bones.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

tashax said:


> I read an article in a newspaper a little while ago. A farmer who is against the cull put antibiotics out for the badgers in peanuts (apparently a fave treat of theirs) they were eaten and none of his cows have ever had tb.
> 
> Instead of funding a mass cull why not fund a mass cure??


is this what you were thinking of Tashax? The amaizing case for badgers » The Robertsbridge Group



Knightofalbion said:


> You neglected to mention that the great majority of Amazoniam deforestation was/is down to cattle ranching.
> 
> As already mentioned, the UK market leader of soya milk and the brand I use is farmed responsibly on non-deforested land
> Alpro | FAQ
> ...


well said

this is why i drink Alpro because its from ethically sourced soy...wonder how many farmers ethically source their soya to feed their livestock... and doesnt it take something like 16lb of soya to produce 1lb of meat? :scared:



lennythecloud said:


> So to prove a point you would risk going against the good hard science science that says that the proposed cull has a great potential to be ineffective or actually spread bTB? You would risk more farms becoming infected, waste masses of money that could be spent on research and controls, risk human life when sabs come into contact with armed farmers and risk severly disrupting the eco system involved? And you think that the only thing that will stand in the way of the countryside being paved over is culling badgers? You can't be serious.
> 
> You seem to be under the illusion that culling badgers can stop bTB on it's own. The government estimate that at best the cull would cause a 16% reduction in cases within 9 years.
> 
> ...


yet another fantastic post Lenny, im afraid i cant rep you as yet...ive got to spread it around a bit first:arf: lol


----------



## takerbabe (Jul 20, 2012)

What gives man the right to seriously interfere with wildlife? I think if it goes to far, the wildlife will eventually turn on man. This world belongs to the animals as much as it belongs to us.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> Thousands of male dairy calves get packed off to the veal trade. Many thousands more don't even get that far...
> 
> One day old....shot in the head. (Over 90,000 meet the same fate every year.)
> 
> ...


Again, look at your source. The Dreary Mail will always report things like this because their ignorant readership laps it up - "I do not pay my TV licence to see things like this' said Mrs Harrington-Bouvier. "I was enjoying my fois gras pate with red pepper brioche whilst looking forward to our special Wednesday night steak night sirloin and it put me right off it did".
The main thing is, if I was allowed to take the meat home and consume it myself without anybody facing prosecution or being shut down Id shoot one myself, no bother at all with that.
The sooner people accept where meat comes from and see the realities then the sooner they can make their decision:

Could you watch an animal being slaughtered? No. Then don't eat meat, you don't deserve to because you don't respect what happens and don't respect the animal.

Could you kill to put food on the table? No. Then don't eat meat then because you are quite happy to pass the buck of how it's done and declare outrage or cry cruelty if there is bloodshed and death. Where the hell do you think meat comes from?

I see that as 90,000 wasted beasts that could easily provide food for many people as I have stated and once that is realised and the demand increases the standard of life for these beasts will increase and improve. Simple. Waste isn't waste if there is a buyer for it, it becomes a product.



JANICE199 said:


> *Some times it's easier for people to go off topic,then they don't have to face the REAL facts.*


Tell me, what REAL facts am I not facing up to? I've explained exactly what I've experienced, how I've made my choices in regards to what I eat and why I choose to eat it. What facts am I missing?



Knightofalbion said:


> You neglected to mention that the great majority of Amazoniam deforestation was/is down to cattle ranching.
> 
> As already mentioned, the UK market leader of soya milk and the brand I use is farmed responsibly on non-deforested land
> Alpro | FAQ
> ...


Who the heck is on about American beef production here? It is UK badger's not American badgers. I have talked at length about my support of the UK farming industry NOT foreign industry. IF you want to go down that route then be my guest but it is a very lengthy debate indeed with lots of fat to chew on about it.

Alpro are a member of an Environment programme that DOES NOT support Anti-aggressive Land Accumulation, I wonder why? It's not even organic so you CAN'T GUARANTEE that is comes from sustainable sources as they state they support sustainable sources. Can you walk to the plantation and see the soya bean you are consuming? No you can't. Funny how I can walk to fields where my food is produced and I can see the multitude of species there including badgers thriving and living alongside food produce. Hell, I'll soon be able to walk out my front door and see my food growing in my own garden, my own chickens roaming around keeping the veg pests down and the insects pollenating my courgette flowers. What wildlife is to be found in soya plantations? None. They are wildlife deserts of soils so sucked dry of any nutrition that nitrates and all manner of fertilisers, pesticides and insecticides are used to ensure a nice bumper crop from which your food derives from. These then get washed into the waterways during rainfall causing further poisoning and ecological issues. The plantations are usually old grazing pastures but as I DO NOT SUPPORT the deforestation of rainforests for my food I have not contributed to that. You are though.



lennythecloud said:


> So to prove a point you would risk going against the good hard science science that says that the proposed cull has a great potential to be ineffective or actually spread bTB? You would risk more farms becoming infected, waste masses of money that could be spent on research and controls, risk human life when sabs come into contact with armed farmers and risk severly disrupting the eco system involved? And you think that the only thing that will stand in the way of the countryside being paved over is culling badgers? You can't be serious.
> 
> You seem to be under the illusion that culling badgers can stop bTB on it's own. The government estimate that at best the cull would cause a 16% reduction in cases within 9 years.


Have you read anything I have written throughout this thread or just jumped on this bandwagon type party that seems to be going on?

Not once have I said that the badger cull will "stop bTB". What have said on numerous occasions which you seemed to have not read or read and not understood despite me using basic English is - There are other carriers of the disease other than badgers such as deer and wild boar. The science is solid I have never said it isn't, but yes, I am sad to say that if this shuts up everyone blaming badgers and continually calling for cull after cull with people eventually losing the drive to petition against it which could result in a national cull not just a few small areas in the bigger picture, then yes, I am for the trial cull. After that everyone can sit smugly in their wingback chairs and say "I told you so" and that includes me. IF after the trial it is shown to NOT make a difference which I believe it won't and yet there is still call for a cull then I'll be shouting louder than any of you guys will to prevent further culls on badgers.

Are these the same sabs that horrendously assault people and police officers as their only way to make a point is to retort with violence? Are these the same sabs that trash fishing lakes and premises causing more damage to the natural environment that is being sympathetically managed to encourage wildlife and it is a proven fact (theres your science again) that fish dont feel the pain of the hook like we do it is the resistance they react to (if you dont believe me I can easily show you this in real life) because the only way they know how to deal with something is to destroy it in such a mindless way that they actually destroy everything along with what they set out to protect not just what they were trying to protect? Are these the same sabs that are such a bunch of cowards they turn up in full guerrilla warfare outfits to hide their identity because they know they are going to have to commit a crime in ordered to get their point across? Are these the same sabs that released mink in the uk causing widespread depletion to water vole and other water fowl that they are now on the endangered species list and people turn their nose up at you when you say I would happily shoot mink? Are these the same sabs that harass, violate, vandalise, and destroy peoples homes, possessions, family and businesses purely because they do not agree with the lifestyle choice of the individual? Are these the same sabs that lace meat/carcasses with poison to kill trail hounds? Are these the same sabs that injure horses that are out trailing, not hunting, trailing? Are these the same sabs that burn kennels down with lurchers still inside them? Are these the same sabs that are all for animal care etc yet own cats and dogs and have no idea where their pet food meat is sourced from? Are these the same sabs that are all for causing wanton destruction etc and hurt people yet as soon as a few big lads start having a go back they start screaming and hiding behind the police? 
But then again, you all know what goes on in the country and in your local area with regards to mindless killers of animals and when you are all tucked up in bed so I dont need to point these out.

Now do you get it? Do you?



lennythecloud said:


> To say you know about slaughter you got this very wrong. Electrical stunning or stunning with a captive bolt is not designed to kill in any kind of slaughter, it is designed to render the animal unconcious and it is killed by bleeding out. Some halal/kosher abbatoirs allow stunning with a particular make of captive bolt or voltage as long as all the other rituals are performed. However many religious abbatoirs still use only a cut to the throat with no stunning and this is perfectly legal under UK law.


Yes sorry I failed to mention I'd be in abattoirs since a young age so I am fully aware of the regulations DEFRA place on the slaughter of animals and the special requirements of religious slaughter. My families abattoir would set aside time for slaughtering animals around specific religuious occasions such as Eid and they would not use the full dose voltage on goat, sheep and cattle so that the heart was still beating but the animal was unconscious. As I Have stated previously great respect was given to the animal throughout the whole process in the abattoir and it is from that I draw my own respect for the death of animals I consume.



lennythecloud said:


> 100% grass fed is very rare today and in some species non-existant. I would guess that all commercially produced monogastrics (pigs and poultry) consume large amounts of grain and soya. The modern dairy cattle need grain and soya or fish meal to stop them all keeling over from ketosis. With beef - some originate from dairy crosses so there is a link with the soya in the dairy diets, most cows are fed grain/soya in pregnancy and even if they spend a good period on grass most beef is finished on hard feed (particularly bull beef). Lamb is probably involves the least soya and grain consumption but even then ewes are often fed during pregnancy and lambs are increasingly being fattened on corn (particularly in lowland systems). It's not the 1600's anymore and we have nowhere near the amount of land needed to support masses of animals as well as the fact that our high yielding animals a) cannot comfortably live outside for much of the year b) NEED extra feeding with grains and soya. Most soya is produced for animal feed and the portion that goes for human consumption mostly ends up in general processed food. The percentage of soya that goes into meat and dairy substitutes is tiny.


This clearly shows you have not fully understood my standpoint on anything so again, I shall put it in simple terms:

I AM FULLY AGAINST ANY INTENSIVE FARMING SCHEME, ALWAYS HAVE AND ALWAYS WILL BE.

Where is Ketosis most commonly found? Intensive farming methods.

If milk wasn't so cheap then people wouldn't consume it in such vast quantities. This would mean less pressure on the livestock to turn a profit. Less pressure means no supplements to produce that extra yield which lessens the toll it takes on the livestock's body.
If beef wasn't so cheap and readily available then the livestock can enjoy a life of less intensity to reach slaughter weight ASAP. There would be no need to supplement their diet, just a bit more patience for the product to mature meaning more time out in the fields on a more natural diet, a better tasting product and a price that will make the consumer think long and hard about the amount of meals they can get from a joint rather than having nice big thick slices as "it was a bargain at £8". What if it was £20? I'd still pay because of the value that price adds to everything right down to the quality of the grass in the pastures.

The moment you start forcing livestock to reach slaughter weight as quickly as possible to make way for the next lot so you can turn a profit in such a low priced, high demand world then that is when you need to start bringing in the pre-packed formulated fodder that uses such things as Soya or sugar beet or corn or palm products.



lennythecloud said:


> That's very nice for you but it is unrealistic for most of the population to replace their current meat consumption with wild rabbits. There are around 40-45 million rabbits wild in the UK and 62 million people - you'd be out of rabbits within a week. So how do we produce animal products for 6 billion people wordwide without severely impacting the environment? If you have the answer then the fao of the united nations is desperate to hear from you.


This is just the cherry on the cake.

When have I said everybody should eat rabbits? I haven't have I?

What I have said is consumers need to be made more aware of the effects of their demands. Their demands for frequent and almost daily meat consumption.

I wish I could stand outside fast food chains with rows of chickens that cant walk and have to be carried to their water and their food (Yes, I do this every time I rescue battery hens until they can manage it themselves after a day or three), that have eyes missing, burnt hocks from standing in their own burning nitrate waste for months at a time. I'd take four crates of little fluffy yellow happy chirping male chicks of about 1 day old and ask people to either kill them or take them home and look after them until they die of old age or stop consuming so many eggs. I wish I could empty the field of Britain for a day and see the reaction on people's faces to see empty fields in summer. I wish I could stand outside burger joints and fell 30 trees in about 1minute, slaughter a cow and let it spill all over the floor before shooting a group of Howler monkeys, Gibbons and a couple of jaguars to boot before asking them "Do you want fries with that?". I wish I could promote the taste and texture of goat. I wish I could walk into a local poopermarket and be able to buy lungs, tripe, cheek, trotters, sweetbreads and oxtails but guess what? The amount of red tape and lack of promotion about the qualities and tastes of these products has resulted in a lot of wasted food which I disagree with. The sell by dates means that products can't be on the shelf from more than a few days and was only killed the day before, yet real butchers have the same meat hanging for 8 times as long, it tastes better and they pretty much sell out as they only buy in what they know they can shift. This wasted meat cannot go anywhere due to licencing and EU legislation except the incinerator in case it makes someone feel slightly dicky.

Walk into any pooper market and my guess is no matter if you are the first in the door that day or the last in the door that day you can buy any meat product or dairy product and there will still be shelves full to the brim. When I was younger we used to buy from a butcher and if they didn't have something then something else was purchased and we had a varied diet that way with beef one week, chicken the next, lamb after that and we had an allotment so whatever was in season we had that. We ate with what was available. That is how I live, how i choose to eat, what I support and what I will stand by.
I hope I can count on you to stand beside me at the local fly fishing competitions in your local areas then as being such Eco-Warriors you will know all about what goes on at them but wont want to see them eradicated just more sustainable. Will you stand with me on the banks of the Scottish Lochs that are suffocating the lochs with pollution and waste meaning less returns of wild salmon as being Captain Planet you know all about these too. If you give me your names Ill even look you up on the Trout & Salmon Association register and we can go for a drink and discuss these issues. Oh wait, you didnt know any of this went on did you because you arent part of it.

I DO NOT WASTE FOOD. I DO NOT SUPPORT INTENSIVE FARMING. I DO NOT WANT TO SEE OUR WILD LIFE DESTROYED. I DO NOT BUY SOYA OR PALM BASED PRODUCTS WHERE I CAN. I RESPECT WHER MY FOOD COMES FROM AND I WOULD LOVE TO BE SELF SUFFICIENT AGAIN.

If you don't understand any of that than I can possibly draw pictures for you to try and explain it.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> this is why i drink Alpro because its from ethically sourced soy...wonder how many farmers ethically source their soya to feed their livestock... and doesnt it take something like 16lb of soya to produce 1lb of meat? :scared:


It is not organic so therefore it can not be from ethically sourced as it means it is open to treatment using pesticides, insecticides and all manner of fertilisers.

If you buy organic milk and meat then you can gurantee that the suppliments that contain Soya ARE made with sustainable soya because their whole Organic Certitifate means that everything from their own land to the land used to grow fodder on HAS to be organic. One link isn't organic then the product can not be sold as organic. Simple.

It takes 0lb of soya to produce 1lb of organically, slow grown meat.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

hutch6 said:


> my own chickens roaming around keeping the veg pests down .


Oh Hutch............... had to pick you up on this :lol::lol::lol:

You let your chickens out in your veg patch, they won't just eat the pests


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

rona said:


> Oh Hutch............... had to pick you up on this :lol::lol::lol:
> 
> You let your chickens out in your veg patch, they won't just eat the pests


Heh, partial to cabbage and lettuce, mine! I've sectioned them off into their half of the garden and chuck slugs and caterpillars over to them...completely organic pest control!


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

rona said:


> Oh Hutch............... had to pick you up on this :lol::lol::lol:
> 
> You let your chickens out in your veg patch, they won't just eat the pests


I know Rona but when you have chickens following you about as you turn over rocks and soil for them they are most welcome to follow me into the veg patch as I lift leaves and expose little critters. It's all thought out and if they can roam around your veg patch but not in it then the critters don't get much chance to get to the veg in the first place. Other than that they will only get the bits that are not fit for consumption or welcome to root through the compost heap and keep it turned over hence, again, nothing is wasted.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

takerbabe said:


> What gives man the right to seriously interfere with wildlife? I think if it goes to far, the wildlife will eventually turn on man. This world belongs to the animals as much as it belongs to us.


Protecting species and habitat IS INTERFERING in order to try and rectify the interence and damage that took place beforehand so shall we stop that and say goodbye to hundreds of wild species so the only ones left are in zoos or are forced to perform? 
What pets do you enjoy? Were they not decended from a wild creature? Release them and cure your guilty conscience.

Let's drop all of the world wide legislation, policies, protection acts, restrictions, quotas, national parks, sanctuaries, wildlife rescue centres, non-intrusion zones, animal protection societies and charities and just hope that it sorts itself out again. The only way you'll stop man interferring is if you take man out of the equation altogether and that way nature can start to reastablish footholds again. 
ETA: Removed the last bit as it was a bit harsh, I apologise.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> It is not organic so therefore it can not be from ethically sourced as it means it is open to treatment using pesticides, insecticides and all manner of fertilisers.
> 
> If you buy organic milk and meat then you can gurantee that the suppliments that contain Soya ARE made with sustainable soya because their whole Organic Certitifate means that everything from their own land to the land used to grow fodder on HAS to be organic. One link isn't organic then the product can not be sold as organic. Simple.
> 
> It takes 0lb of soya to produce 1lb of organically, slow grown meat.


Alpro do organic soya products and all their non-organic is gm free... im all for raising animals organically, but it doesnt alter the fact that even orgainic dairy cows arnt soley fed on grass they too are fed grains etc which they need more of to produce milk, they also need more land and more water added to that they generate much more Co2 emissions..so even organic dairy isnt more eco-friendly than soya, produced sustainably for human consumption, by companies like Alpro. Then theres the welfare issue & the reason i stopped consuming dairy in the first place, though better on the whole im sure for organically kept cows...it isnt great. You mention ketosis, well in organic dairy herds studies showed that there was a tendency for sub-clinical ketotic cows to be on organic farms rather than non organic farms

..this is very intersting...

Is the Modern High Potential Dairy Cow Suitable for Organic Farming Conditions? - Springer


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> Alpro do organic soya products and all their non-organic is gm free... im all for raising animals organically, but it doesnt alter the fact that even orgainic dairy cows arnt soley fed on grass they too are fed grains etc which they need more of to produce milk, they also need more land and more water added to that they generate much more Co2 emissions..so even organic dairy isnt more eco-friendly than soya, produced sustainably for human consumption, by companies like Alpro. Then theres the welfare issue & the reason i stopped consuming dairy in the first place, though better on the whole im sure for organically kept cows...it isnt great. You mention ketosis, well in organic dairy herds studies showed that there was a tendency for sub-clinical ketotic cows to be on organic farms rather than non organic farms
> 
> ..this is very intersting...
> 
> Is the Modern High Potential Dairy Cow Suitable for Organic Farming Conditions? - Springer


But they are not fed it all day everyday.

Let's kill off the UK dairy industry then. In fact the whole farming industry altogether. Turn the farmers out of tennanted farms and go from there. Who looks after the land? Who looks after the drainage ditches to ensure they run free to prevent further flooding because cheap land on flood plains have been sold off for housing and development and the narural waterways outside of farmland have been narrowed and natural courses changed to again allow for housing and development? What happens to the animals that are no longer required? What happens to the countryside now it is no longer classed as trespassing on that land as nobody owns it if it was a privately owned farm so every tom, dick, harry and mary can lark about on it, build on it, drive 4x4s all over it and anything else they wish to. Let's increase taxes to pay not only for the farmers now claiming benefits but for the lack of exports we have to fill the gap in for.

Now all we have to do is ship over larger quantities of alternative based products that we can not grow in our climate meaning that if there was ever a disaster we would be knackered for suffiency. Let's triple our carbon miles. Lets put further strain on other countries that do not thave the same animal welfare code, quotas, legislation and protection as us as well as the land use regs and restrictions so they can supply us even more alternatives because as long as it isn't happening on our doorstep it doesn't matter really. Do you really want to be at the disposal of other countries by the simple means of "If you do not comply with us then we will prevent food supply?"

DOWN WITH THE FARMERS!!! DOWN WITH THE FARMERS!!!!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> But they are not fed it all day everyday.
> 
> Let's kill off the UK dairy industry then. In fact the whole farming industry altogether. Turn the farmers out of tennanted farms and go from there. Who looks after the land? Who looks after the drainage ditches to ensure they run free to prevent further flooding because cheap land on flood plains have been sold off for housing and development and the narural waterways outside of farmland have been narrowed and natural courses changed to again allow for housing and development? What happens to the animals that are no longer required? What happens to the countryside now it is no longer classed as trespassing on that land as nobody owns it if it was a privately owned farm so every tom, dick, harry and mary can lark about on it, build on it, drive 4x4s all over it and anything else they wish to. Let's increase taxes to pay not only for the farmers now claiming benefits but for the lack of exports we have to fill the gap in for.
> 
> ...


lol its a fact that farming animals uses much more land to produce a given amount of energy... we could even feed the planet if we didnt farm meat , so in my ideal world farmers would farm crops for us to eat and not primarily to feed livestock..but hey ho we dont live in an ideal world do we.

So IMO organic or not, because organic doesnt automatically = better welfare for the animals, this is the type of livestock farmer people should be supporting.:thumbup:.....

"Badger cull: not in this farmer's name"

I farm in the cull area, and I know that killing badgers will not stop bovine TB - the answer lies in better farming practice

'Farmers vilify badgers but TB is mainly transmitted cow to cow.' Photograph: David Cheskin/PA

The government justifies a badger cull by claiming it's to help farmers. I have 35 years' livestock management experience, and I live in the heart of the Forest of Dean - the cull area - and I disagree. Killing badgers isn't the long-term or sustainable solution to bovine TB control that farmers so desperately need. Shooting badgers is politically motivated, not scientifically driven, and farmers need to realise they're being sold a lame duck.

Over the years, I have managed some of the highest-yielding dairy herds in the world with consistently high levels of hygiene and disease resistance. Meticulous biosecurity and sympathetic animal husbandry are the key to stamping out TB in cattle, not shooting British wildlife.

Farmers vilify badgers but TB is mainly transmitted cow to cow. So the solution to eradicating TB lies with farmers themselves who must accept responsibility for a disease that is all too easily spread back and forth within and between herds due to poor management, lax biosecurity and substandard animal care. A slow response in tackling the disease compounds the problem, which can therefore soon reach epidemic proportions. I have seen it many times with mad cow disease, foot and mouth and now bovine TB. Alas, the farming industry prefers to scapegoat badgers rather than tackling these fundamental problems.

Water troughs are a reservoir for TB because they are rarely cleaned out. It's not uncommon for trough water to be left stagnating through the winter, collecting dead birds, rodents and various bacteria, only to be drunk by cattle in the spring. Badgers also use these troughs but it's unfair to isolate badgers when the culprit is the bacteria soup itself. Making troughs badger-proof is not rocket science, but more fundamental is the adoption of better hygiene standards by the agricultural industry.

Lax biosecurity on farms is also a major factor. Cows infected with TB should be quarantined immediately, but they rarely are. Every farm should have isolation areas to separate these animals and prevent cross-infection, but they rarely do. Biosecurity is often ignored by farmers and poorly enforced by Defra. Infected cows can be left unquarantined on farms for weeks. Before a single badger is shot, the farming industry should get its house in order.

We also need to improve cattle welfare. Farm animal stress caused by pain and suffering can reduce an animal's immunity and make it more susceptible to diseases like bovine TB. On too many farms, there are high levels of lameness, mastitis and rough animal handling. The average incidence of lameness in our national herd is a shameful 22%.

This is lazy husbandry. We have a wealth of veterinary knowledge to eradicate disease, and in countries with more advanced control measures there are very low incidences of bovine TB.

So as Defra ministers sign the death sentence for thousands of England's badgers, my message to them is this. Not in my name. Not in my name should you hoodwink the public into thinking that killing badgers will help struggling farmers, because you are betraying farmers with this unscientific policy. If you really wanted to help farming, you would help it reform and modernise, you'd actively support rather than hinder badger vaccination, you'd take the fight to Europe to green-light cattle vaccination. But instead, it's far cheaper and easier to just let farmers kill badgers.

More than 120,000 people so far have signed an e-petition calling for the government to kill the cull. For the sake of democracy, science, animal welfare, conservation and farming, I hope they listen

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/28/badger-cull-bovine-tb?CMP=twt_fd


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

takerbabe said:


> What gives man the right to seriously interfere with wildlife? I think if it goes to far, the wildlife will eventually turn on man. This world belongs to the animals as much as it belongs to us.


Well said. There's room for us all.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> 1) You seem to be so hell bent on shouting down others believing you are taking the higher moral ground that you have even failed to understand the basic concept of what I am posting, in between explaining the basic to you, so let me spell i out very clearly for you my stand point on the cull:
> 
> 2) I am against the cull but there is nothing to stop it as numerous petitions have already been thrown out and I believe that the outcome will not show any change in bTB cases so after that the badger can be left wel alone. Either way I hope for a positive outcome.
> 
> ...


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> 1) I'd say you were the one trying to shout people down.
> 
> 2) You are against the cull? So against the cull you've signed the petition? Or are all your words just hot air...


Oh that explains being called "Naive", "stand alone", "would find various images too distressing" and apparantly "losing" a discussion.

By your own words and admission you have only seen one side of things you seem to be trying to inform me about, I am merely giving you a bit of inormation about the otherside that is missing from your experience.

Your second point clearly shows you have no idea where I stand - perhaps there is a clue in post #177. Maybe you can't figure me out because you don't understand my way of life because you've never been exposed to it I don't know. I'll let you think on if I've signed it or not. I can assure you my words are not hot air.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> 1) Again, look at your source. The Dreary Mail will always report things like this because their ignorant readership laps it up - "I do not pay my TV licence to see things like this' said Mrs Harrington-Bouvier. "I was enjoying my fois gras pate with red pepper brioche whilst looking forward to our special Wednesday night steak night sirloin and it put me right off it did".
> 2) The main thing is, if I was allowed to take the meat home and consume it myself without anybody facing prosecution or being shut down Id shoot one myself, no bother at all with that.
> The sooner people accept where meat comes from and see the realities then the sooner they can make their decision:
> 
> ...


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> 1) Oh that explains being called "Naive", "stand alone", "would find various images too distressing" and apparantly "losing" a discussion.
> 
> 2) By your own words and admission you have only seen one side of things you seem to be trying to inform me about, I am merely giving you a bit of inormation about the otherside that is missing from your experience.
> 
> 2) Your second point clearly shows you have no idea where I stand - perhaps there is a clue in post #177. Maybe you can't figure me out because you don't understand my way of life because you've never been exposed to it I don't know. I'll let you think on if I've signed it or not. I can assure you my words are not hot air.


1) I'd say you have lost the discussion. Okay you have a fan club of two. Where are the others? Have your posts inspired non-meat eaters to start eating meat or non-milk drinkers to start drinking milk?
But your involvement has helped keep the thread at the top of the page which has helped promote the cause and for that we're obliged.

2) We come from opposite sides of the killing line. Your side is the side of cruelty and bloodshed and killing. My side is the side of compassion, mercy and non-violence.
I won't ever be "experiencing" your side that's for sure.

3) Guess that'll be a 'no' then.


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> 1) I'd say you have lost the discussion. Okay you have a fan club of two. Where are the others? Have your posts inspired non-meat eaters to start eating meat or non-milk drinkers to start drinking milk?
> But your involvement has helped keep the thread at the top of the page which has helped promote the cause and for that we're obliged.


Epic-scale missing of the point, as usual. Not everyone seeks to evangelise and convert, some just want to show the other point of view.

And this talk of "losing" and "standing alone". It's playground stuff, but not surprising from someone who resorts to name-calling those who disagree with him.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Knightofalbion said:


> 1) I'd say you have lost the discussion. Okay you have a fan club of two. Where are the others? Have your posts inspired non-meat eaters to start eating meat or non-milk drinkers to start drinking milk?
> But your involvement has helped keep the thread at the top of the page which has helped promote the cause and for that we're obliged.
> 
> 2) We come from opposite sides of the killing line. Your side is the side of cruelty and bloodshed and killing. My side is the side of compassion, mercy and non-violence.
> ...


:lol::lol::lol::lol:

Thanks for the laugh :thumbup:


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> 1) That's a bit childish isn't it? I thought the 'chip on your shoulder' Class War was over?! I don't care what background someone comes from or how much money they do or don't have. I'm only interested in a person's heart and soul.
> 
> I don't buy the Daily Mail. It's a news report that is at the link. The source is irrelevant.
> The report is correct, over 90,000 one day old calves ARE killed (in the UK) every year. The unwanted, profitless flotsam and jetsam of the Dairy Industry.
> ...


1) I'd say you have lost the discussion. Okay you have a fan club of two. Where are the others? Have your posts inspired non-meat eaters to start eating meat or non-milk drinkers to start drinking milk?
But your involvement has helped keep the thread at the top of the page which has helped promote the cause and for that we're obliged.

What is with the lost and won thing? I've not changed my way of life and if it's a discussion then there is always more than one side or it becomes a collective group. If you want to win at something go play a game.
It kind of makes sense with the mention of a "fan club" I guess as to why you believe I have lost because in your mind it all comes down to majority and "likes" or "rep". In my mind however it comes down to making educated choices that sits right with your conscience.

2) We come from opposite sides of the killing line. Your side is the side of cruelty and bloodshed and killing. My side is the side of compassion, mercy and non-violence.
I won't ever be "experiencing" your side that's for sure.

No, you come from one side and I have an understanding of both and how they interact and your food stuff is far removed from your plate you won't ever have to.

If you want to turn this personal because I eat meat or I hunt or I don't agree with your way of life then go ahead it really does not bother me.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> I don't buy the *Daily Mail*. It's a news report that is at the link. *The source is irrelevant.*
> The report is correct, over 90,000 one day old calves ARE killed (in the UK) every year. The unwanted, profitless flotsam and jetsam of the Dairy Industry.


Here are my thoughts on that paper summed up and perfectly mirrored in song (very catchy):

The Daily Mail Song - YouTube

This next gem is a list of things that the Daily Mail has genuinely claimed cause cancer.






Can't resist this either. It's a social experiment and is absolutely real.


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

hutch6 said:


> Here are my thoughts on that paper summed up and perfectly mirrored in song (very catchy):
> 
> The Daily Mail Song - YouTube
> 
> ...


Can't listen right now, because OH will get grumbly if I play it while telly's on (fair enough really), but I have a fair idea about the list of things that "cause cancer". Ben Goldacre has covered this too, I think his book Bad Science should be on the national curriculum  Bad Science

Funny how so many things that cause cancer according to the DM are related to women doing terrible things like having fun...


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

myshkin said:


> 1) Epic-scale missing of the point, as usual. Not everyone seeks to evangelise and convert, 2) some just want to show the other point of view.


1) Ditto.

"I am the voice of the voiceless
Through me the dumb shall speak
Till the deaf world's ear be made to hear
The wrongs of the worldless weak...."

"Oh shame on the mother's of mortals
Who have not stooped to teach 
Of the sorrow that lies in dear, dumb eyes
The sorrow that has no speech..."

Whilst some are complicit in the ways of cruelty and bloodshed, and some condone it, I challenge it...

2) He has certainly done that!


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

hutch6 said:


> Here are my thoughts on that paper summed up and perfectly mirrored in song (very catchy):
> 
> The Daily Mail Song - YouTube
> 
> ...


Charlie Brooker. On my list of two of "I'm sorry, lovely OH, but you know if I met them I'd absolutely run off with them, if they'd have me, what with me being all 40 and stuff? Thanks for your understanding, lovely OH". 

It is completely real.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> 1) Alpro are a member of an Environment programme that DOES NOT support Anti-aggressive Land Accumulation, I wonder why? It's not even organic
> 
> 
> > 1) They operate an entirely ethical farming policy. They deal exclusively with farmers they've dealt with for years. Everything is accountable.
> ...


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> 1) Ditto.
> 
> "I am the voice of the voiceless
> Through me the dumb shall speak
> ...


Preaching. It's patronising and insulting. You know nothing of me, or anyone who has disagreed with you, or about the real-life things we do every day.

You're always talking about compassion for animals - what pets/animals do you have? Do you know anything about the reality of what they do? Ever taken a baby bird from a cat's mouth and raised it? Ever picked up an animal that no-one else wants because he bites in fear and taken the long road of patience so he can trust you? Doubt it, it's real, it's messy, and involves seeing another point of view, which you are pants at.

How do you feed these animals you love so much? What do you suggest I feed my cats and dogs to avoid killing, or being responsible for the death of another being?

It is nature. In this perfect world you talk about, what will the cats and dogs eat? The lions, the wolves, they hunt, they eat. My chickens will kill to eat meat if it is small and slow enough. What will the predators and carnivores do in your perfect world? Nature made them too.

If the god you believe in was so great, he would have made a better world, where it wasn't necessary to kill life to eat (including plant life). But either he's not real or he's actually a bit of a git, either way, your preaching grates. Some of us try to be good in the real world...not something you are familiar with, I think.

ETA: don't put numbers in when you're quoting me. It's deceptive, and calls into question your reliability. Red top journalism at it's best.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> No, you come from one side and I have an understanding of both and how they interact and your food stuff is far removed from your plate you won't ever have to.
> 
> 
> > It is the endless cycle of exploitation and killing I and the other AR people on here are objecting to.
> ...


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Team Badger e-petition update:

Over 135,000 signatures...

Latest News from Team Badger

Team Badger


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Dairy consumption and ovarian cancer

Cancer Active -


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Dairy consumption and hormonal cancers

Jane Plant


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Meanwhile, a proper scientist, who actually understands research, says

It's all nonsense, that's what the Daily Mail does


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> No, you come from one side and I have an understanding of both and how they interact and your food stuff is far removed from your plate you won't ever have to.





Knightofalbion said:


> It is the endless cycle of exploitation and killing I and the other AR people on here are objecting to.!


I believe you are speaking of what you think are degrees (and I would argue your measurement criteria are skewed). We can't live life without the endless cycle or killing. No one can. The fact that you are further removed from seeing it does not make it less.

_Not a single bite of food reaches our mouths that has not involved the killing of animals.* By some estimates, at least 300 animals per acre-including mice, rats, moles, groundhogs and birds-are killed for the production of vegetable and grain foods, often in gruesome ways.* Only one animal per acre is killed for the production of grass-fed beef and no animal is killed for the production of grass-fed milk until the end of the life of the dairy cow.

And what about the human beings, especially growing human beings, who are suffering from nutrient deficiencies and their concomitant health problems as a consequence of a vegetarian diet? Or does only animal suffering count?

Of course, we should all work for the elimination of confinement animal facilities, which do cause a great deal of suffering in our animals, not to mention desecration of the environment. This will be more readily accomplished by the millions of meat eaters opting for grass-fed animal foods than by the smaller numbers of vegetarians boycotting meat.

Vegetarians wishing to make a political statement should strive for consistency. Cows are slaughtered not only to put steak on the table, but to obtain components used in soaps, shampoos, cosmetics, plastics, pharmaceuticals, waxes (as in candles and crayons), modern building materials and hydraulic brake fluid for airplanes. *The membrane that vibrates in your telephone contains beef gelatin. So to avoid hypocrisy, vegetarians need to also refrain from using anything made of plastic, talking on the telephone, flying in airplanes, letting their kids use crayons, and living or working in modern buildings.*

The ancestors of modern vegetarians would not have survived without using animal products like fur to keep warm, leather to make footwear, belts, straps and shelter, and bones for tools. *In fact, the entire interactive network of life on earth, from the jellyfish to the judge, is based on the sacrifice of animals and the use of animal foods. *There's no escape from dependence on slaughtered animals, not even for really good vegan folks who feel wonderful about themselves as they finish their vegan meal.​_​
I speak from the experienced POV of an ex vegan/vegetarian, and also from the experienced POV of gardening/gathering and killing my own food as when I grew up that was a necessity.

My vegan diet messed my body up so badly (and it was a careful diet) it took 8 long years following to get pregnant. My niece has lost 18 months of school to ill health following her bout as a vegan through a few teenage years. Probably a family thing but some of our bodies just can't do vegan. (We're apparently in good company with the Dalai Lama.) 

Twenty-Two Reasons Not to Go Vegetarian - Weston A Price Foundation

http://www.gutsense.org/infertility/inf_vegetarian.html



hutch6 said:


> "At least I can look into the eyes of what has died to feed me, you can't though"





Knightofalbion said:


> Well, I can't argue with that can I!!!


CC


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> hutch6 said:
> 
> 
> > No, you come from one side and I have an understanding of both and how they interact and your food stuff is far removed from your plate you won't ever have to.
> ...


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

myshkin said:


> Preaching. It's patronising and insulting. You know nothing of me, or anyone who has disagreed with you, or about the real-life things we do every day.
> 
> You're always talking about compassion for animals - what pets/animals do you have? Do you know anything about the reality of what they do? Ever taken a baby bird from a cat's mouth and raised it? Ever picked up an animal that no-one else wants because he bites in fear and taken the long road of patience so he can trust you? Doubt it, it's real, it's messy, and involves seeing another point of view, which you are pants at.
> 
> ...


Still no reply. Now if I were as childish as you I'd start talking about "losing" and things. I might even call you names. But I'm not, so, answer the questions. What will the carnivores eat in your perfect world? I await an answer, oh wise one.


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

comfortcreature said:


> I believe you are speaking of what you think are degrees (and I would argue your measurement criteria are skewed). We can't live life without the endless cycle or killing. No one can. The fact that you are further removed from seeing it does not make it less.
> 
> CC


From this first sentence, realises that CC can do philosophy, and admires him/her muchly for it  For philosophy is the basis of all. Some stuff is facts, no escaping it. We have to work on from there.


----------



## alan g a (Feb 23, 2011)

I was born in London so by definition I am a townie but I have spent much of my life living in th country. I even several working on a farm. I appreciate the that nature can cause, but it is after all, natures way. Man has to interfere.
Keep the sigs come guys. It's to help nature, not destroy it.


----------



## alan g a (Feb 23, 2011)

myshkin said:


> From this first sentence, realises that CC can do philosophy, and admires him/her muchly for it  For philosophy is the basis of all. Some stuff is facts, no escaping it. We have to work on from there.


Killing for food or survival is one but reckless killing for possibly mistaken idea that things might get better is quite another. The only way to find out is to do but if it proves to be wrong then it's to late. Better the devil you know than the devil you don't.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

well i never! dont know why but i always assumed you were a man CC 



comfortcreature said:


> I believe you are speaking of what you think are degrees (and I would argue your measurement criteria are skewed). We can't live life without the endless cycle or killing. No one can. The fact that you are further removed from seeing it does not make it less.
> 
> _Not a single bite of food reaches our mouths that has not involved the killing of animals.* By some estimates, at least 300 animals per acre-including mice, rats, moles, groundhogs and birds-are killed for the production of vegetable and grain foods, often in gruesome ways.* Only one animal per acre is killed for the production of grass-fed beef and no animal is killed for the production of grass-fed milk until the end of the life of the dairy cow.
> 
> ...


ETA personally i dont have a lot of faith in the sources of your info im afraid.......

Weston A. Price Foundation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Weston A. Price Foundation (WAPF), co-founded in 1999 by Sally Fallon (Morell) and nutritionist Mary G. Enig (PhD), is a U.S. 501(c)(3) non-profit organization dedicated to "restoring nutrient-dense foods to the American diet through education, research and activism."[1]

The foundation has been criticised by medical and health experts for "purveying misleading information" and "failing to update their recommendations in light of contradictory evidence

Fiber Menace? (Part II) « The Rogues Gallery

To be blunt, Mr. Monastyrsky's website is rife with half-truths, distortions, and deceptive (ab)use of sources, making his claims on the subject of fiber at the very least in the category of "not proved," and at worst he is disseminating what could be some very poor medical advice. This is a long post, but it only covers some of the misinformation on Mr. Monastyrsky's website


----------



## MummytoKitty (Sep 28, 2012)

JANICE199 said:


> *" Over 70% of the badger population in large areas of the country will be killed, many of them healthy.
> 
> Independent scientific studies have shown that culling would be of little help in reducing bovine TB, and even suggest that it could make things worse in some areas. "
> 
> ...


I have signed it . Hope it is stopped.


----------



## Guest (Sep 29, 2012)

I have to pull you up on NO ANIMAL DIES DUE TO PASTURE RAISING CATTLE FOR SLAUGHTER. To start with, clearing the land, the animals that would by rights be using the land are killed and starve to death, or die in new territorial struggles, and there is less for all. Once cleared, they have been driven to hardship, trying to find enough to survive in the few hedgerows, etc, As more and more hedgerows diappear, some species must be building inbreeding and future survival threatening genetic problems. 

They have no shelter moving from one remnant bit of vegetation to another, so are lost to cats, dogs, escaped/feral pets plus native predators. They are run over on roads, trying to get to new areas. Larger ones are sometimes shot or poisoned, by farmers, pleasure killers and those who like to live off the land. 

There are a number of species out of control on this planet. The other species have become problems because we have mucked up the species balance from HUMAN interference. The reason less animals are killed in established pasture, is they have long been driven into the tiny remnants of hedgerows and copses. You could philosophically argue, with that logic, that concrete paving kills less than any farm land. Scorched earth policy will show best results, simply because there is nothing there to kill.

Rather than the brutish, right wing attitude of kill/victimise the non profitable/native non edible, in a religious based belief system that tells us that somehow we, as a species, are entitled to destroy species and whole eco systems, for an easy life, if we want to help badgers and our own species, we should look at what we are doing to the planet, the badgers a prime example, most importantly, limit the number of children per family. Our species is the most grasping, greedy, hoarding, destructive on this planet.


Why should badgers pay with their lives, when we have a relatively easy answer that would cost a pound or two, per head to fix, AT MOST? 

Did we give the badgers TB, with our importation of stock? So we give them the illness? At any time in decades, we could have done the work to cure them, and now, we make the species pay with wholesale slaughter. What an admirable species we are. 

The badger is an extraordinary animal. Frankly, even if it weren't, it has equal right to a share of the land it evolved on. 

That big a cull? Seriously? So few unmoved? That sized cull of humans would effect you, perhaps? Why? It might be you or someone you love? Would be, most probably. There we are, SQUEAL!!! You can't make us answer for overpopulating the planet, destroying ecosystems. Kill most of the badgers. Clear another forest. Lets just have fruit trees. That will grow more food for an ugly new housing estate, with no one able to squeal they are scared of TB cows.

Will they arbitrarily leave isolated badger groups, and completely wipe out all families near humans? (Likely) Anyone knowing about genetics, knows that means gene pools will be concentrated, breeding groups isolated and unlikely to meet. The effect will be much worse, if that is the culling method, and I bet it is. Genetic abnormalities in the small number left, will be caused by inbreeding. Is that not horrifying to any animal lover? 

It dismays me that there is ANY opposition to doing the compassionate and logical work, to fix the problems we have probably caused, then increased, by our overbreeding and grasping of any land not 'used' (ie used by man).


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

myshkin said:


> Still no reply. Now if I were as childish as you I'd start talking about "losing" and things. I might even call you names. But I'm not, so, answer the questions. What will the carnivores eat in your perfect world? I await an answer, oh wise one.


Myshkin half of the question I have put forward have not been answered so I wouldn't expect a reply or if you do get one expect it to be one that leads of a path away from the context.

This might be hard to read but I have tried to compile all of the questions I have asked on her that either havent been answer or have been passed off as by the by flippancy or have been answered with contradicting points of what the person was actually for or against. I just hope it makes sense and I await the responses.



hutch6 said:


> Do you own a business or have a job for this example KOA?
> 
> If you do how would you feel if you were told to stop trading or moving stock for 6months for, let's say a sparrow being found on the roof of your business? How about if you were told that because you had brought some dirt from outside into your place of work that you were to leave immediately and stay at home without pay for six months?
> 
> ...





hutch6 said:


> I don't know who was on about natural predators but cubs will be killed by foxes. Other than that they don't have any so once a cub makes it through its first year then it's pretty much untouched.





Knightofalbion said:


> 4) That's ridiculous! Tens of thousands of badgers are killed on the roads every year.





hutch6 said:


> 4) No, what's ridiculous is you seem to think a car is a natural predator. I mentioned predators and you brought cars into it. Do they hunt in packs? Are aeroplanes natural predators of birds? Are speedboat natural predators of manatees? Are vehicles even natural? And I'm supposed to have said something ridiculous.
> 6) So if it's a new sett then you're still tossing a coin as to which badger you get to vaccinate after trapping.





Knightofalbion said:


> 4) "...once a cub makes it through its first year its pretty much untouched" That's what you said.
> 
> 6) Kind of makes it a bit easier if there were only two of them wouldn't you say?
> This is my favourite roundabout answer you have given Knight Of Albion because it is an answer IN FAVOUR of a cull and shows the logic used behind the cull. Well done for contradicting yourself 100%





Knightofalbion said:


> * Now you're back with this bordering on the hysterical post. All rather undignified, wouldn't you say?*
> Thanks for the lecture on badgers! Check my profile. What does it say? 'Glastonbury, Somerset' that's what it says. I live in the country. There is a badger sett just across the way. I observe badgers at close quarters 365 days a year. I don't need any lectures on badgers. Thanks all the same.





hutch6 said:


> So what if you live where you do, how does that make a difference to colour red or how much you know about badgers? I live just outside the dales a stones throw from open moorland and large tracts of ancient woodland, I don't use that as any basis for debate.





Knightofalbion said:


> I know what goes on in the countryside, because I live there, but unlike you I've seen but one side of the track.





hutch6 said:


> If you've only ever seen something from one side then how can you claim to have a wider knowledge of it?





Knightofalbion said:


> You see in my family we don't believe in setting dogs on defenceless creatures, nor blasting defenceless creatures to Kingdom come. We'd consider that sick, cruel and evil. But hey, it'll all come out in the wash.
> 
> *This seems like a weird thing to highlight but later in it is asked what animals have died to make way for the planting for your food, can you see animals and wildlife running through the fields of the crop you consume after all manner of pesticides and insecticides have been used that are strong enough to kill the people working on the plantation and in the surrounding areas as well as the death and suffering caused when these chemicals enter the water ways and eco-systems and there is no reply. If a crop is not GM then it NEEDS to have pest control because it is not immune to the diseases and pests. Out of sight out of mind, that is what gives you your so called clear conscience on the diet you eat*





hutch6 said:


> How much of your property is being damaged by wildlife? How much money have you lost in the last year due to wildlife? What would you do if let's say something as simple as rabbits started burrowing under the corner of your house or garage or shed causing subsidence? As you clearly live in the country then the chances are you might have an open fire, what happens when your chimney gets blocked by birds or wasps?





hutch6 said:


> Ever spoken to a slaughter man about his job and what he takes pride in?





lennythecloud said:


> You would risk more farms becoming infected, waste masses of money that could be spent on research and controls, risk human life when sabs come into contact with armed farmers and risk severly disrupting the eco system involved?





hutch6 said:


> Are these the same sabs that horrendously assault people and police officers as their only way to make a point is to retort with violence? Are these the same sabs that trash fishing lakes and premises causing more damage to the natural environment that is being sympathetically managed to encourage wildlife and it is a proven fact (theres your science again) that fish dont feel the pain of the hook like we do it is the resistance they react to (if you dont believe me I can easily show you this in real life) because the only way they know how to deal with something is to destroy it in such a mindless way that they actually destroy everything along with what they set out to protect not just what they were trying to protect? Are these the same sabs that are such a bunch of cowards they turn up in full guerrilla warfare outfits to hide their identity because they know they are going to have to commit a crime in ordered to get their point across? Are these the same sabs that released mink in the uk causing widespread depletion to water vole and other water fowl that they are now on the endangered species list and people turn their nose up at you when you say I would happily shoot mink? Are these the same sabs that harass, violate, vandalise, and destroy peoples homes, possessions, family and businesses purely because they do not agree with the lifestyle choice of the individual? Are these the same sabs that lace meat/carcasses with poison to kill trail hounds? Are these the same sabs that injure horses that are out trailing, not hunting, trailing? Are these the same sabs that burn kennels down with lurchers still inside them? Are these the same sabs that are all for animal care etc yet own cats and dogs and have no idea where their pet food meat is sourced from? Are these the same sabs that are all for causing wanton destruction etc and hurt people yet as soon as a few big lads start having a go back they start screaming and hiding behind the police?





lennythecloud said:


> That's very nice for you but it is unrealistic for most of the population to replace their current meat consumption with wild rabbits. There are around 40-45 million rabbits wild in the uk and 62 million people - you'd be out of rabbits within a week. So how do we produce animal products for 6 billion people wordwide without severely impacting the environment? If you have the answer then the fao of the united nations is desperate to hear from you.





hutch6 said:


> When have I said everybody should eat rabbits? I haven't have I?





Knightofalbion said:


> 1) I take your point, but answering points raised/misinformation. It's all good.
> 2) Just as well, as you've probably been eating it. And as all halal meat is blessed in the name of Allah, good job you're not a Christian.


_This might be one of my Hysterical posts again but when I have relayed experiences and the actual activity of things that you have zero idea about because as you have stated near the beginning of this post and throughout this thread you have only seen things form one side of the track and yet you come out with things such as only your word on that, the police would only do so with evidence and other such matter of fact responses and yet I am trying to correct your misinformed view of the other side of tracks in the countryside. Now you are either turning a deaf ear as to what I am telling you actually goes on whilst you are not gallivanting about sabotaging what you DO know goes on from what the media had told you (I very much doubt you have ever sabotaged anything you promote to support with such passion in your life which again, put s me one on you so there! )because it is hurtful to know goes on in the world around you day in day out or just dont plain believe me. If you dont believe me then that is why you need to get out and see what goes on or just browse some hunting forums.
Even here you are trying to bring another lead, another argument into the thread and take it down another road, does that make it hysterical?
Oh, and I am not religious and no animal other than human was ever born in a Gods name, lived its life according to a God so how can It die in the name of a God just because some human says a few words before killing it. I can honestly say I have never seen a person of the cloth in a field giving a sermon to livestock or a flock of sheep being herded from a church, synagogue or religious temple. Is your food blessed in your Gods name before it I taken from the fruiting plant?_



Knightofalbion said:


> *"Enough grain is squandered every day in raising American livestock for meat to provide every human being on earth with two loaves of bread"*
> - John Robbins





hutch6 said:


> Who the heck is on about American beef production here? It is UK badger's not American badgers. I have talked at length about my support of the UK farming industry NOT foreign industry. IF you want to go down that route then be my guest but it is a very lengthy debate indeed with lots of fat to chew on about it.


Again, you quote brought in out of context and not related to anything the discussion, or in your mind argument, yet I was accused of being hysterical for doing so, remember?



JANICE199 said:


> *Some times it's easier for people to go off topic,then they don't have to face the REAL facts.*





hutch6 said:


> Tell me, what REAL facts am I not facing up to? I've explained exactly what I've experienced, how I've made my choices in regards to what I eat and why I choose to eat it. What facts am I missing?[/QUOTE}


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> *Can you walk to the plantation and see the soya bean you are consuming?* No you can't. Funny how I can walk to fields where my food is produced and I can see the multitude of species there including badgers thriving and living alongside food produce. Hell, I'll soon be able to walk out my front door and see my food growing in my own garden, my own chickens roaming around keeping the veg pests down and the insects pollenating my courgette flowers. *What wildlife is to be found in soya plantations? *
> .
> I hope I can count on you to stand beside me at the local fly fishing competitions in your local areas then as being such Eco-Warriors you will know all about what goes on at them but won't want to see them eradicated just more sustainable. Will you stand with me on the banks of the Scottish Lochs that are suffocating the lochs with pollution and waste meaning less returns of wild salmon as being Captain Planet you know all about these too. If you give me your names I'll even look you up on the Trout & Salmon Association register and we can go for a drink and discuss these issues. Oh wait, you didn't know any of this went on did you because you aren't part of it.


_Not a single word of support from not just you Knight Of Albion but from anyone who has signed the badger petition on that bit for the Scottish Lochs or fly fishing comps, I wonder why? Is it because they are not on your doorstep, just over the road? Is it because they are furry? Or is it simply because as they are under water they are out of sight out of mind again, you don't actually believe it is going on? There is load of information on the web about them, not much in papers though or on the news or radio. They are still in the countryside, they are still cruel and destructive yet no support. Strange that isn't it. I suppose you know all about Somerset's multi-site micro-hydro plants that are causing loss of habitat, prevent wild fish stocks from migrating and reaching any form of spawning ground meaning less and less return fish, depleted fish stock and as the fish have a direct knock onto the whole eco-system along the waterways these will affect every species along those waterways just so ten, yes TEN houses can get renewable electricity from each micro-hydro power unit. Maybe you are out there right now protesting about the installations, clogging up the current installations (Somerset has more than any other county) because they are in Somerset and you live in Glastonbury Somerset as it states on your profile and you know what goes on in the countryside when it comes to destruction of habitat and species don't you?_


hutch6 said:


> Protecting species and habitat IS INTERFERING in order to try and rectify the interference and damage that took place beforehand so shall we stop that and say goodbye to hundreds of wild species so the only ones left are in zoos or are forced to perform?
> What pets do you enjoy? Were they not decended from a wild creature? Release them and cure your guilty conscience.
> 
> Let's drop all of the world wide legislation, policies, protection acts, restrictions, quotas, national parks, sanctuaries, wildlife rescue centres, non-intrusion zones, animal protection societies and charities and just hope that it sorts itself out again. The only way you'll stop man interferring is if you take man out of the equation altogether and that way nature can start to reastablish footholds again.





hutch6 said:


> Let's kill off the UK dairy industry then. In fact the whole farming industry altogether. Turn the farmers out of tennanted farms and go from there. Who looks after the land? Who looks after the drainage ditches to ensure they run free to prevent further flooding because cheap land on flood plains have been sold off for housing and development and the narural waterways outside of farmland have been narrowed and natural courses changed to again allow for housing and development? What happens to the animals that are no longer required? What happens to the countryside now it is no longer classed as trespassing on that land as nobody owns it if it was a privately owned farm so every tom, dick, harry and mary can lark about on it, build on it, drive 4x4s all over it and anything else they wish to. Let's increase taxes to pay not only for the farmers now claiming benefits but for the lack of exports we have to fill the gap in for?





Knightofalbion said:


> hutch6 said:
> 
> 
> > 1) Again, look at your source. The Dreary Mail will always report things like this because their ignorant readership laps it up - "I do not pay my TV licence to see things like this' said Mrs Harrington-Bouvier. "I was enjoying my fois gras pate with red pepper brioche whilst looking forward to our special Wednesday night steak night sirloin and it put me right off it did".
> ...


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> :ETA personally i dont have a lot of faith in the sources of your info im afraid.......


This is simply a tactic of attacking the messenger instead of addressing the message so lets get back to the point and the message.

Anyone that has worked a garden knows that killing goes on. Anyone that has worked a crop (and I have) and has grazed animals know that the MAJORITY of HORRIBLE TORTURED killing goes on while we make crops.

Do you know the vision of coming onto have chopped bodies of rodents and birds after a tiller has gone through a field? How about upturned nests of chicks that have scattered while machines go through?

The point made in my post is that WE ALL KILL BY OUR LIFESTYLES.

Vegans kill with their choices just as vegetarians do just as meat eaters do.

It is just a matter of degree (and again I would suggest the info that Vegans use to quantify their degree of killing is usually skewed).

Do you disagree that killing goes on to supply Vegans with their food, technology or buildings that they live in?

CC


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

There is no blood on my hands. Unlike you.
I was wondering last night, you worked in an abbatoir for years, you regularly hunt/shoot. How many animals (and birds) have you killed in your lifetime? Must run to five figures at least, if not six. 
How many, give or take a few thousand, you must have a rough idea.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

comfortcreature said:


> My vegan diet messed my body up so badly (and it was a careful diet) it took 8 long years following to get pregnant. My niece has lost 18 months of school to ill health following her bout as a vegan through a few teenage years. Probably a family thing but some of our bodies just can't do vegan. (We're apparently in good company with the Dalai Lama.)
> 
> Twenty-Two Reasons Not to Go Vegetarian - Weston A Price Foundation


Ah yes, the Weston-Price diet, the quickest way to dietary induced cancer and heart disease.

You couldn't hack the vegan diet. Donald Watson managed it - for over 60 years!

Donald Watson - Vegan Society Founder

These people seem to be doing okay on it

Great Vegan Athletes | Great Vegan Athletes

And the Jains have been following the Sacred Path since the 6th century BC.
Over 2,600 years!


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

househens said:


> . . . There are a number of species out of control on this planet. The other species have become problems because we have mucked up the species balance from HUMAN interference. ).


I'll stop right there to address this.

If ants were at the top of the heap do you believe that planet would be any better off?

The fact is that what you call a "planet in balance' is some imaginary place that I won't agree with. There is not an attainable 'utopia' or even anything near to that.

The planet evolves and always has. It is not to be held 'in balance' and was never meant to be. Species are lost and are gained now as they always have been.

Was the great Dinosaur die out the fault of humans?

Species extinction is nothing new - http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/04/species-extinction-is-nothing-new/

_. . . Earth's periodic species extinctions are usually associated with widespread glaciation, volcanism, earth movements and solar disruptions. Most geological eras have closed with such calamitous events. Random and more localised species extinctions are caused by rogue comets. But global warming and abundant carbon dioxide have never featured as causes of mass extinctions.

Because of Earth's long turbulent history, most species surviving today are not "fragile". Every one of them, including humans, is descended from a long line of survivors going back to the beginnings of life on Earth.

Man has thrived because of his adaptability, resourcefulness and more recently, his use of science and technology. We cannot now return to a cave-man existence. Without the freedom to explore, develop and utilise our resources, most humans would not survive. . .​_​
Where are the corpses - http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/04/where-are-the-corpses/



househens said:


> . . . .Rather than the brutish, right wing attitude of kill/victimise the non profitable/native non edible, in a religious based belief system that tells us that somehow we, as a species, are entitled to destroy species and whole eco systems, for an easy life,. . .


I think many could do themselves a favor and stop blaming religion for this belief system. I am a practical person. I don't bind things up with romantic thinking - haven't been able to much past my early twenties. My right wing belief system comes from that practical place as I even stuck with it in the years I was an atheist (now reformed and agnostic but still very right wing in my ideologies).



househens said:


> . if we want to help badgers and our own species, we should look at what we are doing to the planet, the badgers a prime example, most importantly, limit the number of children per family. Our species is the most grasping, greedy, hoarding, destructive on this planet.


Well this is just silliness and has no basis in fact - just alarmist words full of propoganda being repeated. There are plenty of species that are grasping, hoarding, destructive and that deliberately torture and kill, some just for the fun of it (dolphins being one).

Again, the earth would be no better or worse off if ants or termites or mosquitoes or bears or dolphins or apes were at the top of the food chain.

_". . .In his classic work On Aggression, Nobel Laureate Konrad Lorenz argued that man is the only species that regularly kills its own kind. This concept, which contrasted the order and restraint in the animal world with the chaotic aggressiveness of man, reflected the mood of the time: the shadow-of-the-Bomb pessimism of the '50s and early '60s. *But Lorenz was wrong*; since 1963, when his book was published,* naturalists have identified dozens of species that kill their own*, including lions, hippos, bears, wolves, hyenas, herring gulls and more than 15 types of primates other than man.

*In the new perspective, animals are not benign machines that live for the group and kill only to eat. Instead, they are programmed for selfish, even murderous acts when survival and propagation are threatened.* This radical shift in thinking is shown most dramatically by studies of India's sacred monkey, the hanuman langur. In 1965, a naturalist wrote that the long-tailed black and gray langurs were "relaxed" and "nonaggressive." Now, a Harvard researcher has shown that the langur society operates more like the House of Borgia, complete with kidnaping, constant sexual harassment, group battles, abandonment of some wounded young by their mothers, and the regular practice of infanticide. . . "_​
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,912086,00.html

http://www.funtrivia.com/askft/Question105828.html

For those who like Cracked (my kids do).- The 6 Biggest Assholes in the Animal Kingdom | Cracked.com



househens said:


> . Why should badgers pay with their lives, when we have a relatively easy answer that would cost a pound or two, per head to fix, AT MOST?


I can't/won't debate the badger cull as I have not read up on it thoroughly yet. My posts have been to address some of the other outrageous statements I've seen made here.

CC


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> There is no blood on my hands. Unlike you.
> I was wondering last night, you worked in an abbatoir for years, you regularly hunt/shoot. How many animals (and birds) have you killed in your lifetime? Must run to five figures at least, if not six.
> How many, give or take a few thousand, you must have a rough idea.


Yes there is blood on your hands as you buy the produce of massive companies that kill millions of animals per year. Without your demand for produce they wouldn't have to grow the supply and spray it with pesticides and insecticides and keep pests from eating the crops such as birds, rats and other mammals meaning that space would not be lifeless. Your products brands have blood on their hands in your name, in my book that constitutes as that blood being on your hands as you are directly funding their killing. You are so blind to the consequences of your consumption of your "ethical" food it is staggering.

When did I say I worked in an abattoir? I was present in my not so distant family's abattoir as a child but I don't think it would have been safe to allow a young person to wield extremely sharp objects.

I'd say a heck of a lot more than six figures Knight Of Albion wouldn't you? As I own a house that killed a fair few in building it, as there are roads leading to my house that is a few more, as I work in a pretty sanitised office and can openly see the rat boxes with poison inside that is a few more. Then you have to think of stuff like the pets I have kept, all of the bugs on the front of my car (there would have been some major accidents trying to dodge that lot) and there are loads more when you think about it. I try and off set this as much as I can with my work with the conservation work I do, fund and obtain sponsor for.
None of the food I eat really involves waste though that either cost animals lives to produce or takes years to bio-degrade, instead the fur gets fed to my dogs and I eat the skin off of fish. I think we know where the livestock skins go and what happens to them. The only thing that does go to waste is the feathers from wood pigeons and game birds but I do utilise as much of those as I can for my fly tying for fly fishing.
What do you do with your Tetrapak cartons from your Alpro juice? You can't put them in your normal cardboard waste for recycling due to the aluminium foil and the polyethylene contained in them. Do you take them to the specific point at your local recycling station or maybe your council offer a specialised collection service specifically for Tetrapak product, they should as Tetrapak will even provide funding for this. Perhaps you post them back to the address printed on the carton so Tetrapak themselves can recycling it at their specialised plant.

I see you still have not answered any of the perfectly valid questions that were put to you or are you in the process of writing them out?


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> You couldn't hack the vegan diet. Donald Watson managed it - for over 60 years!
> 
> Donald Watson - Vegan Society Founder
> 
> ...


Talk about putting folk down!!!

I thought veganism and vegetarianism was a chosen way of life, not a f-ing challenge   

Now who is after a badge of honor??? You are so hypocritical you are hilarious!!

The person you are putting this to stated that they and their family faced ill health and medical issues and you come back with "couldn't you hack it?". What a vile and nasty thing to say to anyone let alone after reading it was causing ill health. I suggest you revise your comments very carefully and never come on this thread or forum again with such down right nasty comments. You should be thoroughly ashamed of what you wrote. You wrote earlier that you were glad I wasn't teaching anyone or something before well look how the truth comes out now.


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> . . . And the Jains have been following the Sacred Path since the 6th century BC.
> Over 2,600 years!


You need to do your research better as now you are spewing untruths.

Many Jains partake in dairy products. Jain dietary laws do no require those procreating to be vegan (family people are permitted dairy) and there is no evidence of culture wide 'veganism' from the 6th century forward unless, of course, someone is stretching the meaning of 'veganism'.

CC


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

myshkin said:


> Preaching. It's patronising and insulting. You know nothing of me, or anyone who has disagreed with you, or about the real-life things we do every day.
> 
> You're always talking about compassion for animals - what pets/animals do you have? Do you know anything about the reality of what they do? Ever taken a baby bird from a cat's mouth and raised it? Ever picked up an animal that no-one else wants because he bites in fear and taken the long road of patience so he can trust you? Doubt it, it's real, it's messy, and involves seeing another point of view, which you are pants at.
> 
> ...


I know nothing of you, no, all I have to go on are your posts. I've been here nearly three months and I've yet to see you utter one single kind, polite or friendly word to anyone. I've not seen you display one shred of compassion. Virtually every post you make on here seems to have a vein of malice running through it.
And yes, I made an off the cuff remark to your friend "even the spiteful one is against the cull" and did I give a name? NO. Anyone else would have said "Who is he referring to?" You were like "Spiteful? That would be me then!"

Then apparently you're a closet St Francis! And yet everytime your friend says he has killed this or killed that; supports killing this, supports killing that, you can't wait to deliver a 'like'.

Man is more than a beast.

Man was made to 'walk with the angels', not to hurt and kill.

Going by earlier posts, it seems you are unhappy with your lot in life. Let me tell you, before we incarnate on earth we choose the body we are going to incarnate in. Yes, YOU chose the body you are in, I chose the body I am in, we all did the same.

And the central law of the universe is that of Cause & Effect. This is an entirely self-regulating law. No god punishes you, no god rewards you. You determine your own destiny as a consequence of your actions.
The past makes the present - and the present makes the future. Think on that.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> And the Jains have been following the Sacred Path since the 6th century BC.
> Over 2,600 years!





comfortcreature said:


> You need to do your research better as now you are spewing untruths.
> 
> Many Jains partake in dairy products. Jain dietary laws do no require those procreating to be vegan and there is no evidence of culture wide 'veganism' from the 6th century forward.
> 
> CC


That would be correct CC.

Direct from Jainpedia - their own words about their own practices:

JAINpedia > Resources > Jainism FAQs

"What do Jains eat?

Since Jains follow the principle of non-violence  ahiṃsā  they are vegetarians. They do not eat meat or fish or anything else that has a soul or potential life. Traditionally, this includes eggs, root vegetables such as onions and potatoes, and vegetables such as aubergines. Root vegetables are thought to have souls because when a piece of onion, garlic or potato falls to the ground, a new plant can grow. Plants such as aubergine are full of seeds, which each constitute a soul.

*Jains eat cheese, yoghurt and other dairy products,* rice, bread, lentils and most vegetables and fruit that do not fall into the categories mentioned above. *Some contemporary Jains have turned to veganism *as they believe that modern farming methods involve violence towards animals."

What's modern Knight Of Albion? 2,599 years ago? 5th Century BC? Perhaps somewhere around 1940 on wards?


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> Talk about putting folk down!!!
> 
> I thought veganism and vegetarianism was a chosen way of life, not a f-ing challenge
> 
> ...


Neither she or you should be on a public debating forum if you are so spineless that you cannot take a contrary view.

I don't think "couldn't hack it" is a hanging offence.

Foul language. No excuse for that.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> I know nothing of you, no, all I have to go on are your posts. I've been here nearly three months and I've yet to see you utter one single kind, polite or friendly word to anyone. I've not seen you display one shred of compassion. Virtually every post you make on here seems to have a vein of malice running through it.
> And yes, I made an off the cuff remark to your friend "even the spiteful one is against the cull" and did I give a name? NO. Anyone else would have said "Who is he referring to?" You were like "Spiteful? That would be me then!"
> 
> Then apparently you're a closet St Francis! And yet everytime your friend says he has killed this or killed that; supports killing this, supports killing that, you can't wait to deliver a 'like'.
> ...


So this proves my point precisely (why do you keep doing this for me if you are so against what i do? I don't understand your double standard and hypocrisy) that IN ORDER FOR YOUR PLANTS TOO BE PLANTED SO YOU CAN EAT SOYA SOMETHING HAS TO DIE. IN ORDER FOR YOUR CROPS NOT TO BE EATEN BY PESTS AND TURN A GREATER PROFIT *LOTS* OF THINGS HAVE TO DIE.

Is that not cause and effect?

Please don't bring religion into this, one of my father's sperm which as no soul or brain go t my mother's egg and I was created. It happened to us all and it is scientific FACT. It has nothing to do with where your food comes from so don't go off on one of your "hysterical" rambles.


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> You couldn't hack the vegan diet. Donald Watson managed it - for over 60 years!


Donald Watson managing it matters to me how?

Anecdotal evidence of one body, or two or three, that CAN do it does not indicate it can be done by all.

Donald Watson - Vegan Society Founder



Knightofalbion said:


> These people seem to be doing okay on it!


See my comment above re anecdotes.

I wish you best of luck if you are a Vegan.

You still have blood on your hands for your lifestyle. We all do. That is just a fact.

CC


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> Neither she or you should be on a public debating forum if you are so spineless that you cannot take a contrary view.
> 
> I don't think "couldn't hack it" is a hanging offence.
> 
> Foul language. No excuse for that.


Eh? Don't you dare turn this around on me for one second. I have not once said I don't accept what you do but you are not willing to answers question put to you that question your view of what you do. I accept some folk are vegan or vegetarian, I have no issue with that whatsoever and have never said otherwise. However you condone what I do so you can not accept my view and are unwilling to take a contrary view of your practices from anyone's side outside your path of thought.
I accept what consequences come with my diet, you turn a away, shut your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears. This all started because I gave a different view to the badger cull and a different view as to why I will not be signing it.

Are you going to answer the questions I highlighted were not answered?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

aw come on lets all play nice:frown:


----------



## Waterlily (Apr 18, 2010)

Finally getting past the essays (yawn), signed jan


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> aw come on lets all play nice:frown:


That's why I'm staying off this one. I couldn't play nice at the moment


----------



## Guest (Sep 29, 2012)

Knightofalbion said:


> Neither she or you should be on a public debating forum if you are so spineless that you cannot take a contrary view.
> 
> I don't think "couldn't hack it" is a hanging offence.
> 
> Foul language. No excuse for that.


Bellend knobrash motherhumper...

Just my tuppence worth


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

comfortcreature said:


> This is simply a tactic of attacking the messenger instead of addressing the message so lets get back to the point and the message.
> 
> no it isnt lol...its merely questioning the credibility of your info.
> 
> ...


i suppose even buddists could accidentally tread on a spider...so no i cant really disagree can i:arf: lol


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Just had a thought thinking about what has been said on this on this thread earlier, here it is:



Knightofalbion said:


> 4) Dairy farmers are only concerned about money,


So you consume Alpro products as you have stated many times and promoted their benefits etc. I see Alpro advertising in most media types so why would they advertise if they were not concerned about profits?

Why can I buy shares in Alpro if they are not all about making a profit? 
http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q?s=2628217.IR

Why is Bernard Deryckere who was the CEO of Alpro before it got bought out by Dean Foods Company listed on the Forbes website?
http://www.forbes.com/profile/bernard-deryckere/

Funnily enough, and you are absolutely going to love this, Dean Foods Company, who own Alpro remember, are second biggest supplier in the world of........? You've guessed it MILK!!!! They were sat at No.207 in the Fortune 1000 as of May 2012.

http://www.hoovers.com/company/Dean_Foods_Company/ctjhri-1.html

Just look at all of the intensive dairy farms they have under their belt killing thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of dairy calves each year - your very own words and argument against the dairy industry and you contribute to that by giving them money!!

http://www.deanfoods.com/brands.aspx

This just keeps getting better and better because you can't even switch to Provamel, why? Because they own that too.

Land O' Lakes which is also part of Dean Foods, the company you give money to remember, don't forget that, you fund their practices, has had a somewhat, shall we say naughty streak. Would you like to see what your money funds you ill-informed, hypocritical, self-righteous Somerset Warbler?

https://secure.peta.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=2515

For those that don't want to view how Alpro, sorry, Dean Foods treat their animals that buyers of Alpro products fund here is a brief description of what they found:

"In September of 2009, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) revealed footage from a five-month undercover investigation of a Pennsylvania dairy CAFO (Confined Animal Feeding Operation) that supplies milk to Dean Foods label, Land O' Lakes. Land O' Lakes is the largest seller of branded butter in the U.S. The footage documented abuse and neglect of cows and calves at the facility. Cows in pain and unable to stand were electro-shocked and stabbed with a pocket knife. Sick and injured cows were left to languish in their own waste for days and even weeks, without veterinary care. In one case, workers were told to wrap an elastic band around a cow's gangrenous, infected teat to "amputate" it. The cow deteriorated for 11 days before she died"

Hang around for just a little longer because there is more.

Horizon Organic (yes ORGANIC) are another instalment in the Dean Foods Co that you fund, are not all that clean either. Here's a snippet of what you might like to read (I'll post the link in a bit).

"On Horizon's dairy farms in the west, thousands of cows that never encounter a blade of grass spend their days confined to a fenced dry lot, eating (certified organic) grain and tethered to milking machines three times a day"

THREE TIMES A DAY!?!?! Is that not intensive or what? YOU FUND AND PROMOTE AND ENJOY THE PRODUCTS THAT FUND THIS

Do you way back when I mentioned about Alpro does not support "the action of aggressive land buy outs"? Well the company that owns Aplro does:

"Dean Foods has been dubbed the Microsoft of the dairy industry due to its aggressive expansion and competitor buy outs".

Holy Mother Nature would you look at this?!?!

You state that Dairy is cruel and blah blah blah well you can stick that right where the sun don't shine because check this out.

Dean Foods Co, the company YOU GIVE MONEY TO, uses your money to do things like this:

"Dean Foods has donated to the front group Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF). CCF runs attack campaigns against health, food safety, animal rights and animal welfare advocates."

Do you want to know what the CCF do with the money from Dean Foods Co that YOU GAVE THEM?

"The Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) (formerly called the "Guest Choice Network (GCN)") is a front group for the restaurant, alcohol, tobacco and other industries. *It runs media campaigns which oppose the efforts* of *scientists, doctors, health advocates, animal advocates, environmentalists and groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving, calling them "the Nanny Culture* -- the growing fraternity of food cops, health care enforcers, *anti-meat activists*, and meddling bureaucrats who 'know what's best for you.'"
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Center_for_Consumer_Freedom
I love that too much because it means the money you pay for your diet and how you morally choose to source your food actually pays for campaigns against what you try and promote. You are preaching against a brick wall and the wall is made up of your own money. :thumbup: :thumbup: :mad2: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Lets see what else Dean Foods Co do with your money that you give them safe in the knowledge that you do not have any blood on your hands. By the way, how's the Alpro Almond milk looking now?


Knightofalbion said:


> I just found a shop that sells Alpro almond milk this morning and I bought one! Not tried it yet, but it looks very good.





Knightofalbion said:


> Tried it! Can't really describe it, but absolutely delicious!


Yum yum yum!! Does it taste like the blood of a million horrifically treated, butchered and wasted animals?
Let us have a look at some other views on Alpro shall we now this has all come to the surface?


Knightofalbion said:


> The soya milk I use (UK market leader) is ethically sourced, GM-free and doesn't contribute to deforestation
> Alpro | FAQ





noushka05 said:


> i drink Alpro aswell, unsweetened is my favourite,


Hmmm. I don't think I need to say anything here do I?

You said you hike everywhere Knight OF Albion because cars kill badgers. 


Knightofalbion said:


> I walk/hike everywhere.


Well let's see where Dean Foods Co invests your money that you give them for their wonderfully life, cruelty and environment neutral produce shall we?
Exxonmobil - I wonder what they produce.

Exxon Mobil is the world's largest oil company.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/ExxonMobil

That's right, you pay for the petrol and diesel to be produced that actually runs badgers over. You've even got badger blood on your hands now!! How does that feel?


Knightofalbion said:


> Speaking from memory, 50,000 hedgehogs are killed by traffic every year. No species can sustain that rate of loss without a serious impact on population numbers.


Isn't that ironic? Oh but wait, let's not forget the hedgehogs.


Knightofalbion said:


> Hedgehog numbers are down EVERYWHERE. Man is the main cause with the motor car causing most fatalities.


Now if you don't believe any of this have a look at your Alpro prducts. On there somewhere will eb the Dean Foods Co name. So you now have the name of the source of that product don't you? Yes you do, I'll answer that one for you. Now read what you are funding:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Dean_Foods_Company#Political_contributions

Don't ever question the sourcing of my food ever again. You are by far more damaging to resources, wildlife and the planet than I will ever be.

Enjoy your next meal.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

rona said:


> That's why I'm staying off this one. I couldn't play nice at the moment


well i think we should all have a nice glass of vino an chill out a bit:scared:


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

comfortcreature said:


> You need to do your research better as now you are spewing untruths.
> 
> Many Jains partake in dairy products. Jain dietary laws do no require those procreating to be vegan (family people are permitted dairy) and there is no evidence of culture wide 'veganism' from the 6th century forward unless, of course, someone is stretching the meaning of 'veganism'.
> 
> CC


In the first place cows were/are scared in India and were treated as such. Even when they became old they weren't killed. So you can't draw a comparision with the dairy industry over here.

In any case, out of their reverence for life many Jains, since earliest times to the present day, have followed a diet exclusively of what they call "one-sensed" food i.e. plants.

Which, incidentally, is exactly the same as what is known as the First Blessing given to the Israelites. And that was a lot earlier than 6th century BC.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Yes, things have wandered. Sorry Janice!!!!!!


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> In the first place cows were/are scared in India and were treated as such. Even when they became old they weren't killed. So you can't draw a comparision with the dairy industry over here.


I did not draw any comparison. That is not the topic.

You held the Jains up as examples of centuries long vegans - and they are not.



noushka05 said:


> the difference is some 'kill' unintentionally or indirectly


That is the point. Do you believe indirect killing is better somehow?

Re gardens - you've never tilled through an ants nest or a gopher or mouse? How about the myriad of slugs and worms sliced through?

Re crops, which you say are mostly fed to livestock . . . that is where we get our human staples from, wheat, rice, oats etc . . . if we stopped livestock feeding then they'd mostly feed people.

The point being crops and the machinery used to work crops cause lots and lots of killing, much of it brutal.

I find that vegans and vegetarians are often unwilling to address that thought.



noushka05 said:


> i suppose even buddists could accidentally tread on a spider...so no i cant really disagree can i:arf: lol


Many Buddhists and monks eat meat and partake in dairy - they just can't kill it themselves or have it killed for them.

http://vegetarianstar.com/2010/07/2...ing-meat-not-always-against-monks-principles/

CC


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Team Badger e-petition update:

136,900...


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> Just had a thought thinking about what has been said on this on this thread earlier, here it is:
> 
> So you consume Alpro products as you have stated many times and promoted their benefits etc. I see Alpro advertising in most media types so why would they advertise if they were not concerned about profits?
> 
> ...


 im disgusted tbh

can you find any dirt on Provamel Hutch? their soya is lovely and ethically sourced.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> well i think we should all have a nice glass of vino an chill out a bit:scared:


Not now. Hutch has just educated a lot of people :thumbup:


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

jon bda said:


> Bellend knobrash motherhumper...
> 
> Just my tuppence worth


I'm googling away at that and still can't figure it out!

CC


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> im disgusted tbh
> 
> can you find any dirt on Provamel Hutch? their soya is lovely and ethically sourced.


From the last post Noushka:

"This just keeps getting better and better because you can't even switch to Provamel, why? Because they own that too."

Dean Foods Co own Provamel too.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

comfortcreature said:


> I'm googling away at that and still can't figure it out!
> 
> CC


Urban Dictionary: bellend

Urban Dictionary: nobrash

Urban Dictionary: mother humper


----------



## Guest (Sep 29, 2012)

comfortcreature said:


> I'm googling away at that and still can't figure it out!
> 
> CC


I'm so sorry you live in Canada..i'll try and find a translation...


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

LOL. Thx guys. Teaching my sons some new words today. 

CC


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

*OF COURSE IT IS!!*


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Waterlily said:


> Finally getting past the essays (yawn), signed jan


Essays?! Almost dissertations, sometimes bordering on novels


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

comfortcreature said:


> I did not draw any comparison. That is not the topic.
> 
> You held the Jains up as examples of centuries long vegans - and they are not.
> 
> ...


i meant the other monks that dont


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> From the last post Noushka:
> 
> "This just keeps getting better and better because you can't even switch to Provamel, why? Because they own that too."
> 
> Dean Foods Co own Provamel too.


well i still wont touch dairy, i'll just have to do a bit of reseach and find something ethical i feel comfortable drinking:mad2:

looks like green tea with lemon till i do lol


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> well i still wont touch dairy, i'll just have to do a bit of reseach and find something ethical i feel comfortable drinking:mad2:
> 
> looks like green tea with lemon till i do lol


I hope you do Noushka, the whole "investigate where your food comes from and don't just buy for convenience" was my whole ethos on this debate and it is how I was raised from year dot to think about food and how it relates to the world around me.

There are plenty of products out there that are fair to everything in the bigger picture. Good luck.


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

> That is the point. Do you believe indirect killing is better somehow?





noushka05 said:


> not really sure what you mean?,


It is a direct question. Do you believe indirect killing is better than being directly involved in killing?

I think you answered the question here though.



noushka05 said:


> . . . well im not, im sad to think that animals might die indirectly so i can eat, *but on the other hand i know im not consciously contributing to more animals deaths *because i choose not to eat meat, and by not eating it..i know that im doing the single most benefical thing that i can do for the planet.


I can't agree with you - at all and I have made my choices as to which products I believe are the most fair to consume. We don't have to agree though.

CC


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> I hope you do Noushka, the whole "investigate where your food comes from and don't just buy for convenience" was my whole ethos on this debate and it is how I was raised from year dot to think about food and how it relates to the world around me.
> 
> There are plenty of products out there that are fair to everything in the bigger picture. Good luck.


god sake! as if reading labels wasnt enough ive now got to investigate everything on the net aswell! :yikes:

so do you research on the net every single product you have to buy then Hutch?. I trusted that Alpro were an ethical product and though the product itself is...the company isnt....i bet thats true of practically every flippin product going...wonder if Whole earth are badduns aswell?:scared:



comfortcreature said:


> It is a direct question. Do you believe indirect killing is better than being directly involved in killing?
> 
> I think you answered the question here though.
> 
> ...


i think the most important question has to be which has the greatest impact on the environment and impacts on the most animals lives??, ...as livestock farming involves by far the most use of land... so more indirect killings plus the direct killings.. plus has the biggest detrimental impact on the environment that any other one thing( thats even according to the UN)...then its obvious to me which has the greatest negative impact on everything.

but no we dont have to agree CC...& we usually dont


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> god sake! as if reading labels wasnt enough ive now got to investigate everything on the net aswell! :yikes:
> 
> so do you research on the net every single product you have to buy then Hutch?. I trusted that Alpro were an ethical product and though the product itself is...the company isnt....*i bet thats true of practically every flippin product going.*..wonder if Whole earth are badduns aswell?:scared:
> 
> ...


It scares me how many products are owned by or financially involved with corporations affiliated with unethical practice in some form or other. It's very hard to make ethical choices, I made the decision to do the best I can, in baby steps, though it's still not as good as I'd like in an ideal world.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> so do you research on the net every single product you have to buy then Hutch?. I trusted that Alpro were an ethical product and though the product itself is...the company isnt....i bet thats true of practically every flippin product going...wonder if Whole earth are badduns aswell?:scared:


I can see my products in fields Noushka (have you not been listening ) but I use my Gardener's World Calendar book to tell me what veg is in season and if you ask a local green grocer if their produce is British they should be able to tell you. Failing that go to farmer's markets, farm shops, allotments (folk always grow too much) or even if you truly want to be magical and get a massive hug from planet earth (and me) you can land share :

River Cottage - Landshare

I am sorry to say that it does involve more work than just nipping to the local poopermarket but just thing of the connections you make and the community you create :thumbup:

With regards to "white products" (not being racist, it's just what I call them) such as washing powders, toothpaste, cleaning products you just have to dig around. You don't use them very often (or you shouldn't be - one wash with powder and the next without as it washes the residue of the powder from the last wash in anyway and people still stand near me) so you don't consume them on a massive scale.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

simplysardonic said:


> It scares me how many products are owned by or financially involved with corporations affiliated with unethical practice in some form or other. It's very hard to make ethical choices, I made the decision to do the best I can, in baby steps, though it's still not as good as I'd like in an ideal world.


aint that the truth! its a flippin mine field int it

& same here SS, i try to live as ethically as possible, im by no means perfect but i try my best xx


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> I can see my products in fields Noushka (have you not been listening ) but I use my Gardener's World Calendar book to tell me what veg is in season and if you ask a local green grocer if their produce is British they should be able to tell you. Failing that go to farmer's markets, farm shops, allotments (folk always grow too much) or even if you truly want to be magical and get a massive hug from planet earth (and me) you can land share :
> 
> River Cottage - Landshare
> 
> ...


yes intently:aureola: lol...but you surely must buy some tinned stuff?

I already get a lot of produce from off of various family members allotments, particularly this time of year...infact if i see another runner bean im going to scream! lol (not really it'll get blanched and frozen with the rest of em lol), got loads of apples, pear and plums aswell, plus a never ending supply of free range organic chicken and banty eggs.

this is my Dad-in-laws allotment, hes got chickens aswell, behind the gate on the bottom pic, but they are always safely locked away in the coop when the huskies visit.



















i buy all my 'white products lol from the co-op because theyre BUAV approved.

,


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> In the first place cows were/are scared in India and were treated as such. Even when they became old they weren't killed. *So you can't draw a comparision with the dairy industry over here.*


But it is perfectly fine for you to quote things relating to the American farming industry when discussing the UK farming industry?

Another hypocritical statement. You bring in the whole subject here:



Knightofalbion said:


> Ah yes, the Weston-Price diet, the quickest way to dietary induced cancer and heart disease.
> You couldn't hack the vegan diet.
> These people seem to be doing okay on it
> *And the Jains have been following the Sacred Path since the 6th century BC.
> Over 2,600 years!*


Get proved wrong not once but TWICE and from the Jains own website none the less here:



comfortcreature said:


> You need to do your research better as now you are spewing untruths.
> 
> Many Jains partake in dairy products. Jain dietary laws do no require those procreating to be vegan (family people are permitted dairy) and there is no evidence of culture wide 'veganism' from the 6th century forward unless, of course, someone is stretching the meaning of 'veganism'.
> 
> CC


aaaaaand here:



hutch6 said:


> Direct from Jainpedia - their own words about their own practices:
> 
> JAINpedia > Resources > Jainism FAQs
> 
> ...


And then use your by the by brush off comment :



Knightofalbion said:


> *So you can't draw a comparision with the dairy industry over here.*


Did you used to write answers for politicians? Bring in a subject to prove a point, get proven completely wrong so then pass the topic off with a dismissive remark which puts it in a totally different context altogether. Can you explain that one please.
You've still not answered all of my questions from here:

http://www.petforums.co.uk/general-chat/262087-stop-badger-cull-22.html#post1062310227

and here

http://www.petforums.co.uk/general-chat/262087-stop-badger-cull-22.html#post1062310228

Youve posted after them as well so you must have read them or did you not see them? I've put the links up just in case anyway.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> yes intently:aureola: lol...but you surely must buy some tinned stuff?
> ,


That is one heck of a set up!! :thumbup: :thumbup:

Why does he need so much grass though? Surely without so much grass he could....... I'm just kidding.

Looks magnificent.

I do buy tinned and jars of stuff but they are fair trade certified and checked 

I hope to knock it all on the head soon though and get rid of my garden as it is and make it more of a buffet. I too am not 100% squeaky clean, you can't be as everybody likes a convenience of some sort but as you said the better we try the better things will be for everything. You just have to off-set the best you can.

ETA: Holidays, meals at friend's houses, BBQs and restaurants etc. mess things up big time if you want to be really pedantic.


----------



## Guest (Sep 29, 2012)

I can't quote things on the comp for rebuttal but CC if you knew about religions, you'd know that the current major and troublesome, graspng religions of Christianity, Islam and Jewish faiths placed Man as a favoured species of their Gods. The vague comments of the wonders of the planet are subsumed by the major beliefs pushed, that the flora and fauna of the planet are there for Us to 'use' for our benefit. 

You may not have known the basis for the belief in your Rights, whether you are or are not a believer, but that religious base IS the basis of the Western and Eastern world's education system and values. Only with the rise of atheism, has that belief been challenged by a very good proportion of the population. Before the rise of atheism, you would have been stoned, burnt, drowned or tortured and/or murdered by the Church or it's government, or, as the social change grew, socially isolated, for such views. 

The early, small religions involved worship of the natural world, the veneration and guarding of it; a far more equal evaluation of man, and, HELLO! often gave women power and mystical importance. The further back you go, religion was really just an attempt to make sense of what was being experienced, and come up with causes, and build standing in communities, as the only one who can interpret nature.

The idea of someone, with the world in the dire state it is in, claiming we should now lift all wildlife protections, and let it all rip, given we have to 'interfere' to save species just astounds me. Within a decade, there would be only farmed animals left, and there are people here who find that acceptable???? The mentality of insisting that you have the right to shoot the last birds of prey because YOU don't like them. While your next door neighbour puts out poison for birds, because he doesn't like being woken by the dawn chorus? Won't happen? It will with your incredible, lunatic ideal.

If you knew your history, the right wing, all bets are off, capitalist mentality, where those with no conscience, no compassion. and all power, become richer and richer, result in civil revolution and huge violence... (The Russian and French Revolution, and many more examples). Money does not and never has 'trickled' down to the masses. Huge power wielded by very few, NEVER fails to bring about major social unrest, over time. Similarly, countries that go down the path of a democratic but strongly egalitarian and socially protective system have the most stable and content of populations.


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

househens said:


> I can't quote things on the comp for rebuttal but CC if you knew about religions, you'd know that the current major and troublesome, graspng religions of Christianity, Islam and Jewish faiths placed Man as a favoured species of their Gods. The vague comments of the wonders of the planet are subsumed by the major beliefs pushed, that the flora and fauna of the planet are there for Us to 'use' for our benefit.
> 
> You may not have known the basis for the belief in your Rights, whether you are or are not a believer, but that religious base IS the basis of the Western and Eastern world's education system and values. Only with the rise of atheism, has that belief been challenged by a very good proportion of the population. Before the rise of atheism, you would have been stoned, burnt, drowned or tortured and/or murdered by the Church or it's government, or, as the social change grew, socially isolated, for such views.
> 
> ...


Househens I've been around a long time and have full knowledge of religions and the basis for them. I have a left wing father and a left wing son (who is an atheist). I had a deeply religious mother. I know political history, the basis of left and right ideologies and all the ones in between. I worked where I had to be part of a union for years and I own a small business. I have a sister that is a millionaire many times over through her hard work (I have a large family) and another heavily involved in unions. I have another that has been an atheist, then a Buddhist, and is now born again and she likes to tell me I won't ever go to heaven. My OH has a Political Science major with a minor in Theology. I put him through school. He is also agnostic. Believe me, political and religious discussion is not foreign to me.

I also have seen alarmism about numerous topics up the ying yang for more years than I care to comment on and was around to comfort my lunatic sister who thought we were all going to freeze to death when that was the uproar in the 70s.

I am scientifically/mathematically brained. I don't do emotionalism and alarmism very well. I don't do black/white polarized scenarios well either. I don't 'box' people in and pit camps of people against others. We all think individually.

I disagree with much of what you say in your post above. I find much of it makes sweeping generalizations and is polarized. I would say it is poorly researched in its nature and wrong in its conclusions. As an example - when I say I am a right wing thinker you leap to me thinking I have the right to shoot the last bird of prey and that we should lift all wildlife protections? LOL

I probably do agree on some points, but there is too much there to get involved in on this thread.

What it does show is that we come from totally differing points of view, and where you suggest that must come from a religious basis I will continue to disagree. It probably has more to do with how we view things and how we react to life irrespective of any religious basis.

CC


----------



## tashax (Jun 25, 2011)

This has now got way to technical for my brain, so im now just sitting here going yep i understand you all :yesnod:


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> That is one heck of a set up!! :thumbup: :thumbup:
> 
> Why does he need so much grass though? Surely without so much grass he could....... I'm just kidding.
> 
> ...


lol i love it!...especially That grass, its hard to appreciate how big it is on those pics, but its huge!..& its surrounded by trees and bushes with rough untouched patches..lots of nettles! lol so its a haven for wildlife aswell

i'd love to be totally self sufficient aswell, but im not sure how to grow lentils or quinoa lol...so i'll just have to continue doing the best i can hey.

holidays and eating out do make it extra hard...so i think it probably best you dont go anymore.



couple or 3 more pics lol :/


----------



## Guest (Sep 29, 2012)

CC ALWAYS it's about YOU. What a picture you build. 

My whole point IS under that system, YOU may simply act on your your pet hates/unconcern but under that regime, so will everyone else, effecting things you enjoy. I was giving examples. 

What a bleak world you inhabit. I'll have to go back and find out if it was even you that made the suggestion. I only referred to it in that post, as I can't do a print out to address points some 5 pages back, nor do I know how to lift text from others, to argue point by point.

You claim you took 8 years to conceive after a vegan/vegetarian lifestyle, but given you shrug off facts or say you know and then clearly ignore the proof, I would say you were lookng to blame that. That pattern of delayed pregnancy is CLASSIC polycystic ovary pattern childbearing. Often women believe they are infertile and take no precautions, only to conceive, as the usual pattern of child bearing ends. With the pattern of political and religious belief in your family, it sounds reactionary, and based more on who alliances are with, as the psychological leaders make their choices.

I am sorry to read of the heartbreak of the loss of history, tradition, pride and wealth but am astounded by a personal rant of hutch something about bringing soil into a place of work, and being shut down or sent home for 6 months, and this is an unspeakable act? If it is important that something be sterile, WHY wasn't there a locker area, at the entrance, to change shoes and clothes? If that important, wear those white sterile booted and hooded boiler suits worn, as is done in similar situations? Or just the sterile booties over shoes, if not THAT sterile. Who was running the place?? As to sparrows effecting the running of the building, I can only say if CC and buddies hadn't been so unmindful of the state of a British icon bird, it wouldn't have been so at risk to NEED protection. It's very hard to actually work out what was happening. Are we talking medical equipment tiny miniaturised somethings. Clearly some sort of authority was freaking out.


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

househens said:


> CC ALWAYS it's about YOU. What a picture you build. .


This is what you wrote.



> Rather than the brutish, right wing attitude of kill/victimise the non profitable/native non edible, in a religious based belief system that tells us that somehow we, as a species, are entitled to destroy species and whole eco systems, for an easy life, if we want to help badgers and our own species, we should look at what we are doing to the planet, the badgers a prime example, most importantly, limit the number of children per family. Our species is the most grasping, greedy, hoarding, destructive on this planet.


You made a post stating my commonly held right wing stances (grouping right wingers all together as entitled killers) came from a religious basis and then patronisingly claim I must not realise that or understand the basis of my own thinking. I disagree and continue to. Of course I am going to reply about ME. I won't speak for others. If others have right based thinking due to their own religious influences, that is for them to speak to, not me.



> My whole point IS under that system, YOU may simply act on your your pet hates/unconcern but under that regime, so will everyone else, effecting things you enjoy. I was giving examples.


Which system are you referring to? Have you made the leap in believing that because I am a right wing thinker that that means I solely support a far right wing libertarian system in every aspect and on every topic? You shouldn't have if you did.



> What a bleak world you inhabit.


Amazing conclusions you do draw. Where is that one from?



househens said:


> You claim you took 8 years to conceive after a vegan/vegetarian lifestyle, .


I did take 8 years to conceive after a vegan lifestyle and the physical fallout which determined I should end that lifestyle.



househens said:


> but given you shrug off facts or say you know and then clearly ignore the proof, I would say you were lookng to blame that..


Which facts and which proof have you presented that I have shrugged off? I've read a lot of opinion but much that is very lacking in proof and facts. Point out the proof and facts presented that I have "shrugged off" and if you cannot (and you can't) then stop with the grand-stand accusations on nothing.



househens said:


> That pattern of delayed pregnancy is CLASSIC polycystic ovary pattern childbearing. Often women believe they are infertile and take no precautions, only to conceive, as the usual pattern of child bearing ends. With the pattern of political and religious belief in your family, it sounds reactionary, and based more on who alliances are with, as the psychological leaders make their choices.


Now you are my doctor - and psychiatrist - and have diagnosed sight unseen? Wow. Just wow. Just a bit of arrogance in that.

Have you jumped to the conclusion that that the intention of my posts was to condemn veganism by any chance? If so, you shouldn't have.

-------------------



househens said:


> I am sorry to read of the heartbreak of the loss of history, tradition, pride and wealth but am astounded by a personal rant of hutch something about bringing soil into a place of work, and being shut down or sent home for 6 months, and this is an unspeakable act? . . .


This is nothing I have spoken of . . . you are mixing up posters and what each has said here.

------------------

A link back in case you can't find posts - http://www.petforums.co.uk/general-chat/262087-stop-badger-cull-21.html#post1062309348 - http://www.petforums.co.uk/general-chat/262087-stop-badger-cull-22.html#post1062310423

This golden post is where you assume I must not have knowledge or understanding of the topics discussed and to which, apparently, I wasn't supposed to respond about ME and what I might know.



> I can't quote things on the comp for rebuttal but CC *if you knew about religions*, you'd know that the current major and troublesome, graspng religions of Christianity, Islam and Jewish faiths placed Man as a favoured species of their Gods. The vague comments of the wonders of the planet are subsumed by the major beliefs pushed, that the flora and fauna of the planet are there for Us to 'use' for our benefit. . .


http://www.petforums.co.uk/general-chat/262087-stop-badger-cull-26.html#post1062311382

CC


----------



## Guest (Sep 30, 2012)

CC: It is quite clear you cherry pick what you want to consider as causative. If your inablilty to conceive was due to vegan diet, did you have a doctor that even considered pcos? Or was he/she an anti vegan doctor who jumped on that and did not investigate further? Very few doctors approved of a vegetarian/vegan diet, 20/30 years ago. Even more reacted with horror at the idea of a vegan pregnancy. It IS very hard to get a strict vegan diet balanced and supplying everything, and most doctors, many, even now, believe most people don't have the knowledge and discipline to carry it off. I might add that a very large number of doctors smoked heavily, 30 years ago.

I'm not arrogant but stating facts. I know well, if you go back 20/30 years, IF you had a young, really up to date doctor, you MAY have been told you were pcos, and told you would be infertile. If going back 40, no one had a clue. If you had an older doctor, who didn't keep up to date, they would look for any other reason to blame, and many ddn't even KNOW the wide symptoms of pcos. In fact, on a vegan diet, you would have been on one of the best diets to lessen the symptoms of pcos, to diagnose that. If you were underweight, the increase in weight can lift fertility, as can a decrease in weight if over weight. I acknowledge that, but if underweight and/or the usual thin vegan, you would be very unlikely to show pcos symptoms OR show some of the SAME symptoms pcos display. The very thin anorexic can also show hormonal problems similar to pcos, like facial hair, tho it is usually very light down. Sorry if I an boring you with facts, just trying to share my arrogance.

Only recently, they have released data that shows that, in fact, pcos women mostly have as many children, as non pcos women, given most middle class women have 1 or 2, it's just that theirs are usually completely unexpected and as they approach 40 and even over. In fact, there are usually a number of infertile women, in the background of pcos famly trees, miraculously producing late babies, long before pcos was known about. If your doctor was older and smug and didn't keep up to date, he may not have had a clue. WAS pcos mentioned? Honestly? Did you get the high tech scans to prove it wasn't? Ummm no...?

Why is my knowledge arrogance, whilst yours is pure? Scientists can also be obsessive about proving their theories and refusing to countenance disproving evidence. They are after all, only humans and often unaware of the influence of their background. To not know and understand it, is to skew your analysis.

ALL our education, in the Brit Com and America has a basis in Judao/Christian beliefs. If you don't comprehend that, you are starting askew, and unaware. Not just facts, but the choice of facts, and the interpretation of them, the chosen attitude to TEACHING how we consider info. The very texts we are given to read. Our attitude to wilderness, to clearing forests, etc. So if you weren't, where did you school?

If you did not have the knowledge or discipline to achieve the extra calcium, etc, (your vegan diet not known), then yes, I guess you were told to get off it, fast. You probably did muck your body up. You took 8 years to conceive.FULL STOP, at this point, unless you can completely list all the testing done, and even then, there are probably more reasons we still don't know.

It MAY be you feel better to blame diet than feel that your body may have had a genetically caused problem. With the psychology of a proud right wing personality, it would be unpleasant to not see yourself as not the strongest of the strong, in every way, held back by bleeding hearts.

Not psychiatrist. Terminology, Scientific. I understand you dislike the use of psychology. Even more, that it might be used to understand your mindset. They are only posits. As only information volunteered can be used, I acknowledge that. 

In fact, I think it wasn't even you that initially suggested the lifting of all protection of wildlife , tho you then claimed it was yours to defend.

As to being mathematical by nature, I'd certainly agree to an accountants romantic view of life.

You volunteered a view of family that is extremely polar, (north/south) in view, which points to a strong reactive force towards primary influence family members. What do you want me to do? Not analytically think?

The system I refer to is the suggestion around page 20/22? that protecting wildlife is interfering and that ALL protections on wildlife be lifted. Protected species, woodlands, the lot.


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

househens said:


> CC: It is quite clear you cherry pick what you want to consider as causative. ?


Show me where.



househens said:


> If your inablilty to conceive was due to vegan diet, did you have a doctor that even considered pcos? Or was he/she an anti vegan doctor who jumped on that and did not investigate further? Very few doctors approved of a vegetarian/vegan diet, 20/30 years ago. Even more reacted with horror at the idea of a vegan pregnancy. It IS very hard to get a strict vegan diet balanced and supplying everything, and most doctors, many, even now, believe most people don't have the knowledge and discipline to carry it off. I might add that a very large number of doctors smoked heavily, 30 years ago.?


Thank you for acknowledging the difficulties inherent in undertaking a vegan diet. There are even more difficulties associated when you are one with food allergies and genetic weaknesses unfound until you enter into it. I'll quote from above.



comfortcreature said:


> ]Now you are my doctor - and psychiatrist - and have diagnosed sight unseen? Wow. Just wow. Just a bit of arrogance in that.
> 
> Have you jumped to the conclusion that that the intention of my posts was to condemn veganism by any chance? If so, you shouldn't have.





househens said:


> Why is my knowledge arrogance, whilst yours is pure?


Where have I stated your knowledge is arrogance?

It is your assumptions of my life and my reasoning and my knowledge (or assumed lack there-of), my illnesses and statement of those assumptions as fact that are.



househens said:


> Scientists can also be obsessive about proving their theories and refusing to countenance disproving evidence. They are after all, only humans and often unaware of the influence of their background. To not know and understand it, is to skew your analysis.
> 
> ALL our education, in the Brit Com and America has a basis in Judao/Christian beliefs. If you don't comprehend that, you are starting askew, and unaware.


. . . And of course I'd never considered this and how it effects prior. . . couldn't possibly have included the comprehension of that in my conclusions . . . and you are more aware! 



househens said:


> Not psychiatrist. Terminology, Scientific. I understand you dislike the use of psychology.


You are kidding now right? Where does that understanding come from? (it is a wrong one, BTW)



househens said:


> In fact, I think it wasn't even you that initially suggested the lifting of all protection of wildlife , tho you then claimed it was yours to defend.


Not that I am aware of. Again, show me where.



> You volunteered a view of family that is extremely polar, (north/south) in view, which points to a strong reactive force towards primary influence family members. What do you want me to do? Not analytically think?


No I did not. We have left wing thinkers in the family and right as well. We have atheists and those that are religious and those that are agnostic which makes for incredible discussion, which we keep civil because for the most part we RESPECT each other's opinions and stances and don't make ASSUMPTIONS.

If it hasn't occured to you left and right thinking sit on a spectrum. Just barely left of center is left wing. Just barely right of center is right wing. Those are not polarised places and often there is overlap to the other depending on the issue being addressed. They have more in common than each end would have with the middle.

The fact that you would assume 'extremely polar' when I say right or left is telling.



househens said:


> What do you want me to do? Not analytically think?


Thinking is just fine. Assuming you know my thought processes and lifelong experiences and observations and how I might have come to right wing thinking, what that includes and the influences in my life and my reasoning and stating your assumptions as fact around that is a totally different story.



househens said:


> The system I refer to is the suggestion around page 20/22? that protecting wildlife is interfering and that ALL protections on wildlife be lifted. Protected species, woodlands, the lot.


Thank you. Why did you conclude that is a belief I support?

-----------------------------------------------

Still awaiting the answers to these questions I posted above.-
http://www.petforums.co.uk/general-chat/262087-stop-badger-cull-27.html#post1062311650



> > What a bleak world you inhabit.
> 
> 
> Amazing conclusions you do draw. Where is that one from?





> Which facts and which proof have you presented that I have shrugged off?





> Have you jumped to the conclusion that that the intention of my posts was to condemn veganism by any chance?


CC


----------



## Guest (Sep 30, 2012)

Your statement that you were unable to conceive because of your vegan diet. Were you tested for pcos? was it even a suggestion? How do you know it was the vegan diet, IF you weren't tested for pcos? Or half a dozen other possibilities not tested for, by many doctors, 20/30 years ago. You have latched onto blaming a vegan diet. NOW you add you have food allergies and genetic weaknesses that were exposed by a vegan diet not balanced because of your allergies? So it wasn't the diet to blame, but your inability to eat it as recommended. Making blanket statements about vegan diets preventing your pregnancy IS misleading. That is like me saying McDonalds hamburgers prevented me from getting pregnant and didn't mention it was because I ate 20 a day. (I use that as an example, not a snippet of my autobiography. I once took one bite from someone elses big mac, and it was AWFUL, and I wasn't [clearly], vegetarian at the time). If Mac's had 1000000 customers like me, they would have been bankrupted a week after they opened. Won't go near the place.

I can't go into the cherry picking, as I haven't time, rhere's so much.

I addressed the comment on lifting all protections for wildlife, but could not refer back, whilst typing, to whom said it. It wasn't your comment, yet you picked it up and ran with it. Normally, if something is not what we agree with, we don't defend it, and will actually protest at the implication that we do agree with it. You did neither. So...

I believe you refuted you were influenced by the background of religion in anglo backgrounds amongst others, yet you have the classic Victorian mentality, completely enveloped in this Earth as Personal Property, 'if I can't see how I can use it, it has no justification', mentality.

I can't go on. I am fascinated by such psyches. I long to see how huge, generous, sharing and compassionate psyches and their opposites evolve, the nature/nurture. I'm fascinated to see a psyche that demands more, even when it involves deliberate death and suffering, even on a crack pot unproven theory, and what causes it. I must admit, the dichotomy of siblings and generations in your family, really intrigues, but that is me, being sidetracked by my psych. interests and has nothing to do with badger culls. I am stuck here with 2 ill dogs, and explains trying to take my mind from what is going on, but I feel like you step over the very points made, to ask me where I made my point. If there isn't a horrified revolt at the CONCEPT of slaughtering 70% of a Brit species, for an incredibly crackpot theory, we won't have common ground.

I'm depressed enough over my dogs. I may have a dead dog in the coming days or weeks. Altho I long to understand where the first answer, 'Kill' thinking arises, I want to find loving, generous, spontaneously kind and compassionate psyches for those who just happen to share this polluted and desecrated planet, and spend time with them, for a while.


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

househens said:


> Your statement that you were unable to conceive because of your vegan diet. .


That was not my statement. The exact statement and comprehension of it are important. It was also followed by the explanation of "_Probably a family thing but some of our bodies just can't do vegan."_ (which was the point) - no attempt to mislead that the statement was about anybody but me and my niece. - http://www.petforums.co.uk/general-chat/262087-stop-badger-cull-21.html#post1062309348



househens said:


> I addressed the comment on lifting all protections for wildlife, but could not refer back, whilst typing, to whom said it. It wasn't your comment, yet you picked it up and ran with it. .


No, I did not. I made a related statement that obviously brought you that ASSUMPTION but I did not pick anything up and run with it.



househens said:


> Normally, if something is not what we agree with, we don't defend it, and will actually protest at the implication that we do agree with it. You did neither. So...


. . . .you assumed a defense which I did not give and ran with another assumption after that.



househens said:


> I believe you refuted you were influenced by the background of religion in anglo backgrounds amongst others,


I did not. I stated they are not the driving factor in my right ring stance on many things. That is a far cry from refuting there is influence.



househens said:


> yet you have the classic Victorian mentality, completely enveloped in this Earth as Personal Property, 'if I can't see how I can use it, it has no justification', mentality.


You think so? . . . again on no statement I've made and on no facts . . . assumption and arrogance. You have no clue.



househens said:


> I can't go on. I am fascinated by such psyches.


Imagined and assumed psyches that you have made up. Give you points for a grand imagination here.



househens said:


> I am stuck here with 2 ill dogs, and explains trying to take my mind from what is going on, but I feel like you step over the very points made, to ask me where I made my point..


Of course I will if your points are made with accusations about me and are miss statements about what I believe made from nothing but imagination.



househens said:


> If there isn't a horrified revolt at the CONCEPT of slaughtering 70% of a Brit species, for an incredibly crackpot theory, we won't have common ground. .


You might have missed where I said I have not read enough on the cull to comment or decide.



househens said:


> I'm depressed enough over my dogs. I may have a dead dog in the coming days or weeks. Altho I long to understand where the first answer, 'Kill' thinking arises, I want to find loving, generous, spontaneously kind and compassionate psyches for those who just happen to share this polluted and desecrated planet, and spend time with them, for a while.


So sorry you are in this position. It is always a terrible time anticipating the impending loss of a beloved one. My wishes are for the very best in these last days.

CC


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> 1) But it is perfectly fine for you to quote things relating to the American farming industry when discussing the UK farming industry?
> 
> Another hypocritical statement. You bring in the whole subject here:
> 
> ...


1) It isn't in the least bit hypocritical. In India the cows are revered. They live a natural life and they die a natural death. They aren't killed when they get old.
Whereas the UK dairy industry is the same as the US dairy industry, hugely wasteful in precious resources and the cows live a wholly unnatural life in endless cycle of exploitation and killing.

2) Not so. The word vegan wasn't devised till 1944, so you'll not find it in any literature, but from the earliest days of Jainism through the centuries, many Jains interpreted the doctrine of Ahimsa to its full extent and followed a purely plant-based diet, eating only what they called 'one sensed' foods.
Mahahtma Gandhi was heavily influenced by the Jains and their Ahimsa philosophy. He adopted a plant-based diet, inspired by their example.
http://www.somacon.com/p118.php

3) You mean that huge post that must have taken you all afternoon to put together? I didn't bother to read it.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

A small bit of good news, from a most unexpected source

BBC News - Forest of Dean District Council votes to ban badger cull


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

m



comfortcreature said:


> I'll stop right there to address this.
> 
> If ants were at the top of the heap do you believe that planet would be any better off?
> 
> ...


like the slaughter or Canadas seal pups & the extermination of the wolves across America.. the badger cull is also politically motivated!.. unprincipled,immoral governments pandering to those with a vested interest! :mad2:


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Knightofalbion said:


> The price of milk...
> 
> End Factory Farming


Time to stop milking it!


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Knightofalbion said:


> Embarrassing Doctor!
> 
> Time to stop milking it - Health & Beauty - Life & Style - Evening Standard


Time to stop milking it!


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Knightofalbion said:


> Dairy consumption and ovarian cancer
> 
> Cancer Active -


Important information....


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Knightofalbion said:


> Dairy consumption and hormonal cancers
> 
> Jane Plant


Important information


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

The Team Badger e-petition is currently 137,600+

The petition closes in a weeks time. Hopefully we'll reach 150,000 or with a bit of luck 160,000, either way it will be a fantastic achievement.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> 1) It isn't in the least bit hypocritical. In India the cows are revered. They live a natural life and they die a natural death. They aren't killed when they get old.
> Whereas the UK dairy industry is the same as the US dairy industry, hugely wasteful in precious resources and the cows live a wholly unnatural life in endless cycle of exploitation and killing.
> 
> 2) Not so. The word vegan wasn't devised till 1944, so you'll not find it in any literature, but from the earliest days of Jainism through the centuries, many Jains interpreted the doctrine of Ahimsa to its full extent and followed a purely plant-based diet, eating only what they called 'one sensed' foods.
> ...


Like your listing of things

1) You clearly didn't understand my post at all but then again you've done that right throughout this thread or maybe you did understand my post and you do your usually diversionary tactics to pass the issue off the other way.

Here is a brief summary:

It is you that brings up various bits that have nothing to do to with the subject (American farming figures when discussing UK farming, Jains when stating they follow a strict vegan diet) which leads to it being taking off topic and then as soon as you are proved incorrect in your observations you pass it off.
You have accused me of taking things off topic because to do so is a clear case in point that I had "lost". 
It was you that came out with "You couldn't hack the vegan diet" to someone who was posting it made their family ill and then you tried to swing it round that I was out of order for hyphenating a swear word and I don't belong on public discussion forums. I have carried out my side of the discussion with you in a formal manner from start to finish. I have answered your questions Knight Of Albion, extend me the same courtesy and answer the questions I have put to you.

2) See point 1 with regards to 1944 - is that when modern farming techniques came in?

3) It took about 20mins to put together but I guess as it is questions that counter your way of life then they aren't worth reading or answering because your view on things is the only way, none of that refusing of another view creeping in their is their.

I think you will agree Knight OF Albion I have been pretty open and honest about what I eat, why I eat it and this, I knew it would, has left it wide open to questions from the vegan, vegetarian and even just those that can't face where food comes and I have answered those questions. You have not answered any of the questions put to you which gives me (and I am sure a few others) a very strong impression of someone who likes to sit behind a keyboard and preach but away from that keyboard their morals and justifications for their actions are very different. Now IF that is you and that is what you do then I consider that troll but you make it very clear for everyone to see, even you "gang" of "Likers" and "Wow, that was such a wonderful post" strokers that have something to hide. You are very quick to question other's choices and actions but you can't even face to answer question on your own.
If you even cared about the planet, your local area you would have read it as there is lots of info about your area in there I am willing to bet my house on you not knowing about.

Did you read my big long post about Alpro and it's "ethically" sourced Soya that you buy and consume?


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

househens said:


> In fact, I think it wasn't even you that initially suggested the lifting of all protection of wildlife , tho you then claimed it was yours to defend.


That was me in response to this:



takerbabe said:


> What gives man the right to seriously interfere with wildlife? I think if it goes to far, the wildlife will eventually turn on man. This world belongs to the animals as much as it belongs to us.





hutch6 said:


> Protecting species and habitat IS INTERFERING in order to try and rectify the interence and damage that took place beforehand so shall we stop that and say goodbye to hundreds of wild species so the only ones left are in zoos or are forced to perform?
> What pets do you enjoy? Were they not decended from a wild creature? Release them and cure your guilty conscience.
> 
> Let's drop all of the world wide legislation, policies, protection acts, restrictions, quotas, national parks, sanctuaries, wildlife rescue centres, non-intrusion zones, animal protection societies and charities and just hope that it sorts itself out again. The only way you'll stop man interferring is if you take man out of the equation altogether and that way nature can start to reastablish footholds again.
> ETA: Removed the last bit as it was a bit harsh, I apologise.





househens said:


> If there isn't a horrified revolt at the CONCEPT of slaughtering 70% of a Brit species, for an incredibly crackpot theory, we won't have common ground.


If it was 70% of the entire UK population I'd be out stood in front of rifles, which I doubt some on here would do, but it is 70% of a small area of the UK.

That opens it up to - "It is still 1000s!" Well yes it is but as I have said before numerous anti-cull petitions have been signed and submitted and discounted, I signed two of them, but it is going ahead regardless.

If you want to stop the cull then go out in the dead of night in these areas and listen for the "shtuck" noise of a silenced shot, walk towards it screaming, banging a drum, set off fireworks or stand on the bait stations. Then you just need to keep doing that every night for the next four years.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Knightofalbion said:


> 1) It isn't in the least bit hypocritical. In India the cows are revered. They live a natural life and they die a natural death. They aren't killed when they get old.
> *Whereas the UK dairy industry is the same as the US dairy industry, hugely wasteful in precious resources and the cows live a wholly unnatural life in endless cycle of exploitation and killing.*
> 
> 2) Not so. The word vegan wasn't devised till 1944, so you'll not find it in any literature, but from the earliest days of Jainism through the centuries, many Jains interpreted the doctrine of Ahimsa to its full extent and followed a purely plant-based diet, eating only what they called 'one sensed' foods.
> ...


But our farmers don't want to treat their cows like that generally. 
They are being forced into that or bankruptcy by consumers,supermarkets and government 

Compassion in World Farming - SOS Dairy

We also have some pretty special chefs fighting for animal welfare
Jimmy and the Giant Supermarket - Features - Why Buy Rosé Veal? - Channel 4

First chickens, then pigs, now Jamie and Hugh are saving cows by calling for supermarket boycott on dairy - Telegraph

Hugh's Chicken Run - Channel 4

BBC News - Controversy continues over 'mega' pig farm at Foston

Jamie Saves Our Bacon | Oliver's Pig Pens | Channel 4 - YouTube

Jamie Saves Our Bacon | No Profit For Pork | Channel 4 - YouTube

They actually get off their arses and do something


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> Time to stop milking it!





Knightofalbion said:


> Time to stop milking it!





Knightofalbion said:


> Important information....





Knightofalbion said:


> Important information


Yes, here is some information on an alternative to milk and like Knight of Albion says, it is very important information:

http://www.petforums.co.uk/general-chat/262087-stop-badger-cull-24.html#post1062310695

Enjoy your alternative to milk! Yum yum yum!!


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Knightofalbion said:


> 3) You mean that huge post that must have taken you all afternoon to put together? I didn't bother to read it.


You really really need to go and read that post :lol::lol::lol:

By not doing so, you have lost all credibility and look like a totally ignorant idiot.

Go educate yourself


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Ok............ got to leave this thread now


----------



## alan g a (Feb 23, 2011)

If we are talking about the possible health risk of the food we consume then we may as well just starve. EVERYTHING we eat is a potential health risk.
Also, what about all the other wild animals out there.
Bees are harmless to most but to some people a single bee sting could lead to death.
Adders. While not a serious threat to most, its venom, in some cases can be fatal.
Rats, I don't think I need to tell you they possible health hazzard they bring. 
These are just a few examples.
Why not just kill everything and be done with it. Clearly this is neither sensible nor practical. I for will not be a part of it.
In the case of rats living in towns, they are a potential health risk because they they live among waste left by man. It is therefore man that is at fault not the rats. Man has the intelligence to do something about it , the rats don't


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

alan g a said:


> If we are talking about the possible health risk of the food we consume the we as well just starve. EVERYTHING we eat is a potential health risk.
> Also, what all the other wild animals out there.
> Bees are harmless to most but to some people a single be sting could lead to death.
> Adders. While not a serious threat most its venom, in some cases can be fatal.
> ...


So what should be done about the rats?


----------



## alan g a (Feb 23, 2011)

rona said:


> So what should be done about the rats?


I never I had an answer to it. Clearly killing them doesn't seem to work. No matter how many are killed there still exist in very large numbers almost every where.


----------



## Waterlily (Apr 18, 2010)

rona said:


> So what should be done about the rats?


arent you leaving the thread


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

rona said:


> So what should be done about the rats?


I honestly think one small step that would help immensely would be to educate the general public that dropping litter is antisocial & a significant health hazard. 
Somewhere along the way the message has been lost, people have no pride. As to how to educate people, especially the apathetic or stubborn, I'm afraid that's beyond my capabilities 
I just make a polite comment & usually get a mouthful of abuse for my troubles, although one girl thanked me for giving her back the crumpled up crisp packet she'd dropped


----------



## alan g a (Feb 23, 2011)

simplysardonic said:


> I honestly think one small step that would help immensely would be to educate the general public that dropping litter is antisocial & a significant health hazard.
> Somewhere along the way the message has been lost, people have no pride. As to how to educate people, especially the apathetic or stubborn, I'm afraid that's beyond my capabilities
> I just make a polite comment & usually get a mouthful of abuse for my troubles, although one girl thanked me for giving her back the crumpled up crisp packet she'd dropped


In London (and I'm sure in other places too) There is a heavy instent fine for dropping a cigarette butt or a sweet wrapper.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

alan g a said:


> In London (and I'm sure in other places too) There is a heavy instent fine for dropping a cigarette butt or a sweet wrapper.


I know, but it often doesn't seem to be enforced


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> 3) You mean that huge post that must have taken you all afternoon to put together? I didn't bother to read it.


Well just for your benefit here are just some of the questions in a nice easy to understand format for you so you should have no bother and no excuses for not answering them, unless you have something to hide which I am certain you have so prove me wrong.

I am calling you out as a charlatan, a fraud, an ignorant warbler, an empty preacher and a blinded sheep with an almost fascist attitude about the subject of food and where it comes from, the process of field to plate, what is ethical and what is poor decision making.

1.	You are posting on a pet forum so you must have an interest in pets (plenty of general animal forums) so what pets do you have and what pets have you owned? What did/do you feed these pets? If the animal had to eat meat what was fed and where was it sourced from?

2.	You must have some form of income. Could you sustain yourself without an income for 6months or a year?

3.	Are vehicles natural predators for the animals that die or become injured as a consequence of these vehicles?

4.	If there are two badgers in a sett rather than 4 or six does it not increase the chances of inoculating both badgers instead of the same few over and over again?

5.	Does someones post code make them more knowledgeable or experienced on a subject?

6.	If you only see one side of an issue can you make an educated decision on the issue with the complete understandings of the issue and the consequences, actions and results of your decision?

7.	Have you ever spoken personally to a slaughter man and asked them what they take pride in?

8.	Why do you feel the need to bring American farming policies and standards when the discussion and the whole ethos of my decision was around UK farming industry and practices?

9.	Have you ever been to the plantation where your soya product is grown?

10.	What wildlife exists in the soya plantation where your food is grown?

11.	What animals have died to make way for the soya plantation and what animals do die as a result of the use of pesticides, insecticides and to ensure that pests such as rats and birds do not ruin or diminish profits?

12.	Can you please give a brief explanation of your understanding of what goes on at fly fishing competitions that are held in your local area as well as throughout the UK?

13.	Can you please give a brief explanation for what measures you have taken to raise your environmental concerns about the catastrophic effects micro-hydro plants have on the UK river eco-system, not forgetting that you live in the county with the most micro-hydro plants?

14.	Are you fully aware that animals have been slaughtered in their thousands if not hundred thousands, been cruelly treated beyond what even the most evil of people would consider inhumane and that the money you pay for your soya directly funds this?

15.	Do you still deny there is blood on your hands due to the food you buy and consume?


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> I'd say you have lost the discussion. Okay you have a fan club of two. Where are the others? Have your posts inspired non-meat eaters to start eating meat or non-milk drinkers to start drinking milk?
> But your involvement has helped keep the thread at the top of the page which has helped promote the cause and for that we're obliged.


I may not have inspired people to start eating meat or start drinking milk but I am guessing, and I am going out on a limb here, I bet I have made two people stop drinking Alpro or Provamel which argued so adamantly to be nutritious, ethical, nothing to do with the dairy industry and good for everyone, including livestock and wildlife.

Now you may be sickened by the sight of that produce sat in your fridge and hear the screaming of a million cows that have been slaughtered by your funding but don't you think you owe it to those animals who paid with their lives, and dare I say "souls", so you could get your nutritious produce to drink every last drop and not waste any because to do so, as I have said all the way through this thread and how I look at my food, to waste food is to disrespect it and the whole process that has taken place to get it to your lips. If you waste what Alpro you have left then those animals that are all part of the Alpro, sorry, Dean Foods Company family have died for you to waste your produce that paid to fund their slaughter and horrifically diminish their welfare.

So tell me, have I lost?

ETA: My continual posting not only will raise awareness of the badger cull for your cause but it will also raise awareness of the unethically production of Alpro and Provamel along with their support of puppy mills, hindering health science, muddying the waters so consumers can't even make an honest choice (it worked with you), lobbying against animal cruelty and a whole heap of other stuff that people do not like and are probably detrimental tot he UK badgers as a whole. So you are more than welcome. I'll bump this thread any time you like so I can raise awareness of the Soya based dairy alternatives and prove what a great job our non-intensive farmers do. After all, it's a golden service when compared with the shower of excrement second largest dairy producer in the world now isn't it?


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> 2) We come from opposite sides of the killing line. Your side is the side of cruelty and bloodshed and killing. My side is the side of compassion, mercy and non-violence.
> I won't ever be "experiencing" your side that's for sure.


Oh how different our sides truly are dear Knight Of Albion but I think you have the sides mixed up with your references to "cruelty" and "bloodshed" and "killing". You won't ever experience my side or any side because you just pay huge industry giants do to it all for you so you can sleep at night without the guilt.

I hope you are using your time away from the forum wisely and constructively. Maybe you should go down the shop where you buy your Alpro soya products from and start a petition to have the product removed from the shelving, raise awareness of the disgusting acts that are carried out because of the consumers that buy the product, make them aware of their choices and the consequences of their purchasing habits like I have tried on here with you, ask the store manager if you can put up pictures that are so horrific of day, week old calves being shot because the money paid for Alpro goes to funding it and you just want people to be aware, go stand outside an Aplro production plant and protest against the cruelty that goes on it's name, contact every person you have ever recommended Aplro to and inform them of the truth about what happens to ensure that you can have a milk alternative, maybe build a greenhouse and try to grow your own soya, phone around companies and see if you can source soya products and get definite answers as to the whole process of what is involved in getting it from field to plate.

Or maybe, and this is just a maybe, I can take you to my friends who are dairy farmers, who treat their livestock better than most in the UK by your thoughts and ultimately a different world away from what you fund and you can shake them by the hand for fighting for better better milk prices so they don't have to go down the intensive farming route. You don't have to agree with what they do but you have to agree it is the best that we have.
Failing that you can at least do the honourable thing and mention in your conversation with people you do know that drink milk to use a milkman that can tell you the exact farm where they get their milk so they are not funding the milk buyers who are driving farmers to go intensive.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Update and a bump for you Knight OF Albion.

I have just posted this on Alpro's Facebook page. I trust you and everyone else who who buys Alpro or is on Facebook and is concerned about animal welfare will do the same.

Hi Alpro,

Quick question for you.

Are you not owned by Dean Foods Company who are the second largest dairy producer in the world?

It says you are here: Dean Foods - Our Brands

When I checked into Dean Foods Company and what they did I found an astonishing report that is quite frankly disgusting. I hope that you can clarify to your "likers" and followers on here if what is written about Dean Foods Company and how it conducts its business using the money received by the lovely folk that buy Alpro or even Provamel is true? This is what I found, I didn't write this so I am just curious.

Dean Foods Company - SourceWatch

This states that Dean Foods Company, the food company that owns Alpro, funds the Center For Consumer Freedom (CFF).

Center for Consumer Freedom - SourceWatch

I looked at the link on that page and find it very disturbing indeed, I also find it disturbing the treatment that Dean Foods Compnay has been questioned on with regards tot he treatment of its animals that come under other Dean Foods Company brands.

Can you give me some explanation for these articles and allegations please?

Many thanks.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*Great to see Stephen Fry has joined in.:thumbup:
Stephen Fry joins badger cull opposition - 9/28/2012 - Farmers Weekly*


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

I would just like to apologise to every that has been reading this thread is going to read this thread.

In an earlier post I said that if you looked at the packaging of any Alpro product you would see an indication that it is a child company of Dean Foods Company. This is a mistake. Nowhere on Alpro packaging does it say it is a Dean Foods Company product meaning you are prevented from making an ethical decision just by picking up an Alpro product so I apologise for saying it is marked on their products.

However, what does this say about how Dean Foods Company operate if they are unwilling to compromise consumer choice by having their name (Alpro is their company after all) on the packaging so you can make a balanced decision?

It only took a few minutes for me to find the information laid out in the post that discussed Alpro and Dean Foods Company so anybody could have found that freely available information on the web, it is not private data or hidden away oin some dark cupboard on the web.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

JANICE199 said:


> *Great to see Stephen Fry has joined in.:thumbup:
> Stephen Fry joins badger cull opposition - 9/28/2012 - Farmers Weekly*


I love the man even more after reading that


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

rona said:


> 1) You really really need to go and read that post :lol::lol::lol:
> 
> 2) By not doing so, you have lost all credibility and look like a totally ignorant idiot.
> Go educate yourself


1) And give him more opportunity to disrupt the thread, like he has been doing from the start. I notice another thread in Introductions got closed due to arguments. I'm sure there are one or two here who would like to see this one closed....The penny finally dropped.
The e-petition ends next week. After that it doesn't matter.

2) That didn't come across as very polite, Rona.
But no matter.


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> I know nothing of you, no, all I have to go on are your posts. I've been here nearly three months and I've yet to see you utter one single kind, polite or friendly word to anyone. I've not seen you display one shred of compassion. Virtually every post you make on here seems to have a vein of malice running through it.
> And yes, I made an off the cuff remark to your friend "even the spiteful one is against the cull" and did I give a name? NO. Anyone else would have said "Who is he referring to?" You were like "Spiteful? That would be me then!"
> 
> Then apparently you're a closet St Francis! And yet everytime your friend says he has killed this or killed that; supports killing this, supports killing that, you can't wait to deliver a 'like'.
> ...


I reacted with humour to your name calling. And I am malicious and spiteful in your view. You see what you want to see, and demonise any who disagree. The very definition of a fundamentalist.

As for the last two paragraphs, the only thing that causes me unhappiness in my life is the power that a non preventable, incurable, progressive disease has over my body and my abilities to do the things I have always taken pride in and enjoyed. I live with pain every day, and a good night's sleep is a rare thing. It will only ever get worse, never better.
Unhappy with my lot? No, the light gets in through the cracks, and it has taught me to truly appreciate how much is good in my life and how very fortunate I am to have people around me and the sheer force of will it takes to refuse to let my body stop working. It's shown me what a truly good man I share my life with, and what good fortune I have in my friends and family. Messy business, life, not clear cut, even the bad things are not perfectly bad.

I chose this did I? Some compassion your blinkered beliefs give you. A disease of which the greatest cruelty is that it doesn't kill, it takes the self away in a steady decline of bodily functions - this is a consequence of my actions? Nice. 
I too, need to step away from the computer now.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

JANICE199 said:


> *Great to see Stephen Fry has joined in.:thumbup:
> Stephen Fry joins badger cull opposition - 9/28/2012 - Farmers Weekly*


A big 'name' that's good. He has hundreds of thousands of followers on his Twitter account.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> 1) And give him more opportunity to disrupt the thread, like he has been doing from the start. I notice another thread in Introductions got closed due to arguments. I'm sure there are one or two here who would like to see this one closed....The penny finally dropped.
> The e-petition ends next week. After that it doesn't matter.
> 
> 2) That's a bit rude isn't it? Is that how your parents raised you to be?
> ...


1. Giving an opposing or different view is classed as disruption is it? And you think yourself some master debater, tut tut. I have stated I am happy to keep bumping this thread up for you (like wit this post and the many others I have put on here asking for your answers.

I only need one though now.

*Are you going to continue buying Alpro or Provamel products?*

ETA: you were even thanking me for posting, keeping the thread up at the top so more awreness fo the cause was raised and now you want me to stop. Why do you want me to stop? You said yourself is an open public forum because you didn't think I deserved to be on one. Am I not a member of the public? Am I not allowed to freely speak my opposing or different views just because they do not agree with yours? If you read back through I think you will find that you have lead the majority of tangent discussions.

I am here purely to discuss the effects of bTB on UK farming. You brought in the soya stuff and went off on how bad dairy farming is, then brought in American farming practices and then religion. Have I missed anything else?


----------



## Waterlily (Apr 18, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> I've seen a lot of your other posts, had respect for you as an animal lover and a good person and thought you better than that.
> But no matter.


Rona is one of the most genuine and decent members here, and even tho im *team badger* lol, she has a point, if someone wants to sprout _facts_, not just an _opinion_, they need to read all info on it or its a mute debate.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

myshkin said:


> I reacted with humour to your name calling. And I am malicious and spiteful in your view. 1) You see what you want to see, and demonise any who disagree. The very definition of a fundamentalist.
> 
> 2) As for the last two paragraphs, the only thing that causes me unhappiness in my life is the power that a non preventable, incurable, progressive disease has over my body and my abilities to do the things I have always taken pride in and enjoyed. I live with pain every day, and a good night's sleep is a rare thing. It will only ever get worse, never better.
> Unhappy with my lot? No, the light gets in through the cracks, and it has taught me to truly appreciate how much is good in my life and how very fortunate I am to have people around me and the sheer force of will it takes to refuse to let my body stop working. It's shown me what a truly good man I share my life with, and what good fortune I have in my friends and family. Messy business, life, not clear cut, even the bad things are not perfectly bad.
> ...


1) I see what I'm shown. I'm sure you do have a kind-hearted, lovable side and I fervently wish you would display it in your posts on here.

2) I'm genuinely sorry about your illness (MS). I do not want anyone or anything to suffer, or be in misery or pain, that is at the core of everything I do. Unfortunately you don't understand that.
I showed you a good website. That Professor was making progress with his treatment. Unfortunately you just dismissed it because it was 'alternative'. Does it matter what it is if it helps people?

3) You chose the body you're in, yes. There are lessons we have to learn, things we need to experience, some mission or task we are called on to fulfill. There is purpose. There is a bigger picture at play, that we probably won't get to understand, not here anyway.
The question of illness is not black and white. For example, there was a young gentleman on here who was consuming a very large quantity of milk every day. Milk consumption is linked to prostate cancer. The more you consume the bigger the risk. That young fellow is on the way to prostate cancer at that rate. I hope he took my advice. Was he born to have prostate cancer? No! Cause and effect of faulty diet. What triggered your MS? Who can say. 
In life there are more questions than answers...


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> Going by earlier posts, it seems you are unhappy with your lot in life. Let me tell you, before we incarnate on earth we choose the body we are going to incarnate in. Yes, YOU chose the body you are in, I chose the body I am in, we all did the same.
> 
> And the central law of the universe is that of Cause & Effect. This is an entirely self-regulating law. No god punishes you, no god rewards you. You determine your own destiny as a consequence of your actions.
> The past makes the present - and the present makes the future. Think on that.


"Let me tell you". "LET ME TELL YOU".

That is not talking down to someone or preaching is it?

If I chose my body and you chose you body, why are so many people choosing bodies with disabilities then? I assume you can prove all of this with scientific fact and analysis can't you? Can you tell me what it was like whilst you were choosing your body? Was it like a massive pooper market with loads of different shapes, sizes, colours and creeds hanging up? Do you get to choose you mind as well as your body? Why are souls choosing to go live as a Dean Foods Company dairy cow so you can keep them all fed and watered, in a nice comfortable stall with four others for company and none of them can move?


----------



## Waterlily (Apr 18, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> 1) I see what I'm shown. I'm sure you do have a kind-hearted, lovable side and I fervently wish you would display it in your posts on here.


Lmao ... we all have bad days, we all bust a nut (me more then others) but that doesnt give anyone the right to judge character by posts, especially heated and touchy topics close to our hearts. 
You may not have seen her loveable side, but I and many others here have, not everyone kisses arse in public some support others in pm, or rep comments, thats when it really counts anyway, anyone can post to "look" good.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Waterlily said:


> Rona is one of the most genuine and decent members here, and even tho im *team badger* lol, she has a point, if someone wants to sprout _facts_, not just an _opinion_, they need to read all info on it or its a mute debate.


Yes, I misjudged the tone. I've edited.

Lots of good information/facts on here, alas drowning under a sea of waffle & abuse. Recycled waffle and abuse!
If the thread gets closed due to arguments that won't help anyone, least of all the badgers.


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> 1) I see what I'm shown. I'm sure you do have a kind-hearted, lovable side and I fervently wish you would display it in your posts on here.
> 
> 2) I'm genuinely sorry about your illness (MS). I do not want anyone or anything to suffer, or be in misery or pain, that is at the core of everything I do. Unfortunately you don't understand that.
> I showed you a good website. That Professor was making progress with his treatment. Unfortunately you just dismissed it because it was 'alternative'. Does it matter what it is if it helps people?
> ...


I dismissed the link you showed because it contains very bad science. 
I didn't get MS from drinking milk, there is more or less a consensus among neurologists that it is caused by several factors - lack of sunshine to convert to vitamin D in the northern hemisphere, genetics, and possibly exposure to a virus.

Diet doesn't come into it, and certainly won't cure it.

I am being very careful in my words here, because I will not allow myself to say what I feel about your insistence on preaching your message regardless. The dietary thing I can accept that you mean well in, however faulty the basis of your reasoning.

Insisting on your belief that we choose or are responsible for what happens to our bodies in the face of someone you know has an incurable, degenerative illness - I won't allow myself to respond in full with what I think about that, but you are a hypocrite when you call others cruel.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> 1) I see what I'm shown.
> 
> 3) You chose the body you're in, yes. There are lessons we have to learn, things we need to experience, some mission or task we are called on to fulfill. There is purpose. There is a bigger picture at play, that we probably won't get to understand, not here anyway.
> The question of illness is not black and white. For example, there was a young gentleman on here who was consuming a very large quantity of milk every day. Milk consumption is linked to prostate cancer. The more you consume the bigger the risk. That young fellow is on the way to prostate cancer at that rate. I hope he took my advice. Was he born to have prostate cancer? No! Cause and effect of faulty diet. What triggered your MS? Who can say.
> In life there are more questions than answers...


1. You only see what you want to see, hear what you want to hear and think of nothing else.

2. Sorry if I am taking this the wrong way but did you just say "he was born to have bowel cancer" about me and that everyone suffering in the world is doing so because of choices they made and the body they chose?

Have you any idea about how much compassion that last statement actually lacks?

I honestly think you need to go re-evaluate your life, train of thought and put Mein Kampf down. If I didn't enjoy this place and think I did a bit of good on here for people every now and then I would write down exactly what I and I'm sure countless others are thinking about you right now. The only person who is going to get this thread shut down is yourself, keep your religious views to yourself and pray to your God that the suffering and cruelty that you fund does not have an effetc on you because that is going to be monumentla suffering. They won't be able to find a cure because of the dismissive views and countering campaigns that the company your give money to funds with your money to prevents medical development and scientific addvancement.

Do you know what you are probably funding the lack of bovine vaccination. You are probably funding the badger cull directly.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Knightofalbion said:


> 1) And give him more opportunity to disrupt the thread, like he has been doing from the start. I notice another thread in Introductions got closed due to arguments. I'm sure there are one or two here who would like to see this one closed....The penny finally dropped.
> The e-petition ends next week. After that it doesn't matter.
> 
> 2) That didn't come across as very polite, Rona.
> But no matter.


What polite like you?
I've seen from others quotes what you wrote.
At least I only said it makes you look like, not that you were.... but hey ho, from your reply, maybe I was right 



Waterlily said:


> Rona is one of the most genuine and decent members here, and even tho im *team badger* lol, she has a point, if someone wants to sprout _facts_, not just an _opinion_, they need to read all info on it or its a mute debate.


Thank you 

I actually think the badger cull is wrong. I think it's far to little too late and it's got some political agenda behind it.
Farmers are being used as pawns again, like they have been since the second world war  

If people can't look farther than the surface then they aren't worth anyones time.

Noushka and I are very often on very opposing sides in this kind of debate (not this one as it happens), but we can have respect for each other, purely because we can and do admit when we are either wrong or try very hard to understand where the other is coming from. Both of us care immensely about the natural world, it's just how we perceive that care that's different


----------



## Waterlily (Apr 18, 2010)

hutch6 said:


> pray to your God that I never cross your path in person or you are going to want a refund on that body of yours or wonder what you ever did to be in such pain.


wtf lol  threatening is a lil harsh


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

myshkin said:


> I dismissed the link you showed because it contains very bad science.
> I didn't get MS from drinking milk, there is more or less a consensus among neurologists that it is caused by several factors - lack of sunshine to convert to vitamin D in the northern hemisphere, genetics, and possibly exposure to a virus.
> 
> Diet doesn't come into it, and certainly won't cure it.
> ...


Vitamin D, yes - though that was dismissed as 'alternative' at one stage...

I can only say what I know.

We're obviously not on the same page, but despite our differences, I wish you well and sincerely hope something will be found to help you.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Waterlily said:


> wtf lol  threatening is a lil harsh


You're right in I should not have said it that way. I'll go back and edit it with Knight Of Albion's own cause & effect stuff.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> I can only say what I know.


How do you know people and souls suffer because of the bodies they chose? Have you got any scientific evidence to back up your claim? Have you got a scientific explanation as to what a soul actually is? Has anyone ever recreated one in a controlled environment?


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> How do you know people and souls suffer because of the bodies they chose? Have you got any scientific evidence to back up your claim? Have you got a scientific explanation as to what a soul actually is? Has anyone ever recreated one in a controlled environment?


Heck why did I use the word "claim". It is not a claim to you it is fact, knowledge and there must have been scientific founding behind it for it be knowledge as you believe and invest absolute confidence in science as you have proved throughout this thread.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> The penny finally dropped.
> The e-petition ends next week. *After that it doesn't matter.*


No it doesn't because the cull WILL be going ahead. Has that penny not dropped yet?


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Waterlily said:


> Lmao ... we all have bad days, we all bust a nut (me more then others) but that doesnt give anyone the right to judge character by posts, especially heated and touchy topics close to our hearts.
> You may not have seen her loveable side, but I and many others here have, not everyone kisses arse in public some support others in pm, or rep comments, *thats when it really counts anyway, anyone can post to "look" good.*


Thank you WL


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

These are few things on the company that own Alpro and Provamel.

*Dean Foods, Biotech, USDA Conspiring to Pollute Organics*

Dean Foods, Biotech, USDA Conspiring to Pollute Organics | Food Freedom

Senator calls for investigation into Dean Foods

*Judge hears final arguments for Dean Foods settlement with dairy farmers*

Look how many others they have to pay off.

Judge hears final arguments for Dean Foods settlement with dairy farmers

*Articles about Dean Foods Company*

Take your pick from this lot.

Articles about Dean Foods - Sun Sentinel

*Animal Cruelty*

Animal Rights Information and News Resource Blog - Companion Blog for www.geari.org: Dean Foods, Owner of Horizon Organic Dairy Products Again Focus Of Hypocrisy: Proof of Human and Animal Abuse Rampant At Facility

*Are you going to continue buying Alpro or Provamel products?*


----------



## Waterlily (Apr 18, 2010)

myshkin said:


> Thank you WL


yea well, we may butt heads, but I wont stfu when someone decents nature is put to the ground, for eff all.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

hutch6 said:


> No it doesn't because the cull WILL be going ahead. Has that penny not dropped yet?


It won't matter then cos they will have done their bit by signing a petition


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*


Knightofalbion said:



A big 'name' that's good. He has hundreds of thousands of followers on his Twitter account.

Click to expand...

 I believe i'm right in saying,Stephen has over 4 million followers on his twitter.:thumbup:



rona said:



It won't matter then cos they will have done their bit by signing a petition 

Click to expand...

By signing the petition with enough signatures it WILL make a difference.Every little helps.*


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

JANICE199 said:


> *
> 
> I believe i'm right in saying,Stephen has over 4 million followers on his twitter.:thumbup:
> 
> By signing the petition with enough signatures it WILL make a difference.Every little helps.*


I marched in London with 400,000 other people. We weren't listened to. Why should you be any different?


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Vets make damning condemnation of proposed cull

http://www.teambadger.org/pdf/McGill-et-al-Badgers-VT-2012-42-38-35.pdf


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> Just had a thought thinking about what has been said on this on this thread earlier, here it is:
> 
> So you consume Alpro products as you have stated many times and promoted their benefits etc. I see Alpro advertising in most media types so why would they advertise if they were not concerned about profits?
> 
> ...


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Waterlily said:


> wtf lol  threatening is a lil harsh


"PRAY TO YOUR GOD THAT I NEVER CROSS YOUR PATH IN PERSON OR YOU ARE GOING TO WANT A REFUND ON THAT BODY OF YOURS OR WONDER WHAT YOU EVER DID TO BE IN SUCH PAIN." - HUTCH6

Should you be using Pets Forum to make threats of violence?
The last time I looked at the rules, making a threat of violence was an immediate banning offence.
There is no place for that sort of thuggish behaviour on this or any forum.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> keep your religious views to yourself
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Waterlily (Apr 18, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> "PRAY TO YOUR GOD THAT I NEVER CROSS YOUR PATH IN PERSON OR YOU ARE GOING TO WANT A REFUND ON THAT BODY OF YOURS OR WONDER WHAT YOU EVER DID TO BE IN SUCH PAIN."
> 
> Should you be using Pets Forum to make threats of violence?
> The last time I looked at the rules, making a threat of violence was an immediate banning offence.
> There is no place for that sort of thuggish behaviour on this or any forum.


pardon  get the right poster before you get arsy.


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

I know it wasn't you! You're the last person I'd suspect of anything like that.
I'm talking to Hutch6. His name didn't show up on the Quote, it should have done. I've edited and attributed the quote now so its clear. He had deleted it on his original post to cover his tracks. Thanks for pinning it.


----------



## Waterlily (Apr 18, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> I know it wasn't you! I'm talking to Hutch6. His name didn't show up on the Quote.


ah ok :arf:


----------



## koekemakranka (Aug 2, 2010)

What's going on with this thread? I thought it had to do with the badger cull, but somehow has gone way of track via halaal rabbits, soya milk, plague rats right through to death threats and "shudder"...religion. Let's face it folks, if the conversation gets around to religion (which is responsible for most of the man-made misery in this world IMHO) then it is three posts from being closed. Perhaps, for the sake of the badgers, can we get back on track and deal with the petition?


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

koekemakranka said:


> What's going on with this thread? I thought it had to do with the badger cull, but somehow has gone way of track via halaal rabbits, soya milk, plague rats right through to death threats and "shudder"...religion. Let's face it folks, if the conversation gets around to religion (which is responsible for most of the man-made misery in this world IMHO) then it is three posts from being closed. Perhaps, for the sake of the badgers, can we get back on track and deal with the petition?


It's called conversation  
Well PF version anyway :lol:


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> I know it wasn't you! You're the last person I'd suspect of anything like that.
> I'm talking to Hutch6. His name didn't show up on the Quote, it should have done. I've edited and attributed the quote now so its clear. He had deleted it on his original post to cover his tracks. Thanks for pinning it.





Knightofalbion said:


> hutch6 said:
> 
> 
> > The post he apologised for and edited to remove you mean? Why bring it up after the apology has been made? Again, for one who likes to throw accusations of vindictiveness and malice around, you are very vindictive yourself.
> ...


----------



## Guest (Oct 1, 2012)

On National gov tv in Oz, the badger cull is in news magazine program, in prime time. 7 45 pm WHY are Brit cattle not allowed to be vaccinated due to EU regs? INSANITY. Just slaughter everything, not worth cash, eh? What a ghastly world.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

househens said:


> On National gov tv in Oz, the badger cull is in news magazine program, in prime time. 7 45 pm WHY are Brit cattle not allowed to be vaccinated due to EU regs? INSANITY. Just slaughter everything, not worth cash, eh? *What a ghastly world.*


It is isn't it?


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> Should you really be using Pet Forums to besmirch Alpro and Provamel? Two well respected companies with reputations to preserve. You only have to post one innaccurate comment or post one link that turns out to be malicious to expose the Administrator to litigation...
> 
> Both Alpro and Provamel are heavy advertisers. An animal lovers forum like this would seem to be a more than appropiate medium for them to advertise in. Though after your mocking attack on them I doubt either will ever feel inclined to advertise here. That may be a joke to you, but Pets Forum is sustained by revenue earned from paid advertising.


You do make me laugh with your blissful ignorance to barefaced FACTS that have been presented to you because they do not support your choices and you are unable to face the FACT that you are funding their practices amongst other things that do not agree with your choice. If you don't believe what I have laid out in front of you then do some web searching yourself, there are hundreads of articles out there that would cause very large media groups and other instituations to remove if they were slanderous or inaccurate.

Shutting Out Dean Foods | The Co-op Food Stores of New Hampshire and Vermont

Senator calls for investigation into Dean Foods

The L.A Times - I'me pretty sure they wouldn;t be able to report this if it was liable or fale reporting do you?
Articles about Dean Foods Co - Los Angeles Times

Another pretty big compnay that I am sure would be sued for makign it out that Dean Foods Company are not a dairy producer:
Dean Foods says exploring Morningstar sale - Yahoo! News

*How about a Dean Foods Company release from their very own press office announcing their purchase of Alpro?* Would that convince you that I am right in all of that post and that the facts are staring you in the face?

Dean Foods - Press Release

Type in a search engine of your choice (I'm not sure I'll be allowed to post the links) "*Alpro Boycott*", no look at the links. THEY ARE ALL PUBLIC FORUMS TALKING ABOUT ALPRO BEING BOUGHT OUT BY AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP WITH DEAN FOODS COMPANY
If Dean Foods did not own Alpro or have anything to do with Alpro why do they have them listed as one of their brands along with Provamel and even Silk (biggest soya brand in USA I think)? If Dean Foods didn;t have anythign to hide why do they not put their name on the packaging of the Alpro products? Why if you go to the Alpro website and search for "Dean Foods" or even their organic fronted alter-ego company do you get ZERO results?



















On the Provamle site you do get results but if you look at the contents of those links they don't actually mention the name of Dean Foods Company, just a load fo guff about helthy it all is and good for the environemnt which kind of makes you fee a bit ill knowing what sits behind it all, out of sight, out of mind.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> "PRAY TO YOUR GOD THAT I NEVER CROSS YOUR PATH IN PERSON OR YOU ARE GOING TO WANT A REFUND ON THAT BODY OF YOURS OR WONDER WHAT YOU EVER DID TO BE IN SUCH PAIN." - HUTCH6
> 
> Should you be using Pets Forum to make threats of violence?
> The last time I looked at the rules, making a threat of violence was an immediate banning offence.
> There is no place for that sort of thuggish behaviour on this or any forum.


Which I apologised for openly and rectified. I can't believe I actually stooped to be below your level.

Should you be using a Pet Forum as a springboard to convey and preach your ridiculous and clearly dark views?


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

rona said:


> I marched in London with 400,000 other people. We weren't listened to. Why should you be any different?


*ME? pmsl i'm not on my own in this.
At least if they get enough people to sign the petition they get a good chance of it being debated in the commons.
"Since 100,000 signatories is arguably not a significant percentage of a nation of roughly 50 million, it is unlikely that a petition, unless demand is overwhelming (i.e. much more than 100,000 people), will end up in the House of Commons. On the flip side, this means that issues of real importance will be debated, which may not have been without the e-petitions scheme."
*


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

JANICE199 said:


> *ME? pmsl i'm not on my own in this.
> At least if they get enough people to sign the petition they get a good chance of it being debated in the commons.
> "Since 100,000 signatories is arguably not a significant percentage of a nation of roughly 50 million, it is unlikely that a petition, unless demand is overwhelming (i.e. much more than 100,000 people), will end up in the House of Commons. On the flip side, this means that issues of real importance will be debated, which may not have been without the e-petitions scheme."
> *


I used "you" in the wider sense not indicating you personally, but those that have signed the petition 

I could have said "you all"


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> I may not have inspired people to start eating meat or start drinking milk but I am guessing, and I am going out on a limb here, I bet I have made two people stop drinking Alpro or Provamel which argued so adamantly to be nutritious, ethical, nothing to do with the dairy industry and good for everyone, including livestock and wildlife.
> 
> Now you may be sickened by the sight of that produce sat in your fridge and hear the screaming of a million cows that have been slaughtered by your funding but don't you think you owe it to those animals who paid with their lives, and dare I say "souls", so you could get your nutritious produce to drink every last drop and not waste any because to do so, as I have said all the way through this thread and how I look at my food, to waste food is to disrespect it and the whole process that has taken place to get it to your lips. If you waste what Alpro you have left then those animals that are all part of the Alpro, sorry, Dean Foods Company family have died for you to waste your produce that paid to fund their slaughter and horrifically diminish their welfare.
> 
> ...


actually ive never argued so adamantly that its nutritious & good for everyone.... ive heard good and bad so i wouldnt know whether it is or not! ... i didnt start drinking it for the good of my health it was initially because i had heard about the cruelty within the dairy industry....i then found out that Alpro & Provamel were better for the environment...both of which is true...and back then they wernt owned by Deans so certainly a more ethical choice ... im very greatful to you that you found out about that Hutch... but theres no need to rub it in, im angry enough with myself that ive been buying the stuff for those 3yrs since they sold out, had i still frequented veggie forums i would have found out because the take over is common knowledge on them... im guilty of being ignorant that a once all round ethical product is now owned by an unethical company.

anyway i still want to try to avoid anything connected to the dairy industry because it is a cruel industry which does drain limited resources...so i think ive found a genuinly ethical brand, unless you tell me otherwise sherlock lol

Plamil Products

.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

another council blocks the cull on council land:thumbsup:

Councillors say no to badger cull in Tewkesbury | This is Gloucestershire


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

myshkin said:


> Knightofalbion said:
> 
> 
> > hutch6 said:
> ...


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Knightofalbion said:


> "PRAY TO YOUR GOD THAT I NEVER CROSS YOUR PATH IN PERSON OR YOU ARE GOING TO WANT A REFUND ON THAT BODY OF YOURS OR WONDER WHAT YOU EVER DID TO BE IN SUCH PAIN." - HUTCH6
> 
> Should you be using Pets Forum to make threats of violence?
> The last time I looked at the rules, making a threat of violence was an immediate banning offence.
> There is no place for that sort of thuggish behaviour on this or any forum.


Hutch6: Tone can be misconstrued, it happens to us all. But you have purposely been out to disrupt the thread right from the start.
We've had flaming, baiting, swamping, calumny, harrassment, culminating in a threat of gbh! What next threat of murder?
There has to be a line in the sand, no?


----------



## Waterlily (Apr 18, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> Hutch6: Tone can be misconstrued, it happens to us all. But you have purposely been out to disrupt the thread right from the start.
> We've had flaming, baiting, swamping, calumny, harrassment, culminating in a threat of gbh! What next threat of murder?
> There has to be a line in the sand, no?


He said sorry, the thread was boring enough with the other essays, do we need to read more about a post, that is now a non issue anyway.... moving on ?


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> Which I apologised for openly and rectified. I can't believe I actually stooped to be below your level.
> 
> Should you be using a Pet Forum as a springboard to convey and preach your ridiculous and clearly dark views?


"YOU'RE RIGHT IN I SHOULD NOT HAVE SAID IT THAT WAY. I'LL GO BACK AND EDIT IT WITH KNIGHT OF ALBION'S OWN CAUSE AND EFFECT STUFF."

You didn't apologize. You only edited it to save your own back. And you were so contrite you promptly went over to the 'Health' section, dug up an old post I made weeks ago and made, or tried to make, a malicious spoiler attack on that.


----------



## Waterlily (Apr 18, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> "YOU'RE RIGHT IN I SHOULD NOT HAVE SAID IT THAT WAY. I'LL GO BACK AND EDIT IT WITH KNIGHT OF ALBION'S OWN CAUSE AND EFFECT STUFF."
> 
> You didn't apologize. You only edited it to save your own back. .


He's a man, thats pretty much an apology lol


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

Back to the topic...

Team Badger e-petition now stands at over 142,000 signatures


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> myshkin said:
> 
> 
> > Knightofalbion said:
> ...


----------



## koekemakranka (Aug 2, 2010)

Knightofalbion said:


> Hutch6: Tone can be misconstrued, it happens to us all. But you have purposely been out to disrupt the thread right from the start.
> We've had flaming, baiting, swamping, calumny, harrassment, culminating in a threat of gbh! What next threat of murder?
> There has to be a line in the sand, no?


Are you British? Just asking because you have an unusual "old fashioned" turn of phrase: almost as if you were born in a previous era. I find if English is not one's home language, then the phrasing tends to be a little on the formal side. No offence intended, just curious.


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Knight = crusader
Albion = British (in archaic terms).


----------



## koekemakranka (Aug 2, 2010)

myshkin said:


> Knight = crusader
> Albion = British (in archaic terms).


Oh, so a British Knight? Does that mean he is about 800 years old?  

Verily, that would explaineth the knavish turn of phrase he speaketh...


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Knightofalbion said:


> Hutch6: Tone can be misconstrued, it happens to us all. But you have purposely been out to disrupt the thread right from the start.
> We've had flaming, baiting, swamping, calumny, harrassment, culminating in a threat of gbh! What next threat of murder?
> There has to be a line in the sand, no?


I apologise Knight Of Albion. I should not have wrote what I did. If admin feel it over stepped the mark then they can ban me for my conduct.

I never set out to disrupt the thread at all. My entire posting has been focussed around the UK Farming industry and my support for it along with my passion for eating ethically and from sustainable sources. Any subject that lead off from the support I have expressed around the UK farming industry was the consequence of questions being put to my decision making, knowledge or experience. Upon answering these questions or having to backup claims that people rubbished as "only in your experience" it lead to further, more in-depth detail around that thought. This then opens up the discussion to various fields which of course will be further away from the original topic. My initial posts related more to the beef farming industry as that is more affected more restrictively and financially by bTB but the context was taken and applied to the dairy industry instead with the call to boycott stores selling milk that is produced on the affected farms. At no point was the fact of boycotting stores selling the beef affected because let's face it, you can't sell beef for slaughter if you have bTB which proves my point about the financial cost.

I was then giving an inside view of what happens eye of sight in the countryside and a fact I put forward about the use of badger setts was questioned by you. I then provided ample evidence from multiple badger focussed resources that backed up my own experience and the experiences I read about every day almost. You counter argument was that you live in the country and therefore you were better qualified to understand the countryside. I then put questions to you but as I have stipulated throughout this thread you refused to answer the questions. Instead you attacked my way of life stating that you lived a animal loving way and the products that you named and promoted were not part of any dairy industry or are linked to any animal cruelty in anyway. This then led to discussions around my choice of how I source my food for the table and the to-ing and fro-ing about how I have killed; was a hard hearted, bloody handed prime target for bowl cancer that shows a lack of compassion with me stating that you could not identify where the products you consume are sourced but were very quick to promote as ethical and sustainable. 
After a while I got fed up of you belittling my way of life and did a minimal bit of research which exposed very clearly exactly what was behind the products you defended as ethical and free from causing animal suffering or ecological impacts as an immeasurably more damaging product than any activity I have been part of or pursued and yet you still deny that this is the case. Instead you try your usual diversionary tactics of bringing in new subjects such as religious slaughter methods and beliefs behind the vegan diet to go along with you dragging the practices of American farms and the statistics into a discussion which I was trying to focus on the UK farming industry, explaining that you could show pictures of slaughter that would shock people and then as soon as I mentioned that I had experienced slaughter in all senses it was jumped upon with the religious stuff and then there was the good old "I live in X therefore I know about Y".

If anyone is guilty of taking things off topic then I doubt the finger is entirely pointing in my direction.

Time and time again I have answered your unfounded or one sided accusations, questions or opinions with not only my experience from your side of the fence but with knowledge and experience you don't even know about from my side of the fence and your only answer to those opinions is to state that you will never see it from that side of things. Having said this you then accuse others of having a very slanted view on things or not seeing the bigger picture or not being open to others opinions but you are only interested in hearing views and opinions that agree with your own. Anything that counters these or goes against the grain is either ignored and turned away from despite the questions being valid and appropriate the subject which incidentally is the driven directly from your response in the first place. It is only your good self that tries to cloud and muddy the waters of this thread with continual introductions of subjects and topics that steer things rapidly away from the topic being discussed.

Read the post I made on Alpro, Provamel and silk, accept that you do in fact have blood on your hands but you have the ability and now the knowledge that I have, you could say, gifted you to make a more ethical choice and cease your hard earned money funding the exact industry, practices and unethical behaviour that this thread has set out to fight and that you yourself have stated until you are blue in the face do not agree with and are aggressively against. The information I have provided you to make your decision is all over the web as clear as day when you know what to search for and not only that but I have joined vegetarian, vegan and anti-animal cruelty forums to specifically make people who buy this product under the falsehood that you have exactly what their money is going towards. I have posted it on facebook, I am in the process of emailing it to the BBC Watchdog as they have been in contact with me, the major supermarkets and my local shop owners.
Already I have responses from people all over the world saying things like "Thank you so much. I have written to my local store and explained why I will not be a customer of theirs until they either remove the products in question or have it clearly marked that the product packaging has a clear indication as the company behind those brands so consumers can a more ethical choice".

That is what ethos of my posting on here has been about and you have clearly misunderstood, wanted to go into another agenda or just didn't want to answer questions on - Do you know where your food comes from because if you don't then you could be contributing to things such as the badger cull.

My very first post on here was all about various products you could be buying other than milk at that can originate from the farms where the cull is taking place. I was helping people make a more ethical choice by providing that knowledge.

You have failed to answer a whole multitude of questions around your choices, where your food comes from and around your choices. Through this lack of information coming from you but your continual questioning of other people's choices and the leading off down unrelated topics time and time again leads me to think that you are only posting on this thread to put forward your own agenda and preaching of your own beliefs, You are not here to be informed or have your opinions questioned or expand your knowledge, you are a closed book to experiences, knowledge on subjects you want to discuss which you know will attract opposite or conflicting opinions but the minute you are questioned you shut down and refuse to reciprocate the same respect that you have been shown by myself and others on this thread by providing you with open answers to your questions and very well educated and informed responses.

It is clear to me that you will continue preaching your side of the fence without accepting that in order to have your side there has to be another side and your lack of experience and knowledge of this side voids any statement, opinion or findings on the opposite side because you are clearly only gaining your knowledge by people who are on your side and have not been on the other side either. It is like me writing a guide to the culture, understandings, beliefs and practices of a people I have never met, never spoken to, never visited but only gained through third-party people who never been, seen or spoken to them either and then sell the whole lot as quantified, justified and the only truth on the matter. You are a blind sheep being led by the rest of the blind flock.

In response to the other thread I commented on I thought it was quiet important to inform people that a cup of tea will not cure you and that the story was an anecdote - you know, the type of thing you don't take as fact or experience. What I provided came directly from an institute that has been researching the subject with the correct resources, equipment and finest human brains in the world and yet still you dismiss what I found on a subject that you have your own opinion on as a "malicious spoiler attack". And this comes from someone who when a person explains that their health and the health of their loved ones were being compromised by the same diet that you adhere to "couldn't hack the vegan diet" just because it was an opposite opinion of yours. You then went on to suggest that another member of the discussion was cursed with a debilitating condition because of "choices they had made - cause and effect.

What I have re-read over the last few days has painted a very clear picture of the type of person you are and what your agenda is on public forums so I will do you the pleasure of never posting on this thread again so you dont feel like I am baiting you with what are appropriate questions (ay no point have I set out to trip you up, you did that yourself on many occasions), harassing you by asking you to answer these appropriate questions (it can only be harassment if you are refusing to answer them and by refusing to answer them you clearly have something to hide) and when I have written a false or malicious statement about yourself or in the factual information I have written in connection with your choice of food which you defended to the hilt was better for animals, anti-dairy and the better choice for the planet when clearly if extremely bad for all of those things and a heck of a lot more? I merely stated that due to my findings (which anyone could have found) for you to say that I have more blood on my hands than you do is like saying a feather in my hand weighs more than Mount Everest in yours.

Carry on with your one-track mind and thoughts and keep yourself closed off to opinions and facts that prove you otherwise, you are a far poorer person for that than I will ever be.

Many thanks for your questions, I hope my experiences and information has been a help or an insight to some regardless of your blinkered and conspired view of the world. Just a shame you never gave us the benefits of your experiences through those questions but I don't feel I am missing out on anything I don't already know or would have any use for. Feel free to put me on your ignore list if you so wish, I couldn't care less.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

rona said:


> I used "you" in the wider sense not indicating you personally, but those that have signed the petition
> 
> I could have said "you all"


*Sorry i misunderstood your post.*


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Brain May is on the Alan Titchmarsh show today on ITV at 3pm...for anyone whos interested


----------



## Waterlily (Apr 18, 2010)

hutch6 said:


> I apologise Knight Of Albion. I should not have wrote what I did. If admin feel it over stepped the mark then they can ban me for my conduct.
> 
> I never set out to disrupt the thread at all. My entire posting has been focussed around the UK Farming industry and my support for it along with my passion for eating ethically and from sustainable sources. Any subject that lead off from the support I have expressed around the UK farming industry was the consequence of questions being put to my decision making, knowledge or experience. Upon answering these questions or having to backup claims that people rubbished as "only in your experience" it lead to further, more in-depth detail around that thought. This then opens up the discussion to various fields which of course will be further away from the original topic. My initial posts related more to the beef farming industry as that is more affected more restrictively and financially by bTB but the context was taken and applied to the dairy industry instead with the call to boycott stores selling milk that is produced on the affected farms. At no point was the fact of boycotting stores selling the beef affected because let's face it, you can't sell beef for slaughter if you have bTB which proves my point about the financial cost.
> 
> ...


tl;dr


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

another farmer speaks out against the cull...if only all farmers could embrace nature and speak out for the truth the way this chap has.

Stop blaming the badgers, a cull won&#039;t solve our problem - Comment - Voices - The Independent


----------



## Knightofalbion (Jul 3, 2012)

hutch6 said:


> I apologise Knight Of Albion. I should not have wrote what I did. If admin feel it over stepped the mark then they can ban me for my conduct.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

This thread has become so surreal!




The reason for the thread has now reached 143,453 signatures


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

This is me:

:yikes::shocked::skep:ut:


----------



## koekemakranka (Aug 2, 2010)

In truth, hark the wisdom breaking forth from thy rose-plumped lips! Thou art a nebulous pinnacle of grace. Henceforth, slithy toves will beseech thee for thy artful caper. Peace be with you, Thane of All Knowledge.


----------



## Anne Marie (Sep 14, 2012)

I've gladly signed...


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

koekemakranka said:


> In truth, hark the wisdom breaking forth from thy rose-plumped lips! Thou art a nebulous pinnacle of grace. Henceforth, slithy toves will beseech thee for thy artful caper. Peace be with you, Thane of All Knowledge.


I'm sure KoA can speak for herself and it might just be me but I don't think mocking someone's turn of phrase, when they're clearly making a sincere post, comes across as particularly nice or mature 

I've read most of the posts on this thread because it's a subjest I find interesting and i've agreed and disagreed with points both hutch6 and KoA have made. It's a shame things went the way they did.


----------



## Waterlily (Apr 18, 2010)

lennythecloud said:


> I I don't think mocking someone's turn of phrase, when they're clearly making a sincere post, comes across as particularly nice or mature


Not just you, I thought it was low as well.


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

lennythecloud said:


> I'm sure KoA can speak for herself and it might just be me but I don't think mocking someone's turn of phrase, when they're clearly making a sincere post, comes across as particularly nice or mature
> 
> I've read most of the posts on this thread because it's a subjest I find interesting and i've agreed and disagreed with points both hutch6 and KoA have made. It's a shame things went the way they did.


Ah, I probably should just leave it, but.....speaking only for myself, what I found mind bogglingly hilarious and so far out of touch with reality that all I can do is laugh, are things like:

"I wasn't out for an apology"

"I very much hope we can get along in a spirit of tolerance in future" (Oh, the irony!)

"don't worry, you won't be banned"

The "gracious forgiveness" without a single word of regret for the unpleasant accusations, character bashings and complete inability to even acknowledge what has caused offence........the turn of phrase only accentuates all this, and I welcomed an injection of humour into a thread on which some very unpleasant and personal things were said.

But that's just me.


----------



## koekemakranka (Aug 2, 2010)

lennythecloud said:


> I'm sure KoA can speak for herself and it might just be me but I don't think mocking someone's turn of phrase, when they're clearly making a sincere post, comes across as particularly nice or mature
> 
> I've read most of the posts on this thread because it's a subjest I find interesting and i've agreed and disagreed with points both hutch6 and KoA have made. It's a shame things went the way they did.


O come on, it was gentle teasing. KnightsofAlbion knows that, she has a sense of humour. I also happen to love her turn of phrase. It makes a refreshing change from all the text speak and poor grammar in the media nowadays.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

lennythecloud said:


> You would risk more farms becoming infected, waste masses of money that could be spent on research and controls, risk human life when sabs come into contact with armed farmers and risk severly disrupting the eco system involved?





hutch6 said:


> Are these the same sabs that horrendously assault people and police officers as their only way to make a point is to retort with violence? Are these the same sabs that trash fishing lakes and premises causing more damage to the natural environment that is being sympathetically managed to encourage wildlife and it is a proven fact (there's your science again) that fish don't feel the pain of the hook like we do it is the resistance they react to (if you don't believe me I can easily show you this in real life) because the only way they know how to deal with something is to destroy it in such a mindless way that they actually destroy everything along with what they set out to protect not just what they were trying to protect? Are these the same sabs that are such a bunch of cowards they turn up in full guerrilla warfare outfits to hide their identity because they know they are going to have to commit a crime in ordered to get their point across? Are these the same sabs that released mink in the uk causing widespread depletion to water vole and other water fowl that they are now on the endangered species list and people turn their nose up at you when you say "I would happily shoot mink"? Are these the same sabs that harass, violate, vandalise, and destroy people's homes, possessions, family and businesses purely because they do not agree with the lifestyle choice of the individual? Are these the same sabs that lace meat/carcasses with poison to kill trail hounds? Are these the same sabs that injure horses that are out trailing, not hunting, trailing? Are these the same sabs that burn kennels down with lurchers still inside them? Are these the same sabs that are all for animal care etc yet own cats and dogs and have no idea where their pet food meat is sourced from? Are these the same sabs that are all for causing wanton destruction etc and hurt people yet as soon as a few big lads start having a go back they start screaming and hiding behind the police?


To answer my questions regarding your remark about sabs and farmers, I will take the answer to all o fmy question about what type of sabs we are talking about as a resounding "yes".

Activists pose as Government officials in covert operation to stop badger cull - Telegraph

Supermarkets threatened with vandalism in campaign against badger cull - Telegraph

Anti-badger cull activists target farmer's wife - 9/25/2012 - Farmers Weekly

Supermarkets face protests over support for badger cull | Environment | guardian.co.uk

Badger cull farmers are targeted by activists

Are these really concerned or aware of the bigger picture or are they just out to cause violence and vandalism with the cull as an excuse?

I have to say, a smile comes across my face when I think about them out in the dark totally focussed on disrupting the marksman but don't see any of the dog lads coming up behind them in the darkness of night. There'll be a few getting surprised and I wonder what they'll do next. Show remorse for disrupting people's lives in the surrounding area, for tresspassing, maybe they sent threatening letters and harrassed people? I doubt it. They'll do what they always do and run straigjht to the law as soon as it suits them because they had a cause to support so it wasn't a crime they were comitting when they were threatening businesses and lives


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*


noushka05 said:



Brain May is on the Alan Titchmarsh show today on ITV at 3pm...for anyone whos interested

Click to expand...

I wish i had known,i don't have my telly on until early evening.



Anne Marie said:



I've gladly signed...

Click to expand...

Thank you for your support.
*


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

myshkin said:


> Ah, I probably should just leave it, but.....speaking only for myself, what I found mind bogglingly hilarious and so far out of touch with reality that all I can do is laugh, are things like:
> 
> "I wasn't out for an apology"
> 
> ...


I can see where your coming from but I interpreted KoA post differerntly, it seemed more genuine to me. Things were said from both sides that shouldn't have been said but if people thought there was something wrong with KoA post they should have picked her up on what she said rather than make fun of the way she says it (i'm assuming KoA's female, sorry if you're not!).

I have a friend who's had alot of stick in her life for the way she speaks (she's autistic) and it upsets her but when you listen to what she's saying it's actually very intellegent stuff. That's why I felt the need to comment on koekemakranka post.


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

lennythecloud said:


> I can see where your coming from but I interpreted KoA post differerntly, it seemed more genuine to me. Things were said from both sides that shouldn't have been said but if people thought there was something wrong with KoA post they should have picked her up on what she said rather than make fun of the way she says it (i'm assuming KoA's female, sorry if you're not!).
> 
> I have a friend who's had alot of stick in her life for the way she speaks (she's autistic) and it upsets her but when you listen to what she's saying it's actually very intellegent stuff. That's why I felt the need to comment on koekemakranka post.


Fair enough, interpretation can be all, and I take your point on why you would comment.
Thing is, lots of people, me included *did *pick up on what we disagreed with, and found it was completely ignored, time and time again. So sometimes (again, speaking for myself) humour can be a way of releasing frustration without getting irate.

But fair play to you for speaking out.

I assumed male, the username and a blog called the Holy Lance all seem like very phallocentric symbolism to me....but again, interpretation!


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

hutch6 said:


> To answer my questions regarding your remark about sabs and farmers, I will take the answer to all o fmy question about what type of sabs we are talking about as a resounding "yes".
> 
> Activists pose as Government officials in covert operation to stop badger cull - Telegraph
> 
> ...


I actually have a familly member whe sabbed fox hunts pre-ban. I wouldn't do what she did but she's certainly no thug and now runs a reputable animal sanctuary, her aim when she went out was purely to disrupt the course of the hunt without harming animals, people or property. I fully accept that not all sabs are like that and some of them ARE in it for violence and vandalism but I know for a fact some are in it out of genuine concern for the animals. Some hunting folk can be equally nasty towards sabs and both sets unfortunately often end up assaulting and even killing each other.

Now I don't care whether or not a sab is a thug or if it's completely stupid to go running around at night in front of guns - they are someone's loved partner, parent or offspring and they do not deserve to bleed to death in a field for the sake of a few badgers or cows. Equally the marksman does not deserve to have the fact that they ended up killing a person on their conscience or derserve to be harmed by a sab that is a thug. I think the public safety issue with shooting free running badgers should concern people who place any value on human life, no matter what they think of the cull.

"Detective chief superintendent Adrian Tudway, national co-ordinator for domestic extremism at the Association of Chief Police Officers, told Defra officials: "Farmers and landowners culling badgers with firearms (of any description) has potential to place armed farm workers in the near vicinity of protesters and activists, typically during the night-time; we regard this as a scenario with clear potential for harm to public safety  we believe there is a likelihood [of] incidents of lawful protest and lobbying as well as some potential for unlawful direct action, disorder and criminality." He also referred to reduced police resources owing to "the impact of the recent funding cuts"." -

Badger cull poses risk to public safety, ministers told | Environment | The Guardian


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *
> 
> I wish i had known,i don't have my telly on until early evening.
> 
> ...


here you are Janice this arrogant pig of a farmer isnt really helping their image is he!

[youtube_browser]ypyUZvHLGCg[/youtube_browser]


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

just seen this doing the rounds and it is Brilliant!!! im sure Hutch and other Chris Packham fans will enjoy it...and even those who arnt come to that lol.

:001_wub::drool:

[youtube_browser]rLecWtR1axQ[/youtube_browser]


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> here you are Janice this arrogant pig of a farmer isnt really helping their image is he!
> 
> [youtube_browser]ypyUZvHLGCg[/youtube_browser]


*You've probably already seen this on FB, but here's what Brian had to say.*
"Hello dear folks.

Just checking in. I get so little time to write these days - the campaign to save the badgers has become pretty much a full-time job for me - and really not the job I wanted in life.

But so many of you are pitching in and being so supportive. I just wanted to say thanks again.

Your reactions to the 'The Yelling Farmer" on the Titchmarsh Show have been very encouraging. (see ..) He seems to have done his own cause a lot of damage by behaving so badly  and, as many of you have said, it's good that people finally got to see the kind of mentality we are really up against.

The Petition is still growing - I'm amazed how much is going on out there  because every day these are not just the same people 'voting' - which would be impressive enough  every day NEW people are going to the trouble of clicking those buttons and filling in the form on the Government website, putting on record how they feel about the imminent killing of so many wonderful animals.

We do get news from various quarters, and it's not at all clear whether all the conditions will be met for the cull to go ahead. But the NFU is still talking confidently to its members - absolutely relishing the thought of finally getting their own way, and going on this incredibly pointless and vindictive killing spree. As you saw on Titchmarsh, many of the farmers are not the kind of people who can listen to logical arguments  they are utterly convinced that they know best - after all, they have been 'in the field' for years, so how could anyone presume to tell them what to do. But the sad truth is that they have been doing it for years, but they are now failing  and the attitude of 'we will not change' is exactly the attitude which may cause the death of the Farming industry. This is not what any of us wanted. But what would we 'townies' know?

We have a healthy and growing number of badger-friendly farmers now, and our friends at TB Rethink are putting together a new website for them to rally. It's been so hard for enlightened farmers to stand up and be counted  they have so much fear of ridicule and ostracisation from their pro-cull colleagues. But now they we will be able to be sure that they are not alone. These are the new wave thinkers in Farming. They advocate better conditions for the animals they breed, and decent treatment of the wildlife that surrounds them. It may take a while, but they must be the winners in the end. We thank them for their courage.

And - yes there is still, even in the midst of these horrors . music.

I will be on the road with KERRY to make some beautiful music in November  I've been rediscovering my love for the acoustic guitar .. and we have been working hard on new arrangements. Somehow the songs speak louder than ever with very simple treatments. When you have a great singer, who doesn't need to embroider for the sake of it, but just speaks from the heart  the more subtle and empathetic the accompanimnet is, the more the beauty comes through. Well, so it seems to me. Kerry still has a couple of nights left in her week at the Hippodrome in London - you might still get a ticket if you're quick, for these very intimate nights  and  well, you never know who might turn up to play with her  ! Her last night is this Saturday. You have been warned !!

On a different subject  yes, I am still working hard on the Diableries (though it's been hard to keep making the time available) . We will have our first set of Diableries STEREO CARDS hopefully for Halloween ! This has been hard labour, but very exciting in itself. The cards WILL have magic eyes, not in the same way as the 1860s originals  but by a process which nobody has thought of before ! We think you will love them !

One more word on the Petition. Please do keep telling everyone you meet about the fate of the badgers. I still meet countless people who still have no idea that it's going on  and they are outraged when they hear about it. I just keep saying 'please go to TeamBadger.org and press the button. If we all get even 5 new poeple every day, we'll eventually get to the whole population  and the people DO care. We just passed the number 3 live petition on the site  another milestone. It would be great, in a week or so, to overtake the other two, and be the top petition on the site. We might just do it. It will all help us get the issue debated in Parliament.

so  again . a million  THANKS!!

Bri

XXX
18Like · · Share


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

noushka05 said:


> just seen this doing the rounds and it is Brilliant!!! im sure Hutch and other Chris Packham fans will enjoy it...and even those who arnt come to that lol.
> 
> :001_wub::drool:
> 
> [youtube_browser]rLecWtR1axQ[/youtube_browser]


:laugh::laugh:

I think noushka's come over all unecessary after watching that!


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

lennythecloud said:


> Some hunting folk can be equally nasty towards sabs


Yes there are usually reasons for that which I have explained.

I don't think anyone is going to have an uncovered rifle if there are people about, it goes against all common sense with shooters.

A few comments on the cull from inside the farming community for you:

"To quote Brian May: "I don't want a single badger to be killed" Mr May, I don't wnat a single cow to be killed . Can you please help them too?"

"Farmers don't have an in-built hatred of badgers - the drive for a badger cull is created by watching our visually healthy livestock killed for failing a test. If vaccination was a legal option the same, if not more, support would be voiced by the farming community.
I'm concerned to see the number of posts stating - or implying - that farmers do not care about, or care for , their livestick. I'd liek to make it clear that, although modern farming enterprises have to be managed as abusinesses, farmers care about their livestock. We aren;t in the business to cvause pain and suffering."

"I'm an animal lover so I hate the idea of a cull, but I can't believe the hypocrisy of the UK public. A few weeks ago they were all up in arms over milk prices and farmer's livelihoods. Now they want these self-same farmers to go out of business rather than be able to protect their livestock. Shows their ignorance of what farmers do for the country and countryside."

"If TB is simply spread from cow to cow, how do you explain the disease spreading from one lotof cattle, which are housed inside on one farm and od not have any contact with any other cattle, to another lot of cattle on another farm? The cattle are not skipping over the gate to go and say hello to fellow bovins. It's obvious a third party is involved - badgers. This is commen sense really".


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

I don't know how much awareness is out there of why a vaccination scheme is not being used so I thought I'd write an easy to understand explanation of why the government are not going down the vaccination route and why farmers can't vaccinate cattle (I hope I'm not telling folk how to suck eggs).

*Badgers.*

In order to be effective a vaccination scheme would have to run for a number of years to ensure that "clean" animals were properly vaccinated and allow the infected population to die to reduce the risk of contracting the disease in the setts.
The vaccinating process is a very costly one. Not only has there been £millions spent on developing, researching and trialling a vaccination but the whole trapping and vaccinating process is time consuming and costly. 
The vaccination available is not 100% effective either and would have zero effect on an already infected animal meaning the disease can still be spread by animals already infected or ones that the vaccination was not effective on.
Reducing badger number will allow vaccinating to be more effective as you are dealing with less numbers so it is more likely that all badgers in the area have the chance to be vaccinated.
There is a planned £15.5M investment being ploughed into the research and development of an oral vaccine that is both cheaper and will be more effective as numerous individuals can be vaccinated at the same time rather than the time consuming task of trapping individuals. This vaccine is also being developed to be effective on both badgers and cattle but is a number of years off and there is then the licencing application and grant to go through.

*Cattle.*

As it stands it is ILLEGAL under EU ruling to vaccinate cattle with the current vaccine available. This sounds ridiculous but I shall explain.
The vaccine for cattle is pretty effective but when the cattle are put through their routine herd testing procedure, every six months or so, the vaccination actually produces a positive result in the TB tests meaning that although the vaccinated cow does not have TB the TB will show a positive result to show it does have TB. This leads to a wide open field of issues and could mean that although a cow has had regular vaccination the vaccination might not have been effective so the cow does actually have TB and because the rest of the herd show the same positive result then there are no movement restrictions placed on the herd so the disease can be spread to an area where there is not TB purely by the sale of that cow. It also means that there is an infected animal in the area spreading disease to neighbouring areas and the wildlife within those areas. That is why the current vaccine is illegal.

I hope that gives a decent explanation.

You might ask "So if it isn't 100% effective on badgers then the badgers left by the cull will still be open for contracting the disease despite their depleted numbers so there is no point having the cull if there is a reservoir of the disease in both wildlife and livestock, so why have you not signed the petition and add your voice to as you have just proved the cull is a ridiculous idea in the first place?"

Well, I have signed numerous petitions calling for a halt to the cull when it was cancelled previously as well as the badger cull that did go ahead previously. Farm Minister David Heath has categorically stated that regardless of what fuss the public kick up about the cull and even if it is opened for debate in parliament and he would welcome such debate, there is not going be any reversal of the government policy.
There are two sides to my reasons for not signing other than the cull WILL be going ahead:

1. I want the trial to show that culls are not effective on their own and the government has got this incredibly wrong and should be ashamed of themselves. If the cull didn't happen then there would be call after call after call for one. At least if they have one in a small area relative to the rest of the UK then the results will show this and they have no reason for calling for another cull as they have been proved to be ineffective - shut up, get on with it, you'll look like idiots and it will be out there for all to see and you have no reason to call for another cull of badgers ever again.

2. Yes, there are farmers that purely blame the badgers and again the go ahead will give them what they want and the results will prove them wrong and they can stop blaming the wildlife when this is such a small issue in the huge problem.

The cull will shut both sides up and prove once and for all there is no benefit in a cull. It could be worse and it could be nationwide which would be catastrophic. I will always champion UK farming but those few that believe the issue is purely down to badgers will have to point the finger of blame somewhere else.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*Taken from the clip which noushka put up,for those who didn't watch it.
Brian May says.*
" isg did the only impartial experiment,cost the tax payer £50 million,
it took ten years, 11 thousand badgers died.
And the conclusion was, culling badgers will NOT solve the problem."

*So why kill more?*


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *You've probably already seen this on FB, but here's what Brian had to say.*
> "Hello dear folks.
> 
> Just checking in. I get so little time to write these days - the campaign to save the badgers has become pretty much a full-time job for me - and really not the job I wanted in life.
> ...


he couldnt be battling any harder for the badgers could he, what a great bloke he is...think i'll pop my Queen cd on now



myshkin said:


> :laugh::laugh:
> 
> I think noushka's come over all unecessary after watching that!


hahaa well i dont get out much



hutch6 said:


> Yes there are usually reasons for that which I have explained.
> 
> thats a matter of opinion, most sabs are animal lovers a lot of what you read is pro-hunt propaganda.
> 
> ...


yes badgers (and other wildlife!) can spread bTB, but the majority of badgers are healthy with only a tiny minority infectious...but when they are stressed their immune system drops and makes them more suseptible to the disease, which is what scientists fear will happen with the cull, more badgers becoming infectious!

so, how do you explain that 40% of farms in the middle of these bTB hotspots have been TB free for 10yrs??....better husbandry maybe!

(anyone interested in avoiding dairy from pro-cull farms can buy Yeo Valley dairy they wont be culling on any of their farms)

.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> I don't know how much awareness is out there of why a vaccination scheme is not being used so I thought I'd write an easy to understand explanation of why the government are not going down the vaccination route and why farmers can't vaccinate cattle (I hope I'm not telling folk how to suck eggs).
> 
> the Government and the farmers are using badgers as the scapegoat.. simple as!!
> 
> ...


but the trials are flawed before they begin for a start, they wont be testing the carcasses, they dont even know how many badgers there are...so how could they possibly come to a valid conclusion when they dont even know that?

anyway the pilot culls are only being done to see if badgers can be killed efficiently & humanely by free shooting them ( a cheaper method!)...if its deemed they are then it will be rolled out across the whole country and tens of thousands more badgers will suffer the same fate!...


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *Taken from the clip which noushka put up,for those who didn't watch it.
> Brian May says.*
> " isg did the only impartial experiment,cost the tax payer £50 million,
> it took ten years, 11 thousand badgers died.
> ...


Did the isg study suggest that culling badgers, along with other measures, would help?

Or was the suggestion just that alone it would not help?

I ask because I've heard a speaker suggest in combination it would be of help.

Does anyone have a link?

(I'm still reading the evidence for myself).

Think I found it - http://archive.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/farmanimal/diseases/atoz/tb/isg/report/final_report.pdf

CC


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

> . . . First, while badgers are clearly a source of cattle TB, careful evaluation of our own and others' data indicates that badger culling can make no meaningful contribution to cattle TB control in Britain. Indeed, some policies under consideration are likely to make matters worse rather than better. Second, weaknesses in cattle testing regimes mean that cattle themselves contribute significantly to the persistence and spread of the disease in all areas where TB occurs, and in some parts of Britain are likely to be the main source of infection . . .
> 
> . . . Scientific findings indicate that the rising incidence of disease can be reversed, and geographical spread contained, by the rigid application of cattle-based control measures alone . . .


Did a quick skim read.

So, as I understand this so far Badgers do transfer TB to cattle.

I have some questions for those who know.

It seems the best way forward is to vaccinate/test cattle. Have I got it right that in the UK regulations have tied hands so that can't be done?

What proposals have been put forward to help farmers stop the spread of TB in cattle - that they are allowed to implement?

Currently are they just using the method of killing cattle and herds found affected?

CC


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

comfortcreature said:


> Did a quick skim read.
> 
> So, as I understand this so far Badgers do transfer TB to cattle.


Yep that's known for certain.



comfortcreature said:


> I have some questions for those who know.
> 
> It seems the best way forward is to vaccinate/test cattle. Have I got it right that in the UK regulations have tied hands so that can't be done?


Correct. Because animals that have been vaccinated with the BCG are currently indistinguishable from those infected with bTB. Our export market would die overnight if we started to vaccinate because people wouldn't risk importing infected cattle.

The holy grail of TB control is to develop a test that can distugish between a cow infected with microbacterium bovis and a cow that has the microbacterium bovis antigen as the result of BCG vaccination. There's alot of research going on into this.



comfortcreature said:


> What proposals have been put forward to help farmers stop the spread of TB in cattle - that they are allowed to implement?


Not much and that's what makes it so frustrating for them though husbandry is a good place to start. Electric fencing can be used to keep badgers out of cattle sheds and from feeding areas. TB loves damp overcrowded areas with immunocompromised animals so shed design and stocking are important. Also monitoring cattle movement is essential - cattle to cattle transmission is still thought to be the most important factor in bTB spread.



comfortcreature said:


> Currently are they just using the method of killing cattle and herds found affected?


Yep we use the test and slaughter method in the UK. Herds are tested every 1-4 years (depending on area) with what's known as the intradermal comparative skin test (TST). Positive animals are slaughtered and the whole herd is put under movement restrictions and are retested before these are lifted.

The problem with the TST is that it doesn't always show up infected animals, it can be subjective and there's potential for other skin lesions to interfere with results.

There is an alternative test called the interferon gamma release assay that gives far more accurate results. I'm not sure what they're doing with that - it may still be in the research phase or it may be too expensive. The thing about the IGRA test is that it has a better potenial to develop a diagnostic to differenciate between infected and vaccinate animals.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

just had a trawl through this thread to clarify a common misconception about these pilot culls, they are NOT to test for any reduction in bTB! they are soley to see if badgers can be killed humanely by free shooting them! This pilot cull wont be overseen by independant scientists and statisticians with no vested interests as in the ISG trial but by the Bovine eradication group, chaired by a farmer with 5 more farmers and members of the NFU! so what chance do our badgers have  ???



[QUOTE said:


> hutch6;1062284505].
> 
> , ?
> 
> A few pilot tests to see what effect losing a couple of hundred badgers out of a 56K(est) population to not see if the management and control of this industry crippling issue can be improved but also the badger population can be improved in health as well. IT has its drawbacks but it also has much greater benefits for all species involved


.

QUOTE]



hutch6 said:


> .
> .
> 
> I can clearly see both sides of the argument for and against a cull, but I clearly see a benefit to everything in having the trial cull. If it doesn't work then a few badgers have been sacrificed, it could've been a heck of a lot worse and if that was the case then I'd be out standing in front of guns at feeding stations.
> ...





hutch6 said:


> .
> 
> ? Even if the results show that the cull did not have a direct impact on bTB cases in cattle then the proof is there for all to see clear and wide and the badgers can be left to repopulate and even setts split and relocated to fill the gaps. If the scientific reports on the impact badgers have on bTB are correct then the badgers don't have anything to worry about long term and everybody can move on from blaming them once and for all. It is a win win situation for badgers and the ones that are culled will be martyred I am sure.





hutch6 said:


> :
> 
> Not once have I said that the badger cull will "stop bTB". What have said on numerous occasions which you seemed to have not read or read and not understood despite me using basic English is - There are other carriers of the disease other than badgers such as deer and wild boar. The science is solid I have never said it isn't, but yes, I am sad to say that if this shuts up everyone blaming badgers and continually calling for cull after cull with people eventually losing the drive to petition against it which could result in a national cull not just a few small areas in the bigger picture, then yes, I am for the trial cull. After that everyone can sit smugly in their wingback chairs and say "I told you so" and that includes me. IF after the trial it is shown to NOT make a difference which I believe it won't and yet there is still call for a cull then I'll be shouting louder than any of you guys will to prevent further culls on badgers.
> 
> ...





hutch6 said:


> If it was 70% of the entire UK population I'd be out stood in front of rifles, which I doubt some on here would do, but it is 70% of a small area of the UK.
> 
> .


this abysmal, immoral government are using the farmers to do their dirty...and they will do it!!

up to 130,000 out of the UK badger population of approx 288,000 will die!! unless we can pressure them into doing yet another u turn!

.
over 151,000 have now signed the petition, please keep sharing it everyone


----------



## alan g a (Feb 23, 2011)

I forget who it was who said that this petition ended last week, but they wrong. The figure stands at over 152,000.
Out of interest the closing date is 07/09/2013


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Just an update for anybody who still thinks the opposition to the badger cull is purely coming from fluffy badger lovers or stupid people who know nothing about the countryside. This letter came out today and is signed by 30 of the very, very best scientists working in disease and wildlife management today. -

"Bovine tuberculosis is a serious problem for UK farmers, deserving the highest standard of evidence-based management. The government's TB-control policy for England includes licensing farmers to cull badgers. As scientists with expertise in managing wildlife and wildlife diseases, we believe the complexities of TB transmission mean that licensed culling risks increasing cattle TB rather than reducing it.

Even if such increases do not materialise, the government predicts only limited benefits, insufficient to offset the costs for either farmers or taxpayers. Unfortunately, the imminent pilot culls are too small and too short term to measure the impacts of licensed culling on cattle TB before a wider roll-out of the approach. The necessarily stringent licensing conditions mean that many TB-affected areas of England will remain ineligible for such culling. We are concerned that badger culling risks becoming a costly distraction from nationwide TB control.

We recognise the importance of eradicating bovine TB and agree that this will require tackling the disease in badgers. Unfortunately, culling badgers as planned is very unlikely to contribute to TB eradication. We therefore urge the government to reconsider its strategy.

Professor Sir Patrick Bateson FRS
University of Cambridge and president of the Zoological Society of London, and 30 others (see observer.co.uk/letters) 
Professor Mike Begon, University of Liverpool ;
Professor Tim Blackburn, Zoological Society of London ; 
Professor John Bourne CBE, former Chairman, Independent Scientific Group on Cattle TB; 
Professor William Sutherland, University of Cambridge;
Professor Terry Burke, University of Sheffield;
Dr Chris Cheeseman, formerly Food & Environment Research Agency;
Professor Sarah Cleaveland, University of Glasgow;
Professor Tim Clutton Brock FRS, University of Cambridge ;
Professor Andrew Dobson, Princeton University;
Dr Matthew Fisher, Imperial College London; 
Dr Trent Garner, Zoological Society of London;
Professor Stephen Harris, University of Bristol; 
Professor Daniel Haydon, University of Glasgow;
Professor Peter Hudson FRS, Pennsylvania State University;
Professor Kate Jones, University College London; 
Professor Matt Keeling, University of Warwick; 
Professor Richard Kock, Royal Veterinary College;
Professor Lord Krebs Kt FRS, University of Oxford;
Dr Karen Laurenson, Frankfurt Zoological Society;
Professor Sir John Lawton CBE FRS, former chief executive of the Natural Environment Research Council; 
Professor Simon Levin, Princeton University;
Professor Georgina Mace FRS, University College London;
Professor Jonna Mazet, University of California, Davis School of Veterinary Medicine; 
Professor Lord May OM AC Kt FRS, University of Oxford; 
Professor Graham Medley, University of Warwick;
Professor E.J. Milner-Gulland, Imperial College London; 
Professor Denis Mollison, former Independent Scientific Auditor to the Randomised Badger Culling Trial; 
Professor Pej Rohani, University of Michigan; 
Dr Tony Sainsbury, Zoological Society of London; 
Professor Claudio Sillero, University of Oxford; 
Professor Rosie Woodroffe, Zoological Society of London"

Culling badgers could increase the problem of TB in cattle | letters | From the Observer | The Observer


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Ecology and Policy Blog » Blog Archive » The 200 year old debate to cullor not to cull?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Im sure most have heard already but thanks to Brian May & Team badger a 6 hour debate has been secured in parliament for the 25th of october.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> Im sure most have heard already but thanks to Brian May & Team badger a 6 hour debate has been secured in parliament for the 25th of october.


*Great news..Well done to Brian and all those that signed the petition.:thumbup:*


----------



## Anne Marie (Sep 14, 2012)

Sorry to sound dumb but have we lost the battle against the  mindless killers?

someone just told me they start shooting anytime tonight....

God, I hope she is wrong.


----------



## noogsy (Aug 20, 2009)

done on facebook x


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*"Well, last week, with Gavin Grant, chief executive of the RSPCA, and a delegation from TeamBadger, I visited Brussels to find out why the EU would not allow us to vaccinate our cows. We were joined, at our request, by a representative from the NFU.
What we discovered is a bomb that will blow the idea of culling badgers out of the water for ever. We were warmly welcomed at the European Parliament by MEPs of all parties  90 per cent against culling wild animals, and 100 per cent in favour of helping us make cattle vaccination in Britain happen. 
Next stop was the European Commission. Why, we asked Georg Haeusler, Chef de Cabinet for Agriculture, would the EU not let us vaccinate cows?
He looked at us in surprise and said: But this is not true. You British are welcome to. You would find it was not possible to sell cows into the mainland of Europe because we would be risking bringing bTB into our countries.
*

This cruel badger cull is pointless - and I can prove it, says Queen guitarist Brian May | Mail Online


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Great news for badger lovers everywhere, not to mention the poor badgers!...Looks like odious Owen Paterson is about to announce the cull is to be delayed! Yet another U Turn for this inept Government! lets hope this means its scrapped altogether!

Defra's Benyon has already refused to ban the poison carbofuron, used by gamekeepers to kill raptors, what a vile bunch of wildlife killers this bunch morons are:cursing:

Badger cull to be delayed as Tories take another U-turn | Environment | The Guardian


----------



## alan g a (Feb 23, 2011)

Excelent news. 
:thumbup:


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

alan g a said:


> Excelent news.
> :thumbup:


Yes it's great news, but we must keep the petition going.
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*I thought i'd add the link again just in case anyone else would like to sign it..
Stop the badger cull - e-petitions*


----------



## alan g a (Feb 23, 2011)

More good news guys.

BBC News - Badger cull: Government to delay scheme until next year

The petition is now 162,000+


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

The Anti's won the vote by an overwhelming majority of 147 to 28!!

MPs inflict badger cull defeat on government - as it happened | Environment | guardian.co.uk


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*Bumping up just in case more want to sign the petition.:thumbup1::thumbup:*


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*Interesting footage.*
BBC News - Badger cull: Queen&#039;s Brian May on sett in his garden


----------



## alan g a (Feb 23, 2011)

Bobbie said:


> I know your heart might be in the right place but have you ever witnessed a farmers distress when his animals are affected? and he loses them all. I have. But on the same note if you go down to our beach very early the badgers are there sometimes with their young. So I have a foot in both camps.


Yes. I worked on a farm. I was nearly married to a farmers daughter. ( She was tragically killed in a farming accident but that's another story ).
There are several solutions to the problem. Killing badgers is not one of them.
The biggest cause of the transfer of foot and mouth from one herd to another is Man. Do you suggest that the human race be culled too?


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

alan g a said:


> The biggest cause of the transfer of foot and mouth from one herd to another is Man. Do you suggest that the human race be culled too?


Not a bad idea actually

BUT, will someone explain why upon walking in off the street into a hospital, im asked to use the anti-bacterial hand gel, did i walk on my hands to get there? its my feet that have been in contact with any crap outside the ward

Its ironic i can walk into a hospital in any attire and state of cleanliness but if entering an abattoir/slaughter house i need wellies, a white coat and a hair net and have to go through a boot wash...


----------



## alan g a (Feb 23, 2011)

Colliebarmy said:


> Not a bad idea actually
> 
> BUT, will someone explain why upon walking in off the street into a hospital, im asked to use the anti-bacterial hand gel, did i walk on my hands to get there? its my feet that have been in contact with any crap outside the ward
> 
> Its ironic i can walk into a hospital in any attire and state of cleanliness but if entering an abattoir/slaughter house i need wellies, a white coat and a hair net and have to go through a boot wash...


The truth is that being clean is important, but you can take this too far. You may kill all the in your home, which is fine. One day you have a child. It is brought up in a clean germ environment. It therefore does not build a natural resistance to common illnesses, leaving to all kinds of illnesses. the it steps out of protective environment.


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

When we had foot and mouth in the UK all vehicles going into and out of farms went through a foot deep dip of antiseptic type stuff, when we had MRSA in hospitals i didnt see anything like that?


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

Bumperty bump bump bump!!

Look, it's all in here.


----------



## hutch6 (May 9, 2008)

SIGNED!!!!!! :dita:


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hutch6 said:


> SIGNED!!!!!! :dita:


OMG i think i love you  :thumbup:

as a friend of course


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*


hutch6 said:



SIGNED!!!!!! :dita:

Click to expand...

Well done and thank you.



noushka05 said:



OMG i think i love you  :thumbup:

as a friend of course

Click to expand...

Me too.:thumbup:*


----------

