# More Fox Hunting Lies Exposed!



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

http://www.league.org.uk/news-and-o...rn-linked-to-high-profile-hunt-claims-charity

IF - as so many hunters claim - fox hunting is needed to keep pest control down, why then would there be 16 cubs holed up in a shed on land linked to a hunt in North Yorkshire???

This proves that most hunters who are into FOX hunting (not proper drag hunting that some do adhere to) are blood-thirsty morons who get their cheap thrills from killing.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

'Man is the cruelest animal'

_Friedrich Nietzsche

He is too, and I'm no exception. I often wish grave ill on those who commit acts of cruelty against animals and wonder what method I might choose for punishing the guilty. _


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

I don't know much about fox hunting but I cannot see why on earth a hunt would do this. They would be far more interested in the vixens to hunt if they are still hunting.....................much more "sport"

Now the terrier man himself, could have wanted to rear them to train his terriers on when they got a little bigger. Nothing to really link that to the hunt though


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

I've always understood that cubs are used to train the young hounds 

Foxes are encouraged to breed in certain areas, in order to provide cubs and foxes to hunt in the coming season.

There really is nothing positive to be said about fox hunting :Rage


----------



## Muze (Nov 30, 2011)

Very sad, as I said recently, actually a very good friend of mine is very pro fox hunting and openly admits he loves it 'when the hounds get in there and start ripping at the fox' and said it would just be liek me swatting a wasp..... it's an odd one and, unfortunately, I think reality is that certain kinds of people who do get a primitive kick out of it :/


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Hunting doesn't start again for some months. 

Maybe it's to release them to the wild later to give that particular hunt foxes to 'accidentally' hunt with their young hounds, particularly now they're not actually allowed to do it 'normally'. Some hunts probably did like actually hunting foxes, it's less predictable than following a man-made trail. If those hunts are now breaking the law, imho, they should be disbanded. Any single person breaking the law, should be barred from working for, or attending any hunt imo. 

I'm not so naive as to believe everyone who organises, or attends a hunt, is whiter than white, but if they want any support at all they should be trying to be that's for sure. I'm not entirely convinced that hunts raised young foxes to release in front of the hounds to give sport as is rumoured though. The sport wouldn't last for very long, if the fox was caught practically before he started to run, which would be likely. Most of the fun to be had for most people was following the scent, which may or may not lead to a fox, not the split second of his death. Maybe, just maybe, I could have been led to believe that some hunts would kill a few captured foxes to prove they were being successful at their job on a less successful day, but it's a stretch.

Cubbing was about training the young hounds what to kill and dispersing and culling the fox population, of course they can't do that now. It didn't start until the Autumn though, when fox cubs would be older. None of the hunts I went on released foxes into the wild, or gave the young hounds foxes to 'play' with, or committed any other rumoured crimes. They were more matter of fact, doing a job they thought necessary at the time, in a way tradition told was acceptable. Birds are brought into the country and raised here, before being released into the wild to be shot, but not foxes.

The more actual evidence of misbehaviour by (fox) hunts, the less likely there will be a positive result for them in any vote or referendum. They will be hoist by their own petard with any luck. But the various groups will need evidence, not rumour and hearsay.

Hopefully those breaking the law will end up disbanded eventually and those not breaking the law will be allowed to continue with their drag and trail hunts.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

Just to pick up on Muze's point and to bring back what someone posted re killing spiders some time ago: is it ok to kill insects and rodents (sorry if you're into your rats etc) but not foxes? Is it because foxes are seen as typically part of the British countryside and are cute to look like and resemble dogs?

If people think it's ok to eliminate perceived 'pests' eg rats, pigeons or rabbits, do they not think the same applies to foxes? I don't think it's at all on to chase down an animal and kill it, shoot if you absolutely must or trap and relocate (although I know that's not a great idea).

Nice inflammatory title, btw. And the link from a non-judgmental source.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

The farmer next door to where I had my horses in the foot and mouth year, so some years ago now, put poison down for the rats. We had some pretty severe flooding at the time too, so the rats came in to get away from the floods. I moved my hay and pallets and underneath was a family of rats. Babies laying next to mother who had probably been poisoned. It was horrible, I still get sad thinking about it now.  I've seen rats poisoned, trapped and drowned, attacked with pitchforks, climbing into water buckets dying of dehydration. What we do to rats doesn't bear thinking about.


----------



## suewhite (Oct 31, 2009)

Elles said:


> The farmer next door to where I had my horses in the foot and mouth year, so some years ago now, put poison down for the rats. We had some pretty severe flooding at the time too, so the rats came in to get away from the floods. I moved my hay and pallets and underneath was a family of rats. Babies laying next to mother who had probably been poisoned. It was horrible, I still get sad thinking about it now. I've seen rats poisoned, trapped and drowned, attacked with pitchforks, climbing into water buckets dying of dehydration. What we do to rats doesn't bear thinking about.


I had the same in my garden mother and babies in the nest lying cuddled up dead when my neighbour called the pest control,so I decided never again but within a few months the rat population was unbelievable.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

The trouble with shooting is to be ensured of a clean kill you'd probably have to capture, or dig out the animal first anyway. I can't see too many expert snipers being available to hang around waiting for a fox to pop up and they'd be pretty expensive to employ even if they would do it. A sniper is very skilled and highly trained and that's to shoot humans, who are bigger and slower than foxes. Maybe I'm wrong and shooting them would be easier than I think it would. I'm with Ouesi really though, I don't think there's proof that there's much need to kill foxes at all really, but if they do, I'm not convinced shooting is the best way either.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

Lurcherlad said:


> I've always understood that cubs are used to train the young hounds
> 
> Foxes are encouraged to breed in certain areas, in order to provide cubs and foxes to hunt in the coming season.
> 
> There really is nothing positive to be said about fox hunting :Rage


So they use the cubs in the same way as those who use bait dogs in fights?


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

cinnamontoast said:


> Just to pick up on Muze's point and to bring back what someone posted re killing spiders some time ago: is it ok to kill insects and rodents (sorry if you're into your rats etc) but not foxes? Is it because foxes are seen as typically part of the British countryside and are cute to look like and resemble dogs?
> 
> If people think it's ok to eliminate perceived 'pests' eg rats, pigeons or rabbits, do they not think the same applies to foxes? I don't think it's at all on to chase down an animal and kill it, shoot if you absolutely must or trap and relocate (although I know that's not a great idea).


Whilst I don't like to think of most animals being hurt - I put my spiders outside btw, never kill them - I can live with it being done in a kind & humane manner. NOTHING about fox hunting is kind or humane!



> Nice inflammatory title, btw. And the link from a non-judgmental source.


My title is merely truthful and, given the story was all over the news last night, I think the source is irrelevent.

Only someone in favour of fox hunting would think otherwise.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

MoggyBaby said:


> Only someone in favour of fox hunting would think otherwise.


That is seriously untrue. Being a sceptic doesn't make anyone in favour of (or against) fox-hunting. It just makes you a sceptic who doesn't believe everything you read on the Internet. In other words, sensible.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Dogloverlou said:


> So they use the cubs in the same way as those who use bait dogs in fights?


No. Maybe some moron would, but no, that's not the idea. Cubbing was in the Autumn, when the fox cubs are older. Young hounds are taken out hunting with older hounds to learn their trade. The hunting was a little slower, started earlier in the day and the young hounds were taught to ignore other scents and what they are meant to do when they go hunting proper. They didn't have foxes taken out of a box and dangled in front of them.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

Elles said:


> No. Maybe some moron would, but no, that's not the idea. Cubbing was in the Autumn, when the fox cubs are older. Young hounds are taken out hunting with older hounds to learn their trade. The hunting was a little slower, started earlier in the day and the young hounds were taught to ignore other scents and what they are meant to do when they go hunting proper. They didn't have foxes taken out of a box and dangled in front of them.


So why were young cubs kept at the premises in the story linked? To teach the hounds to scent? I'm not understanding.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

I have no idea dogloverlou.  Maybe to let loose to make 'accidental' hunts more likely, maybe to give to the terriers as suggested, maybe the bloke is called Jeffrey Dahmer. Or we could be really, really generous (and stupid probably lol) and say he rescued them when their mothers were run over. Either way, fox hunting is now illegal and any morons using captured foxes in the past, or present should be put against the wall and shot imo and that would be too good for them.

ETA: Rumour has it that fox pee is used by some hunts to set the trail, so maybe they were kept like premarin mares and their urine collected.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

MoggyBaby said:


> My title is merely truthful and, given the story was all over the news last night, I think the source is irrelevent.
> 
> Only someone in favour of fox hunting would think otherwise.


Rubbish. You can't expect a balanced view from LACS, much as you can't expect one from say a pro-hunting source. I'm afraid you're talking nonsense with this 'in favour of fox hunting', so sorry to disappoint.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Elles said:


> The trouble with shooting is to be ensured of a clean kill you'd probably have to capture, or dig out the animal first anyway. I can't see too many expert snipers being available to hang around waiting for a fox to pop up and they'd be pretty expensive to employ even if they would do it. A sniper is very skilled and highly trained and that's to shoot humans, who are bigger and slower than foxes. Maybe I'm wrong and shooting them would be easier than I think it would. I'm with Ouesi really though, I don't think there's proof that there's much need to kill foxes at all really, but if they do, I'm not convinced shooting is the best way either.


To shoot foxes, you would either set a bait that is secured so that it can't be pulled away or you would go out at night with night sights or vehicle head lights



Elles said:


> I have no idea dogloverlou.  Maybe to let loose to make 'accidental' hunts more likely, maybe to give to the terriers as suggested, maybe the bloke is called Jeffrey Dahmer. Or we could be really, really generous (and stupid probably lol) and say he rescued them when their mothers were run over. Either way, fox hunting is now illegal and any morons using captured foxes in the past, or present should be put against the wall and shot imo and that would be too good for them.
> 
> .


Or planted by the LACS


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

rona said:


> Or planted by the LACS


Surely not?!  Like the frozen RTA fox that was produced, still frozen solid, intact, by a sab on an anti-hunt Facebook page?? Can't really be bothered to find the pic, so will wait to be told that a) I am clearly pro-hunt and b) it's a lie unless supported by shaky obscure vid.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

cinnamontoast said:


> Surely not?!  Like the frozen RTA fox that was produced, still frozen solid, intact, by a sab on an anti-hunt Facebook page?? Can't really be bothered to find the pic, so will wait to be told that a) I am clearly pro-hunt and b) it's a lie unless supported by shaky obscure vid.


Oh, I saw something like that when I was looking around the sab sites the other day. It was either frozen or had been dead for a very very long time............


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

Dogloverlou said:


> So they use the cubs in the same way as those who use bait dogs in fights?


I don't think so.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

The bloke carrying it later admitted he'd been given it out of someone's freezer. Was it the one where the wee fox had its head turned round as though to object to something behind?


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Lurcherlad said:


> I don't think so.


I expect some sick bar steward somewhere does. 
Bad people everywhere .....................



cinnamontoast said:


> The bloke carrying it later admitted he'd been given it out of someone's freezer. Was it the one where the wee fox had its head turned round as though to object to something behind?


Not the one I saw then, the one I saw had sunken or missing eyes, had obviously been dead for a very long time. If I remember right it was covered in fresh blood. 
Ridiculous


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

rona said:


> I expect some sick bar steward somewhere does.
> Bad people everywhere .....................
> 
> *Sadly, yes - but I don't think it's normal practise. Either way, it's pretty evil IMO.*
> ...


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

rona said:


> Not the one I saw then, the one I saw had sunken or missing eyes, had obviously been dead for a very long time. If I remember right it was covered in fresh blood.
> Ridiculous


They've tried it more than once?! No way!


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Of course if sabs capture and plant fox cubs, or kill and freeze them for later stunts, they can be put against the wall too. I'm not fussy. 

Hunting with vehicle headlights, just makes me think of Criminal Minds.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Ironically, the lies now being exposed...


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Elles said:


> Hunting with vehicle headlights, just makes me think of Criminal Minds.


It's also used to control rabbits numbers. It's the only effective way other than ferreting, unless gassing is used of course 



Elles said:


> Ironically, the lies now being exposed...


Eh?


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2015)

rona said:


> It's also used to control rabbits numbers. It's the only effective way other than ferreting, unless gassing is used of course


Wouldn't more foxes help control rabbit numbers? 
I genuinely don't know, I'm asking. Though it seems to me that restoring the predator/prey balance would be a good thing...

Anyone remember this?
I wonder what would happen to the UK if larger predators were brought back?


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

The thread title is 'more foxhunting lies exposed', meaning about the fox hunting, ironically the lies now being exposed are those of the sabs. (frozen and dead foxes). Sorry for any confusion.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Elles said:


> The thread title is 'more foxhunting lies exposed', meaning about the fox hunting, ironically the lies now being exposed are those of the sabs. (frozen and dead foxes). Sorry for any confusion.


There are many lies on both sides, what I don't like is the way the sabs recycle pictures, videos and "news". Many stuff that's coming up now is more than 2 years old...........2 years is the last time a person linked to a hunt was found guilty under the hunt act


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

Dare I link this? It's on a friend's Facebook, the vixen is quite tame and has been hurt. If anyone would like to donate, please feel free. I do hope she hasn't got cubs waiting for her. Do you suppose they'd be independent yet?

https://crowdfunding.justgiving.com/Peterboroughfoxy


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

I agree. I don't like the lie that anyone who went hunting is a bloodthirsty psychopath who should fall off and break their neck personally.  But then I suppose if people think my galloping around a field is too dangerous an activity to inflict on my horse, I suppose I can understand their view that hunting, even without involving foxes should be banned as too risky for the horses.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

If she had cubs, it's unlikely they'll be old enough to hunt and look after themselves isn't it, though possible.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

My daughter came round yesterday and showed me a video a college friend of hers had put on facebook, unfortunately it's a private vid or I'd share it. He lives next to some woods and a fox was coming into his garden, he was throwing a ball, the fox fetching it and dropping it at the edge of the woods and hiding again. Then popping back out for him to throw it again. The fox didn't come near him, but surely it must have been a tame fox that had been released into the wild?


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

I've seen vids on Facebook with foxes going into gardens and playing with dog toys that were left, tossing them up and down, hilarious!


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Elles said:


> The fox didn't come near him, but surely it must have been a tame fox that had been released into the wild?


Would have thought so, but why would anyone get a fox that tame and just dump it?

Unless of course it was still a tame fox.

My ex father in law had a fox that he's bought up from a cub, it curled up on the chair in front of the fire but was free to go out when it wanted


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Found the pic 
P1050866 by Jenny Clifford, on Flickr


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

One of my favourite pictures ever, so much so, I have it hanging up at work!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

The hunt apologists are out in force as per lol



cinnamontoast said:


> Just to pick up on Muze's point and to bring back what someone posted re killing spiders some time ago: is it ok to kill insects and rodents (sorry if you're into your rats etc) but not foxes? Is it because foxes are seen as typically part of the British countryside and are cute to look like and resemble dogs?
> 
> If people think it's ok to eliminate perceived 'pests' eg rats, pigeons or rabbits, do they not think the same applies to foxes? I don't think it's at all on to chase down an animal and kill it, shoot if you absolutely must or trap and relocate (although I know that's not a great idea).
> 
> Nice inflammatory title, btw. And the link from a non-judgmental source.


And its a pity you don't have the same compassion for a fox as you do for a spider



MoggyBaby said:


> Whilst I don't like to think of most animals being hurt - I put my spiders outside btw, never kill them - I can live with it being done in a kind & humane manner. NOTHING about fox hunting is kind or humane!
> 
> My title is merely truthful and, given the story was all over the news last night, I think the source is irrelevent.
> 
> *Only someone in favour of fox hunting would think otherwise*.


Quite...



Elles said:


> No. Maybe some moron would, but no, that's not the idea. Cubbing was in the Autumn, when the fox cubs are older. Young hounds are taken out hunting with older hounds to learn their trade. The hunting was a little slower, started earlier in the day and the young hounds were taught to ignore other scents and what they are meant to do when they go hunting proper. They didn't have foxes taken out of a box and dangled in front of them.


Most hunts have never stopped cubbing.

How do you know what went cruelties went on/go on behind the scenes Elles?

_"I've seen a fox deliberately strung up in a tree to send the hounds into a frenzy.."_
Clifford Pellow Huntsman



And nothing changed it appears! VVV



Dogloverlou said:


> So why were young cubs kept at the premises in the story linked? To teach the hounds to scent? I'm not understanding.


Have a look at this Lou x








Elles said:


> The thread title is 'more foxhunting lies exposed', meaning about the fox hunting, ironically the lies now being exposed are those of the sabs. (frozen and dead foxes). Sorry for any confusion.


Have you any proof lies are being exposed about sabs? Or are these exposes just more pro hunt propaganda?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

cinnamontoast said:


> The bloke carrying it later admitted he'd been given it out of someone's freezer. Was it the one where the wee fox had its head turned round as though to object to something behind?


A sab 'bloke'?? yeah right


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Elles said:


> My daughter came round yesterday and showed me a video a college friend of hers had put on facebook, unfortunately it's a private vid or I'd share it. He lives next to some woods and a fox was coming into his garden, he was throwing a ball, the fox fetching it and dropping it at the edge of the woods and hiding again. Then popping back out for him to throw it again. The fox didn't come near him, but surely it must have been a tame fox that had been released into the wild?


When people are kind to wild animals they often respond. But with so many evil ******** in the world who get their kicks killing wildlife its dangerous to gain the trust of a wild creature, far safer for them to live in fear of THE most dangerous animal on the planet!


----------



## Guest (Jun 14, 2015)

MoggyBaby said:


> http://www.league.org.uk/news-and-o...rn-linked-to-high-profile-hunt-claims-charity
> 
> IF - as so many hunters claim - fox hunting is needed to keep pest control down, why then would there be 16 cubs holed up in a shed on land linked to a hunt in North Yorkshire???
> 
> This proves that most hunters who are into FOX hunting (not proper drag hunting that some do adhere to) are blood-thirsty morons who get their cheap thrills from killing.


Totally agree with this. There just are not other reason to hunt foxes but to participate killing an innocent animal. What´s the difference between this and killing elephants, lions etc? All wrong.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MrsZee said:


> Totally agree with this. There just are not other reason to hunt foxes but to participate killing an innocent animal. What´s the difference between this and killing elephants, lions etc? All wrong.


There is no difference Mrs Zee. The people who hunt animals for trophies & the people who hunt foxes are incapable of feeling any empathy for their victims - 'sport' hunters all have the same twisted mentality.


----------



## Catharinem (Dec 17, 2014)

Muze said:


> Very sad, as I said recently, actually a very good friend of mine is very pro fox hunting and openly admits he loves it 'when the hounds get in there and start ripping at the fox' and said it would just be liek me swatting a wasp..... it's an odd one and, unfortunately, I think reality is that certain kinds of people who do get a primitive kick out of it :/


 I don't get it. Why are you friends with this guy? You wouldn't hear me say, " really great bloke, beats his wife though", or "nice man, his only fault is he's a rapist" . You can tell a man by the company he keeps, why keep company with a sadist?


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

rona said:


> There are many lies on both sides, what I don't like is the way the sabs recycle pictures, videos and "news". Many stuff that's coming up now is more than 2 years old...........2 years is the last time a person linked to a hunt was found guilty under the hunt act


Let's just say that as an impartial onlooker in these debates, I long ago gave up on reading/watching any links posted to AR/Sab produced content due to the frequent OTT sensationalist editing style, general total lack of context (and anything out of context is _always_ a pretext), and out-and-out speculation given (and usually repeated over and over) as fact. As a lover of history trained to evaluate sources impartially, they proved useless for anything other than examples on how NOT to be reliable evidence.

Never bothered reading hunt stuff anyway, although there is a lot less of that posted anyway as far as I can tell. I do gain a measure of ironic amusement when the standard AR/Sab response to anyone posting about a negative experience with activists is always a biased, hunt loving, fox murdering scumbag, though (or words to that effect) - tell that to people who have happened to innocently be out hacking on the same day as a hunt is riding out and end up on the receiving end of their less savoury tactics...


----------



## Catharinem (Dec 17, 2014)

Elles said:


> The trouble with shooting is to be ensured of a clean kill you'd probably have to capture, or dig out the animal first anyway. I can't see too many expert snipers being available to hang around waiting for a fox to pop up and they'd be pretty expensive to employ even if they would do it. A sniper is very skilled and highly trained and that's to shoot humans, who are bigger and slower than foxes. Maybe I'm wrong and shooting them would be easier than I think it would. I'm with Ouesi really though, I don't think there's proof that there's much need to kill foxes at all really, but if they do, I'm not convinced shooting is the best way either.


You have no idea have you? Ok, so snipers are highly trained and expensive to kill important people, usually either surrounded by security or in a war zone, so they have to be shot from a very long way away. They are paid a lot because they risk their lives, or at least a very long prison sentence, possibly even torture if captured in a warzone. A "sniper" to take out a problem fox would be a local person, known and trusted by the farmer, who would in all probability give his services for free to be allowed on the land to shoot pigeons ( a pest species which foxes aren't so good at catching as non - flying rabbits, but can be exported to French restaurants for a fair bit of money, so it's a win/win situation for farmer and person shooting). Possibly a few pounds of sausages/half a lamb/ few bales of straw for the allotment etc might change hands too. Country folk work on favours. There isn't a need to kill foxes unless they cause a problem, and if they do the "sniper" catches them in the act, knowing they have the right fox. A high powered bullet is going to miss completely or kill. Yes it really is that easy, but not nearly as much fun as dressing up in red and white, having a drink and chat, galloping all over the place with excitable horses and wayward hounds, and finally either telling the story of "the one that got away" at the Hunt Ball or watching a wild creature ( probably not even the one who's been taking the poultry) be attacked 30 to 1 with dogs.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

Catharinem said:


> I don't get it. Why are you friends with this guy? You wouldn't hear me say, " really great bloke, beats his wife though", or "nice man, his only fault is he's a rapist" . You can tell a man by the company he keeps, why keep company with a sadist?


You put a rapist on the same par as someone who hunts? The relish with which he appears to look forward to the ripping up of a fox, maybe I agree, but if I absolutely, gun to head say which was worse, I'm afraid I'd go for the rape, every time. At least the poor fox is dead afterwards.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Jesthar said:


> Let's just say that as an impartial onlooker in these debates, I long ago gave up on reading/watching any links posted to AR/Sab produced content due to the frequent OTT sensationalist editing style, general total lack of context (and anything out of context is _always_ a pretext), and out-and-out speculation given (and usually repeated over and over) as fact. As a lover of history trained to evaluate sources impartially, they proved useless for anything other than examples on how NOT to be reliable evidence.
> 
> Never bothered reading hunt stuff anyway, although there is a lot less of that posted anyway as far as I can tell. I do gain a measure of ironic amusement when the standard AR/Sab response to anyone posting about a negative experience with activists is always a biased, hunt loving, fox murdering scumbag, though (or words to that effect) - tell that to people who have happened to innocently be out hacking on the same day as a hunt is riding out and end up on the receiving end of their less savoury tactics...


Could you be an' impartial onlooker' if the debate was about gangs of yobs riding around of bikes hunting down cats with packs of dogs? How would you feel about the 'hunters' then? would you class them as cat murdering scumbags, no ? how would you feel about the people who tried to prevent them killing the cats? And where is your evidence that sabs target people 'innocently out hacking' with their less savoury tactics? What exactly are their less savoury tactics anyway?


----------



## Catharinem (Dec 17, 2014)

cinnamontoast said:


> You put a rapist on the same par as someone who hunts? The relish with which he appears to look forward to the ripping up of a fox, maybe I agree, but if I absolutely, gun to head say which was worse, I'm afraid I'd go for the rape, every time. At least the poor fox is dead afterwards.


 I said I wouldn't say a person was a friend but a rapist, same as I wouldn't say a person was a friend but a wifebeater or a friend but enjoyed watching hounds tear a fox. You tell a man by the company he keeps. I might KNOW a man who hunted, but I wouldn't be FREINDS with him, it wouldn't be possible.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Jesthar said:


> tell that to people who have happened to innocently be out hacking on the same day as a hunt is riding out and end up on the receiving end of their less savoury tactics...


Or the 45,00 people that joined the hunting fraternity because they no longer kill fox


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

rona said:


> Or the 45,00 people that joined the hunting fraternity because they no longer kill fox


Oh blimey, you do like to knock on people's doors, don't you?


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Catharinem said:


> A high powered bullet is going to miss completely or kill.


You really have no idea do you? 

What a ridiculous statement.

While less than with a shot gun get away injured. I'm positive some do, though riflemen are usually far more proficient than those with a shotgun in their hands.


----------



## Catharinem (Dec 17, 2014)

rona said:


> You really have no idea do you?
> 
> What a ridiculous statement.
> 
> While less than with a shot gun get away injured. I'm positive some do, though riflemen are usually far more proficient than those with a shotgun in their hands.


Aim for a head or heart shot, not a random blast, and only pull trigger when certain of your shot. The power of the bullet hitting the body will drop the animal even if a second shot is needed, which it very rarely would be. As much as anything is, shooting with a rifle is the most humane way of killing a problem fox, certainly more so than hunting with dogs, poisoning, snaring or any of the other horrible ways to kill a fox. I personally have never shot a fox, but I have shot target rifles, observed fox behaviour and worked in a wildlife hospital where injured foxes were treated. Loads of RTAs, some gangrenous shotgun wounds, can't remember any bullet wounds though. In the right hands, at the right distance, aimed at the right spot, I stand by my statement. Of course, if you can come up with an even better solution, with more accuracy and less stress, I'm sure we'd all be interested in it.


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> Could you be an' impartial onlooker' if the debate was about gangs of yobs riding around of bikes hunting down cats with packs of dogs? How would you feel about the 'hunters' then? would you class them as cat murdering scumbags, no ? how would you feel about the people who tried to prevent them killing the cats? And where is your evidence that sabs target people 'innocently out hacking' with their less savoury tactics? What exactly are their less savoury tactics anyway?


Introducing an 'emotive hypothetical' doesn't work on me, Noush. Not due to a lack of emotion or empathy, I will clarify, but because it has no place in a rational, facts oriented debate, other than as a distraction and guilt tripping technique.

And I can safely say that you wouldn't approve of my sources for people innocently out hacking, as they happen to board at stables where people who do ride to hounds also livery, and 'straight from the horses mouth' is a biased and tainted source for the AR mob. 

And no, I'm not pro-fox hunting. Switch 'em all to trails (non-fox scent) and wait for the bloodthirsty remnant of the current generation to die out is my line, but I;'ve said that before.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Jesthar said:


> Introducing an 'emotive hypothetical' doesn't work on me, Noush. Not due to a lack of emotion or empathy, I will clarify, but because it has no place in a rational, facts oriented debate, other than as a distraction and guilt tripping technique.
> 
> And I can safely say that you wouldn't approve of my sources for people innocently out hacking, as they happen to board at stables where people who do ride to hounds also livery, and 'straight from the horses mouth' is a biased and tainted source for the AR mob.
> 
> And no, I'm not pro-fox hunting. Switch 'em all to trails (non-fox scent) and wait for the bloodthirsty remnant of the current generation to die out is my line, but I;'ve said that before.


Killing animals for fun does tend to get (a lot of) people worked up. But I don't see why emotive language should detract from all the facts & the evidence, because they are still there if people care to look.
Not saying that all sabs are lily white, but ive yet to see any evidence support all these anecdotes about sabs I keep hearing - and there are so many anecdotes you would have thought someone somewhere would have managed to film something on their camera phones . Most serious convictions (by far!) are against hunt scum & that's a FACT. 

What I don't get with some who say they are against fox hunting, is they seem to have more anger towards the people & NGO's trying to save the animals than they do the people abusing them :/ It only seems to happen where blood sports are concerned.


----------



## CRL (Jan 3, 2012)

noushka05 said:


> Killing animals for fun does tend to get (a lot of) people worked up. But I don't see why emotive language should detract from all the facts & the evidence, because they are still there if people care to look.
> Not saying that all sabs are lily white, but ive yet to see any evidence support all these anecdotes about sabs I keep hearing - and there are so many anecdotes you would have thought someone somewhere would have managed to film something on their camera phones . Most serious convictions (by far!) are against hunt scum & that's a FACT.
> 
> What I don't get with some who say they are against fox hunting, is they seem to have more anger towards the people & NGO's trying to save the animals than they do the people abusing them :/ It only seems to happen where blood sports are concerned.


Maybe because as you have already said the people filming the hunt are the sabs and moniters. They are not going to film sabs doing bad things now are they?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

CRL said:


> Maybe because as you have already said the people filming the hunt are the sabs and moniters. They are not going to film sabs doing bad things now are they?


No that's the job of the hunt scum


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

CRL said:


> Maybe because as you have already said the people filming the hunt are the sabs and moniters. They are not going to film sabs doing bad things now are they?


Fortunately, some people following the hunt do. One of Jay Tierney's lot (he who has a made up name and fraudulently took over £3000 of money for reasons I can't be bothered to go into here and lives off these donations) was filmed spraying citronella directly into a hound's face. It was on Facebook if you can be bothered to look on a hunting page and is clear as day.

Equally, a sab up north-North Tyneside group, I think, posted a video showing himself walking into the back of a horse and claiming that the rider had deliberately backed into him. I'd personally move away from the back end of a 600kg animal that was restless, first thing you're taught at a yard. He also started shouting at riders following others about not using their horses as weapons because he went and stood determinedly on the path (loads of room either side). One horse brushed past him, hardly moved him. Another vid loaded by sabs shows them accelerating towards hunt followers and making threats to kill. The audio is quite clear. Another vid filmed by sabs shows an irate landowner asking them nicely to get off his land then he gets a bit annoyed when they refuse, even tho the hunt didn't go across it and he has nothing to do with the hunt.

There is bad behaviour on both sides, without doubt, but more vids from sabs-they tend to have their hands free not trying to control an excited horse.


----------



## freeda brocks (Jun 15, 2015)

cinnamontoast said:


> Fortunately, some people following the hunt do. One of Jay Tierney's lot (he who has a made up name and fraudulently took over £30 000 of donated money for reasons I can't be bothered to go into here and lives off these donations) was filmed spraying citronella directly into a hound's face. It was on Facebook if you can be bothered to look on a hunting page and is clear as day.
> 
> Equally, a sab up north-North Tyneside group, I think, posted a video showing him walking into the back of a horse and claiming that the rider had deliberately backed into him. I'd personally move away from the back end of a 600kg animal that was restless, first thing you're taught at a yard. He also started shouting at riders following others about not using their horses as weapons because he went and stood determinedly on the path (loads of room either side). One horse brushed past him, hardly moved him. Another vid loaded by sabs shows them accelerating towards hunt followers and making threats to kill. The audio is quite clear. Another vid filmed by sabs shows an irate landowner asking them nicely to get off his land then he gets a bit annoyed when they refuse, even tho the hunt didn't go across it and he has nothing to do with the hunt.
> 
> There is bad behaviour on both sides, without doubt, but more vids from sabs-they tend to have their hands free not trying to control an excited horse.


No I haven't ever been filmed spraying any hounds, I haven't made up any name either (I changed my surname some time ago and my nickname of Jay has been used for years as many people pronounce my name wrong and I have to say "it's pronounced with a J")
If I've been living off of donated money you are the first person to have spotted it, I've fundraised a lot of money using crowd sourcing "gofundme" but the people who donate can see the leaflets/stickers/posters/equipment that are bought with the money.
I've only been out sabbing twice in recent years and neither time have I sprayed any citronella in any hounds faces nor has anyone claimed that they have video of me doing so.
I haven't been sabbing in North Tyneside and most of your second paragraph sounds garbled. I suggest you provide links or stop talking shit


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)




----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

Bother. I'm out of popcorn...


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Jesthar said:


> Bother. I'm out of popcorn...


I don't mind sharing


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

freeda brocks said:


> No I haven't ever been filmed spraying any hounds, I haven't made up any name either (I changed my surname some time ago and my nickname of Jay has been used for years as many people pronounce my name wrong and I have to say "it's pronounced with a J")
> If I've been living off of donated money you are the first person to have spotted it, I've fundraised a lot of money using crowd sourcing "gofundme" but the people who donate can see the leaflets/stickers/posters/equipment that are bought with the money.
> I've only been out sabbing twice in recent years and neither time have I sprayed any citronella in any hounds faces nor has anyone claimed that they have video of me doing so.
> I haven't been sabbing in North Tyneside and most of your second paragraph sounds garbled. I suggest you provide links or stop talking shit


That's the trouble when people believe pro hunt propaganda, they end up slandering peoples names! I have donated to you Jay because I KNOW the money goes where it is meant to go - I have seen exactly what has been bought with it! I for one will be forever grateful for the sacrifices you have made to save persecuted wild animals. Wonder how many other people went out night after night to try to save our badgers?


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

I just cant understand how anyone can take part in the killing of an innocent animal for fun! Its senseless animal cruelty, however you want to dress it up! Those poor foxes are living, breathing creatures, with feelings.

Only the other day, whilst out with my dogs, a mother and cubs ran across the path in front of us. My dogs were about to give chase until I commanded them to 'leave' which they did. They are simply not allowed to chase or worry wild animals. I can think of anything more horrific!


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

* CONVICTED FRAUDSTER BEHIND GROUP FIGHTING BADGER CULL *

Gamal Eboe, who goes by the pseudonym Jay Tiernan (pictured) is leading the anti-cull movement, and the action against Caffe Nero

A leader of the anti-cull movement is a convicted fraudster, it emerged last night.

Jay Tiernan, one of the founders of Stop The Cull, has presented himself as the respectable front of animal activism, promoting his cause on BBC Newsnight.

A judge even praised his 'good character' while sentencing him earlier this year for breaking an injunction on harassing people involved in the culls.

But the 44-year-old is really Gamal Eboe, an activist who once defrauded the Government out of thousands of pounds.

He has been described in court as an 'extremist' and was linked to the Stop Huntingdon Life Sciences group which ran a violent hate campaign against the laboratory's workers in the late 1990s. Eboe was arrested in 2001 for protesting against HLS.

In 2003, he was handed an eight-month suspended sentence after submitting claims for £3,000 to the Department for Education for training students when he was actually on holiday in Greece.

The staunch vegan, who claims to have 'grown up in the countryside', was born in Hammersmith, west London, to retired Lebanese property developer Abdul Eboe and his wife Maureen.

Eboe is believed to have served in the Army before becoming involved in activism.

He married campaigner Louise Watson in 2002, but a source close to the family said they split less than three years later. His ex-wife was said to 'want to forget the whole episode'.

Although he claims to live in Bristol, he gives his address as Bath on a dating website.

Much of Eboe's activism is funded by crowd-sourcing websites - which appeal to the public for donations - under his pseudonym Freeda Brocks, a pun on 'free the badgers'.

He has received more than £30,000 since 2013 via such sites, including £9,820 towards court costs after he was ordered by a judge to pay the National Farmers' Union £25,000.

He is listed as a full-time 'campaigner' in his company Direct Action Team's records.

Asked if calls for a boycott would hurt farmers, he said this week: 'I really hope it does … not only in terms of sales; I hope it saps morale.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-paid-corporation-tax-2007.html#ixzz3d9X74Of4


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

rona said:


> * CONVICTED FRAUDSTER BEHIND GROUP FIGHTING BADGER CULL *
> 
> Gamal Eboe, who goes by the pseudonym Jay Tiernan (pictured) is leading the anti-cull movement, and the action against Caffe Nero
> 
> ...


Daily fail? About right for you Rona lol

Jay has always been open & honest about his past & his activism. http://badger-killers.co.uk/gamal-jay-tiernan-response-to-daily-mail/


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Oh so if you are open and honest about committing fraud then that's ok


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

It's not only the Daily Fail though.....

http://www.theguardian.com/education/2002/feb/19/furthereducation.uk6
*The Guardian Tuesday 19 February 2002*


> In the first case arising from the collapse of the government's Individual Learning Account scheme, 12 people today appeared before a magistrates court charged with conspiring to defraud the Department for Education and Skills.
> 
> The nine men and three women were accused of fraudulently obtaining tens of thousands of pounds from the department by asking students to enrol on a learning programme when no training actually took place.
> ...............
> ...


*BBC News Friday, 1 February, 2002*
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/1795666.stm
Eleven accused of training fraud plot
(includes details on Gamal Eboe)

And there are others...

But let's be impartial here.

The Guardian article refers to the fraud having been set up to obtain money for 'animal rights activity'. 
So it's not quite the same as committing fraud to line their pockets.....

If that makes any difference to some reading this?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

StormyThai said:


> Oh so if you are open and honest about committing fraud then that's ok


No one said it was ok - but it is being open & honest  Jay is trusted by those of us who know a bit more about him than daily fail readers . Jay & the other cull saboteurs have saved the lives of more badgers than any other group has - I'm sure protestors &wounded badger patrollers would concur with that. To me anyone who selflessly puts themselves at risk to defend animals has my infinite gratitude & I will always try to help by donating when I can.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

freeda brocks said:


> No I haven't ever been filmed spraying any hounds, I haven't made up any name either (I changed my surname some time ago and my nickname of Jay has been used for years as many people pronounce my name wrong and I have to say "it's pronounced with a J")
> If I've been living off of donated money you are the first person to have spotted it, I've fundraised a lot of money using crowd sourcing "gofundme" but the people who donate can see the leaflets/stickers/posters/equipment that are bought with the money.
> I've only been out sabbing twice in recent years and neither time have I sprayed any citronella in any hounds faces nor has anyone claimed that they have video of me doing so.
> I haven't been sabbing in North Tyneside and most of your second paragraph sounds garbled. I suggest you provide links or stop talking shit


Why are you using a pseudonym, Mr Eboe? At no point did I say _you _sprayed a hound, but one of your crew did. It's on film as I'm sure you know. My second point about the almost unintelligible North Tyneside sab (I'm a Geordie before you call me out on that one) is that sabs aren't all angels, much as hunters can also behave very poorly.

You were charged with fraud: are we to presume that you are an innocent man? How do you support your full time campaigner role as you don't work? And are you behind the Caffè Nero ban on milk originating from the badger cull areas, thereby making life even harder-like they need more hardship-for the dairy farmers who are being paid so little for milk that several have given up the fight recently and sold their herds?

I wonder who put you onto this thread? Good job, whoever it was, now more people know about the fraud. Fab!

"Asked if calls for a boycott would hurt farmers, he said this week: 'I really hope it does … not only in terms of sales; I hope it saps morale.' " Nice, real nice. Cos our farmers are all just wealthy landowners sitting round doing nothing, of course.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

silvi said:


> The Guardian article refers to the fraud having been set up to obtain money for 'animal rights activity'.
> So it's not quite the same as committing fraud to line their pockets.....
> 
> If that makes any difference to some reading this?


Not seeing that in the link. Where is it?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

'


cinnamontoast said:


> Why are you using a pseudonym, Mr Eboe? At no point did I say _you _sprayed a hound, but one of your crew did. It's on film as I'm sure you know. My second point about the almost unintelligible North Tyneside sab (I'm a Geordie before you call me out on that one) is that sabs aren't all angels, much as hunters can also behave very poorly.
> 
> You were charged with fraud: are we to presume that you are an innocent man? How do you support your full time campaigner role as you don't work? And are you behind the Caffè Nero ban on milk originating from the badger cull areas, thereby making life even harder-like they need more hardship-for the dairy farmers who are being paid so little for milk that several have given up the fight recently and sold their herds?
> 
> I wonder who put you onto this thread? Good job, whoever it was, now more people know about the fraud. Fab!


'Caffe nero', from the horses mouth - (pro cull farmers don't deserve trade!)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02swzk9


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

They are aiming for Sainsbury next I believe


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

rona said:


> They are aiming for Sainsbury next I believe


I believe Sainsbury have told them where to go. I fail to see why farmers in the cull area should be punished even more. I don't believe all farmers in the cull area agreed to the cull and they're struggling enormously as it is. This campaign appears to be working against the activists, which is a crying shame, as I know most people with a brain and any sense of empathy for wild animals would prefer to see an immediate end to the cull. It's misguided, hasn't killed as many badgers as expected and has generally been a waste of time. It would surely be more efficient to inoculate the cattle.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

cinnamontoast said:


> Why are you using a pseudonym, Mr Eboe? At no point did I say _you _sprayed a hound, but one of your crew did. It's on film as I'm sure you know. My second point about the almost unintelligible North Tyneside sab (I'm a Geordie before you call me out on that one) is that sabs aren't all angels, much as hunters can also behave very poorly.
> 
> You were charged with fraud: are we to presume that you are an innocent man? How do you support your full time campaigner role as you don't work? And are you behind the Caffè Nero ban on milk originating from the badger cull areas, thereby making life even harder-like they need more hardship-for the dairy farmers who are being paid so little for milk that several have given up the fight recently and sold their herds?
> 
> ...


God aren't you nosey? :Wideyed

Bet you believe every word of this moron lol




rona said:


> They are aiming for Sainsbury next I believe


Activism is the only way we're going to stop the cull. They intend to roll the culls out Rona, what do you suggest we do just turn a blind eye & let them exterminate thousands of our badgers?


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

noushka05 said:


> No one said it was ok - but it is being open & honest  Jay is trusted by those of us who know a bit more about him than daily fail readers . Jay & the other cull saboteurs have saved the lives of more badgers than any other group has - I'm sure protestors &wounded badger patrollers would concur with that. To me anyone who selflessly puts themselves at risk to defend animals has my infinite gratitude & I will always try to help by donating when I can.


Nothing about fraud is open and honest..I most certainly wouldn't take a convicted fraudsters word for anything,,,


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

StormyThai said:


> Nothing about fraud is open and honest..I most certainly wouldn't take a convicted fraudsters word for anything,,,


People who do things for animals, even when they're not legit, will always be good people in my opinion. I guess this fella below is more your cup of tea.


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

cinnamontoast said:


> Not seeing that in the link. Where is it?


This bit:
"It is alleged they used the ILA programme, set up to encourage people to study outside the standard educational system, to obtain property fraudulently and gain information on those involved in legitimate research to further support animal rights activity."

Come to think of it, that's not quite the same thing....

I had a couple more links but I lost them when I closed the laptop down.
Will look again.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

The interview between Jay Tiernan and Nick Ferrari is supposed to be rather enlightening. I can't listen because my connection is not good tonight. 

Apparently he's not happy about his real name being made public and he wants to go back to whole herd slaughtering


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

cinnamontoast said:


> I believe Sainsbury have told them where to go.


I believe they aren't excepting that and are going to have a day of intimidation at stores throughout the country some time this month


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

Okay, just had another look and it seems that my head linked what I found in the Guardian and links like this one:
Fraud simple enough for a child 
That said"The five were arrested as part of a National Crime Squad investigation into animal rights extremists"

And my head linked that up to Gamal "Jay" Tiernan's own response to the Daily Fail here:
http://badger-killers.co.uk/gamal-jay-tiernan-response-to-daily-mail/ (linked by Noush earlier)

From the response:


> I have been frequently arrested and charged for quite a few minor and not so minor offences; obstruction of the highway, aggravated trespass, criminal damage (once for cutting a fence, once for putting a sticker on a bank wall) theft of a beagle from a laboratory animal breeder (for which I went to prison)* and notoriously for "obtaining money by deception" from the government which I siphoned back into the Animal Rights movement AND into my own lifestyle*.


So it seems I let him off lighter than he let himself off


----------



## freeda brocks (Jun 15, 2015)

cinnamontoast said:


> Why are you using a pseudonym, Mr Eboe? At no point did I say _you _sprayed a hound, but one of your crew did. It's on film as I'm sure you know. My second point about the almost unintelligible North Tyneside sab (I'm a Geordie before you call me out on that one) is that sabs aren't all angels, much as hunters can also behave very poorly.
> 
> You were charged with fraud: are we to presume that you are an innocent man? How do you support your full time campaigner role as you don't work? And are you behind the Caffè Nero ban on milk originating from the badger cull areas, thereby making life even harder-like they need more hardship-for the dairy farmers who are being paid so little for milk that several have given up the fight recently and sold their herds?
> 
> ...


I'm not using a pseudonym as I just explained, I changed my surname some years ago (you can send me a check made payable to Mr. Tiernan and see if I cash it) you can read details here: http://badger-killers.co.uk/gamal-jay-tiernan-response-to-daily-mail/

"one of my crew"? there are over 40 sab groups in the uk, I'm hardly responsible for what other people do, I personally wouldn't spray citronella in a dogs face, but its not toxic.

I can't see that any group of people can be made up entirely of angels, but there is far more violence emanating from the hunt than there is from sabs, for every bit of archived footage of a sab attacking anyone I could promise you I can find ten where a huntsman is starting it (including the recent Tedworth incident where the first two seconds of footage clearly shows one sab being attacked by two hunt people)

I pleaded guilty to £3,000 worth of fraud in 2003, so I'm not sure why anyone would presume I was innocent of that offence.

You are making an assumption that I don't work, I've been working today and I'll be working tomorrow, I'll earn about £370 for those 2 days work.

Yes I am behind the recent campaign against Nero, the accusation that farmers who happen to be based in the cull zones but aren't involved in culling are suffering is disingenuous. If you have examples of a farmer being adversely affected by Nero who isn't involved in killing badgers, please do say so.

Two people put me onto this thread, but I wouldn't tell anyone who.

I never said I was nice! I'm only interested in stopping a badger cull, farmers losing money and pulling out of the industry means land is not involved in the cull which in turn means the % of land ownership signed up for the cull drops. If that % drops below 70% then the licence becomes invalid. If farmers want to whinge and whine about it they can, but no one made them sign up for the cull and people campaigning against it has been a big thing for over a year before culling started.
Market forces have meant that cows have to produce more milk over a shorter period of time in the last few decades, a dairyman also now has to look after a larger herd, yet I don't see farmers all complaining that capitalism isn't fair or that market forces are un-kind to cows via increased rates of mastitis and laminitis.

I may not bother coming back to read your replies, so if you don't hear from me again please don't worry, nothing bad has happened to me x


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

The thing is, that money didn't come from the government but mainly disabled young adults as far I as I can see.

Am I wrong?


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> People who do things for animals, even when they're not legit, will always be good people in my opinion...


So... fraud, breaking and entering, criminal damage and vandalism (including some which have led to the death of hundreds of animals), arson (including fires that have burned animals alive), blackmail, threats, intimidation, hostage taking, eco-vandelism, bombings, grave desectration, actual bodily harm, even attemped murder - all things which have been done by various animal extremists over the years - are fine and dandy and the people doing them are 'good people' by you as long as they are doing such things in the name of 'doing things for animals'?


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

freeda brocks said:


> Market forces have meant that cows have to produce more milk over a shorter period of time in the last few decades, a dairyman also now has to look after a larger herd, yet I don't see farmers all complaining that capitalism isn't fair or that market forces are un-kind to cows via increased rates of mastitis and laminitis.


Not all herds are dairy herds 
http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/North-...ars-learning/story-26694514-detail/story.html

Also some are rare breed herds


----------



## freeda brocks (Jun 15, 2015)

StormyThai said:


> Nothing about fraud is open and honest..I most certainly wouldn't take a convicted fraudsters word for anything,,,


Trust is a sliding scale, you may "trust" your neighbour to not steal a parcel delivered to the wrong address but that doesn't mean you'd lend them £50, trust is earnt.
My role is pretty much spokesperson for the campaign, so I'm judged by what I say, if I misinformed people of what was going on then it would quickly become self evident. Most of what I say is already in the public domain and has been put there by other people, that doesn't mean that I don't use dishonest methods, I quite publicly have stated on a number of occasions that I rang up lots of farmers and pretended to be from Defra or an interested journalist and then found out where culling was taking place. People who are against the cull may not feel comfortable doing that sort of thing themselves but no one has said they think I shouldn't be doing it.

"All warfare is based on deception"
- Sun Tzu (the art of war)


----------



## freeda brocks (Jun 15, 2015)

rona said:


> Not all herds are dairy herds
> http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/North-...ars-learning/story-26694514-detail/story.html
> 
> Also some are rare breed herds


I am aware of that fact, I didn't say all herds are dairy


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

I won't spend too much time doing this as you probably won't be back 
But just in case, a bit about your ending comments:



freeda brocks said:


> Market forces have meant that cows have to produce more milk over a shorter period of time in the last few decades, a dairyman also now has to look after a larger herd, yet I don't see farmers all complaining that capitalism isn't fair or that market forces are un-kind to cows via increased rates of mastitis and laminitis.
> 
> I may not bother coming back to read your replies, so if you don't hear from me again please don't worry, nothing bad has happened to me x


A few articles:

Supermarkets' milk price war leaves a sour taste for dairy farmers

Dairy farmers warned: milk prices have further to fall

British farmers' milk price protest

Do British dairy farmers really make a loss on milk?

All of these articles, and more besides show that dairy farmers are very unhappy about current market forces. They might not state that this is capitalism in action, but that is what it is.
As to 'unkind to cows' - when smaller dairy farmers say that they will soon be struggling to feed their dairy herd, it may be seen as a business statement, but it sure will be unkind to the cows too.

But I'll leave it there Freeda (love the username by the way) as you probably won't be back to the debate anyway


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

rona said:


> The thing is, that money didn't come from the government but mainly disabled young adults as far I as I can see.
> 
> Am I wrong?


I was assuming that it came from government grants.
But if it did come from disabled young adults (or they lost funding because of it) then that's certainly not good.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

silvi said:


> I was assuming that it came from government grants.
> But if it did come from disabled young adults (or they lost funding because of it) then that's certainly not good.


That's what the money was earmarked for wasn't it? Independant living allowance for their education.

It's all a bit vague but that's how it reads to me


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

rona said:


> That's what the money was earmarked for wasn't it? Independant living allowance for their education.
> 
> It's all a bit vague but that's how it reads to me


This is the thing with this type of fraud.
On the surface, it looks like no one is being hurt by it.
But when we look into it deeper, someone always loses out.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

Been off having a life.



freeda brocks said:


> Yes I am behind the recent campaign against Nero, the accusation that farmers who happen to be based in the cull zones but aren't involved in culling are suffering is disingenuous. If you have examples of a farmer being adversely affected by Nero who isn't involved in killing badgers, please do say so.
> 
> Two people put me onto this thread, but I wouldn't tell anyone who.


And making out that all farmers in the cull zones sat down and signed off on the cull is a downright lie. All dairy farmers are being adversely affected by market forces currently. Ensuring that such an insignificant company refuses to use milk from that area is not really going to be a massive issue, but adding to the disaster that is UK farming is extremely unfortunate. Good job the company isn't influential or big enough to harm the industry long term. It's a shame to use such strong arm tactics: it wins you zero friends and may have the opposite effect to that which you desire. Plenty of people are now telling me they're avoiding Caffè Nero.

I know who told you about the thread, she's very active on here.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

silvi said:


> As to 'unkind to cows' - when smaller dairy farmers say that they will soon be struggling to feed their dairy herd, it may be seen as a business statement, but it sure will be unkind to the cows too.


There is a dairy farmer in my area. They've been on the farm for 3 generations and have expanded slowly. They have a massive herd 1200 animals but they are some of the best kept cows and followers I've ever seen.
I've known about them and seen their cows from a time they were about quarter the size. The cows have always looked great and as far as an outsider can tell, are looked after very well.
I believe they raise virtually all their own stock, including rose veal from male calves. They sell an award winning cheese along with other home made products to add value to their produce.

I think it would be a travesty if these people were ever to go out of business, for whatever reason, so that we have to import from a country with far worse animal welfare


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

noushka05 said:


> People who do things for animals, even when they're not legit, will always be good people in my opinion. I guess this fella below is more your cup of tea.


You would be guessing wrong yet again, but if it makes you feel better that the only reason people question things is because they are supporters then feel free. Your false opinion on where my morals and ethics lie is of no concern to me.



freeda brocks said:


> Trust is a sliding scale, you may "trust" your neighbour to not steal a parcel delivered to the wrong address but that doesn't mean you'd lend them £50, trust is earnt.
> My role is pretty much spokesperson for the campaign, so I'm judged by what I say, if I misinformed people of what was going on then it would quickly become self evident. Most of what I say is already in the public domain and has been put there by other people, that doesn't mean that I don't use dishonest methods, I quite publicly have stated on a number of occasions that I rang up lots of farmers and pretended to be from Defra or an interested journalist and then found out where culling was taking place. People who are against the cull may not feel comfortable doing that sort of thing themselves but no one has said they think I shouldn't be doing it.
> 
> "All warfare is based on deception"
> - Sun Tzu (the art of war)


Yes trust is earnt...The thing is you my friend do not start on a level playing field, as you have already proven that you are willing to lie to get what you want 

Stealing is stealing, you do not have to steal to make your mark in animal welfare...you most certainly do not steal to earn trust


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

Jesthar said:


> So... fraud, breaking and entering, criminal damage and vandalism (including some which have led to the death of hundreds of animals), arson (including fires that have burned animals alive), blackmail, threats, intimidation, hostage taking, eco-vandelism, bombings, grave desectration, actual bodily harm, even attemped murder - all things which have been done by various animal extremists over the years - are fine and dandy and the people doing them are 'good people' by you as long as they are doing such things in the name of 'doing things for animals'?


But apparently it's ok, because animals' lives are more important than those of humans. After all, humans will hopefully 'go extinct' soon. Really can't use the rolly eyes emoticon again, it might get worn out.



rona said:


> There is a dairy farmer in my area. They've been on the farm for 3 generations and have expanded slowly. They have a massive herd 1200 animals but they are some of the best kept cows and followers I've ever seen.
> I've known about them and seen their cows from a time they were about quarter the size. The cows have always looked great and as far as an outsider can tell, are looked after very well.
> I believe they raise virtually all their own stock, including rose veal from male calves. They sell an award winning cheese along with other home made products to add value to their produce.
> 
> I think it would be a travesty if these people were ever to go out of business, for whatever reason, so that we have to import from a country with far worse animal welfare


Perhaps the activists would rather we import from abroad: live transport, anyone? Pigs that are normally caged and unable to move, used purely as breeding machines in pens they can't even turn over in them or milk from countries where the welfare standards are woefully lower than even the worst ones here?

I think there are ways and means which would be more effective: activist=criminal in many people's eyes and the high profile nature of their activity is ensuring that more people see what they get up to now. There will always be a call for meat/dairy produce, this won't change. I fear this little Caffè Nero campaign will not spread because there is far too much sympathy for the farmers who have already experienced devastating losses from bovine TB. Making their lives worse in even minor ways is plain stupid.


----------



## freeda brocks (Jun 15, 2015)

StormyThai said:


> You would be guessing wrong yet again, but if it makes you feel better that the only reason people question things is because they are supporters then feel free. Your false opinion on where my morals and ethics lie is of no concern to me.
> 
> Yes trust is earnt...The thing is you my friend do not start on a level playing field, as you have already proven that you are willing to lie to get what you want
> 
> Stealing is stealing, you do not have to steal to make your mark in animal welfare...you most certainly do not steal to earn trust


yes I am prepared to lie to get what I want, but to whom?
stealing is stealing and I haven't said that anyone does have to steal to make their mark in animal welfare, my first anti-vivisection demo I ended up stealing a beagle which I went to prison for, I had no intention of gaining anyone's trust by doing so, I just wanted to stop a dog from going to a laboratory. You can view a bit of it at about 2:30 onwards in this video: 




So I've stolen a dog = I'm a thief
I've defrauded the gov of money = I'm a fraudster
I've lied to farmers to find out where the cull is = I'm a liar.

If anyone wants to think that that means I am constantly lying, de-frauding and stealing then that is their affair, people can work it out for themselves.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

freeda brocks said:


> (including the recent Tedworth incident


What you mean the incident where the huntsman ended up in hospital after being beaten unconscious.............................


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

freeda brocks said:


> I've defrauded the gov of money = I'm a fraudster + a liar


That right there has zero to do with animal welfare and is one of the reasons that your word means nothing to me...
There is no valid reason/excuse for defrauding the government, all you did was effect innocent lives...why are those innocents not worthy of your time?

Your involvement in AR is irrelevant to any points I have raised.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

freeda brocks said:


> If anyone wants to think that that means I am constantly lying, de-frauding and stealing then that is their affair, people can work it out for themselves.


I think we already have.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

freeda brocks said:


> I've defrauded the gov of money = I'm a fraudster


But sadly, the money you took unlawfully was supposed to be going to disabled youngsters. I think that's pretty disgraceful. There is no excuse for that. And why do sabs rely on gofundme appeals to fund their outings/lives? I see multiple appeals begging for funds to repair a vehicle, replace a tyre (which is then repaired, but apparently it cost £500, yeah, whatever!). Why can't they fund their life's passion from their own funds? I do.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

rona said:


> What you mean the incident where the huntsman ended up in hospital after being beaten unconscious.............................


The incident the police dropped? Perhaps this is why they dropped it - https://www.facebook.com/huntsabs/posts/838014216256014 Theres no way they would have dropped it if they had evidence to prosecute a sab! Funny how you accept everything as gospel from pro hunt sources.


----------



## CRL (Jan 3, 2012)

noushka05 said:


> The incident the police dropped? Perhaps this is why they dropped it - https://www.facebook.com/huntsabs/posts/838014216256014 Theres no way they would have dropped it if they had evidence to prosecute a sab! Funny how you accept everything as gospel from pro hunt sources.


just because something is dropped by the cps does not mean they are innocent of the crime. i know this from personal experinece.


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

freeda brocks said:


> So I've stolen a dog = I'm a thief
> I've defrauded the gov of money = I'm a fraudster
> I've lied to farmers to find out where the cull is = I'm a liar.


I'm unrepentant and even proud of it = I'm a shyster


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

noushka05 said:


> The incident the police dropped? Perhaps this is why they dropped it - https://www.facebook.com/huntsabs/posts/838014216256014 Theres no way they would have dropped it if they had evidence to prosecute a sab! Funny how you accept everything as gospel from pro hunt sources.


They would if the cps didn't deem the case worth spending public money on.
I am not saying that is what happened just that it isn't as simple as evidence = court case.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

CRL said:


> just because something is dropped by the cps does not mean they are innocent of the crime. i know this from personal experinece.


True, Nids case being the perfect example  But have you seen that video? theres only a few seconds of it & its clearly been edited.



cinnamontoast said:


> But sadly, the money you took unlawfully was supposed to be going to disabled youngsters. I think that's pretty disgraceful. There is no excuse for that. And why do sabs rely on gofundme appeals to fund their outings/lives? I see multiple appeals begging for funds to repair a vehicle, replace a tyre (which is then repaired, but apparently it cost £500, yeah, whatever!). Why can't they fund their life's passion from their own funds? I do.


Did the youngsters not get their money then?.

Hunt thugs regularly damage sab vehicles - I can show you LOADS of videos if you like? Have you ever thought people who love animals actually WANT to donate to help the sabs? Sabs save foxes lives, no one else is!


----------



## CRL (Jan 3, 2012)

noushka05 said:


> True, Nids case being the perfect example  But have you seen that video? theres only a few seconds of it & its clearly been edited.


no i havent seen the video. and im not going to watch it. i hate watching videos like that. 
the court case i am on about there was plenty of evidence including a second person pleading guilty, 3 witnesses, social services testimony, the defendant says he did it but it was meant as a joke. and yet even with that much evidence the case was dropped, the person got to keep working in the proffession and even got a big handout from the company he got fired from. 
dropping court cases means nothing. i know he was guilty, it just wasnt proven in a court of law. shame really cus the scum needs locking up.


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

noushka05 said:


> Did the youngsters not get their money then?.


Frauds scuttle adult learning scheme
The Guardian Thursday 25 October 2001


> A £150m scheme to improve adult basic skills was abandoned last night by the education secretary, Estelle Morris, after evidence emerged that learners had been ripped off by unscrupulous companies.
> 
> The much heralded system of individual learning accounts (ILAs), through which 2.5m learners have received credits worth up to £200 towards courses, fell victim to abuse and fraud.
> ..............
> ...


----------



## freeda brocks (Jun 15, 2015)

rona said:


> What you mean the incident where the huntsman ended up in hospital after being beaten unconscious.............................


yes, watch the video, it begins with two hunts people attacking one sab. If anyone starts hitting me (on sabs or in any situation) I may well end up putting them in hospital or I may end up in hospital myself, thats what happens during fights, people get hurt.
I'm not a violent person, I don't ever contemplate attacking people, but I'm not a pushover either and I will defend myself.


----------



## freeda brocks (Jun 15, 2015)

StormyThai said:


> That right there has zero to do with animal welfare and is one of the reasons that your word means nothing to me...
> There is no valid reason/excuse for defrauding the government, all you did was effect innocent lives...why are those innocents not worthy of your time?
> 
> Your involvement in AR is irrelevant to any points I have raised.


the money I got went in part back to AR and in part to fund my lifestyle. I pleaded guilty, I haven't made any mention of people being not worthy of my time


cinnamontoast said:


> But apparently it's ok, because animals' lives are more important than those of humans. After all, humans will hopefully 'go extinct' soon. Really can't use the rolly eyes emoticon again, it might get worn out.
> 
> Perhaps the activists would rather we import from abroad: live transport, anyone? Pigs that are normally caged and unable to move, used purely as breeding machines in pens they can't even turn over in them or milk from countries where the welfare standards are woefully lower than even the worst ones here?
> 
> I think there are ways and means which would be more effective: activist=criminal in many people's eyes and the high profile nature of their activity is ensuring that more people see what they get up to now. There will always be a call for meat/dairy produce, this won't change. I fear this little Caffè Nero campaign will not spread because there is far too much sympathy for the farmers who have already experienced devastating losses from bovine TB. Making their lives worse in even minor ways is plain stupid.


The campaign will spread, Sainsbury's is next. How long it takes them to capitulate is anyone's guess but I can already see the cracks. 
"sympathy for farmers"? I don't see very much of that, people are generally in four camps with regard to the badger cull
1) they don't like it
2) they support it
3) they don't know about it and when they find out they don't care
4) they don't know about it and when they find out they do care and then want to know how they can help

The caffe nero media frenzy hasn't done the anti-cull campaign any harm, the opposite as you say the high profile nature of our activity is ensuring more people see what we get up to, we hand out leaflets outside shops and engage with the public about the cull throughout the year and go into the fields and stop the cull when it's on. Our numbers constantly increase


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

freeda brocks said:


> the money I got went in part back to AR and in part to fund my lifestyle. I pleaded guilty, I haven't made any mention of people being not worthy of my time


It's interesting that you show no remorse for the vulnerable innocent people you effected so you could "fund your chosen lifestyle"
That speaks volumes!


----------



## freeda brocks (Jun 15, 2015)

cinnamontoast said:


> But sadly, the money you took unlawfully was supposed to be going to disabled youngsters. I think that's pretty disgraceful. There is no excuse for that. And why do sabs rely on gofundme appeals to fund their outings/lives? I see multiple appeals begging for funds to repair a vehicle, replace a tyre (which is then repaired, but apparently it cost £500, yeah, whatever!). Why can't they fund their life's passion from their own funds? I do.


none of the money was supposed to goto disabled youngsters, I have no idea where you got that idea, it was called the "individual learning account" anyone could claim from the government the sum of £150 towards an educational course, I and my co-defendants were shown to be giving half of that money back to the claimants and keeping the other half.


----------



## freeda brocks (Jun 15, 2015)

StormyThai said:


> It's interesting that you show no remorse for the vulnerable innocent people you effected so you could "fund your chosen lifestyle"
> That speaks volumes!


what vulnerable innocent people?


----------



## freeda brocks (Jun 15, 2015)

bed time for me I think, nice chatting to you all xx


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

freeda brocks said:


> what vulnerable innocent people?


Do you genuinely believe that not one single person was effected by the scheme to improve adult basic skills being cancelled?
Really?


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

CPS not proceeding is not a sign of innocence. Dunno who said that, but it's rubbish. They frequently don't proceed due to cost to the taxpayer.



freeda brocks said:


> the money I got went in part back to AR and in part to fund my lifestyle. I pleaded guilty, I haven't made any mention of people being not worthy of my time
> 
> The campaign will spread, Sainsbury's is next. How long it takes them to capitulate is anyone's guess but I can already see the cracks.
> "sympathy for farmers"? I don't see very much of that, people are generally in four camps with regard to the badger cull
> ...


I think you're delusional. All the media I've seen is about why the CEO capitulated and how the headquarters in Luxembourg should be targeted. Apparently more people care about British farmers than your little campaign. If Sainsbury go the same way, they'll lose a ton of business. They are vocal in their support of farming. The people to target are the government. If you haven't realised that, I do worry. Even if a farmer says he doesn't want the cull, he has no choice.



freeda brocks said:


> it was called the "individual learning account" anyone could claim from the government


To fund your lifestyle? Get a job like the rest of us! We don't go round defrauding the government to live! You're listed as a full time campaigner, so what work did you do in the last week that earned nearly £400 and are you paying tax? How will you fund your retirement? More fraud?


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Not the vulnerable eh?

http://www.myworldofwork.co.uk/content/ila-scotland-funding-for-you

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200203/cmselect/cmpubacc/544/54403.htm
"the Government withdrew it following allegations of fraud and abuse."

"The scale of fraud and abuse could amount to £97 million, including £67 million fraud."

Even if it wasn't from the vunerable as you seem to think. You are making every one of the tax payers in the country support your activities and life style.
I see you've also set up a Ltd company...........


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

freeda brocks said:


> yes, watch the video, it begins with two hunts people attacking one sab. If anyone starts hitting me (on sabs or in any situation) I may well end up putting them in hospital or I may end up in hospital myself, thats what happens during fights, people get hurt.
> I'm not a violent person, I don't ever contemplate attacking people, but I'm not a pushover either and I will defend myself.


Watched it and yes they were trying to get him away rather forcibly from the huntsman who was already on the ground, and then I see him get free and lash out with what looks like a thick chain.
I think you'd have to get close and personal with someone lashing out with something like that or get somewhat hurt yourself. Looks like they had no choice to me. Sorry


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

According to reports I've now read, the object he was attacking with was either a metal pipe, or wood on a rope. The sabs initially said it was wood and that they use wood on ropes. They later said it was a hunt whip. If you watch the video and look at the stills you can see the end fly off it. From that I would guess it was either wood or metal pipe (as the hunt said) on a rope. Unless the sabs involved came forward, there'd be no evidence for a prosecution. They had their faces covered, so no-one could identify them.

I already said you'd probably have to be stupid to believe that the fox cubs were rescued when their mothers were run over, before I saw the linked article. It was actually a joke, I didn't think anyone would think we would be stupid enough to believe it. I suppose though, it will have to actually be proven otherwise and was the only thing he (or his lawyers) could think of to use as a defence.

More lies from both sides.


----------



## Catharinem (Dec 17, 2014)

noushka05 said:


> God aren't you nosey? :Wideyed
> 
> Bet you believe every word of this moron lol


These must be the same people that have a nannying job lined up for Rolf on his release.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

rona said:


> Not the vulnerable eh?
> 
> Even if it wasn't from the vunerable as you seem to think. You are making every one of the tax payers in the country support your activities and life style.
> I see you've also set up a Ltd company...........


And you took funding away from those in need of improving their basic skills, most of whom, one imagines, wanted to do so in order to be more employable. You shot yourself in the foot-they're the ones paying for your so-called 'lifestyle'.


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

Catharinem said:


> These must be the same people that have a nannying job lined up for Rolf on his release.


That statement is all kinds of wrong.
But surely you know that?


----------



## suewhite (Oct 31, 2009)

Well!! I have had my eye's opened reading this thread and to me what I have read makes it a very sad day for those of us who are anti hunting and for the foxes.I campaign to close Puppy Farms also go to them to rescue and attend protests,we all fund ourselves and it costs us thousands our choice we go without things many people wouldn't (holidays and any social life) sorry to say to take happily from a fund that fund being my and other people's tax money is so wrong and does your cause no good.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

suewhite said:


> Well!! I have had my eye's opened reading this thread and to me what I have read makes it a very sad day for those of us who are anti hunting and for the foxes.I campaign to close Puppy Farms also go to them to rescue and attend protests,we all fund ourselves and it costs us thousands our choice we go without things many people wouldn't (holidays and any social life) sorry to say to take happily from a fund that fund being my and other people's tax money is so wrong and does your cause no good.


But you are a decent human being, with animals welfare in your heart, very different from some of those that sab hunts I can tell you.

That's without ever being on a hunt. I can say that with confidence after some of the things I've seen


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

silvi said:


> Frauds scuttle adult learning scheme
> The Guardian Thursday 25 October 2001


I cant condone or defend this, to say I'm disappointed is an understatement. Admittedly the main reason I could never vote tory is because f their cruelty towards animals, however their treatment of the disabled is equally appalling & having a social conscience I wouldn't have voted for them whatever. So I have to say, reading this article is really upsetting. The stealing of the beagle & the phone calls were acts of mercy to save animals lives & I will always be grateful for the sacrifices Jay has made to save lives out in the fields - but the repercussions of the gvt fraud on disabled people _if accurate,_ is indefensible.



Elles said:


> According to reports I've now read, the object he was attacking with was either a metal pipe, or wood on a rope. The sabs initially said it was wood and that they use wood on ropes. They later said it was a hunt whip. If you watch the video and look at the stills you can see the end fly off it. From that I would guess it was either wood or metal pipe (as the hunt said) on a rope. Unless the sabs involved came forward, there'd be no evidence for a prosecution. They had their faces covered, so no-one could identify them.
> 
> I already said you'd probably have to be stupid to believe that the fox cubs were rescued when their mothers were run over, before I saw the linked article. It was actually a joke, I didn't think anyone would think we would be stupid enough to believe it. I suppose though, it will have to actually be proven otherwise and was the only thing he (or his lawyers) could think of to use as a defence.
> 
> More lies from both sides.


http://
Theres a pretty good photo of the main suspect here - police still not interested. I wonder why that could be :/ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...espite-dossier-evidence-possible-suspect.html

Yes it was a rope with a wooden handle - a homemade whip. Used for rating the hounds . The sabs didn't lie, they've said this all along.

Only one side is barbarically killing wild animals - if this stopped sabs would happily be redundant



CRL said:


> no i havent seen the video. and im not going to watch it. i hate watching videos like that.
> the court case i am on about there was plenty of evidence including a second person pleading guilty, 3 witnesses, social services testimony, the defendant says he did it but it was meant as a joke. and yet even with that much evidence the case was dropped, the person got to keep working in the proffession and even got a big handout from the company he got fired from.
> dropping court cases means nothing. i know he was guilty, it just wasnt proven in a court of law. shame really cus the scum needs locking up.


That's awful, the hand out he got must have been the ultimate kick in the teeth. The CPS are, thankfully, reviewing Nids case, it will be a travesty if she doesn't get her day in court, she could have been killed. It was the police who shelved the case Rona mentioned CRL - & no wonder :/


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> I cant condone or defend this, to say I'm disappointed is an understatement. Admittedly the main reason I could never vote tory is because f their cruelty towards animals, however their treatment of the disabled is equally appalling & having a social conscience I wouldn't have voted for them whatever. So I have to say, reading this article is really upsetting. The stealing of the beagle & the phone calls were acts of mercy to save animals lives & I will always be grateful for the sacrifices Jay has made to save lives out in the fields - but the repercussions of the gvt fraud on disabled people _if accurate,_ is indefensible.


Sadly it appears to be very true, Noush - plenty of articles from diverse sources with just a quick Google, even though it was he best part of 15 years ago. This one covers the implications as well as the details of Gamal's involvement:

https://www.tes.co.uk/teaching-resource/Fraud-simple-enough-for-child-378422/


----------



## Catharinem (Dec 17, 2014)

silvi said:


> That statement is all kinds of wrong.
> But surely you know that?


Tongue in cheek obviously! But about as likely as being expected to believe "people" gave the hunt poor orphaned foxes to care for.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

Jesthar said:


> Sadly it appears to be very true, Noush - plenty of articles from diverse sources with just a quick Google, even though it was he best part of 15 years ago. This one covers the implications as well as the details of Gamal's involvement:
> 
> https://www.tes.co.uk/teaching-resource/Fraud-simple-enough-for-child-378422/


I fail absolutely to see how his guilt can be disputed. He admitted it himself on this thread, saying some of the money was given to the animal rights campaign and some used to support his 'lifestyle choice' ie not work and choose to defraud the government. It's not just in the Daily Fail and no way would they have published that someone was convicted if it weren't true, they may be a sensationalist rag, but they ain't stupid.

Wonder who paid for the holiday in Greece??


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

rona said:


> But you are a decent human being, with animals welfare in your heart, very different from some of those that sab hunts I can tell you.
> 
> That's without ever being on a hunt. I can say that with confidence after some of the things I've seen


And from what l've seen of Sue, completely different to ALL blood sport enthusiasts - a genuine animal lover.



Jesthar said:


> Sadly it appears to be very true, Noush - plenty of articles from diverse sources with just a quick Google, even though it was he best part of 15 years ago. This one covers the implications as well as the details of Gamal's involvement:
> 
> https://www.tes.co.uk/teaching-resource/Fraud-simple-enough-for-child-378422/


Thank you. It appears the scheme wasn't set up very well at all leaving it wide open to abuse, and was doomed to fail. That's not making any excuses for Jay - he did a bad thing & it contributed to the ending of the scheme by the looks of things. But anyone who goes out night after night in all weather for weeks on end trying to stop badgers being cruelly killed cant be all bad. No one can knock Jays selfless compassion for animals.



cinnamontoast said:


> I fail absolutely to see how his guilt can be disputed. He admitted it himself on this thread, saying some of the money was given to the animal rights campaign and some used to support his 'lifestyle choice' ie not work and choose to defraud the government. It's not just in the Daily Fail and no way would they have published that someone was convicted if it weren't true, they may be a sensationalist rag, but they ain't stupid.
> 
> Wonder who paid for the holiday in Greece??


No one has disputed his guilt 

No the fail ain't stupid - just blatant liars & manipulators of the truth.


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

I must be reading the various links wrong? This was a £150 million pound program that was poorly managed and so allegedly suffered from millions of pounds of fraud and thus was consequently discontinued. I doubt that Gamal's theft of a poxy three grand, reprehensible though it be, was responsible for the scheme being terminated.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

How do you know it was a home made whip Noushka? Did you see it? The police have still been unable to identify the perpetrators and the hunt said they'd never seen them before, maybe they were rentamob, unless you know who they were?



noushka05 said:


> completely different to ALL blood sport enthusiasts - a genuine animal lover.


Who do you class as blood sport enthusiasts? Those who go drag or trail hunting today? Those who went fox hunting when it was legal? Just those who get kicks from seeing animals die, whatever the situation? Just out of interest.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Satori said:


> I must be reading the various links wrong? This was a £150 million pound program that was poorly managed and so allegedly suffered from millions of pounds of fraud and thus was consequently discontinued. I doubt that Gamal's theft of a poxy three grand, reprehensible though it be, was responsible for the scheme being terminated.


Sounds like the program was so badly thought out its scrapping was inevitable. Committing fraud is bad, hunting down a terrified animal for fun is one of the most heinous crimes imaginable imo.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Elles said:


> How do you know it was a home made whip Noushka? Did you see it? The police have still been unable to identify the perpetrators and the hunt said they'd never seen them before, maybe they were rentamob, unless you know who they were?
> 
> Who do you class as blood sport enthusiasts? Those who go drag or trail hunting today? Those who went fox hunting when it was legal? Just those who get kicks from seeing animals die, whatever the situation? Just out of interest.


They said so from the start & thats what many sabs use for rating the hounds. There's a clear photo of a 'suspect' if the police had the inclination to pursue it further - obviously, for some reason, they don't 

Thought it was obvious - people who are pro blood sports. Not people who go on genuine drag hunts, no. People who go trail hunting (or are apologists for said hunts), yes - they are a cover for illegal fox hunts.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

As the ones doing the hitting in the video had their faces covered, maybe they have no proof it was that actual person in the photo who caused injury, even if they know who he is. The police (and the hunt) have said that they were unable to identify the perpetrator.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

rona said:


> But you are a decent human being, with animals welfare in your heart, very different from some of those that sab hunts I can tell you.
> 
> *That's without ever being on a hunt. I can say that with confidence after some of the things I've seen*


If you have never been on a hunt then the only things you can have "seen" are the videos on social media. And if you have chosen to believe pro-hunt videos rather than anti-hunt videos, then that is your choice - but if you haven't been on a hunt or been a sab then you don't actually *KNOW* what happens at all; and so your boast about speaking with confidence is just so much hot air - all you can speak with confidence about is what other people have shown you.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Elles said:


> As the ones doing the hitting in the video had their faces covered, maybe they have no proof it was that actual person in the photo who caused injury, even if they know who he is. The police (and the hunt) have said that they were unable to identify the perpetrator.


That little bit of edited video? lol But didn't the hunt say the person in the photo was the main suspect?


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Of course I don't know what Rona has witnessed, but no, you don't have to go on a hunt to see it. Just happen to be in the same area at the same time, driving past, walking your dogs, or hacking your horse maybe. It doesn't have to be just from social media, nor do you have to be part of it.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

_Sometimes I think we live in such a bizarre world where advocates for life are considered radical and proponents of death are considered normal, where violence is considered acceptable and non-violence is dismissed as unpatriotic or cowardly.

Few killers question the morality of their actions. Once you have reached a stage where you can inflict cruelty and death, thoughts of morality, empathy and respect have long since vanished.

For if a killer of a deer could feel the pain and anguish of his victim or see the fawn starve because of a mother that did not return they would have little appetite for the meat.

Humans who have crossed the line into dealing death and inflicting misery have become alienated from the wonderment of life and no longer see or appreciate the magic of being alive.

Life is to be cherished, protected, defended and championed, not to be wantonly and cruelly destroyed, and certainly not for so frail an excuse as pleasure or sport. 
_
Captain Paul Watson.


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

Satori said:


> I must be reading the various links wrong? This was a £150 million pound program that was poorly managed and so allegedly suffered from millions of pounds of fraud and thus was consequently discontinued. I doubt that Gamal's theft of a poxy three grand, reprehensible though it be, was responsible for the scheme being terminated.


A poxy three grand isn't much in relation to the amount of fraud said to have taken place, I agree.
But add up all those poxy three grands and it did amount to enough to lead to the termination of the scheme.

If this was a company avoiding paying three grands worth of tax per year, there are several on this forum who would jump in to condemn them straight away.

If this was someone on benefits getting away with claiming three grand more of benefits each year than they were officially entitled to, there would be others on this forum jumping in to say that what they were doing was wrong (not to mention the whole of the right wing media).

Yes, this was a badly-managed scheme open to fraud. But that didn't mean that anyone had to take advantage of that fact.

But what I find more questionable, is that this government scheme was set up to help people on low incomes. People who could not afford to pay for these educational schemes themselves.

But no thought appears to have been given to that when the perpetrators devised their plan to carry out the fraud.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)




----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

Well worth listening to all the way through. Much as I think NFU is not the best organisation, I think the spokesman has a very valid point. Not sure why Gamal thinks NFU alone should lobby the government: why don't the animal activists do this, lawfully, then I think far more people would donate/support the anti cull campaign. 

Standing outside of cafés and handing out leaflets does not encourage the gen pub to engage with the antis. It makes them walk past, head down, don't want to know attitude. I'd go through them if I wanted to use the services of the café. 

Why doesn't Gamal admit to his original name? He's trying to be a politician and divert by saying the interviewer is having a pop about his family. Don't think so! It's a known fact. As a public figure who is frequently in the spotlight, he will surely expect the media interest. You make a deal with the devil involving yourself in high profile cases.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

Satori said:


> I must be reading the various links wrong? This was a £150 million pound program that was poorly managed and so allegedly suffered from millions of pounds of fraud and thus was consequently discontinued. I doubt that Gamal's theft of a poxy three grand, reprehensible though it be, was responsible for the scheme being terminated.


Of course not, it just means that he's a convicted criminal, along with the others who were prosecuted.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

I don't like the badger cull at all, but I don't get the pictures of dead animals the protesters use? Will they stand outside butchers next and show gory pictures of slaughtered food animals, saying buy your meat here, this is humane and it's organic, doesn't it look lovely? Dead animals don't look very nice, but they're dead. Now pictures of animals suffering in labs, yes, too right. Those pictures and videos of rabbits having shampoo dripped into their eyes made a huge difference, as did the reports that animals were skinned alive for their fur/skins, but dead animals? People eat dead animals every day of the week. Seeing what they look like unprocessed and unpackaged shouldn't really upset anyone. Is it just me, or does anyone else think it's strange. 

Perhaps he's trying to get away from his real name, because his family don't want to be associated with him and are frightened of repercussions, or the Mail knocking on their door. tbh I think once he'd said he doesn't want to discuss it, I was surprised the interviewer kept pressing him. Obviously if it wasn't him, he would have just said so, doh. He also asked if the activists wore balaclavas outside cafe nerro. Erm, no, they wore badger masks. :Hilarious Someone didn't do their research imo. I personally think the interview could have been better. :Bag


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> where violence is considered acceptable and non-violence is dismissed as unpatriotic or cowardly.


So that's his excuse for violent behaviour, we live in a world where it's more acceptable than not.  Strange person. I always think of true protesters campaigning for change as being Ghandi like and peaceful, or chaining themselves to railings and burning empty buildings like the suffragettes, not masked mercenaries.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

rona said:


>


Unlike the farmer, Jay certainly knows his facts about badgers and the pointlessness of culling them.

Those who are against boycotting &/or sabbing the culls, can I ask if they have any better suggestions how we might stop the culls?



Elles said:


> Of course I don't know what Rona has witnessed, but no, you don't have to go on a hunt to see it. Just happen to be in the same area at the same time, driving past, walking your dogs, or hacking your horse maybe. It doesn't have to be just from social media, nor do you have to be part of it.


Funny but you never seem to hear people who are pro sab having bad experiences with them. Just the presence of sabs gets some people worked up. You, for example Elles, said you thought this elderly hunt monitor was trying to 'provoke a response':Wideyed. And if you listened to Rona, she'd have you believe that conservationists were the destructive force on nature while gamekeepers were the guardians of our countryside lol


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Elles said:


> So that's his excuse for violent behaviour, we live in a world where it's more acceptable than not.  Strange person. I always think of true protesters campaigning for change as being Ghandi like and peaceful, or chaining themselves to railings and burning empty buildings like the suffragettes, not masked mercenaries.


What violent behaviour?


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Elles said:


> Of course I don't know what Rona has witnessed, but no,





Elles said:


> driving past, walking your dogs


Both of these 

Been verbally abused twice to, by these delightful people while they drove past, I assume because I walk in wax jacket and hat in the winter

Big brave chaps crammed into a vehicle abusing a lone female


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

noushka05 said:


> Funny but you never seem to hear people who are pro sab having bad experiences with them.


Yes because a pro sab is going to speak up about the underhand things that members of their group get up too..ya know, just like a pro hunt person will keep shtum about the not so legal activities that they might take part in 

I would also like to point out that recounting personal experiences with sabs, or recounting stories heard does not make one an anti sab, it just makes them people that have heard what some of the nastier sabs can get up too....now, as many have criminal records (not all) then they are the perfect people to not be caught 

I am not saying that all, or even a large portion will take part in suspect activities, but to say "Well I've not heard it so you must be a hunt apologist (or whatever word you choose for the day) and obviously it doesn't happen because people in charge of half a ton of excited animal should just stand around videoing this on their smart phones that they must carry with them"

It doesn't work like that..you not seeing something doesn't make that thing not exist, it just means you didn't see it....

And before you do your predictable...I do not hunt, I do not agree with fox hunting, I do not think fox hunting should be made legal and finally I am not making excuses for anyone..having an open mind does not equate to me making excuses or supporting anything!


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

The desire for violence that got him removed from Greenpeace and led him to setting up his own groups.

I said the sabs try to provoke a reaction. I didn't mention elderly hunt monitors. Though I did say that hunt followers often got on fine with the monitors and would stop for a chat. The monitors don't cover their faces and tend to be the same people, so the hunt followers get to know them. Don't forget hunting is now banned and out of 45000 people taking it up since the ban, at least one or two are likely to be anti fox hunting. 

Though honestly, talk about ageism. Are you implying that all sabs are young hooligans, as the more mature are unable to keep up? Or what? I'm not young, but if I wanted to sab, I bet I'd give them a run for their money on my mobility scooter. :Finger I'm crap at blowing the hunt horn though.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

cinnamontoast said:


> Well worth listening to all the way through. Much as I think NFU is not the best organisation, I think the spokesman has a very valid point. Not sure why Gamal thinks NFU alone should lobby the government: why don't the animal activists do this, lawfully, then I think far more people would donate/support the anti cull campaign.
> 
> Standing outside of cafés and handing out leaflets does not encourage the gen pub to engage with the antis. It makes them walk past, head down, don't want to know attitude. I'd go through them if I wanted to use the services of the café.
> 
> Why doesn't Gamal admit to his original name? He's trying to be a politician and divert by saying the interviewer is having a pop about his family. Don't think so! It's a known fact. As a public figure who is frequently in the spotlight, he will surely expect the media interest. You make a deal with the devil involving yourself in high profile cases.


So many people have contacted their MP's & campaigned against it that Cameron even admitted the badger cull was his most unpopular policy. Animal activists, the general public, conservationists, naturalists, environmentalists, anti cull farmers, vets, scientists have had NO influence on this. The government are in the pockets of the NFU & their hunt/shoot allies. Heck over 300,000 people signed the 'stop the badger cull' government e-petition. Its one of the biggest e-petitions ever - still it had no influence. Proof, if ever it were needed, that this is a sham of a democracy. Activism is the only hope now the tories are back in the driving seat. Unless you have any better ideas that is?

I handed out loads of leaflets during the Leeds badger march - most people seemed interested to me.



cinnamontoast said:


> Of course not, it just means that he's a convicted criminal, along with the others who were prosecuted.


To me the life of a fox is priceless & people who kill them for sport are criminals - I find it really sad that people value material things more than the life of a wild animal. People who kill wild animals for fun should ALL be prosecuted imo - they are wildlife criminals. What a backward world we live in :/



Elles said:


> I don't like the badger cull at all, but I don't get the pictures of dead animals the protesters use? Will they stand outside butchers next and show gory pictures of slaughtered food animals, saying buy your meat here, this is humane and it's organic, doesn't it look lovely? Dead animals don't look very nice, but they're dead. Now pictures of animals suffering in labs, yes, too right. Those pictures and videos of rabbits having shampoo dripped into their eyes made a huge difference, as did the reports that animals were skinned alive for their fur/skins, but dead animals? People eat dead animals every day of the week. Seeing what they look like unprocessed and unpackaged shouldn't really upset anyone. Is it just me, or does anyone else think it's strange.
> 
> Perhaps he's trying to get away from his real name, because his family don't want to be associated with him and are frightened of repercussions, or the Mail knocking on their door. tbh I think once he'd said he doesn't want to discuss it, I was surprised the interviewer kept pressing him. Obviously if it wasn't him, he would have just said so, doh. He also asked if the activists wore balaclavas outside cafe nerro. Erm, no, they wore badger masks. :Hilarious Someone didn't do their research imo. I personally think the interview could have been better. :Bag


I don't get your logic Elles? Why is showing pics of badgers inhumanly killed in the culls any different from showing the suffering of animals in labs? If people aren't moved to care about the badgers what hope is there of saving them?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Elles said:


> The desire for violence that got him removed from Greenpeace and led him to setting up his own groups.
> 
> I said the sabs try to provoke a reaction. I didn't mention elderly hunt monitors. Though I did say that hunt followers often got on fine with the monitors and would stop for a chat. The monitors don't cover their faces and tend to be the same people, so the hunt followers get to know them. Don't forget hunting is now banned and out of 45000 people taking it up since the ban, at least one or two are likely to be anti fox hunting.
> 
> Though honestly, talk about ageism. Are you implying that all sabs are young hooligans, as the more mature are unable to keep up? Or what? I'm not young, but if I wanted to sab, I bet I'd give them a run for their money on my mobility scooter. :Finger I'm crap at blowing the hunt horn though.


Haven't got much time - but here you go Elles VVV Will probably catch u later & respond to this in full lol x



Elles said:


> The girl in the first video should have kept out of the way. What did she want? The bloke to turn round and come back with his horse risking trampling her further? How do you know his horse wasn't tanking off with him and at that moment he couldn't turn round if he wanted to. I don't think it's acceptable to run over people with galloping horses, but unfortunately if people stand in the way, there will likely be accidents. I was more concerned about the comment that the hunt refused to let the ambulance through. That really doesn't make sense to me. Hunts need ambulances themselves sometimes, why would they block one? Air ambulance is often called out to remote areas, or difficult to get to areas, especially when speed is of the essence. It it's true an ambulance was deliberately blocked by anyone, they should also be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I agreed with you that some who go hunting are arrogant twats though, probably the same applies to some who don't.
> 
> Elderly ladies on public roads are unlikely to get video evidence of hunts illegally killing foxes I'm afraid. They are just putting themselves at risk and trying to provoke a response imo. The groups attending need to make sure everyone is kept safe and the way clear.
> 
> I do know of hunts that are quite friendly with the monitors btw. They don't have a problem with them. It's the sabs they aren't keen on. I wish I could find the head cam film of some young people out hunting, they spoke to some people watching, the monitors I believe and then filmed one of the girls doing their first jumps. It's how hunting could and should be imo., but I can't find it. It was linked on face-book a few months back.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> Heck over 300,000 people signed the 'stop the badger cull' government e-petition.


Sometimes wonder if e-petitions actually are worth it. To me they are pretty meaningless as they are so easy to fill in and it's so easy to inflate numbers. This isn't just for this topic but for all. Get a facebook campaign for anything and you can probably get thousands of people filling in an e-petition without even knowing any details of what they are signing. Don't know what the meaningful alternative would be though.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

The pictures are of dead badgers, people need to know what happens to them before they're dead.  The ways they've been killed over the years and now with the free shooting, it's terrible. The reason given for not inoculating is that the EU don't accept it, as there's no way of telling the difference between a cow reacting because it's inoculated and one that's reacting because it's infected. They need to work harder on that, but then you're back to lab animals and whether you agree the suffering of lab animals is acceptable for the greater good and the protection of badgers. Whole nuther thread. 

I think images, whether photo-shopped, or cartoons even, of badgers suffering, rather than badgers dead would have more of an effect. Maybe I'm wrong and people care more about live cows (and other people) suffering tb so can be easily persuaded that a cull is necessary. 

People were easily persuaded that killing thousands of healthy animals to prevent the spread of f&m was necessary. I was really frightened for my horses at the time, as they would have had to be killed if they were in a f&m area too and getting forage for them when farmers weren't allowed to deliver it was a nightmare.

If you note I said elderly ladies, not elderly monitors, I said the hunts get on with the monitors, it's the sabs they don't like. Like I said ageism.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

StormyThai said:


> Yes because a pro sab is going to speak up about the underhand things that members of their group get up too..ya know, just like a pro hunt person will keep shtum about the not so legal activities that they might take part in
> 
> I would also like to point out that recounting personal experiences with sabs, or recounting stories heard does not make one an anti sab, it just makes them people that have heard what some of the nastier sabs can get up too....now, as many have criminal records (not all) then they are the perfect people to not be caught
> 
> ...


I agree, I haven't read all the thread (can't be bothered ... same old, same old  ) or much about the person in question but I have posted before that I used to sab local hunts when I was younger & agree that not all sabs are nice people & not all are there to protect foxes, some are fantastic & will get up early in the morning, in all weathers because they are dedicated to a cause .... but then not all hunt participants/supporters are sadists, there are good & bad in both groups .,...

I don't agree with fox hunting & I don't agree with the badger cull either but don't thinking threatening people or their businesses is the way to win public support


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

I do not agree with the badger cull in any way, shape or form, but I think that some of the arguments against it are confusing and contradictory, which adds to the problem.

Yesterday evening, I had a look at different websites discussing bovine TB and efforts to eradicate it, but, as I said, the arguments are contradictory.

As far as I remember (without going and finding loads of links again) there is already a vaccine for cattle to prevent bovine TB, but it is not particularly effective for several reasons and that it will take another ten years at least to develop, test and put into use a vaccination that will be more effective. And that this is down to EU regulations on testing and time necessary before a vaccination comes into force.

On other websites, I saw that further tests on cattle and regulating cattle movements was the answer (at least until a new vaccine is approved), but then saw arguments that strict regulations for this were already in force and any more would be detrimental to small farmers.

Then there is the option of vaccinating badgers (being carried out in part of Wales right now?). But this is extremely difficult, not only because the badgers have to be caught and penned for vaccination, but because the vaccine has to be given (I think) every 3 years. There is also the argument that the vaccine is at most 50% effective, so to build up a badger population that has a majority of badgers free of TB will take many years, so will not solve immediate problems. Cost is also obviously a prime concern here and those opposed to this argue that a mass vaccination of badgers would be much too costly.
When opponents argue that culling badgers is also very costly, they are told that the figures in no way compare to mass vaccination.
(I would say that cost doesn't come into the saving of life, but I'm not a politician having to juggle with government funding)

As far as I can tell, there is another way - an oral vaccination for badgers, but although research is well underway, it appears that it will take a very long time for an oral vaccine to be produced that is effective, palatable to badgers, doesn't harm other wildlife and doesn't have a harmful effect on the environment.

But to add to all this, there are figures to show that the incidence of bTB is actually in the decline, but that these figures have been kept from us. And if this is the case, why the cull?

So, I looked at Jay's website for answers, because I think it is important to provide good arguments against culling as well as our obvious complete distaste of the whole dreadful thing. I think it would certainly be easier to argue at government level this way.

But it seems that Jay's fall back suggestion is that we all stop eating meat and consuming dairy products.
And when the general public are presented with this alternative, they are not going to be so clear about their feelings.

That's quite sad actually


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

StormyThai said:


> Yes because a pro sab is going to speak up about the underhand things that members of their group get up too..ya know, just like a pro hunt person will keep shtum about the not so legal activities that they might take part in


I've often recounted(on here too) the story of some nasty men that I knew in the shooting world and what they got up to. There were only two and I distanced myself from them pretty damn quick once I knew what they were like. Unfortunately, they also went out with the hunt on foot..........Just the types that probably aren't taking notice of the law.......there were only two though, most field sports people aren't like that at all, though I can't vouch for huntsmen as I don't know any, just seen them out and about same as sabs

Edit: I did actually know a master of hounds quite a few years ago and in another capacity. One of the most delightful men I have ever met in my life and he certainly loved his hounds


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

StormyThai said:


> Yes because a pro sab is going to speak up about the underhand things that members of their group get up too..ya know, just like a pro hunt person will keep shtum about the not so legal activities that they might take part in
> 
> I would also like to point out that recounting personal experiences with sabs, or recounting stories heard does not make one an anti sab, it just makes them people that have heard what some of the nastier sabs can get up too....now, as many have criminal records (not all) then they are the perfect people to not be caught
> 
> ...


Can't imagine who you're responding to there!  You sound just like.......me!! layful

Perhaps they could all learn to neck rein so that they have a hand free at all times going over five foot fences, handy for the necessary video.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Go pro on their helmets? Though unfortunately the batteries don't last very long and they aren't that easy to switch on and off, if you wanted to video only when something was happening and save battery power. Or maybe that's just my cheapie version.  I clip mine to my jacket, couldn't work out how to safely attach it to my helmet with their being no vents on it and I was worried it would damage the shell if I fell off and stop the helmet from working properly. It'll probably break my ribs if I do fall off, but better that than brain damage and I could wear an air fuelled body protector to protect my ribs if I was really wealthy. Darn things are so expensive.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

Worth it tho, Elles. Certainly saved Oli Townend when he had that rotational. We've got a Sony that we've attached to the dog to see where he went in the woods, no sound, but a hard wearing case and decent battery power. The video is on here somewhere, Star Wars dog might bring it up.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Goblin said:


> Sometimes wonder if e-petitions actually are worth it. To me they are pretty meaningless as they are so easy to fill in and it's so easy to inflate numbers. This isn't just for this topic but for all. Get a facebook campaign for anything and you can probably get thousands of people filling in an e-petition without even knowing any details of what they are signing. Don't know what the meaningful alternative would be though.


You have to fill in all your details & then verify it via your email, takes a little bit more effort than most other petitions. So I wouldn't have thought many would bother signing them if it wasn't an issue they didn't feel strongly enough about & I'm assuming having to leave all your details, including post code, means they cant easily be inflated? E-petitions are a waste of time though. The stop the cull petition triggered a debate in the HoC , the majority of MP's voted against the cull, the government ignored them & pushed on with the culls anyway.



cinnamontoast said:


> Can't imagine who you're responding to there!  You sound just like.......me!! layful
> 
> Perhaps they could all learn to neck rein so that they have a hand free at all times going over five foot fences, handy for the necessary video.


Doesn't she just

Not all participants in hunts ride horses , but I'm sure you know that. Some follow on foot (terriermen ride on quads) theres plenty of footage showing hunt supporters filming sabs filming the hunt.



rona said:


> I've often recounted(on here too) the story of some nasty men that I knew in the shooting world and what they got up to. There were only two and I distanced myself from them pretty damn quick once I knew what they were like. Unfortunately, they also went out with the hunt on foot..........Just the types that probably aren't taking notice of the law.......there were only two though, most field sports people aren't like that at all, though I can't vouch for huntsmen as I don't know any, just seen them out and about same as sabs
> 
> *Edit: I did actually know a master of hounds quite a few years ago and in another capacity. One of the most delightful men I have ever met in my life and he certainly loved his hounds*


Didn't these hounds get a bullet in the head once they'd served their purpose then?



silvi said:


> I do not agree with the badger cull in any way, shape or form, but I think that some of the arguments against it are confusing and contradictory, which adds to the problem.
> 
> Yesterday evening, I had a look at different websites discussing bovine TB and efforts to eradicate it, but, as I said, the arguments are contradictory.
> 
> ...


The science is clear - killing badgers can have NO meaningful impact on the disease in cattle. Its only the pro cull set confusing the issue with their lies & misinformation. The government are well aware of the science, they just keep deliberately misrepresenting it. The pilot culls were merely to test whether free shooting badgers was humane, efficient & safe. The Independent Expert Panel monitoring the culls concluded that they had failed on all counts, so the government refused to appoint another IEP in 2014 culls to monitor them. With their stricter cattle measure, along with badger vaccination, Wales has seen bTB plummet by 48% in 4 years. And the EU have recognised Wales commitment to tackling the disease http://gov.wales/newsroom/environme...-for-future-success-of-welsh-farming/?lang=en The government & the NFU are well aware its the cattle they should be focusing on, yet they remain obsessed with killing badgers. There is clearly an ulterior motive for the culls, tb is being used as a convenient excuse to eradicate this much loved _protected _species. Most of the Somerset cull zone has no dairy cattle, the culls are taking place on shooting estates...

I posted this back in 2013. Its a post by a very insightful & knowledgeable naturalist. I have highlighted one line in the message - the demonisation of protected raptors in the right wing press has begun.

_
The controversial decision by Natural England to extend the culling of badgers in Gloucestershire was narrowly approved against the recommendation of its own top scientific adviser, according to internal documents seen by the Guardian.

This is what is wrong with this cull in a nutshell, and I mean wrong in a very big and corrupt way. A small clique of powerful people, who I believe are the Countryside Alliance decided they wanted Badger culling. However, I believe the Countryside Alliance's wish to see Badger culling is not motivated by the wish to control bTB, but by the wish to be able to legally kill what are now protected species. There is currently illegal persecution of protected species on the estates of some of the wealthiest and most powerful people in the country (these wealthy people form the core of the Countryside Alliance). These people deeply resent being told what they are allowed to kill on their land, and what they are not are not allowed to kill. As far as they are concerned it is their land, and the plebs have no right to tell them what they can do on it.
I believe that for a long time the Countryside Alliance agitated for a Badger cull as a means to get through other culling of protected species. This is not speculation, as I was aware of shooters with no farming interests were trying to push through this Badger cull some time back. They convinced farmers that Badgers were the cause of bTB. They realised that the public was far more likely to sympathise with farmers rather than wealthy grouse shooters.

In other words I am saying a cabal of wealthy landowning members of the establishment decided they were going to have Badger culling, and that was the end of that.

The circumstantial evidence is in the way that those behind the cull just brush aside all science and expert opinion. It is pure misuse of power and grand corruption. This tiny clique of people who _have got themselves to the centre of power, and they are misusing their position to implement something against public opinion, and against the public interest.

And hes not the only one to believe the Countryside Alliance are at the heart of the badger cull http://somersetlabour.co.uk/ye/countryside-alliance-now-running-badger-cull/

*A Bloody Holy Trinity of Un-Natural England, National Farmers Union and DEFRA have baked together in Hell this wicked and unnecessary Badger Cull with the Countryside Alliance emerging as the "Prince of Darkness'" in the English countryside!
*
This is an excellent article by Badger Trust CEO Dominic Dyer on Caffe Nero's sourcing of 'badger friendly' milk & this could end up being good news for farmers.

*Where Caffè Nero leads on badger-free milk, others will follow*
Dominic Dyer

13th June 2015

Tweet

*Mil*

*Milk Farmers in the badger cull zones hardly depend on Caffè Nero's custom, writes Dominic Dyer. So why are the pro-cull lobby so hot under the collar with the coffee chain's refusal to buy their produce? Because it could force the entire food chain to take responsibility for how milk is produced - and a very good thing too!*

I hope this will be seen as a key moment when the whole food chain from farm to fork woke up to the need to work together to tackle bovine TB, without the further needless slaughter of badgers.
The Caffè Nero badger cull milk sourcing story is a storm in a coffee cup, but it has created more froth in the media than an extra large cappuccino.

Just in case you don't know, the international coffee shop chain has stopped sourcing milk from the badger cull zones in Gloucestershire and Somerset, after badger-lovers threatened to protest at its outlets.

But the move has given the pro badger cull lobby a golden opportunity to pull out all the stops in a frenzy of fear and anger, aimed at demonising not only the badger but also the caring & compassionate people who are willing to stand up and protect the species.

This is a desperate tactic, which is only being used because those who support the culling of badgers know they have completely failed to justify the policy on scientific, economic and humaneness grounds.

*Time to introduce a few facts into the debate?*

*The facts speak for themselves. To date two years of badger culling in West Somerset and West Gloucestershire has resulted in the death of 2,476 badgers at a cost in the region of £15 million pounds. Which when divided between the number of badgers killed is over £6,600 per badger, the most expensive wildlife cull of its kind on record.*

*Despite assurances from the government that this would be a farmer led policy, the vast majority of this £15 million bill has been paid for by the tax payer.* The huge costs of the cull are not only down to policing, but also the purchase and use of cages and heat seeking equipment and the employment of large numbers of civil servants both in Whitehall and the cull zones.

The government has also run up significant legal costs defending the disastrous badger cull policy in Court against the Badger Trust, Information Commissioner and private individuals.

The pilot culls were set up to test the efficiency and humaneness of free shooting of badgers at night by trained marksmen, nothing more. On this basis they have been a disastrous failure, as free shooting has proved highly ineffective as a killing method and has been found to be inhumane by both the government's own Independent Expert Panel and more recently the British Veterinary Association.

The only way the culls can now continue is if a majority of badgers to be killed are trapped in cages and then shot. However based on the government's own cost estimates this will come in at £3,500 per square km compared to £3,250 for trapping and vaccinating badgers.

To go forward with such a costly deeply flawed and unpopular culling policy, when* vaccination projects are cheaper*, is a political nightmare for the government. This is why despite huge pressure from the National Farmers Union, the badger cull will not be extended to new areas of England in 2015.

*The political tide is turning - where it counts most*

It's also noticeable that many of the new intake of Tory MPs are increasingly nervous of being associated with the disastrous badger cull policy. The new Tory MP for Bath Ben Howlett, took the wind out of the sales of the interviewer on BBC Sunday Politics this week, when in response to a question on the Caffè Nero story, he said he was opposed to badger culling and supported badger vaccination as an alternative.

The former Environment Secretary Owen Paterson might be doing his best to stir up things up from the side lines, but it's clear he has little influence over the new generation of Tory MPs who came into Parliament on the coat tails of David Cameron's surprise election victory.

Also the new DEFRA Edge Badger Vaccination scheme rolls out across 10 counties of England this summer, with over £1.3 million in public funding. This is David Cameron's 'Big Society' in action as public money is being used to provide training and equipment for large numbers of volunteers from Badger Trust and Wildlife Trust Groups to work with farmers to trap & vaccinate badgers on their land across wide areas of the country.

Andrew Bingham, MP for High Peak in Derbyshire, is just one of a growing number of Tory MPs who have changed their minds on badger culling and are now actively working to support badger vaccination in their constituencies, as part of this new DEFRA scheme.

Badger vaccination cannot cure a badger with TB, but with disease levels in badgers at around 15% (based on data from Randomised Badger Culling Trial) vaccinating the 85% without the disease is most definitely worthwhile. Despite what some farmers might want to believe, badger vaccination has been scientifically proven to significantly lower the spread of TB in disease free badgers and reduce the spread of the disease of in new born cubs.

However, we need to be careful not to fall into the trap of playing the badger blame game, when it's comes to bovine TB. As the DEFRA Chief Scientist Ian Boyd told an NFU hosted TB policy conference last year, only 6% of TB infections in cattle are due to badgers, the other 94% is due to cattle to cattle disease transmission and this is where urgent action needs to be taken to get control of bovine TB.

*Now other milk users are getting forced off the sidelines*

A positive development from the Caffè Nero story is that food retailers and restaurant chains who are key users of fresh milk in the food chain, are now being dragged back into the centre of the debate on the bovine TB issue.

For too long they have sat on the side lines and allowed the government and the farming industry to play the badger blame game, which has resulted in the disastrous position we are currently in.

I will be meeting with Sainsbury's next week on behalf of the Badger Trust and I will tell them it's time the food retailers started to show some leadership on the bovine TB issue.

If they truly wish to do what is right for their farm suppliers, customers and the future of our wildlife, they should put funding into the DEFRA Edge badger vaccination scheme, work with their milk suppliers to improve bio security at the farm gate level and work with the government and farming industry to bring forward a cattle TB vaccination field trial in the UK in the next 12 to 18 months.

I hope we can look back at the Caffè Nero milk sourcing debate as a key moment when the whole food chain from farm to fork woke up to the need to work together to tackle bovine TB, without the further needless slaughter of badgers, which is so angering the wider public.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Oh to have such a closed mind...Noush I used to read all of your posts as you highlighted a lot about animal welfare but your continued closed mind to thoughts outside your own and then the little jabs you like to take has meant that I no longer take you seriously!

Hopefully one day you will wake up to this so that you don't continue to ostracise others that like to keep open minded about things....


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

Satori said:


> I must be reading the various links wrong? This was a £150 million pound program that was poorly managed and so allegedly suffered from millions of pounds of fraud and thus was consequently discontinued. I doubt that Gamal's theft of a poxy three grand, reprehensible though it be, was responsible for the scheme being terminated.


That's not really the point, though is it? The amount of money stolen in immaterial, the fact remains that it WAS stolen, and the person who stole it appears to show neither remorse nor regret for not only having taken money from some of the most vulnerable in society, but also having helped deny many more such people the opportunity to receive training when the scheme had to be wound up because of him and his fellow fraudsters. Yes, the scheme may have been badly designed and suffered a death from a thousand cuts, but does that make abusing it _right_ because he didn't steal as much as some others did and used _some_ of the money to print some AR leaflets? There are plenty of AR people out there who fund their activities through their own honest work with no thought of committing fraud or other questionable fundraising activities, why should Gamal not do the same?



noushka05 said:


> That little bit of edited video? lol


Thinking of a phrase involving pots and kettles at this point!

Plus, no video from EITHER side of the hunting debate has any real evidenciary value unless it is timestamped, real-time and unedited from start to finish including all the footage from the minutes leading up to the event (and preferably the whole unedited video from the moment filming of any kind started to the moment it ended), and that includes having no music, text or commentary added. Which means no side has any videos 'proving' anything as things stand. A video cllip out of context is a pretext, after all.


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

Jesthar said:


> but does that make abusing it _right ... ?_


No.


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

noushka05 said:


> The science is clear - killing badgers can have NO meaningful impact on the disease in cattle. Its only the pro cull set confusing the issue with their lies & misinformation. The government are well aware of the science, they just keep deliberately misrepresenting it. The pilot culls were merely to test whether free shooting badgers was humane, efficient & safe. The Independent Expert Panel monitoring the culls concluded that they had failed on all counts, so the government refused to appoint another IEP in 2014 culls to monitor them. With their stricter cattle measure, along with badger vaccination, Wales has seen bTB plummet by 48% in 4 years. And the EU have recognised Wales commitment to tackling the disease http://gov.wales/newsroom/environme...-for-future-success-of-welsh-farming/?lang=en The government & the NFU are well aware its the cattle they should be focusing on, yet they remain obsessed with killing badgers. There is clearly an ulterior motive for the culls, tb is being used as a convenient excuse to eradicate this much loved _protected _species. Most of the Somerset cull zone has no dairy cattle, the culls are taking place on shooting estates...
> 
> I posted this back in 2013. Its a post by a very insightful & knowledgeable naturalist. I have highlighted one line in the message - the demonisation of protected raptors in the right wing press has begun.
> 
> ...


Thanks.
I haven't got time to read all of this now, but I will later.

I'm interested in ways that the badger cull can be stopped and how the appeal can be made and explained to the general public (preferably without turning the average person away from the appeal because of the fear they may have [justified or otherwise] of extremists). I'm also interested in how the actual statistics on all this can be outlined so that the argument for stopping the badger cull (and never having it re-instated in the future) will stand on firm ground.

That's why I outlined what I had discovered in one short search of the internet.
Because activists will have to win arguments, as well as hearts and minds, to ensure permanent success.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

StormyThai said:


> Oh to have such a closed mind...Noush I used to read all of your posts as you highlighted a lot about animal welfare but your continued closed mind to thoughts outside your own and then the little jabs you like to take has meant that I no longer take you seriously!
> 
> Hopefully one day you will wake up to this so that you don't continue to ostracise others that like to keep open minded about things....


I'm afraid my mind is fixed where blood sports are concerned, people who hunt animals for fun are no different from yobs who set their dogs on cats to me. In case you hadnt noticed, the little jabs are a two way thing, I don't get digs in at people who aren't like that with me. Heck I've even had threads done aimed at me, which is something I have never done nor would ever do. And to be quite honest with you, I don't think you or I have ever shared much common ground where blood sports are concerned (remember our marathon hen harrier debate? lol). I like a lot of people on here, they are the ones I would hate to ostracise & if I thought I had I would try to put that right. The rest will just have to take me as they find me i guess. And I don't think most members would hold a grudge on to the next thread anyway.



Jesthar said:


> That's not really the point, though is it? The amount of money stolen in immaterial, the fact remains that it WAS stolen, and the person who stole it appears to show neither remorse nor regret for not only having taken money from some of the most vulnerable in society, but also having helped deny many more such people the opportunity to receive training when the scheme had to be wound up because of him and his fellow fraudsters. Yes, the scheme may have been badly designed and suffered a death from a thousand cuts, but does that make abusing it _right_ because he didn't steal as much as some others did and used _some_ of the money to print some AR leaflets? There are plenty of AR people out there who fund their activities through their own honest work with no thought of committing fraud or other questionable fundraising activities, why should Gamal not do the same?
> 
> Thinking of a phrase involving pots and kettles at this point!
> 
> Plus, no video from EITHER side of the hunting debate has any real evidenciary value unless it is timestamped, real-time and unedited from start to finish including all the footage from the minutes leading up to the event (and preferably the whole unedited video from the moment filming of any kind started to the moment it ended), and that includes having no music, text or commentary added. Which means no side has any videos 'proving' anything as things stand. A video cllip out of context is a pretext, after all.


That was my point Jesthar lol. Some people on this thread believed that little clip of the huntsman whilst playing down the videos of the seriously injured sab & the elderly monitor I posted. The video of the hunt monitor stood up in court - the huntsman pleaded guilty.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

So the badger cull is because rich people want to kill them and resent being told what they can and cannot kill? Nothing to do with EU directives? I don't agree with it at all, but I don't believe it's to do with rich people wanting to shoot a protected species. I think it's to do with trade, money and the EU. We have to eradicate tb in cattle herds and do what other countries did, ie kill wild life and put into place other controls, because the EU say we have to and some farmers want it, over having stricter controls on them. imho

I didn't intend to play down the video of the injured sab who was knocked down by a horse, if it's being implied that I did. It was a horrifying video to me. Not least because I ride horses myself and wouldn't want to knock down anyone, putting them, myself and my horse at risk. I suggested that in future anyone attending hunts for any reason pay attention and stay out of the way of galloping horses. Standing in a gateway when you know horses are likely to be heading for it, especially at speed, is at best foolish, regardless of who's riding them, or not.  I personally felt that if the girl involved was inexperienced, the more experienced of the sabs/monitors attending should have taken care of her and should have instructions in place to avoid incidents like that one and should at least learn from what happened. That doesn't mean that I dismiss it.

The girl being run down was a horrible video, as was the one where the hunt were being attacked and having an implement on a rope swung violently at them. Neither should happen.


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> That was my point Jesthar lol. Some people on this thread believed that little clip of the huntsman whilst playing down the videos of the seriously injured sab & the elderly monitor I posted. The video of the hunt monitor stood up in court - the huntsman pleaded guilty.


But it wasn't _my _point. The video submitted to court would have had to have been the original, unadulterated raw footage to be legally viable, so that is not up for debate.

However, the videos posted _online_ can - and usually are - edited to show and emphasise exactly what the posting party (on either side) wants. Such as the AR one someone helpfully dissected for us earlier in this thread (I think it was this thread, anyway). I'm sure the people doing it feel it is a way to increase the impact and therefore the support for their cause, but in reality when your average person realises what they have been viewing has been manipulated it just makes them lose faith in anything else posted by that and similar sources, so it actually undermines the cause.

Basic psychology doesn't seem to be their strong point, really.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Jesthar said:


> but in reality when your average person realises what they have been viewing has been manipulated it just makes them lose faith in anything else posted by that and similar sources, so it actually undermines the cause.


Reminds me of the video manipulated by that Hewitt woman who in the end was prosecuted for I believe harrassment mainly due to the uncut version of her own video


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

noushka05 said:


> In case you hadnt noticed, the little jabs are a two way thing, I don't get digs in at people who aren't like that with me.


I have not thrown digs your way...ok I may be sarcastic but that isn't the same...
You on the other hand have called me lots of different names because I happen to be able to see things that you refuse too.

As for not sharing common ground..well that proves my point that you don't listen or even take on board what is said if it doesn't fit with you...I have never said I agree with blood sports..EVER!


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

Elles said:


> So the badger cull is because rich people want to kill them and resent being told what they can and cannot kill? Nothing to do with EU directives?
> 
> The girl being run down was a horrible video


Good god, who said that about the cull? Possibly one of the stupidest things I've ever read, along with the 'toffs who ride horses' nonsense.

Tell me about it, been there, done that, got the gruesome pictures and the leg that will never see the light of day again. But as repeatedly mentioned here and elsewhere, you don't stand on a path with the hunt galloping around. Horses are big, dangerous animals, accidents happen. I could link the story of a girl I know whose skull was smashed like an egg just catching in a horse and she was used to horses, like me, but accidents happen. I could recount tons of accidents like a friend turning out her horse and he double barrelled her and split her spleen or the one who got her nose smashed up by a flying ice chunk coming out of a horse's hoof that bucked. I sincerely hope the girl will recover properly, but horses can be dangerous to be around. You have to be super careful and not put yourself in harm's way. I'm sure Elles and the other riders also have horrific tales from over the years.



StormyThai said:


> As for not sharing common ground..well that proves my point that you don't listen or even take on board what is said if it doesn't fit with you...I have never said I agree with blood sports..EVER!


Brick wall, ST, brick wall. Doesn't matter what you say. You either take one extreme stance or another, or you're an 'apologist' or not really against it.  (Although you don't have to actually do anything about it like actually get off your bum, just post endless links )


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> This is what is wrong with this cull in a nutshell, and I mean wrong in a very big and corrupt way. A small clique of powerful people, who I believe are the Countryside Alliance decided they wanted Badger culling. However, I believe the Countryside Alliance's wish to see Badger culling is not motivated by the wish to control bTB, but by the wish to be able to legally kill what are now protected species. There is currently illegal persecution of protected species on the estates of some of the wealthiest and most powerful people in the country (these wealthy people form the core of the Countryside Alliance). These people deeply resent being told what they are allowed to kill on their land, and what they are not are not allowed to kill. As far as they are concerned it is their land, and the plebs have no right to tell them what they can do on it.


From Noushka's earlier post, though she was quoting someone else, she didn't say who. It's annoying, because it doesn't help at all, it just starts to look like crazy conspiracy theories and tinfoil hats.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

StormyThai said:


> Yes because a pro sab is going to speak up about the underhand things that members of their group get up too..ya know, just like a pro hunt person will keep shtum about the not so legal activities that they might take part in
> 
> I would also like to point out that recounting personal experiences with sabs, or recounting stories heard does not make one an anti sab, it just makes them people that have heard what some of the nastier sabs can get up too....now, as many have criminal records (not all) then they are the perfect people to not be caught
> 
> ...


Ehh? I'm not talking about other sabs, I'm talking about regular people,they never seem to have a problem with sabs they come across . People are always thanking them the sacrifices they make to save wild animals. As someone opposed to fox hunting would you rather no one went sabbing or monitoring & hunts were left to get on killing foxes unhindered?



Elles said:


> The pictures are of dead badgers, people need to know what happens to them before they're dead.  The ways they've been killed over the years and now with the free shooting, it's terrible. The reason given for not inoculating is that the EU don't accept it, as there's no way of telling the difference between a cow reacting because it's inoculated and one that's reacting because it's infected. They need to work harder on that, but then you're back to lab animals and whether you agree the suffering of lab animals is acceptable for the greater good and the protection of badgers. Whole nuther thread.
> 
> I think images, whether photo-shopped, or cartoons even, of badgers suffering, rather than badgers dead would have more of an effect. Maybe I'm wrong and people care more about live cows (and other people) suffering tb so can be easily persuaded that a cull is necessary.
> 
> ...


Wales are winning the battle against the disease without the cattle vaccine. A European Commission report slammed farmers for failing to abide by tb prevention measures, they didn't blame badgers or call for their culling.

It was the NFU who opposed the vaccination of livestock against foot & mouth in favour of mass slaughter. I don't think the NFU believe in vaccination, they much prefer to kill animals.

So hunts don't like the elderly:Wideyed & its because that lady was elderly( not because she was a hunt monitor) that Marles drove his horse into her? Wow they really are reprehensible people.(not that I needed any more proof of that!)



Elles said:


> So the badger cull is because rich people want to kill them and resent being told what they can and cannot kill? Nothing to do with EU directives? I don't agree with it at all, but I don't believe it's to do with rich people wanting to shoot a protected species. I think it's to do with trade, money and the EU. We have to eradicate tb in cattle herds and do what other countries did, ie kill wild life and put into place other controls, because the EU say we have to and some farmers want it, over having stricter controls on them. imho
> 
> I didn't intend to play down the video of the injured sab who was knocked down by a horse, if it's being implied that I did. It was a horrifying video to me. Not least because I ride horses myself and wouldn't want to knock down anyone, putting them, myself and my horse at risk. I suggested that in future anyone attending hunts for any reason pay attention and stay out of the way of galloping horses. Standing in a gateway when you know horses are likely to be heading for it, especially at speed, is at best foolish, regardless of who's riding them, or not.  I personally felt that if the girl involved was inexperienced, the more experienced of the sabs/monitors attending should have taken care of her and should have instructions in place to avoid incidents like that one and should at least learn from what happened. That doesn't mean that I dismiss it.
> 
> The girl being run down was a horrible video, as was the one where the hunt were being attacked and having an implement on a rope swung violently at them. Neither should happen.


You have put your own spin on things Elles:Wideyed nothing at all was said about rich people in general. Or are all rich people members of the Countryside Alliance? lol The countryside is controlled by hunt fanatics represented by countryside lobby groups of the Countryside Alliance, the CLA which have very close ties with the NFU, they represent many of the large landowners . Fox hunts hate badgers because foxes often take refuge in badger setts & it is illegal to interfere even with setts. Game shoots hate badgers because they will predate game birds & their eggs. Badgers are a heavily protected species & this group are offended by that. The CA, CLA, GWCT all support the badger cull!

No, badger culls have nothing to do with the EU, this is a government policy. You have fallen for pro cull propaganda, killing wildlife will not solve anything. If we wiped out all our wildlife bTB would still be prevalent within the cattle herds. The EU commended Wales for their tackling of the disease - Wales haven't killed any badgers. You cant push the blame for this travesty onto the EU.

.........................................................................................



Jesthar said:


> But it wasn't _my _point. The video submitted to court would have had to have been the original, unadulterated raw footage to be legally viable, so that is not up for debate.
> 
> However, the videos posted _online_ can - and usually are - edited to show and emphasise exactly what the posting party (on either side) wants. Such as the AR one someone helpfully dissected for us earlier in this thread (I think it was this thread, anyway). I'm sure the people doing it feel it is a way to increase the impact and therefore the support for their cause, but in reality when your average person realises what they have been viewing has been manipulated it just makes them lose faith in anything else posted by that and similar sources, so it actually undermines the cause.
> 
> Basic psychology doesn't seem to be their strong point, really.


The unedited version is in the public domain & is just as shocking.



cinnamontoast said:


> Good god, who said that about the cull? Possibly one of the stupidest things I've ever read, along with the 'toffs who ride horses' nonsense.
> 
> Tell me about it, been there, done that, got the gruesome pictures and the leg that will never see the light of day again. But as repeatedly mentioned here and elsewhere, you don't stand on a path with the hunt galloping around. Horses are big, dangerous animals, accidents happen. I could link the story of a girl I know whose skull was smashed like an egg just catching in a horse and she was used to horses, like me, but accidents happen. I could recount tons of accidents like a friend turning out her horse and he double barrelled her and split her spleen or the one who got her nose smashed up by a flying ice chunk coming out of a horse's hoof that bucked. I sincerely hope the girl will recover properly, but horses can be dangerous to be around. You have to be super careful and not put yourself in harm's way. I'm sure Elles and the other riders also have horrific tales from over the years.
> 
> Brick wall, ST, brick wall. Doesn't matter what you say. You either take one extreme stance or another, or you're an 'apologist' or not really against it.  (Although you don't have to actually do anything about it like actually get off your bum, just post endless links )


No one.



Elles said:


> From Noushka's earlier post, though she was quoting someone else, she didn't say who. It's annoying, because it doesn't help at all, it just starts to look like crazy conspiracy theories and tinfoil hats.


...................................................................................................................



StormyThai said:


> I have not thrown digs your way...ok I may be sarcastic but that isn't the same...
> You on the other hand have called me lots of different names because I happen to be able to see things that you refuse too.
> 
> As for not sharing common ground..well that proves my point that you don't listen or even take on board what is said if it doesn't fit with you...I have never said I agree with blood sports..EVER!


Maybe not, but you do always appear to bat for the pro team. lol



silvi said:


> Thanks.
> I haven't got time to read all of this now, but I will later.
> 
> I'm interested in ways that the badger cull can be stopped and how the appeal can be made and explained to the general public (preferably without turning the average person away from the appeal because of the fear they may have [justified or otherwise] of extremists). I'm also interested in how the actual statistics on all this can be outlined so that the argument for stopping the badger cull (and never having it re-instated in the future) will stand on firm ground.
> ...


Who are you classing as extremists Silvi? The people who were out in the fields during the culls? the protestors involved in the badger marches (the badger army)? I've never heard a single report of an average person being afraid of any of the anti cull protestor groups - puzzled

There _has_ been a huge outcry from the general public. MP's have been inundated with complaints from their constituents calling for an end to the cull, its one of their top topics of concern. Cameron even admitted this was his most unpopular policy. So I would say, by & large, hearts & minds have been won. The culls are contrary to the clear scientific evidence & the democratic will of the people. Imo increased activism is the only hope we have now. I am interested to hear any other suggestions though.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

noushka05 said:


> Ehh? I'm not talking about other sabs, I'm talking about regular people,they never seem to have a problem with sabs they come across . People are always thanking them the sacrifices they make to save wild animals. As someone opposed to fox hunting would you rather no one went sabbing or monitoring & hunts were left to get on killing foxes unhindered?
> 
> .


So the people recounting stories on here are not regular people...interesting 

To jump from understanding that not all sabs are there for the good of the cause to pulling all sabs and monitors so that hunts are left unchecked is a pretty big jump even for you Noush.
My point is clear in the post you quoted to be fair.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/eu-directive-stating-requirement-for-badger-cull

EU directive for badger cull

http://www.badgergate.org/guest-articles/change-outdated-cattle-policies/
"Defra's website, *a vaccine against bTB can reduce the prevalence, incidence and spread of TB in the cattle population* and also *reduce the severity of a herd breakdown*, regardless of whether infection is introduced by wildlife or cattle.

We are only denied this essential approach with bTB because of *an outdated EU directive governing export* that insists on 'accelerated eradication' of the disease while simultaneously banning the use of cattle vaccine. This predictably leads to carnage in all directions.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Goodness, I don't agree with killing badgers, nor do I believe killing badgers will wipe out, or even reduce tb in cattle. I said, that the reason I believe that badgers are killed is in part because EU directives call for it. They want tb eradicated, they point towards doing what other countries have done to reduce or eradicate tb and they expect our government to do the same. ie control of cattle and farms, control of environment and control of wild hosts, in this country badgers. Other countries have culled other species, but in our country badgers are considered the guilty party, rather than many of the farmers themselves, who don't want to be controlled any further than they are already.

In order to stop killing badgers, in my humble opinion, farmers need to be more active and involved and the trapping and inoculation of badgers on the edges of tb areas could be carried out. The cost could be recuperated from farmers and who they supply, rather than just our taxes. Vaccinating cattle is not currently accepted by the EU, nor expected to be within the next 5 to 10 years and an oral vaccine for badgers is probably even further away. If we were not members of the EU we could start vaccinating cattle tomorrow probably.

Even if it was down to rich people running the countryside alliance and wanting to eradicate badgers, it sounds very conspiracy theory/tinfoil hat and I doubt the general public would be interested. It wouldn't be an argument I'd want to use if trying to persuade a conservative voter to support the badger.

Everyone can read articles on the internet and make their own minds up about what is or isn't being said. I personally don't know anyone who has been intimidated by activists campaigning on behalf of the badger, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. I can't know what happens if I'm not there. I do know from personal experience that some hunt sabs can be very intimidating and scary people, they don't dress in camo/black and cover their faces to appear friendly and make peaceful protests.

Maybe the sabs could check out some of the farms in the danger areas and see if their farmers are doing all they can to prevent cross contamination with better biosecurity.

A quick search on 'badger biosecurity' brought up this link as the first one:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/sep/28/badger-cull-bovine-tb

I agree wholeheartedly. I've visited enough farms where badgers practically get an invite.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

rona said:


> https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/eu-directive-stating-requirement-for-badger-cull
> 
> EU directive for badger cull
> 
> ...


But I am led to understand that the vaccine isn't totally reliable, needs redoing every three years and the oral one is very untested. I think testing and proper funding for the vaccine is the correct way forward rather than killing perfectly healthy animals for no good reason.

I don't think deliberately trying to harm farmers' livelihoods is the right way to do things and will simply alienate the people the activists want to recruit to their cause.


----------



## suewhite (Oct 31, 2009)

Re the badger cull surely there are other animals that carry the disease a very quick look tells me Deer 36% positive,Cats 25% positive,Pigs 19% positive,and sheep 44% positive I may be have the wrong end of the stick (not unusual) but I have never heard these animals being mentioned.As for fox hunting I have watched video's of good and bad on both side's, the bad on both side not doing there cause any good at all.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Although badger lifespan can be 14 years, they reckon that most wild badgers are lucky to last 5, so if farms were very good with their biosecurity and testing and badgers were inoculated (or maybe even if not), it would probably have a greater effect than killing badgers I think.


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> The unedited version is in the public domain & is just as shocking.


_Still_ not the point. The point was never about that specific video, nor will it ever be about that specific video. I wouldn't have used the plural 'videos' if it was...


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

suewhite said:


> Re the badger cull surely there are other animals that carry the disease a very quick look tells me Deer 36% positive,Cats 25% positive,Pigs 19% positive,and sheep 44% positive I may be have the wrong end of the stick (not unusual) but I have never heard these animals being mentioned.As for fox hunting I have watched video's of good and bad on both side's, the bad on both side not doing there cause any good at all.


Yes it seems to be some mental block in some that Badgers must be the main culprits.  In some instances they probably are, but I'm sure that's not across the board. 
In my mind deer are far more likely to be the problem as is poor husbandry 
When you're likely to lose your livelihood you'd panic and listen to only one side of the argument or tend to be a bit gullible.

When you are dealing with high emotions, it's easy to convince someone that there's only one side to the story


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Elles said:


> If we were not members of the EU we could start vaccinating cattle tomorrow probably.


They probably still wouldn't buy meat or milk from us if we did that..........that's part of the problem, trade

http://www.tbfreeengland.co.uk/vaccination/


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

rona said:


> Yes it seems to be some mental block in some that Badgers must be the main culprits.  In some instances they probably are, but I'm sure that's not across the board.
> In my mind deer are far more likely to be the problem as is poor husbandry
> When you're likely to lose your livelihood you'd panic and listen to only one side of the argument or tend to be a bit gullible.
> 
> When you are dealing with high emotions, it's easy to convince someone that there's only one side to the story


Agree with this.

I have always wondered how big a part bad husbandry plays in the spread of the disease. Animals living in filth are surely at greater risk than those kept in a clean and healthy environment, I would have thought.


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

Lurcherlad said:


> Agree with this.
> 
> I have always wondered how big a part bad husbandry plays in the spread of the disease. Animals living in filth are surely at greater risk than those kept in a clean and healthy environment, I would have thought.


Don't know how true this is, or whether it's part of the 'anti-farmer' argument.
But from what I've read so far, it seems that, in trying to control livestock and prevent infection from outside sources, some farmers are being reduced to keeping animals in conditions which are too confined and probably more open to cross-infection as a result.

But don't shoot the messenger. This is just something I've read.....
I've been working most of today, so I haven't had time to check this out.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

silvi said:


> Don't know how true this is, or whether it's part of the 'anti-farmer' argument.
> But from what I've read so far, it seems that, in trying to control livestock and prevent infection from outside sources, some farmers are being reduced to keeping animals in conditions which are too confined and probably more open to cross-infection as a result.
> 
> But don't shoot the messenger. This is just something I've read.....
> I've been working most of today, so I haven't had time to check this out.


Devil and the deep blue sea sometimes.

Must admit, I've never heard that though except in epidemics


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

noushka05 said:


> Who are you classing as extremists Silvi? The people who were out in the fields during the culls? the protestors involved in the badger marches (the badger army)? I've never heard a single report of an average person being afraid of any of the anti cull protestor groups - puzzled


Why did you pick out one remark from what I said Noush?
The point I was making was that in order to stop the badger cull and prevent further culls in the coming years, the argument against culling has to be as wide-ranging and as effective as possible. It has to be able to stand up to counter arguments and knock them into touch.
That should include facts and figures that are hard to argue against, but should also provide a strong, truthful argument that the general public likes and understands.

Perhaps Jay, as heading anti-cull activity, is being targeted in particular for his past activism and being made to appear as an extremist, but personally I think that it isn't really that hard to portray him that way.
But remarks about the best way is for us all to become vegans are not going to convince the majority of the GBP that his particular stance is the best one.



noushka05 said:


> There _has_ been a huge outcry from the general public. MP's have been inundated with complaints from their constituents calling for an end to the cull, its one of their top topics of concern. Cameron even admitted this was his most unpopular policy. So I would say, by & large, hearts & minds have been won. The culls are contrary to the clear scientific evidence & the democratic will of the people. Imo increased activism is the only hope we have now. I am interested to hear any other suggestions though.


Yes there has been a huge outcry from the GBP.
No one wants to think about 'Bertie Badger' being slaughtered. And quite right too.
But, while Cameron, after hearing facts and figures handed to him by his advisers, is still convinced that the argument for the cull is the most effective argument, he is not going to give in easily. That is why the anti-cull argument has to be more effective (and sadly, that means more cost-effective) than the cull argument.

We have all seen this before with road building through the countryside in particular. Many people may protest; there will be demos both violent and peaceful, but the road still goes ahead.
And as Cameron seems to want to emulate Thatcher, who forced through loads of very unpopular legislation (with sheer force if necessary), then demos and marches will not stop him. In fact, in some cases, they could make him and his government more determined to push things through.

I've been on many protests and rallies and I and many others thought that they were right and very worth while. Did we win? Did we hell! and most of the protesters eventually fell away anyhow.
There has to be another way, because we sure as hell are not going to get the GBP to undertake a revolution any time soon, however much they love badgers.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

There'll be nothing until vaccination becomes feasible imo. Until then they'll kill badgers and intensive and poor farming practices will continue. It was poor farming practices that created the foot and mouth problem that put my horses at risk. It's poor farming practices that infect badgers and are the main cause of any spread of tb. imho.

But then I don't know why I read this thread now about badgers, it raises my blood pressure. :Inpain I probably hate (some) farmers nearly as much as Noushka hates fox hunters. I try to be a reasonable person and I don't blame all farmers, I buy produce from some of them, of course. The badger issue is one of those that makes me glad to be an older person who doesn't have long enough left to worry about it and can leave it to the young 'uns though. I've done my bit and had no effect and I'm not sure the world has too long left either if humans carry on the way we are. 

For the badgers, they'll have to wait for vaccine. I don't hold out much hope of anything else really. There are even decent farmers rallying against the cull and that had no effect either, the government still went ahead.

Have any of you seen badgers in real life, other than flattened on the road? They're huge and noisy and bloody scary. :Nailbiting Many people seem to think they're the size of a cat, or maybe a fox, but full size adult they're not, they're massive bodies on short legs and meeting them on a path late at night gets your heart rate up. Well it does mine. :Shamefullyembarrased


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

Elles said:


> Have any of you seen badgers in real life, other than flattened on the road? They're huge and noisy and bloody scary. :Nailbiting Many people seem to think they're the size of a cat, or maybe a fox, but full size adult they're not, they're massive bodies on short legs and meeting them on a path late at night gets your heart rate up. Well it does mine. :Shamefullyembarrased


Yes. A few years ago.
And I admit that there was a split second when it scared the c**p out of me!


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Elles said:


> I've done my bit and had no effect and I'm not sure the world has too long left either if humans carry on the way we are


Unfortunately I agree, I'm glad I was born at a time when fighting for the world might have been worthwhile. I fear it's now too late



Elles said:


> There are even decent farmers rallying against the cull and that had no effect either, the government still went ahead.


Those in government just aren't in touch with the natural world, it's all about that weird false thing called money..............what damn good has that really done for anyone?



Elles said:


> Have any of you seen badgers in real life, other than flattened on the road? They're huge and noisy and bloody scary. :Nailbiting Many people seem to think they're the size of a cat, or maybe a fox, but full size adult they're not, they're massive bodies on short legs and meeting them on a path late at night gets your heart rate up. Well it does mine


I had the great pleasure and honour to witness a couple of wild large adults and 3 cubs playing outside their sett one summers evening a lifetime ago...........one of the highlights of my life and I shall always treasure the memory


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

The last time I saw any was autumn at about 11pm by moonlight. I'd forgotten to turn off the trough tap, so had to go back up to the field to do it, when two of them charged out of the hedge, cut across the path in front of me and ran alongside for a while fighting each other, making a hell of a racket. I'm guessing they were 2 fully grown boars, I know they can be about 17 kilos, which is some weight. They scared the hell out of me, but then I was on my own in the middle of the night. I'm sure they were twice the size of normal badgers I've seen pottering about and they're big enough. :Shamefullyembarrased 

I would guess government policy on badgers and fox hunting is to do with votes really. They said they'd hold a free vote on fox hunting which won over the countryside alliance and pro hunt, without putting off too many against it, after all a vote could fail. Thus on balance increasing their votes. They said they'd try limited badger culls to see how it went, then only roll it out if it was successful. Winning the pro badger cull vote, without putting off too many against it. Again on balance increasing their votes and keeping the EU happy. If they don't know yet whether culling badgers works, they'll never know. They've been trying it for donkey's years.

This is what we should be doing.

http://www.tbfreeengland.co.uk/latest-news/working-to-stop-the-spread-of-bovine-tb/

Some farmers diversified into puppy farming remember? Do you think they're the kind of people who can be trusted to keep their cattle well. It only takes one or two in an area to keep an infection going. If you don't pity the puppy farmer who keeps his dogs in bad conditions harbouring disease and suffering, don't pity the cattle farmer who does the same thing just because it's cows. He should be doing all he can to keep his animals safe and well, unfortunately some of them don't and that makes it even harder for those who do. Maybe they could campaign the government for grants to help if they need it. Better the money is spent on that than on badger killing.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Elles said:


> Goodness, I don't agree with killing badgers, nor do I believe killing badgers will wipe out, or even reduce tb in cattle. I* said, that the reason I believe that badgers are killed is in part because EU directives call for i*t. They want tb eradicated, they point towards doing what other countries have done to reduce or eradicate tb and they expect our government to do the same. ie control of cattle and farms, control of environment and control of wild hosts, in this country badgers. Other countries have culled other species, but in our country badgers are considered the guilty party, rather than many of the farmers themselves, who don't want to be controlled any further than they are already.
> 
> In order to stop killing badgers, in my humble opinion, farmers need to be more active and involved and the trapping and inoculation of badgers on the edges of tb areas could be carried out. The cost could be recuperated from farmers and who they supply, rather than just our taxes. Vaccinating cattle is not currently accepted by the EU, nor expected to be within the next 5 to 10 years and an oral vaccine for badgers is probably even further away. If we were not members of the EU we could start vaccinating cattle tomorrow probably.
> 
> ...


Owen Paterson has strong links with the Countryside Alliance as does David Cameron & other tory MPs. I do agree with much of your post Elles, though you are wrong about the EU. (and Sabs have filmed farms in the cull zones AND game shoots involved in the culls. They uncovered appalling animal welfare issues)

Concerns over Englands badger cull were raised in the European Parliament. The Commission clearly states there are no rules at EU level concerning controlling bTB in wildlife & that it is up to member state to adapt their own tb strategy. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do?reference=E-2014-006041&language=EN .

_Subject: Mass killing of badgers in the UK
  ) 
Scientific research has shown that large-scale action against badgers is not capable of halting the spread of bovine tuberculosis(1). The mass killing of badgers influences the surviving animals' behaviour so that the spread of bovine TB is encouraged by increased badger migration(2). Nevertheless the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and Natural England are proposing to kill more than 12 000 badgers. What is the Commission's opinion of this?

1. What measures does the Commission propose to take against the United Kingdom to halt these unnecessary, inhumane badger culls now that it is clear that the mass killing of badgers actually encourages the spread of bovine TB?

2. Is the senseless killing of animals not contrary to Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which states that the Union and the Member States are to pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals, since animals are sentient beings?

3. Does the Commission agree that it is better to prevent the spread of zoonoses such as bovine TB by reducing the size of the cattle herd?


Parliamentary questions 
11 September 2014 
E-006041/2014

Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission 
Bovine tuberculosis is a contagious disease transmissible to animals and to humans and is therefore submitted to compulsory eradication programmes in all Member States.

In some regions, bovine tuberculosis has also been detected in wildlife, as in badgers in the UK, which can then be involved in the maintenance of the disease in the environment and its spread to bovine herds.

*There are no rules at EU level concerning the control of bovine tuberculosis in wildlife. Therefore, it is the responsibility of each Member State to adapt its bovine tuberculosis eradication strategy to take into account the specific epidemiological situation in wildlife present in its territory. Given the absence of specific EU legislation, the Commission cannot take measures in this regard.*

Killing animals for disease control purposes, even in great number, is not in itself a breach of Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU if performed in such a way that animals are spared any avoidable pain, distress or suffering.

Current EU legislation on bovine tuberculosis establishes a wide number of disease control measures to be applied in bovine herds. These measures do not include the diminution of the size of bovine herds as this is not considered an important risk factor.

_


silvi said:


> Don't know how true this is, or whether it's part of the 'anti-farmer' argument.
> But from what I've read so far, it seems that, in trying to control livestock and prevent infection from outside sources, some farmers are being reduced to keeping animals in conditions which are too confined and probably more open to cross-infection as a result.
> 
> But don't shoot the messenger. This is just something I've read.....
> I've been working most of today, so I haven't had time to check this out.


Have you got a link for farmers keeping livestock in to prevent infection please?

It isn't part of any 'anti farmer' argument its fact. Poor farming practices created this mess in the first place & the key to solving this crisis is by implementing stricter cattle measures. Badgers are a just a costly distraction.



silvi said:


> Why did you pick out one remark from what I said Noush?
> The point I was making was that in order to stop the badger cull and prevent further culls in the coming years, the argument against culling has to be as wide-ranging and as effective as possible. It has to be able to stand up to counter arguments and knock them into touch.
> That should include facts and figures that are hard to argue against, but should also provide a strong, truthful argument that the general public likes and understands.
> 
> ...


Curiosity I guess. I didn't give it that much thought, its just a question.

The argument against culling more than stands up to the counter arguments - it couldn't be much stronger. The government have wilfully ignored all advice even from their own advisors. Three debates in Parliament, two votes. Three line whip was used on Tory MPs to ensure they won the first vote . Second vote (after the disastrous pilots) the majority of Tory MPs defied the govt & voted with labour & other parties to stop the culls. They were ignored!

30 eminent scientists warned the government culling badgers was 'mindless' . Lord Krebbs (architect of the Randomised Badger Culling Trials) called it a 'crazy scheme'.. The Independent scientific community couldn't have been clearer, but the government ignored them and implemented the shoddy pilot culls in 2013. As predicted they were an epic failure, the pilots failed to meet their own criteria . That inept Idiot Paterson blamed their failure on the badgers moving the goal posts. The government had set up an Independent Expert Panel to monitor these culls. The IEP judged them to be neither humane or effective. They proved a complete and utter failure on humaneness, scientific & economic grounds. The government ignored the IEP recommendations & disbanded the panel!. So last years culls had no independent scrutiny whatsoever. Still, the culls were a fiasco yet they are going to carry on culling this year, rolling the culls out to other areas. Un-flaming-believable 

. The pro cullers label all protesters/activists as extremists & have done from the onset. Any organisation or any individual who sticks their head above the parapet is targeted by the pro cull/bloodsports fanatics. The Countryside Alliance along with their pro hunt allies in the right wing rags have even tried to smear the name of Brian May for having the temerity to oppose the culls . The bbc censored Chris Packham for tweeting against the badger cull after former Chief Executive of the Countryside Alliance Simon Hart MP complained. The CA launched their smear campaign against the RSPCA after they prosecuted the Heythrop hunt, the RSPB are now under attack because they have spoken out against hen harrier persecution by grouse moors - its a familiar pattern with the hunt/shoot lobby. These apostles are cruelty are completely transparent.

Renowned ecologist Dr Gordon McGlone said this on the Chris Packham incident ~ http://www.gordonmcglone.co.uk/chri...-twitter-remarks-about-badger-cull-telegraph/
*
A tale of double standards*.

_Chris Packham is accused of breaching BBC guidelines in expressing an opinion about the badger cull and its proponents. How 'ironic 'then that the chief complainant is Simon Hart MP whose views on the cull are certainly not balanced. Yet Mr Hart, previously CEO of the pro badger cull Countryside Alliance, is also a public servant paid directly from the exchequer purse.

The badger cull is indeed a place of double standards. Those brave enough to stick their head above the parapet have the reputational scars to prove it.

It hurts, I know, I've been there._

*Brian May ~*

_Bloody badger butchering? Perhaps that makes me sound like a violent extremist, which is how peaceful dissenters like me are often portrayed. Anyone who dares to disagree with the NFU or the Countryside Alliance is branded a nutter.

Yet in all my time as a campaigner for animals I have never met a 'violent' protester. People who love animals are naturally peaceful_

: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2193595/Brian-May-I-voted-Tory-But-Ill-vote-Cameron-bloody-badger-cull.html#ixzz3dhdMyi5c

This obsession with killing badgers in the face of such strong opposition & against all the science is why people believe there is an ulterior reason for the culls. The badger cull is a politically driven policy, and its quite obviously more about killing badgers than it is about tackling tb.

So how on earth are we going to stop a government so determined to push ahead with these awful culls? I believe activism is the only hope we have, especially now they believe they have a mandate to cull. So I intend to carry on protesting, demonstrating whenever I can. If the culls are rolled out close enough to me I will join activists in the fields. Plus I'll carry on boycotting & hope that more people will get involved & try to stop this madness.

Just to give you an idea of the calibre of some of the 'protesters'.



Does anyone really think of badgers as bertie badgers? lol
."



StormyThai said:


> So the people recounting stories on here are not regular people...interesting
> 
> To jump from understanding that not all sabs are there for the good of the cause to pulling all sabs and monitors so that hunts are left unchecked is a pretty big jump even for you Noush.
> My point is clear in the post you quoted to be fair.


Excuse my cynicism, but I question the objectivity of certain members when they regularly regurgitate pro hunt propaganda or get their info from pro hunt/shoot sources such as the GWCT, the CA , Horse & Hound or the Shooting Times lol I tend to take their anecdotes with a pinch of salt.

Wasn't clear to me, so thank you for clarifying.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

Puppy farming ought to be totally eradicated. Having it licenced does not particularly help welfare standards, particularly when no health testing is employed. I am horrified at the big ones in Wales.


----------



## suewhite (Oct 31, 2009)

cinnamontoast said:


> Puppy farming ought to be totally eradicated. Having it licenced does not particularly help welfare standards, particularly when no health testing is employed. I am horrified at the big ones in Wales.


Yep totally agree with you, Puppy Farms are places from hell, I disagree with the badger cull and am anti hunting but those animal have had a life in there natural environment so if I had to choose where the most cruelty is I would have to say Puppy Farms the breeding dogs are cruelty at it's worst.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

suewhite said:


> Yep totally agree with you, Puppy Farms are places from hell, I disagree with the badger cull and am anti hunting but those animal have had a life in there natural environment so if I had to choose where the most cruelty is I would have to say Puppy Farms the breeding dogs are cruelty at it's worst.


Some farming practices are similar, luckily not so much in this country as in other countries that we import from


----------



## purplemonkeydishwasher (Jun 3, 2015)

suewhite said:


> Yep totally agree with you, Puppy Farms are places from hell, I disagree with the badger cull and am anti hunting but those animal have had a life in there natural environment so if I had to choose where the most cruelty is I would have to say Puppy Farms the breeding dogs are cruelty at it's worst.


Hear hear - I cannot stand the thoughts of puppy farms.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

rona said:


> Some farming practices are similar, luckily not so much in this country as in other countries that we import from


And if British farmers are forced to sell their herds/animals, as a girl I know has had to this year, we will be obliged to import because people sure as hell won't all just go vegan because of welfare standards. Best not target our farmers, hey?


----------



## Catharinem (Dec 17, 2014)

Have only skim read the last couple of pages, but there's a few things leaping out. Not quite sure how foot and mouth put your horses at risk Elles, since horses can't contract F and M? Haven't heard of many farmers "diversifying" into puppy farming either, certainly many less than the people who live in normal looking houses and have them in their back yard - hence the term back yard breeder. It's not like you need a lot of acres to breed dogs if you want to churn them out. Puppy farmers are completely different from breeders, but they are also completely different from farmers. I am a farmer, and also have one KC reg cocker bitch, no endorsements, who is a family pet first and foremost - I remember my husband taking a call from someone wanting to look at a puppy, who was told " my wife's around the farm, can I take a message?". Poor guy got all embarrassed and explained he didn't want to buy from a puppy farm. Husband said come and look, walk away if you don't like us. Having spent 2 hours cooing over the lambs, pigs, ponies and wildlife pond, being licked all over by the bitch and jumped all over by the dog he chose and reserved his puppy. Puppy farmers are not farmers any more than they are breeders. Why does how big or small a badger is effect whether or not they should be culled on scientific grounds? I don't believe they should be culled, I think bovine vaccines should work better and be linked to something like a green fluorescent protein, so an animal showing positive whose cells also expressed GFP under UV could be shown to be positive due to vaccination rather than disease exposure. But whether a badger is cute and fluffy or big and scary is completely irrelevant to the argument. Something not many of you may know is that the TB testing of cattle, at least meat cattle, is pretty much irrelevant anyway - we had our first test this Spring, cattle inspector came out a month or so earlier to explain the process and what we needed to do. I asked if the test was positive how long we would have to say goodbye, and method of killing (shot on farm etc). We only have a couple of named cows, and their offspring who will be beef this Autumn. They will be just under 2 1/2 years at slaughter, and will have spent their entire lives on our farm, eating grass and running with their mums ( and younger sister - only one cow calved last year). They will travel 20 miles on the morning of their slaughter, and the beef I'm looking forward to will be incredible due to the animals stress free life and natural diet. They live on grass and hay, and a very few nuts in mid - winter. I was told if positive for TB they would be slaughtered. I said yes, but how, and was told in the usual abbatoir. So what happens to the meat, is it incinerated? No, there's a post mortem, any effected organs are removed and the rest is eaten as usual! What happens if something is slaughtered between herd tests? There's a post mortem anyway! So, for meat cattle ( dairy are different as TB can be spread in milk), testing is pointless, and expensive - cattle under 30 months would have a post mortem at abbatoir anyway, and old breeding cull cows don't enter the human food chain anyway due to BSE control! Crazy! Save all the expensive routine testing for those farms sending beef to slaughter at least once a year ( quarantine and test whole herd if a positive animal at abbatoir PM), and spend the money on TB vaccine research.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

noushka05 said:


> Excuse my cynicism, but I question the objectivity of certain members when they regularly regurgitate pro hunt propaganda or get their info from pro hunt/shoot sources such as the GWCT, the CA , Horse & Hound or the Shooting Times lol I tend to take their anecdotes with a pinch of salt.
> 
> Wasn't clear to me, so thank you for clarifying.


Just like you when you regurgitate anti propaganda huh


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

cinnamontoast said:


> And if British farmers are forced to sell their herds/animals, as a girl I know has had to this year, we will be obliged to import because people sure as hell won't all just go vegan because of welfare standards. Best not target our farmers, hey?


The biggest threat to British farmers is other British farmers. As farming gets increasingly industrial, small farms are out competed by bigger, more efficient farms. This kind of competition along with international feed price and supermarket orders has a far bigger impact on people having to sell up than any grass roots animal rights/welfare campaign.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

What I can't understand is, if the hunt fraternity are still hunting, what does it matter if the law is repealed?

According to the antis, it doesn't make any difference anyway


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

rona said:


> What I can't understand is, if the hunt fraternity are still hunting, what does it matter if the law is repealed?


How many people break the law on speeding, drink driving or wearing a seatbelt? Just because people break the law doesn't mean we should get rid of it.....


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

noushka05 said:


> Does anyone really think of badgers as bertie badgers? lol


It was just an example remark.

But as has already been said on this thread, many people have never actually seen a badger in real life. and of those who have, most have been scared the first time, as these really aren't the cuddly animals they may think they are.

Of course they should not be culled and the badger cull, I agree, appears to be politically motivated.
But for me, this is about the needless culling of living beings, rather than because of the way these animals appeal to popular consciousness.

And in this sense, @suewhite 's comment about Puppy Farms brings a whole new dimension to the argument.

Where do we begin to effectively tackle animal cruelty, and how do we balance out an agenda to fight all animal cruelty?

Or to some people, are foxes and badgers deemed more important than dogs and cats?


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

silvi said:


> Or to some people, are foxes and badgers deemed more important than dogs and cats?


Unfortunately specisism is rife amongst many humans


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

It makes no difference how big badgers are, I agree that we shouldn't be killing them. It was just chatting generally.  How big they are and their conformation does however make a difference to ethical means if people do have to kill them and much though I'd like to I can't stop them.

Horses can't catch foot and mouth, but they can spread it. Movement was restricted and getting forage for them from farms was very difficult when farmers weren't allowed off the property, or daren't risk it, or had everything destroyed and burned. At one point it was rumoured that horses on or nearby infected farms could and would be destroyed to reduce the chance of spreading it and we were warned to keep our horses on the yard, no taking them out. At the time I had my own little yard in Devon and had Virkon coming out of our ears. It was very worrying for us and for the farmers who were our friends and suppliers, watching the devastation creeping closer and closer, seeing and smelling the smoke from the fires, with little to nothing any of us could do about it apart from batten down the hatches, hope it didn't get any nearer and we could still feed our animals. Not everyone could, especially if their business relied on hacking on Dartmoor for example. Dartmoor was closed, as were many riding schools in restricted areas. Make no mistake, foot and mouth may not have infected horses, but it affected them.

Puppy farmers are breeders, they breed dogs and often are still farmers with livestock. They are a part of the undesirables of farming, though not the only part of course. Not all farmers are ethical, humane, or careful. That's what should be addressed, rather than killing wildlife imo. There's far too much shipping animals around and not enough biosecurity going on, with plenty of welfare issues, even if it can be worse overseas sometimes. I suppose we'd better not mention BSE. :Locktopic

You may be part of one ethical and humane farming family Catharinem and for that I commend you, but that doesn't make the UK a paradise for animals sadly.  What is it they say, one swallow does not a Summer make.


----------



## suewhite (Oct 31, 2009)

Well have to say I have been on fully working farms in both Wales and Ireland that also breed puppies of many breeds and in the most awful conditions but were praised by the Council for there diversification in these austere times.There is a thread on here from someone from the RSPCA and I offered to take them with me on my next trip but surprise they didn't take me up on it.xx


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

suewhite said:


> praised by the Council for there diversification in these austere times.


Wasn't it DEFRA that suggested it?


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

lennythecloud said:


> The biggest threat to British farmers is other British farmers. As farming gets increasingly industrial, small farms are out competed by bigger, more efficient farms. This kind of competition along with international feed price and supermarket orders has a far bigger impact on people having to sell up than any grass roots animal rights/welfare campaign.


As with any industry. I think that it's not helpful, however, to target a farmer for being in the cull area. I can understand why a small farm simply wouldn't survive. Surely we should be supporting, not targeting, farmers?


----------



## suewhite (Oct 31, 2009)

rona said:


> Wasn't it DEFRA that suggested it?


Yes it was Rona, they are just a Government body so the inspections are left local Councils and with the cut backs this is very low on there list. Sorry guys didn't mean to take the thread off subject I will shut up now.xx


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

suewhite said:


> Yes it was Rona, they are just a Government body so the inspections are left local Councils and with the cut backs this is very low on there list. Sorry guys didn't mean to take the thread off subject I will shut up now.xx


It's all linked though isn't it?

This governments total disregard for animal welfare.........well, anything to do with the natural world at all


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

I don't think it really is off topic. :Bear:Beaver:Cat:Chicken:Cowandaenguinigeon:Turtle I think that's all of them.  I was just pretty much typing up the same thing rona.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

cinnamontoast said:


> I think that it's not helpful, however, to target a farmer for being in the cull area... Surely we should be supporting, not targeting, farmers?


Yes, support ethical farming practices. Standing outside supermarkets and cafes, to try to force them to not buy from farms because of where they are rather than how they behave is a poor show indeed. That would be like saying don't buy a dog from any breeder in Yorkshire or Wales, because the council has licensed puppy mills in the area. How about trying to persuade these companies to source only ethically produced, produce instead? They'd rather force them to buy from a factory farm in a different area than an organic farm in a cull zone?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

StormyThai said:


> Just like you when you regurgitate anti propaganda huh


The difference with me is I have never tried to make out I'm anything but anti! 



silvi said:


> It was just an example remark.
> 
> But as has already been said on this thread, many people have never actually seen a badger in real life. and of those who have, most have been scared the first time, as these really aren't the cuddly animals they may think they are.
> 
> ...


I had my first encounter with badgers in the wild only recently. I wasn't afraid nor did I want to 'cuddle' one. I felt overwhelmed with emotion at the privilege of seeing such shy & secretive creatures in their natural habitat . My joy at seeing them is tinged with sadness though, as I can't stop worrying what the future holds for these beautiful animals and their kind. Badgers are nothing to fear, however a lot of wild animals we campaign to save are extremely dangerous, yet we still care about them. I doubt very much anyone would want to cuddle an elephant or a tiger lol . Using your assumption would you say some people are campaigning against puppy farms because dogs are 'cuddly and appeal to popular consciousness? I care about those dogs because I feel empathy for them, exactly the same as I feel for badgers or foxes. I assumed that's how everyone felt.

I doubt any of the scientists think of badgers as 'cuddly' 'bertie badgers'. Some of them oversaw the killing of 11,000 badgers in the RBCT. People are outraged at the badger cull because it is corruption at its worst, & it offends on so many levels. The cullis an affront to science, a stupid, senseless act of violence that is counterproductive. People are sickened by the suffering inflicted upon these innocent animals. But its even more than that. This is a wildlife conservation issue. Our wildlife is disappearing at an alarming rate, the protection of badgers was one of our greatest conservation success stories, the badger cull has overturned all that. Powerful vested interests have been lobbying for years to kill protected species, the badger cull has set a dangerous precedence. Many fear legislation will now be weakened for other protected species. Buzzards and other raptor species are in grave danger. Watch this space.

Added to all that, as if it couldn't get worse, the culls have given the green light to wildlife criminals & badger persecution is soaring. http://badgertrust.org.uk/news/post...-leading-to-huge-increase-in-persecution.aspx
_The report shows that 2013 proved to be another year of mayhem, death and destruction for badgers throughout the UK. Badgers were baited with dogs, illegally shot and gassed, badgers were poisoned and had petrol poured down their setts and ignited and in some cases badgers were even skinned alive and thrown by the side of the road._

_A total of 697 badger persecution incidents were reported during 2013 involving badger baiters, farmers, landowners, game keepers and property developers across the UK, but this is only the tip of the iceberg with thousands of incidents of illegal killing of badgers going unreported every year._

The badger cull and puppy farming are both important animal welfare issues in their own right. Some could argue that the harp seal pup massacre is more horrific than both these issues, so we should focus on that. I personally wish we would unite against all acts of animal abuse where we can.

I value & respect all life, however there's no denying that to some cats & dogs are definitely more important than foxes or badgers.



StormyThai said:


> Unfortunately specisism is rife amongst many humans


Ain't that the truth.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Elles said:


> Yes, support ethical farming practices. Standing outside supermarkets and cafes, to try to force them to not buy from farms because of where they are rather than how they behave is a poor show indeed. That would be like saying don't buy a dog from any breeder in Yorkshire or Wales, because the council has licensed puppy mills in the area. How about trying to persuade these companies to source only ethically produced, produce instead? They'd rather force them to buy from a factory farm in a different area than an organic farm in a cull zone?


People handed out leaflets & stuck info stickers on things - jeez


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Elles said:


> They'd rather force them to buy from a factory farm in a different area than an organic farm in a cull zone?


You have to be careful about generalizations 
http://www.vote-ok.co.uk/the_scientific_case_for_badger_culling

Not all traditional farmers are bad or for the cull and not all organic farmers are good and against the cull.

I know a few organic farmers who treat their animals worse than some of the traditional farmers I know.
Organic doesn't mean good, it just means they use less chemicals


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Factory farm, not traditional farm.  I kept my horses on an organic farm once. They are supposed to treat the animals well, as well as use fewer chemicals and no GE, but there are too many loopholes and it's not strict enough, I agree. I think I mentioned the farmer before, he was the one who shot at foxes and deer with a high powered rifle from his window. I did think about putting organic and ethical, but I thought there can't be that many like him that are only in it for the money and I was getting fed up with the word ethical.  :Hilarious


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> I felt overwhelmed with emotion at the privilege of seeing such shy & secretive creatures in their natural habitat .


Not a country girl then.  It's not that rare for me and when two boars come crashing out of the hedgerow, nearly knocking into you, fighting and squabbling, they don't seem so shy or secretive. I was on my own in the middle of the night Noushka, there was nothing romantic about it. I've been nearly flattened by deer too, had to let go of one of the horses when a deer jumped out of the woods off a bank, between me and the horse. That was scary too. I admit it, I get scared by wildlife sometimes, especially when I'm on my own and it's dark. Mind you my own horse nearly gave me a heart attack in thick fog once. I went to field to catch him and couldn't find him, until he touched me on my shoulder from behind me. I nearly jumped out of my skin. :Hilarious I'm such a wimp.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

noushka05 said:


> The difference with me is I have never tried to make out I'm anything but anti!


Hmmm, interesting that you "forget" that no one on this thread is pro fox hunting...Just because you want to label people as pro's because they don't agree with everything you say does not make them so...
Just because they have had different life experiences than you, it does not make them pro fox hunting..

I know it's easier for you to think this so that you don't have to question some of the morals and ethics of the people that you continuously blindly defend...but again, it doesn't make it so 

You can go around in circles all you like, you can label me and others whatever you like..it won't change anything, and you blindly following without sitting up to think "hang on a sec" just makes you look stubborn.

So..you doubt what I say because I am a hunt apologist (in your words), yet I'm supposed to lap up what you say because...well, just because 

Sorry Noush, it doesn't work like that!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

rona said:


> You have to be careful about generalizations
> http://www.vote-ok.co.uk/the_scientific_case_for_badger_culling
> 
> Not all traditional farmers are bad or for the cull and not all organic farmers are good and against the cull.
> ...


We agree on this Rona. Charles Mann, NFU chairman & co founder Vote hunt OK which supports hunting with dogs, is a disgrace. And this is an excellent example of the very close ties between the NFU & the hunting lobby.



Elles said:


> Not a country girl then.  It's not that rare for me and when two boars come crashing out of the hedgerow, nearly knocking into you, fighting and squabbling, they don't seem so shy or secretive. I was on my own in the middle of the night Noushka, there was nothing romantic about it. I've been nearly flattened by deer too, had to let go of one of the horses when a deer jumped out of the woods off a bank, between me and the horse. That was scary too. I admit it, I get scared by wildlife sometimes, especially when I'm on my own and it's dark. Mind you my own horse nearly gave me a heart attack in thick fog once. I went to field to catch him and couldn't find him, until he touched me on my shoulder from behind me. I nearly jumped out of my skin. :Hilarious I'm such a wimp.


On the contrary, I've lived in the countryside all my life  Well they are shy & secretive, you were lucky to see them even if you don't feel lucky. It is unnerving when you hear noises in the dark though, I would get frightened if I was on my own & didn't know what the noise was. I'm not a bit brave I can frightened myself to death at home if I hear a strange noise in the dark lol



StormyThai said:


> Hmmm, interesting that you "forget" that no one on this thread is pro fox hunting...Just because you want to label people as pro's because they don't agree with everything you say does not make them so...
> Just because they have had different life experiences than you, it does not make them pro fox hunting..
> 
> I know it's easier for you to think this so that you don't have to question some of the morals and ethics of the people that you continuously blindly defend...but again, it doesn't make it so
> ...


Yeah ok, I'm sure one day these 'anti's' will have something positive to say about people & organisations defending & trying to protect our wildlife from the blood sport industries - I wont hold my breath though

. And just fyi, I don't think people have to support the act of fox hunting to be hunt sympathiser.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Elles said:


> Factory farm, not traditional farm.  I kept my horses on an organic farm once. They are supposed to treat the animals well, as well as use fewer chemicals and no GE, but there are too many loopholes and it's not strict enough, I agree. I think I mentioned the farmer before, he was the one who shot at foxes and deer with a high powered rifle from his window. I did think about putting organic and ethical, but I thought there can't be that many like him that are only in it for the money and I was getting fed up with the word ethical.  :Hilarious


Traditional isn't necessarily factory............


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

StormyThai said:


> you blindly following without sitting up to think "hang on a sec" just makes you look stubborn.


Or gullible.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

noushka05 said:


> . And just fyi, I don't think people have to support the act of fox hunting to be hunt sympathiser.


That is clear..anyone that has an open mind and doesn't believe all the anti propaganda does not a hunt sympathiser make....Having an open mind does not equate to making excuses, it just means we are not willing to accept everything spoon fed to us without first being clear of the facts.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

rona said:


> Traditional isn't necessarily factory............


Let me elaborate a bit. 

They would rather the companies buy from cruel factory farms who agree with a badger cull, but are in a different area, than kind and ethical organic farmers who disagree with it, but are in a cull zone?

That was what I meant, by saying it would be like telling people not to buy any dogs from Wales or Yorkshire, because councils approve puppy farms there. I suppose they're just supporting badgers at the time, not ethical farming though.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

So now even those anti fox hunting aren't anti enough?  Some of those posting might have spent years on various animal welfare issues, trying to improve matters through peaceful protest, petitions, physical care and demonstration, but unless they also support violent activists, even if just from a computer chair, it's not good enough? 

Just makes me think of Daffyd Thomas from Little Britain. Noushka is the only anti in this village.  :Hilarious


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

rona said:


> Or gullible.


LOL You're a fine one to talk! the Shooting Times is your bible:Hilarious



StormyThai said:


> That is clear..anyone that has an open mind and doesn't believe all the anti propaganda does not a hunt sympathiser make....Having an open mind does not equate to making excuses, it just means we are not willing to accept everything spoon fed to us without first being clear of the facts.


Yet the animal abusing blood sport brigade rarely come under any scrutiny from these open minded folk - funny that 

.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Elles said:


> So now even those anti fox hunting aren't anti enough?  Some of those posting might have spent years on various animal welfare issues, trying to improve matters through peaceful protest, petitions, physical care and demonstration, but unless they also support violent activists, even if just from a computer chair, it's not good enough?
> 
> Just makes me think of Daffyd Thomas from Little Britain. Noushka is the only anti in this village.  :Hilarious


Violent activists? What are you on about now Elles?


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

noushka05 said:


> LOL You're a fine one to talk! the Shooting Times is your bible:Hilarious
> 
> Yet the animal abusing blood sport brigade rarely come under any scrutiny from these open minded folk - funny that
> 
> .


You know what assuming does?


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

StormyThai said:


> That is clear..anyone that has an open mind and doesn't believe all the anti propaganda does not a hunt sympathiser make....Having an open mind does not equate to making excuses, it just means we are not willing to accept everything spoon fed to us without first being clear of the facts.


Like all the sabs that piled onto a businesses website over the last few days on the say so of that weird Hewitt woman, only to find they were trying to destroy the wrong business. 
Not only that, but the one that they targeted was in India


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

Elles said:


> So now even those anti fox hunting aren't anti enough?  Some of those posting might have spent years on various animal welfare issues, trying to improve matters through peaceful protest, petitions, physical care and demonstration, but unless they also support violent activists, even if just from a computer chair, it's not good enough?
> 
> Just makes me think of Daffyd Thomas from Little Britain. Noushka is the only anti in this village.  :Hilarious


LOL! First laugh I've had all day! and you forgot to say actually got off their bum to carry out an action as opposed to simply posting dozens of links  
*Those who shout the loudest usually have the most to hide.*

Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/loudest.html#FD81xDWCeQcW3RlY.99



rona said:


> Like all the sabs that piled onto a businesses website over the last few days on the say so of that weird Hewitt woman, only to find they were trying to destroy the wrong business.
> Not only that, but the one that they targeted was in India


I did laugh at that, just too funny, especially with the company address plainly displayed at the top of the page! There must be seriously confused employees in India!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Some good news for badgers for a change -

Natural England confirm they have not accepted nor are they considering any new badger cull licences 2015 NFU failed to get cull extension. 



And the National Trust has blocked the badger cull on its land - great news.


The culls will still continue in Somerset & Gloucestershire though


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

cinnamontoast said:


> I did laugh at that, just too funny, especially with the company address plainly displayed at the top of the page! There must be seriously confused employees in India!


Probably playing in the same league of intellectuals as those who keep getting confused between paedophile and paediatrician... 

I think Terry Pratchett got it about right - to work out the IQ of a mob, you divide the IQ of the lowest mobbee by the total number of people in the mob


----------



## Jonescat (Feb 5, 2012)

noushka05 said:


> The culls will still continue in Somerset & Gloucestershire though


Are they still a trial then? Otherwise this makes no sense at all, other than as a refusal to do a u-turn. Written from the cull zone, where many badgers seem to die on the roads as opposed to any other way, and where a great many people will swear blind that there are no badgers, nothing to see at all round here, no sirree......


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

The most often I've seen a diverse collection of wildlife is out riding at dusk, or through woodland/forestry in the winter after it's snowed. Wildlife tends not to be frightened of horses, so if it's quiet they don't run away. I've seen deer lying down, foxes trotting on a path in front of me, badgers snuffling about, as well as the scary occasions. We have buzzards and owls round here, but my favourite bird is the blackbird who wakes me up at about 4 -5 am. If my alarm goes off at that time, it's really annoying, but the bird is lovely, can't think of a nicer way to wake up. I quite miss him when he's not about. Hmmm, wonder if I can download the sound to use as my alarm. :Singing

I don't see the sense in any trial. They've been killing badgers for donkey's years, if they don't know by now what the effect is, they never will.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

Jesthar said:


> Probably playing in the same league of intellectuals as those who keep getting confused between paedophile and paediatrician...
> 
> I think Terry Pratchett got it about right - to work out the IQ of a mob, you divide the IQ of the lowest mobbee by the total number of people in the mob


I'm re-reading the Discworld series and the occasional remark he makes is just superb. Brilliant mind, taken too soon.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

You want to support an institution that is actually doing something for millions of animals without alienating the people they are trying to influence, try these
https://www.facebook.com/farm.animals


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Coincidentally, the Daily Mail today.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...-factory-farming-shun-meat-dairy-forever.html

Very nice dear. Anyone else see more than one thing wrong with the picture of this "very passionate animal lover" with her dogs? Much prefer Rona's link. People who aren't insisting everyone turn vegan have far more chance of effecting change imo.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

It's a shame that the comments below show a vegan is such a poor light. Had he/she proffered some of the perfectly valid arguments rather than slagging off meat eaters, others may well have listened and considered it.


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2015)

Elles said:


> Anyone else see more than one thing wrong with the picture of this "very passionate animal lover" with her dogs?


Unless those aren't actually her dogs? But yeah, choke chain and a prong collar is a nice touch if they are her dogs LOL 
IME sometimes some of the more adamant animal lovers don't actually really "get" those animals they advocate for. I'm quite sure they genuinely love them, but they don't respect them for the creatures they are, nor understand them on their own terms. Major generalization here on my part, but just something that sometimes comes to mind when I see some of the more passionate animal "lovers" interacting with those animals they love. The dog getting drowned in hugs and kisses while looking completely overwhelmed and uncomfortable, feeding cats vegan diets, that sort of thing....


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Elles said:


> Anyone else see more than one thing wrong with the picture of this "very passionate animal lover" with her dogs?


Is that a choke chain I see, and also........no..........it couldn't be could it?..............


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

rona said:


> Is that a choke chain I see, and also........no..........it couldn't be could it?..............


To give the author her say she does respond in the comments:


> Author here - that is a great dane rescued by my aunt. She was a soldier dog in the US army who was so badly abused by her handler she nearly died of internal injuries. He hacked her ears off with pliers and beat her almost to death. No one would take her because she was so fear-aggressive. My aunt did. It took a lot of patience (and bravery!) but she is now a deeply loved dog who is back on her feet. She still charges/attacks any man she sees as a result of her trauma, which is rarely a problem because they live in the middle of nowhere. But when she is around people, she has to wear that collar so that when she charges, my aunt can stop her. Her other great dane doesn't wear one, as you can see


Well, that's what she says anyway...........

But as to the argument for veganism, particularly re us not needing diary produce once we are no longer children.
Not true, or at least, we need a good source of calcium.
Sure, there is soya, but that itself has problems...


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

silvi said:


> To give the author her say she does respond in the comments:
> 
> Well, that's what she says anyway...........
> 
> ...


yes I read that. So a dog that's been abused, with huge fear and aggression problems has been put into the position where you may have to abuse it ........yeah right............


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2015)

silvi said:


> To give the author her say she does respond in the comments:
> 
> "Author here - that is a great dane rescued by my aunt. She was a soldier dog in the US army who was so badly abused by her handler she nearly died of internal injuries. He hacked her ears off with pliers and beat her almost to death. No one would take her because she was so fear-aggressive. My aunt did. It took a lot of patience (and bravery!) but she is now a deeply loved dog who is back on her feet. She still charges/attacks any man she sees as a result of her trauma, which is rarely a problem because they live in the middle of nowhere. But when she is around people, she has to wear that collar so that when she charges, my aunt can stop her. Her other great dane doesn't wear one, as you can see"
> 
> ...


Wait what?!!!
What the actual what?!
A soldier dog in the US army? What a load of horse manure!! There are ZERO great danes in use in any branch of the US armed forces LOL. And even if there were, military dogs are not up for adoption by the general public, certainly not available in rescue. That's just a bold faced lie.

Where was this written? Was this the author or the vegan girl - or are they the same person?

Oh, and not for nothin' if a dog has fear aggression, a prong collar is just going to make it worse. And if that is supposedly a "soldier dog" from the US army, a prong collar isn't going to stop the dog anyway.


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2015)

And those ears aren’t even cropped?! Gotta be a wind-up comment...


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

I think this is her

http://www.annabelfenwickelliott.com

She wrote this article which looks like the same chi as in the vegan article

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...hihuahua-America-s-legendary-pet-groomer.html

So if it is the same person, she was in the US with the chi, so the Great Danes could be in the US, despite not having their ears cropped (though apparently replaced with prosthetics having been removed with pliers) and could possibly be the responder from New York who talks about having an aunt with an abused ex soldier dog. Though I think you'd have to also believe in alien abductions and fairies. According to her bio, if it is the same person, she was in New York, but is now back in the UK.


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2015)

Elles said:


> I think this is her
> 
> http://www.annabelfenwickelliott.com
> 
> ...


Well, FWIW, just because a dane is in the US doesn't mean they'll have cropped ears (with players or otherwise  )
My uncropped dane born and residing in the US  Incidentally wearing a very appropriate expression for the context


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

I did wonder why you said the ears aren't even cropped. First I thought you must mean army dogs will have cropped ears, then I remembered you said there weren't any Great Danes in the US army. After posting, I realised you meant the ears aren't even cropped, let alone cut off with pliers. Doh.


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2015)

Elles said:


> I did wonder why you said the ears aren't even cropped. First I thought you must mean army dogs will have cropped ears, then I remembered you said there weren't any Great Danes in the US army. After posting, I realised you meant the ears aren't even cropped, let alone cut off with pliers. Doh.


LOL, yes, "aren't cropped at all" might have been a clearer way of expressing that 

It has to be some sort of wind up comment though, I mean, how can you even pretend a dog had their ears ripped off with pliers when they're clearly visibly intact and perfectly fine? So weird.....


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

Don't shoot the messenger!
I was only re-posting the bit I found in the comments 
Did seem weird the way it was worded, but as the question asked here was asked there, I thought I may as well do a copy and paste.


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

ouesi said:


> My uncropped dane born and residing in the US  Incidentally wearing a very appropriate expression for the context


Lovely picture


----------



## Guest (Jun 24, 2015)

silvi said:


> Don't shoot the messenger!
> I was only re-posting the bit I found in the comments
> Did seem weird the way it was worded, but as the question asked here was asked there, I thought I may as well do a copy and paste.


LOL I'm not shooting the messenger, I just thought that whole story about the great dane was ridiculous! I sure hope it wasn't the real author who posted it!


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

Cracking link to a video showing protesters telling millionaire comedian Russell Brand he's a 'turncoat' and to eff off back to Miliband and calling him a turncoat at the anti-austerity demonstration on that DM article. Loving the irony.


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

cinnamontoast said:


> Cracking link to a video showing protesters telling millionaire comedian Russell Brand he's a 'turncoat' and to eff off back to Miliband and calling him a turncoat at the anti-austerity demonstration on that DM article. Loving the irony.


I watched the video, but to be honest, I couldn't make out what was being said, it was bleeped so much!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

[



cinnamontoast said:


> LOL! First laugh I've had all day! and you forgot to say actually got off their bum to carry out an action as opposed to simply posting dozens of links
> *Those who shout the loudest usually have the most to hide.*
> 
> Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/loudest.html#FD81xDWCeQcW3RlY.99
> ...


Please don't try to tarnish my name with your snide innuendos. Hard as it is for someone like you to understand I shout loud because I care . I've been on this forum a long time & have never reported anyone before for a personal attack on me as I don't take offence easily, but this is one step too far.



rona said:


> You want to support an institution that is actually doing something for millions of animals without alienating the people they are trying to influence, try these
> https://www.facebook.com/farm.animals


CIWF is one of my favourite organisations, nothing to do with foxhunting though - surprise surprise lol However game birds are just within CIWF's remit & they have condemned the shooting industry for their diabolical battery farming of these poor birds. Hunting down animals with dogs is horrific, doubt those with a moral conscience need any influence on that matter . Are are any organisation that campaign against bloodsports that you do approve of? - the IFAW maybe?



silvi said:


> To give the author her say she does respond in the comments:
> 
> Well, that's what she says anyway...........
> 
> ...


There are plenty of good vegan sources of calcium Silvi - http://www.care2.com/greenliving/25-vegan-sources-for-calcium.html



cinnamontoast said:


> Cracking link to a video showing protesters telling millionaire comedian Russell Brand he's a 'turncoat' and to eff off back to Miliband and calling him a turncoat at the anti-austerity demonstration on that DM article. Loving the irony.


Apparently RB went down a storm at the rally (the bottom video seems to back it up), the DM (predictably) pick up on a couple of hecklers - and you 'unquestioningly' believe the DM - now that is ironic lol













rona said:


> Like all the sabs that piled onto a businesses website over the last few days on the say so of that weird Hewitt woman, only to find they were trying to destroy the wrong business.
> Not only that, but the one that they targeted was in India


Can I ask how you know they were sabs Rona? Here is the fb page I think the info on the fox killer came from .( WARNING to fox lovers, there are really upsetting pics on there.) https://www.facebook.com/stopterrierwork?fref=ts I think the individuals who targeted the business were stupid & irresponsible, I feel very sorry for the business owner, but I can't see where its on the say so of the person you name?. Unless shes said it elsewhere?



Jonescat said:


> Are they still a trial then? Otherwise this makes no sense at all, other than as a refusal to do a u-turn. Written from the cull zone, where many badgers seem to die on the roads as opposed to any other way, and where a great many people will swear blind that there are no badgers, nothing to see at all round here, no sirree......


I'm afraid so, they are set to run for a total of 4years . After the pilots failed (twice) it was hoped they would be abandoned, but I cant see any u turn happening now. Living in Gloucestershire, I thought this might be of interest to you JC http://www.glosagainstbadgershooting.org/


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

silvi said:


> I watched the video, but to be honest, I couldn't make out what was being said, it was bleeped so much!


Lots of people telling Brand to eff off, saying he's a turncoat etc. I do love the irony of him (or any other overpaid actor/celebrity) joining in the austerity protests.


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

noushka05 said:


> There are plenty of good vegan sources of calcium Silvi - http://www.care2.com/greenliving/25-vegan-sources-for-calcium.html


Thanks Noushka.
Getting the right sources of calcium is something that bothers me as osteoporosis runs very strongly through my family. So I've done a fair bit of research on the best ways to try to keep our bones healthy.
An article that one links to is actually more useful for that though as it discusses the vitamin K link, etc.
But I'm still undecided on the article's claim that drinking milk causes our bodies to 'leak' calcium (in a reaction to the acid in pasteurised milk), because: a) we've been here before with different claims about milk; and b) the source for that article is the website 'saveourbones', which itself has in the past provided some very unsafe data for osteoporosis followers.

There is also the very strong possibility that the average consumer will have difficulty accessing some of the items on the original list, or with some of the items and some consumers, be unable to eat them because of allergy problems.

Either way, it would take many years for the bulk of the population to give up eating and drinking dairy products so basically we need our dairy herds. And we certainly need their milk more than we need imported milk.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

And I'd rather buy British than import any day.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

cinnamontoast said:


> Lots of people telling Brand to eff off, saying he's a turncoat etc. I do love the irony of him (or any other overpaid actor/celebrity) joining in the austerity protests.


Lots of people? Yeah, there must have been at least two :Hilarious



Brian May on the incident - bang on as usual. I thought you'd appreciate it 





silvi said:


> Thanks Noushka.
> Getting the right sources of calcium is something that bothers me as osteoporosis runs very strongly through my family. So I've done a fair bit of research on the best ways to try to keep our bones healthy.
> An article that one links to is actually more useful for that though as it discusses the vitamin K link, etc.
> But I'm still undecided on the article's claim that drinking milk causes our bodies to 'leak' calcium (in a reaction to the acid in pasteurised milk), because: a) we've been here before with different claims about milk; and b) the source for that article is the website 'saveourbones', which itself has in the past provided some very unsafe data for osteoporosis followers.
> ...


That's ok.

Osteoporosis runs in my family too. My lovely Mum suffered from severe osteoporosis & had to have the 3 monthly intravenous injections. She'd always been active, consumed dairy all her life & ate what many would consider a balanced diet. My MIL also suffers with osteoporosis & she use to have the annual injection but shes since been discharged as shes now gained enough bone density - shes always been a big consumer of dairy. In Africa & Asia where they consume very little dairy, fracture rates are far lower than they are here. Diet & other factors are important for keeping healthy bones, I'm not convinced dairy plays a major role, but that's just me, Its for the individual to decide. This wasn't the reason I ditched dairy, I did it for purely ethical reasons.

Beyoncé has announced shes gone vegan, I really hope she will influence a new generation of vegans.

Back to bad news for badgers. NE, Defra, the NFU refute claims by Badger Trust cull wont be roll out to other areas. I knew it was too good to be true

http://m.westernmorningnews.co.uk/W...-NFU-Natural/story-26753062-detail/story.html

.


----------



## silvi (Jul 31, 2014)

noushka05 said:


> That's ok.
> 
> Osteoporosis runs in my family too. My lovely Mum suffered from severe osteoporosis & had to have the 3 monthly intravenous injections. She'd always been active, consumed dairy all her life & ate what many would consider a balanced diet. My MIL also suffers with osteoporosis & she use to have the annual injection but shes since been discharged as shes now gained enough bone density - shes always been a big consumer of dairy. In Africa & Asia where they consume very little dairy, fracture rates are far lower than they are here. Diet & other factors are important for keeping healthy bones, I'm not convinced dairy plays a major role, but that's just me, Its for the individual to decide. This wasn't the reason I ditched dairy, I did it for purely ethical reasons.


Don't want to hijack the thread any further, but just to say I'm sorry about your Mum but glad to hear that your MIL has gained bone density. My Mum has osteopenia (now bordering on osteoporosis), but so far she is refusing medication and instead doing a mix of healthy diet, sunlight and exercise, because she says that medication didn't help my Nan at all - just gave her other health problems.
Whether that will change in the future, I don't know....

My family are a mix of races from all over the place, including Africa, and my Nan was never a big consumer of dairy produce, but she had osteoporosis very badly before she died.
It used to be said that osteoporosis is a white, western disease, but my family seems to prove otherwise. And a change of diet to a westernised diet doesn't really fit either, as our family grew up with a real mix of cultural eating styles 
But I'll leave it there for now.



noushka05 said:


> Beyoncé has announced shes gone vegan, I really hope she will influence a new generation of vegans.


It's a shame that we have to rely on celebrities to influence our eating habits as they often give us as much crap advice as good advice.
That's not a throwaway remark by the way, I really do feel this.



noushka05 said:


> Back to bad news for badgers. NE, Defra, the NFU refute claims by Badger Trust cull wont be roll out to other areas. I knew it was too good to be true
> 
> http://m.westernmorningnews.co.uk/W...-NFU-Natural/story-26753062-detail/story.html
> 
> .


That's not good.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

silvi said:


> Don't want to hijack the thread any further, but just to say I'm sorry about your Mum but glad to hear that your MIL has gained bone density. My Mum has osteopenia (now bordering on osteoporosis), but so far she is refusing medication and instead doing a mix of healthy diet, sunlight and exercise, because she says that medication didn't help my Nan at all - just gave her other health problems.
> Whether that will change in the future, I don't know....
> 
> My family are a mix of races from all over the place, including Africa, and my Nan was never a big consumer of dairy produce, but she had osteoporosis very badly before she died.
> ...


Thank you. I really do hope your Mum will be okay.

I think celebrities can be a force for good raising awareness of issues & making people stop & think. And they can inspire. Before I gave up meat completely I had been an on & off veggie since my early teens. I finally gave up eating animals completely due to a combination of two events. One was seeing a documentary on ARA Chrissie Hynde, it helped to strengthen my resolve & I've been a strict veggie for 10 years now.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Brian May briefing Tory MP's on foxhunting today along with Marc Abraham & Peter Egan.

I love these three, like Ricky Gervais, they campaign relentlessly for animals, giving a voice to the voiceless. For our foxes sake I hope the briefing goes well.


----------

