# Ooops



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Jack Russell dog left fighting for life after his tongue was ripped out by a HAWK | Mail Online


----------



## Bobbie (May 3, 2008)

Oh how sad poor dog and owner


----------



## Pupcakes (Jun 20, 2011)

S***! 

Oh God poor dog :-( 

I hope he can eat his food again.

The man says at first he thought his dog was being attacked by a SBT, that stood out to me. Maybe they have trouble with the breed there.

Poor little Jack...


----------



## springfieldbean (Sep 13, 2010)

Oh god, that's horrific. Poor, poor dog, and his owner, I can only imagine what he's going through. I really hope the little JR can learn to swallow and live a somewhat normal life.

Doesn't sound as though the hawk's owner appreciated the devastation this will have on the dog and his owner. I wouldn't want the bird put to sleep though - just better controlled, probably with a different owner.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

springfieldbean said:


> I wouldn't want the bird put to sleep though - just better controlled, probably with a different owner.


It doesn't say where it happened or if either of them had permission to be there.
I had the same thing happen once on private land that I had permission to be on, there was no way I was going to take responsibility


----------



## Goldstar (Nov 12, 2011)

Poor little dog. Hope he recovers.

The hawk shouldn't be put down though. Probably thought the dog was a prey animal.


----------



## we love bsh's (Mar 28, 2011)

This is really bad people should not have to walk their pets in fear of being attacked by a bop  just the same as they should not have to walk in fear of another dog attack.

That poor dog and the owner of the bird doesnt give a dam by sounds of it not even about his own bird..just arrogant.


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

Yikes. Strange how the bird owner seems to say he will have his bird put down on the guys say so if he says so etc.

It is an awful incident I don't really know what to make of it :nonod:

Birds of prey do make me very nervous. My godmum's OH has had red tails, snowy owls, an eagle owl and did have a harris hawk as well.


----------



## Muze (Nov 30, 2011)

Bit more than an oops IMO, that's horrific. 

Wouldn't want the bird pts but would certainly want the owner to take some responsibilty. Potentially criminal damage due to recklessness if nothing else.

peed me off how they managed to sneak an SBT reference even thought the incident was totally unrelated 

Very sad


----------



## 8tansox (Jan 29, 2010)

Tragic. I fly a Harris Hawk most Monday afternoons and we're always alert to see what's about. So far, she's caught rabbits and pigeons. We fly on private land though, but I'd be mortified if an accident did happen and a dog escaped from somewhere and "got in the way". Don't know how I'd feel.


----------



## babycham2002 (Oct 18, 2009)

I was concerned whilst in Wales about the Red Kites, Percy would be easy prey to a kite. 

If I was aware of a Bird Of Prey whilst out walking the dogs, I would keep them very close and or change the walk direction.


My thoughts are with all those concerned


----------



## dandogman (Dec 19, 2011)

I feel sorry for both the owner of the JRT and the bird.

I do see where the JRT's owner is coming from. 

The bird owner seems to be taking responsibility e.g. paying for bills, taking them to the vets though. 

I can see both sides, I am not too sure how I would feel in that situation.


----------



## skip (Sep 25, 2011)

Rather a shocking incident not the sort of thing I've really heard of or thought about. I feel so sorry for the dog and its owner. The hawk guy doesn't seem too worried if he has to put the bird down. Funny one this, I suppose its the birds natural instinct but why fly it so close to a place known for dog walks


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

skip said:


> why fly it so close to a place known for dog walks


I fly mine in a popular dog walking area. It also happens to be private land where no one but me has permission to be on. If a dog gets nailed it would be unfortunate but the blame would be entirely with the dog owner


----------



## Guest (Nov 7, 2012)

I would be terrified to walk a small dog in any of the fields around here. 
We have hawks, kites, eagles and buzzards. Small quickly moving animal + open field spells disaster to me. 

Sad story for all involved


----------



## canuckjill (Jun 25, 2008)

Where I live we are always careful, there is the most awesome Bald Eagle that flies over my house once in awhile. I am always in awe of its beauty. We also have 2 Great Horned Owls that live in the Hamlet.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

hawksport said:


> I fly mine in a popular dog walking area. It also happens to be private land where no one but me has permission to be on. If a dog gets nailed it would be unfortunate but the blame would be entirely with the dog owner


You are a charmer. How about taking responsibility for your birds.

The thing that stuck out with that story is that the bloke is considering keeping that poor dog alive in that state. How can that be fair. It will never be able to eat or drink normally. It wont be able to run around in case it overheats, it wont be allowed near a fire, or out in the sun. Horrible and selfish to keep it going.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

hawksport said:


> I fly mine in a popular dog walking area. It also happens to be private land where no one but me has permission to be on. If a dog gets nailed it would be unfortunate but the blame would be entirely with the dog owner


I'm surprised you say that as a dog owner.  There are always threads about out of control dogs whose owners should know better: are bird owners somehow exempt? Don't you have public liabilty?

If I'm riding and have an accident involving a car or private property, then I have insurance to cover that. I would take responsibility for any damage caused because it's my animal. Don't care if there's a dog etc there that hasn't got permission to be there. I find that a bit of an unfortunate attitude, frankly.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*The title of this thread is rather flippant imho.
Such a sad story,i hope the dog can have some quality of life.And i wouldn't want to see the bird pts.*


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Blitz said:


> You are a charmer. How about taking responsibility for your birds.


I do take responsibility for my birds, I don't take responsibility for people walking dogs where they aren't supposed to be. If one of my birds strayed onto your property and your dogs killed it would you take responsibility



cinammontoast said:


> I'm surprised you say that as a dog owner.  There are always threads about out of control dogs whose owners should know better:
> are bird owners somehow exempt?


Yes they are, the same as cat owners are



cinammontoast said:


> Don't you have public liabilty?


Yes I do



cinammontoast said:


> If I'm riding and have an accident involving a car or private property, then I have insurance to cover that. I would take responsibility for any damage caused because it's my animal. Don't care if there's a dog etc there that hasn't got permission to be there. I find that a bit of an unfortunate attitude, frankly.


So if you were on land that you pay to use and a dog that wasn't supposed to be there got hurt by your horse you would take responsibility for the accident. That's very generous of you but I believe in people taking responsibility for their own actions


----------



## MyMillie (Jun 17, 2012)

Muze said:


> *Bit more than an oops IMO, that's horrific. *
> 
> Wouldn't want the bird pts but would certainly want the owner to take some responsibilty. Potentially criminal damage due to recklessness if nothing else.
> 
> ...


My very thoughts too!.... the title is very flippant I must say!! 

Dreadful for the poor dog and owner!!


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

hawksport said:


> I do take responsibility for my birds, I don't take responsibility for people walking dogs where they aren't supposed to be. If one of my birds strayed onto your property and your dogs killed it would you take responsibility
> 
> Yes they are, the same as cat owners are
> 
> ...


I find your attitude unbelievable. Why do you come on a pet forum when you obviously do not care for pets.
There is a huge difference between someone straying on to private land and their dog being attacked by a working bird of prey (or shot by mistake if a shoot is going on) and working a bird regularly in an area that is KNOWN to be used by dog walkers. If dog walkers should not be there then get the land owner to evict them but do not ignore their rights just because you feel you have more rights. Do you run someone down in the road because your car is allowed to be there and they are straying off the foot path.

On another note, I was very nervous walking one of my dogs along the shore one day when I spotted a sea eagle sitting in the rocks by the path


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

If I see them first they will be evicted. One of the reasons I am allowed to be there is security. Unfortunately a hawk has much better eye sight than me

I find that a ridiculous comparison. A car only does what the driver makes it do, a hawk sat in a tree follows it's natural instincts

You must of missed my question to you[/QUOTE]

That is not the point though is it. It is the attitude. If you KNOW that you are working your bird in a popular dog walking area and there was a risk to the dogs then surely a sensible person would stop working the bird there.
If I was out with my horses and wanting a good gallop somewhere where I was well entitled to but there was a lot of dog walkers around or people out with kids or whatever then I would have to modify what I wanted to do, however annoying it would be and however much I had more right to be there.

And yes, I obviously did miss your question, what was it.


----------



## we love bsh's (Mar 28, 2011)

HS i think what is worse here is the fact you dont come accross as you would care if your bird did do that to a dog thats simply sad.


----------



## Goldstar (Nov 12, 2011)

Whilst it was an horrific accident to have happened it was just that, an accident. I imagine it would be near impossible for the hawk owner to prevent such an attack. 

People walk their dogs in most places, whether they are supposed to be there or not. If a hawk owner believes they are in a secure place, on private land where no dog walkers are supposed to be and an accident happens then the dog owner has to take the responsibility for their own choices.

I really feel for the Jack Russell though, poor little guy.


----------



## we love bsh's (Mar 28, 2011)

hawksport said:


> *I would be gutted *as anyone who knows me knows I would be,but at the end of the day a wild animal follows it's natural instincts and if I am on private property carrying out my lawful business and someone else is trespassing then thats their fault not mine


I think its your title that makes it come across as such.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

hawksport said:


> I would be gutted as anyone who knows me knows I would be,but at the end of the day a wild animal follows it's natural instincts and if I am on private property carrying out my lawful business and someone else is trespassing then thats their fault not mine


*But the thread wasn't about you or your birds.
Yet your reaction to the story was "Ooops"...Sounds pretty uncaring.*


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

hawksport said:


> Why should I give up my pastime just because other people think they can walk their dogs wherever they like?
> 
> My question was
> If one of my birds landed on your property and your dog killed it would you take responsibility


Sorry, I did not think that was a serious question.

No, I would not take responsibility if the bird landed on my property or even if it landed near where I was walking my dogs. But I would not have a flippant attitude towards it happening. On the other hand if I knew that someone was working birds nearby and there was a risk that my dogs would attack a bird then I would keep them out of the way during that time.

At the same time I would not blame a bird owner for an attack if I had strayed unwittingly onto private property where a bird was being worked but if a bird was being worked where I and other dog walkers went regularly I would feel the bird owner was being very careless - after all, as you have pointed out, your bird could get killed - and with smaller birds that is probably far more likely than a dog being attacked.

Unfortunately country pursuits often have to share the same area and there has to be a sensible and courteous compromise - such as not galloping horses where there are pedestrians even though it might be an area where horses are regularly ridden.

Also I am not sure of the current law in England but in Scotland there is nothing to stop dog owners walking wherever they want (excluding through livestock and around buildings) but there is certainly a law against hunting with guns or birds without permission so the fact you asked permission and the dog owners did not may well be irrelevant.


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

"I thought it was another dog at first,* like a Staffordshire Bull Terrier* and tried to kick it but it wouldnt let go."

Was that a necessary addition to his story? Im sorry, I just thought 'wtf?' when I got to that bit. I wonder if the daily fail added that bit themselves?
I guess it just proves how unable to identify staffies most people are; even a bird could be a staffy now 

But on topic.....hell. Thats horrible. I don't blame the bird, or the bird's owner, it seems like a freak accident. I'd never have imagined the bird could do that kind of damage, or would try to once it realised this was a dog it was going after! But then I know nothing about birds of prey. 
We used to have someone who would work one on the field beside my parents house. I was quite grateful when he stopped, because I could sit in the garden with my rats on my lap and not worry!


----------



## lozzibear (Feb 5, 2010)

I think the title of this thread is outrageous, OOPS! To a story of a dog who may need to be PTS! OOPS! Terrible... 

I think this story is tragic... and the hawks owner should take the responsibility. And, I think it is terrible that the hawks owner had a go at the JRTs owner for kicking the bird! The bird got off very lightly with a kick, compared to having his tongue ripped out!


----------



## Milliepoochie (Feb 13, 2011)

hawksport said:


> A few more facts have come to light this morning
> This happened on private industrial land with no public access
> The area isn't popular with dog walkers because it's contaminated
> The dog first attacked the hawk.
> The hawks owner drove the dog and it's owner to the vet


Its a tragic story and some interesting developments.

We have Red Kites near us (A breeding pair)- They are amazing to watch and when your the only one up the Hills I swear they follow you round its amazing. Would be worried if I had a chihuahua I think 

In terms of this story its horrible - but I do not think the bird should be destroyed. I personally think the owner of the Hawk repsonded in the corrct way - The bird was insured - he went striaght over to the incident and took the man and dog to the vets. He even said if the man was insistant he would have th ebird destroyed - I really dont think ther eis anything else he could of done or mos timportant should do.

I personally think it would be disgusting that the bird could be pts.

I think the dog owner is lucky he isnt being persevered for being on private property without permission and whilst its tragic what has happened to the dog it has happened because the owner was walking where he wasnt allowed to be.

Had he of kept to public rights of way the poor dog would be ok I dont think he has any right to be angry at the birds owner if they were on private property that they have permisison to fly on.


----------



## Milliepoochie (Feb 13, 2011)

lozzibear said:


> I think the title of this thread is outrageous, OOPS! To a story of a dog who may need to be PTS! OOPS! Terrible...
> 
> I think this story is tragic... and* the hawks owner should take the responsibility*. And, I think it is terrible that the hawks owner had a go at the JRTs owner for kicking the bird! The bird got off very lightly with a kick, compared to having his tongue ripped out!


In all seriousness what else can the Hawks owner be asked to do?


----------



## we love bsh's (Mar 28, 2011)

I can say for certain that reporters will put info into their own words and then the story changes somewhat.

The bit about the staff sounds added in.

Maybe it would be an idea to train the bird what is pray and whats not,can that be done?

I know you can train ferrets to be good with dogs that work along side them when rabbiting.


----------



## we love bsh's (Mar 28, 2011)

Milliepoochie said:


> In all seriousness what else can the Hawks owner be asked to do?


To control his bird.


----------



## Milliepoochie (Feb 13, 2011)

we love bsh's said:


> To control his bird.


Maybe he should keep it on a lead


----------



## we love bsh's (Mar 28, 2011)

Milliepoochie said:


> Maybe he should keep it on a lead


Now thats an idea.


----------



## we love bsh's (Mar 28, 2011)

hawksport said:


> The bird was trained to hunt with dogs. Thats why it went over to the dog and then got attacked


I see, its a hard one.

I see that the birds need their freedom too maybe some warning signs would be good idea for certain places to fly these birds,for people like me who would be other wise clueless and end up in the wrong path.

If the dog it that bad though it really should be pts or i dont know how it will get a quality of life.


----------



## we love bsh's (Mar 28, 2011)

How are your birds with dogs?


----------



## lozzibear (Feb 5, 2010)

Milliepoochie said:


> In all seriousness what else can the Hawks owner be asked to do?


Well, firstly he should not have a go at the dogs owner for kicking his bird when he is standing holding the dogs tongue!! (according to the article)

I also think if someone chooses to take such an animal out in public, they should have much better control over it. And, in regards to now trying to blame the dog, I will wait until more information is properly released... according to that article the hawk swooped on the dog... you never know who is telling the truth.


----------



## Phoenix&Charlie'sMum (Oct 12, 2009)

I feel very sorry for the dog being left in this state. I wonder how the bird ended up? There are no clues as to wether the bird sustained any injuries??

Hawksport has bought up some relevant questions that should have been answered in the original report.

I think people find it difficult trying to distinguish a hawk out Working and someone out having a leasurely gallop on their horse. As Hawkssport has stated he takes his Hawk on permissioned land to Work his animal - therefore must be doing it as a job and is required by the land owner to be there. I dont think this is the same as someone who has has permission to use some land to exercise their horse - did the land owner requiest you to go there for any perticular purpose?

I think Hawksport has been critised a little too much on here for a job that he is required to do.

Before the facts emerged i did wonder if the owner was allowed to walk there but also to walk his dog off-lead - as most dog walking areas are on-lead walks. 

I think in this case as the new facts emerge - the owner of the dog should take responsibility as obviously his dog was not under control and was allowed to attack the Hawk. 

Its just one of those freak accidents which elave both parties feeling like [email protected] but they feel someone needs to be blamed


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

hawksport said:


> I do take responsibility for my birds, I don't take responsibility for people walking dogs where they aren't supposed to be. If one of my birds strayed onto your property and your dogs killed it would you take responsibility.
> 
> So if you were on land that you pay to use and a dog that wasn't supposed to be there got hurt by your horse you would take responsibility for the accident. That's very generous of you but I believe in people taking responsibility for their own actions


Yes to the question, I'd feel too bad not to. And I have public liability. I don't care if they shouldn't be there, animals aren't always under our perfect control.

Morally, ethically, I'd feel obliged to help/pay/use my insurance.

You came across as very flippant until you were picked up on it.


----------



## lozzibear (Feb 5, 2010)

Phoenix&Charlie'sMum said:


> Before the facts emerged i did wonder if the owner was allowed to walk there but also to walk his dog off-lead - as most dog walking areas are on-lead walks.
> 
> I think in this case as the new facts emerge - the owner of the dog should take responsibility as obviously his dog was not under control and was allowed to attack the Hawk.
> 
> Its just one of those freak accidents which elave both parties feeling like [email protected] but they feel someone needs to be blamed


I can't speak for other areas, obviously, but there are loads of areas where dogs are allowed around here that dogs are allowed off lead... I can't actually think of a single place I walk where I have seen a sign, or been told by others, or police we have come across etc that the dogs should be on lead.

As for the new information, how do we know that is true? How do we know the dog attacked the hawk first? And how do we know the dog owner shouldn't have been there? It would strike me as odd, that the hawk owner is willing to put his hawk to sleep when 1. the dog owner shouldn't actually be there and 2. his dog attacked the hawk first... It can be difficult to know the truth in articles especially when there are conflicting statements.


----------



## canuckjill (Jun 25, 2008)

I still find Hawk ownership amazing. Quite a rarity in my area, with the exception of the Birds of Prey Centre don't think I know of any.So it makes it hard for me to get this. So in the UK is it quite common for certain areas to be known for Birds of Prey owners to be out flying their birds?...I would think if I knew an area was known for this I wouldn't be letting my dogs off leash in the area....Truthfully I think this is just an awful accident, sad for both parties as I'm sure the owner of the bird is also an animal lover.


----------



## Phoenix&Charlie'sMum (Oct 12, 2009)

lozzibear said:


> I can't speak for other areas, obviously, but there are loads of areas where dogs are allowed around here that dogs are allowed off lead... I can't actually think of a single place I walk where I have seen a sign, or been told by others, or police we have come across etc that the dogs should be on lead.
> 
> As for the new information, how do we know that is true? How do we know the dog attacked the hawk first? And how do we know the dog owner shouldn't have been there? It would strike me as odd, that the hawk owner is willing to put his hawk to sleep when 1. the dog owner shouldn't actually be there and 2. his dog attacked the hawk first... It can be difficult to know the truth in articles especially when there are conflicting statements.


Now that would be a retorical question...

How do you know the owner was allowed to walk there? How do you know the hawk attacked the dog?

From what i can read the owner hasnt offered to have the hawk PTS - he stated "If he wants the bird destroyed its up to him.' - is that an offer of PTS??


----------



## Phoenix&Charlie'sMum (Oct 12, 2009)

hawksport said:


> The hawk has bites to it's feet and feather damage so it probably won't be flying again until next September after it has moulted


I guess its another one of those Daily Frail one sided stories


----------



## 2Cats2Dogs (Oct 30, 2012)

What a tragic set of circumstances.

I also find Hawksports comments very insightful about flying birds.

If the dog was walking on private land, well it is the owners fault. I myself have never walked my dogs on private land purely because it is illegal for starters. Was the area where the attack was carried out sign posted clearly to state it was private land?

The owner of the hawk maybe new to flying, I don't know. The story doesn't say much. 

My thoughts are with the dog. The injury is just horrifying. 

Can't blame a bird of prey for being just that.


----------



## 2Cats2Dogs (Oct 30, 2012)

hawksport said:


> It was industrial land and most industrial land I know has signs up.
> The dogs owner was also in full camo gear. When we get people in camo gear with terriers they are only there for one reason


For me the dog owner can't have any complaints and must shoulder some of the responsibility. Seems he is quick to apportion all the blame to the owner of the bird. Yes granted he probably didn't expect a wild bird to attack his dog, but still if he ignored the signs that he was tresspassing he can't legally have any complaints.

The bird owner has done more than his fair share if he is paying vet bills and even took the owner and the dog to the vets as well as offering for the bird to be destroyed.


----------



## Phoenix&Charlie'sMum (Oct 12, 2009)

hawksport said:


> It was industrial land and most industrial land I know has signs up.
> The dogs owner was also in full camo gear. When we get people in camo gear with terriers they are only there for one reason


Rattiessss!!!


----------



## WelshOneEmma (Apr 11, 2009)

I think it very sad BUT the birds owner has tried to take responsibility. 

Where we walk Piper there are BOP, we have them circling the garden regularly (so I watch when the chickens go out). I don't think the BOP should be put down and I think if you walk your animal near where these birds fly and/or are flown you need to take it into account.

And if it were my dog, I would not have her put down. I dont think her quality of life would be that bad, but I would give her a chance to see too.


----------



## canuckjill (Jun 25, 2008)

a puppy I sold in the 90's actually lost its tongue in a terrible accident and it had to be PTS....It was devastating, it usually depends on where the tongue was torn at the front or at the back...My poor lil one lost its tongue at the very back and he was the reason several dog beds were taken off the shelf in Alberta and were made illegal


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

cinammontoast said:


> Yes to the question, I'd feel too bad not to. And I have public liability. I don't care if they shouldn't be there, animals aren't always under our perfect control.
> 
> Morally, ethically, I'd feel obliged to help/pay/use my insurance.
> 
> You came across as very flippant until you were picked up on it.


You may feel obliged but if the circumstances are actually as reported doubt your insurance company would 

Its a horrible thing to have happened but its a bird of prey - I know little about them, presumably you get wild ones too (?). whose fault would be if it had been a wild bird. Freak accidents happen why is it someone has to be deemed to blame


----------



## we love bsh's (Mar 28, 2011)

hawksport said:


> My Harris hawk which is now on loan in Yorkshire has only ever worked over my dog. She knows he knows his job and will follow him all day On the odd occasion she has seen another Dobermann she has gone over for a quick look before realising her mistake She is very wary of other dogs she doesn't know as are most Harris hawks. I suspect the one in this case was flown over a dog very similar to the one that was hurt.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


HS that picture is great!


----------



## dandogman (Dec 19, 2011)

Too me it sounds like the Daily Mail have gone with the dogs story as they are much more likely to get a following of people with it than a bird of prey story.


----------



## tattoogirl73 (Jun 25, 2011)

hawksport said:


> My Harris hawk which is now on loan in Yorkshire has only ever worked over my dog. She knows he knows his job and will follow him all day On the odd occasion she has seen another Dobermann she has gone over for a quick look before realising her mistake She is very wary of other dogs she doesn't know as are most Harris hawks. I suspect the one in this case was flown over a dog very similar to the one that was hurt.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


i love seeing pics of arni with your birds. it shows how the prey drive of the dobermann can be controlled in the right enviroment and with the right training. he's a credit to you, hawksport


----------



## blitzens mum (Jul 15, 2012)

this is a tragic accident and i dont think either party is at fault, no one could have predicted this happening and all we can do is learn from it
of course i feel terrible for the suffering of the poor dog, i would be devastated if it happened to mine and my heart goes out to his owner
i dont think the hawk owner was callous in his attitude he was probably in shock himself, i think its easier for us to sit here and criticise, we weren't there, we are going by only what we have read and who knows how we would re act if it had happened to us
hawksport your birds are beautiful


----------



## Thorne (May 11, 2009)

Horrendous accident, poor dog! 

I think the hawk owner is being very fair by offering to pay vet bills - if it's true that this was on private land where the dog and owner had no permission to be then the chap ought to take more responsibility for his actions. 

If a hawk (or other owned animal!) happened to come into my garden and be attacked by my dog who would definitely do so if he was quick enough, I would be mortified and offer to pay vet bills. BUT if the intruding animal was prevented from being there by it's owner, there wouldn't be a problem to start with. 
My horrid dog slipped his collar years back to chase a cat into its garden and was bitten (no broken skin) and chased out again by the resident GSD. The neighbour was annoyed but relieved there was no harm done to any party but I accepted I was responsible for my dog and any injuries he might've incurred because he shouldn't have been there. It has never happened again and I won't allow it to.
I'm sure I read a thread on here a few months ago where a member's dogs attacked a cat that had strayed into their garden and the general consensus was that she was not responsible for the dogs' actions. I would agree but why do so many posters on this thread think this doesn't apply to hawks flown on private land?

Without knowing either party or the exact circumstances I can't make any judgement.

I do tend to agree with Blitz in as much as I don't believe it's fair to keep a tongueless dog alive. Unless this dog is a real trooper surely he will continue to suffer in the future?

(Yes, the SBT reference made me roll my eyes too! Funny looking dog that would have to be )


----------



## Pet Services Kent (Dec 3, 2010)

Hi hawksport, just wondering as i know nothing about your sport- what do your dog and bird hunt together and how do they work together as a team(as in who does what)? I'M intrigued!


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Pet Services Kent said:


> Hi hawksport, just wondering as i know nothing about your sport- what do your dog and bird hunt together and how do they work together as a team(as in who does what)? I'M intrigued!


The dog finds the rabbits in cover and moves them out, if the rabbit isn't fast enough the hawk catches it. If it's fast enough and makes it to more we move on and leave it in peace


----------



## Pet Services Kent (Dec 3, 2010)

Cool thanks!


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2012)

second incident involving a bird of prey.
EXCLUSIVE: Toddler Alfie Hall, 2, maimed in playground hawk attack | The Sun |News


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

diablo said:


> second incident involving a bird of prey.
> EXCLUSIVE: Toddler Alfie Hall, 2, maimed in playground hawk attack | The Sun |News


Kids flying hawks around housing estates. exactly why we need a proper system of licencing.

This made me laugh though "Harris hawks fly at up to 200mph and can kill a fox."


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

Sorry, but how anyone would want to own a killing machine and get pleasure out of watching it do exactly that - is totally alien to me!

Its not that long ago that I posted a picture of an owl taking a cat. These birds of prey dont belong in residential areas and you are risking the lives of other peoples much loved pets.


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2012)

Ang2 said:


> Sorry, but how anyone would want to own a killing machine and get pleasure out of watching it do exactly that - is totally alien to me!
> 
> Its not that long ago that I posted a picture of an owl taking a cat. These birds of prey dont belong in residential areas and you are risking the lives of other peoples much loved pets.


What do you think a cat does when its out where a hawk can get it?
Do you think the cat is out there in the field sunning itself making nicey-nicey with the rodents and birds of the area?


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2012)

hawksport said:


> Kids flying hawks around housing estates. exactly why we need a proper system of licencing.
> 
> This made me laugh though "Harris hawks fly at up to 200mph and can kill a fox."


what about age restrictions , wouldn't that work better than implementing a licensing system ? it's such a shame , can't blame the bird at all really can you , they're still wild animals and have to be treated and respected as so.
i know absolutely nothing about keeping birds of prey , do think they are absolutely amazing animals though.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

ouesi said:


> What do you think a cat does when its out where a hawk can get it?
> Do you think the cat is out there in the field sunning itself making nicey-nicey with the rodents and birds of the area?


I wouldnt accompany a cat for the thrill of watching it kill! Moreso, I have catproofed my garden as I hate the thought of any cat killing mice and birds etc.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Ang2 said:


> Sorry, but how anyone would want to own a killing machine and get pleasure out of watching it do exactly that - is totally alien to me


Because some of us would rather eat meat that has lived and died the way nature intended than buy it from the supermarket


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

diablo said:


> what about age restrictions , wouldn't that work better than implementing a licensing system ? it's such a shame , can't blame the bird at all really can you , they're still wild animals and have to be treated and respected as so.
> i know absolutely nothing about keeping birds of prey , do think they are absolutely amazing animals though.


I know lots of sensible 14 year olds, I also know lots of adults who haven't got the brains they were born with


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

hawksport said:


> Because some of us would rather eat meat that has lived and died the way nature intended than buy it from the supermarket


So when you fancy a steak, do you send him out for a cow?


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2012)

Ang, do you eat meat? Dairy?


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

ouesi said:


> Ang, do you eat meat? Dairy?


Yes I do, although very little - and of course my animals eat meat. I see the point you are trying to make! However, I am an animal lover - trust and hope that all animals are slaughtered humanely and would never want to witness the savage killing of any animal.

I dont understand people watching dog fights any more than I understand people wanting to watch or participate in the killing of any animal.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Ang2 said:


> So when you fancy a steak, do you send him out for a cow?


Thank you for proving the point I made to Diabalo
Let me know if you have anything sensible to ask


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

hawksport said:


> Thank you for proving the point I made to Diabalo
> Let me know if you have anything sensible to ask


Its not about having your meat the way nature intended it to be killed. For you its a sport - end of.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Ang2 said:


> Its not about having your meat the way nature intended it to be killed. For you its a sport - end of.


And you came to that conclusion from?


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

hawksport said:


> And you came to that conclusion from?


Maybe the clue is in your username.


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2012)

Ang2 said:


> Yes I do, although very little - and of course my animals eat meat. I see the point you are trying to make! However, I am an animal lover - *trust and hope that all animals are slaughtered humanely* and would never want to witness the savage killing of any animal.
> 
> I dont understand people watching dog fights any more than I understand people wanting to watch or participate in the killing of any animal.


I dont know how to say this nicely so Ill just say it.
If you think hunting is about wanting to witness the savage killing of an animal, then you are clueless.

I dont eat meat, but if I did, it would be the meat of animals I had either raised or hunted myself. 
Oh, and I enjoy watching my dogs hunt. Because they are enjoying themselves.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Ang2 said:


> Maybe the clue is in your username.


Obviously it's a sport the same as fishing and shooting


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

ouesi said:


> I dont know how to say this nicely so Ill just say it.
> If you think hunting is about wanting to witness the savage killing of an animal, then you are clueless.
> 
> I dont eat meat, but if I did, it would be the meat of animals I had either raised or hunted myself.
> Oh, and I enjoy watching my dogs hunt. Because they are enjoying themselves.


Dont call me clueless because I am far from!

We are no longer living in the dark ages where every man is a hunter by necessity. Hunting is now a sport. I wouldnt want/allow my dogs to rip apart any animal.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Ang2 said:


> Dont call me clueless because I am far from!
> 
> We are no longer living in the dark ages where every man is a hunter by necessity. Hunting is now a sport. I wouldnt want/allow my dogs to rip apart any animal.


If your concience is clear eating animals that have been taken from their parents,caged, transported around the country and then stood watching the animals in front of it being killed before their turn came that's fine with me. I prefer to eat animals that have lived wild and free, been chased for 20 seconds by a natural predator and then killed


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

hawksport said:


> If your concience is clear eating animals that have been taken from their parents,caged, transported around the country and then stood watching the animals in front of it being killed before their turn came that's fine with me. I prefer to eat animals that have lived wild and free, been chased for 20 seconds by a natural predator and then killed


None of which I take any pleasure from - unlike you!


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Ang2 said:


> None of which I take any pleasure from - unlike you!


From an animal welfare point of view does it make any difference if someone takes pleasure in the way it's killed


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

I thought not


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2012)

Where does the fantasy that hunting an animal means it is possibly harried for the last 30 seconds, or 1 second of it's life, come from??? This is the fantasy of the ignorant or thoughtless. A prey animal in the wild is rarely anything but under stress. It can rarely relax, it lives in hardship, for at least part of the year, and many of the people claiming that they live such a low impact life, are, as ever, allowing the prey animals to struggle, watch their litters die or sicken, fight to get through the worst weather, so a small section of the community can congratulate themselves that they pay almost nothng for their meat. Even a farmer is forced to provide their animals with sufficient food and water, ALL YEAR ROUND, or face up to prosecution. To hunt wild animals is to let them battle year in, year out, if young and strong, survive harsh conditions, weeks or months of hunger, so some usually comfortably middle class 'sportsman' or wealthy landowner can boast they would never buy their meat from a supermarket. Morally, I can't see that answer is much more acceptable than the base levels of farming, apart from the horrendous, poorly cared for factory farms.

To enjoy watching a kill is somewhere I would CRINGE to ever be, as a human. It is a base enjoyment, that one would hope a civilised, gentle upbringing would prevent. To be excited, and even sicker, personally proud, of a kill, is really wallowing in the lowest levels of humanity. It is never a fair fight, either. The Great Hunters... Shooting from a safe distance, or sending in dogs, risking another animals life to kill, then getting the limp dead creature propped up, or standing with high powered rifle, with foot on some endangered animal... BIG MAN... Or stuffing and mounting it, to preen over it's death, for decades. This is the savagery, the insane testosterone pride in killing, of the Taliban. The Proof of Manhood found only in the uneducated areas of the world. There are times when death IS a mercy, but there should never be pleasure in death. Even with feral animals that must be controlled, there should be sadness and regret and fury for the morons that introduced them.

Before you throw battery hens and the worst of intensive farming at Ang2, there is also the alternative of organic free range farming, which on some small scale properties, entails portable butchers/slaughterers going to properties, setting up, and the job being done with the animals still thinking they are going into the building to be given hard feed. I've seen the footage, but could still never so betray an animal I have taken in, but THEY have been so well looked after, never known fear or hunger... THOSE people are the ONLY people that I feel have earned a right to take some lives, tho, again, I could not betray the trust that that animal had in me.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

househens said:


> Where does the fantasy that hunting an animal means it is possibly harried for the last 30 seconds, or 1 second of it's life, come from??? This is the fantasy of the ignorant or thoughtless.A prey animal in the wild is rarely anything but under stress. It can rarely relax, it lives in hardship, for at least part of the year,


I don't recall anyone saying any different



househens said:


> and many of the people claiming that they live such a low impact life, are, as ever, allowing the prey animals to struggle, watch their litters die or sicken, fight to get through the worst weather, so a small section of the community can congratulate themselves that they pay almost nothng for their meat. Even a farmer is forced to provide their animals with sufficient food and water, ALL YEAR ROUND, or face up to prosecution. To hunt wild animals is to let them battle year in, year out, if young and strong, survive harsh conditions, weeks or months of hunger, so some usually comfortably middle class 'sportsman' or wealthy landowner can boast they would never buy their meat from a supermarket. Morally, I can't see that answer is much more acceptable than the base levels of farming, apart from the horrendous, poorly cared for factory farms.


So what should we do with all the wild rabbits?
Take them all into captivity so they don't have to struggle to survive?
Leave them alone and let them live in peace?



househens said:


> To enjoy watching a kill is somewhere I would CRINGE to ever be, as a human. It is a base enjoyment, that one would hope a civilised, gentle upbringing would prevent. To be excited, and even sicker, personally proud, of a kill, is really wallowing in the lowest levels of humanity. It is never a fair fight, either. The Great Hunters... Shooting from a safe distance, or sending in dogs, risking another animals life to kill, then getting the limp dead creature propped up, or standing with high powered rifle, with foot on some endangered animal... BIG MAN... Or stuffing and mounting it, to preen over it's death, for decades. This is the savagery, the insane testosterone pride in killing, of the Taliban. The Proof of Manhood found only in the uneducated areas of the world. There are times when death IS a mercy, but there should never be pleasure in death. Even with feral animals that must be controlled, there should be sadness and regret and fury for the morons that introduced them.


Who takes pleasure in watching a kill?



househens said:


> Before you throw battery hens and the worst of intensive farming at Ang2, there is also the alternative of organic free range farming, which on some small scale properties, entails portable butchers/slaughterers going to properties, setting up, and the job being done with the animals still thinking they are going into the building to be given hard feed. I've seen the footage, but could still never so betray an animal I have taken in, but THEY have been so well looked after, never known fear or hunger... THOSE people are the ONLY people that I feel have earned a right to take some lives, tho, again, I could not betray the trust that that animal had in me.


The percentage of meat produced that way makes that point a non starter


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

hawksport said:


> From an animal welfare point of view does it make any difference if someone takes pleasure in the way it's killed


The difference it makes is YOU as a person - writing on a forum of supposed animal lovers. Seeing the killing of another animal as 'sport' makes you no better than those who take pleasure in dog fighting.


----------



## Shrap (Nov 22, 2010)

Ang2 said:


> The difference it makes is YOU as a person - writing on a forum of supposed animal lovers. Seeing the killing of another animal as 'sport' makes you no better than those who take pleasure in dog fighting.


That is not what was asked.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

Shrap said:


> That is not what was asked.


The question was stupid to start with. Of course it make a difference. Taking pleasure in killing does not go 'hand in hand' with animal welfare - does it?


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Ang2 said:


> The question was stupid to start with. Of course it make a difference. Taking pleasure in killing does not go 'hand in hand' with animal welfare - does it?


So this is ok because the consumer took no pleasure in the killing
Undercover investigation at Freedom Food broiler farm - YouTube

This on the other hand is a welfare issue because someone enjoyed themselves doing it
AAS410K .22 15yd Head Shot! - YouTube

I know which I prefer


----------



## WelshOneEmma (Apr 11, 2009)

I think the point about BOP in residential areas is silly. I live in an estate (we do have small gardens) and we ALWAYS have BOP circling through out the day, to the point of people with small dogs and kittens keeping them in when the birds are out. I make a point of bringing my chickens in when i see them overhead.

In large built up areas where people like to complain about pigeons and rats we also need people to be able to work BOP as I personally believe its a more humane way to cull using a BOP than a trap or poison. My uncle works BOP and is often used by refineries etc to help control the pigeons.

I personally would struggle to kill any animal - thats me. However I do eat meat and would rather eat wild caught meat (and will buy wild venison from the farm shop when they have it) rather than some of the supermarket stuff. An animal living wild usually has a better quality of life than some of these farm animals. 

I have cats, so am used to them bringing in wild caught animals (not so much over the years though). I also have a dog that catches mice. They die quicker with the dog than they do the cats. I have a chameleon who I have to feed live food to and god help any worm the chicken finds. Its nature for a lot of animals to eat others. As long as the death is quick and humane, which it is with a BOP, I dont have a problem with it. I dont see hawksport being someone who "takes pleasure in a kill" just someone who has accepted death of another animal to feed him is part of life. No different to fishing - unless you are someone who catches the fish then puts it back - now that is barbaric!


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Ang2 said:


> Dont call me clueless because I am far from!
> 
> We are no longer living in the dark ages where every man is a hunter by necessity. Hunting is now a sport. I wouldnt want/allow my dogs to rip apart any animal.


Not clueless yet you just 'hope' animals are slaughtered nicely?

Righto!


----------



## 2Cats2Dogs (Oct 30, 2012)

Wow there is a massive mis-interpretation in what is 'pleasure' 

So if a BOP hunts a rabbit in the wild without human assistance that is fine, but if a human is nearby witnessing it makes it sadistic?

Bizarre. 

I see people hunting for rabbits and ducks for food purposes. I have no issue in this. I would rather hunt for meat than the battery farming that goes on. I find it more in-humane that people buy battery farmed meat than free range/wild meat.


----------



## Thorne (May 11, 2009)

Ang2, I hope you are a strict vegan because otherwise you're coming across as a bit hypocritical - hoping farmed animals live good lives and are slaughtered humanely is one thing, but if you feel that strongly about the issue it's better to stay away from animal products all together.

Many farmed animals do live good lives. Many, many more do not.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Added to which Ang, 'hoping' just screams that you are being wilfully ignorant of where your meat comes from. Ignorance is not bliss, nor does it give you much of a leg to stand on when you want to criticise others.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Well I think most would know where my thoughts will lie. I'd much rather eat a brace of partridge that have been cleanly shot, than buy anything from a supermarket in those God awful little polystyrene trays usually on offer at ridiculously low prices which should indicate to anyone buying them how little the bird or animal was worth when it was alive. I can hardly see a farmer caring for a chicken that's on a supermarket shelf at two for a fiver, and ensuring it's tucked up warm at night and lives a long healthy life, oh no, that's right, they only live for a few months before they're packed into crates, hung from their feet, if they're electrocuted before their throats are slit they're the lucky ones! 

So yes, I'd rather see a bird cleanly shot, pluck and draw it with my own hands, and cook it, than buy anything mass produced. I take great pleasure in knowing that the bird lived a more natural life, and that it's death was much swifter and more natural, and yes, I will admire the skill of the gun in making a clean kill, and the skill of the dog that retrieves the bird to hand if it's required. 

Anyway, before I ruin the OP's thread I'll b*gga off and get myself a cuppa and write some reports about bridges to keep me out of trouble


----------



## Micky93 (May 15, 2012)

Hawksport I have to say, your birds look stunning. I've never really seen any round here as we don't seem to have anyone who does the sport but yours look truly incredible.. Beak looks a little too sharp for me too get close too but then I duck when a pigeon flies too close 

And as for you Ang, I think what hawksport does is for reason. He owns birds of prey and therefore they need to hunt (and eat!). Why shouldn't they catch their prey in a natural way? Don't get me wrong, I could never catch an animal or skin it but that is purely because I am a wimp. However, do I still eat meat?Yes! Just my opinion but there we go.

As for the article, I think it's a very tragic and horrific accident and I feel very strongly for both dog and bird.


----------



## LinznMilly (Jun 24, 2011)

Just gone through this whole thread and can see both sides tbh. 

I must say I do feel sorry for the poor dog, but it appears the bird didn't get away without injuries either. Yes, I understand the dog's owner is angry, but if this really was on private land and he didn't have permission to be there, then I'm sorry, but he does have to shoulder some of the responsibilty for the condition of his dog, and asking for the hawk to be PTS for doing what comes naturally to it, is a little OTT ... Maybe because he knows he had no right to be there and is redirecting anger towards the bird?? If it were on an open, public field where there were going to be loads of dogwalkers/families with pushchairs, etc then that would be a different matter IMO.

The hawk's owner has taken the dog and his owner to the vet and offered to pay for vets bills, apparently he's insured. I can't see how he can do more tbh.

As for the second article, where the toddler was attacked, full responsibility lies with the hawk's owner.  

For those of you who have said that you don't see how anyone can take the pleasure in a hunt/kill, normally I'd agree except my own personal experience has made me see differently...

I'm facinated by BOP. Have been for as long as I can remember, but I'd like to think I'm sensible enough to realise I couldn't do the birds justice, so, one Christmas, my parents give me the next best thing - a voucher for a Falconry Experience Day. . .

It was the beginning of the day, we were out with a Harris Hawk, who was just hopping from tree to tree alongside us as we walked along. Suddenly the falconer shouted at the bird and there she was, on the ground ahead of us, mantling/hiding her prey. It was over in seconds - so fast none of us who weren't used to these birds even realised what had happened until it was too late. Yes, I felt sorry for the prey animal, but at the same time, I did get a primal thrill to have been part of it 

Having recalled that, it does make me wonder what other damage the bird could have inflicted if it really wanted to kill the dog 

I agree, there should be some sort of stricter controls regarding the sale of BOPs, but in the right hands, they really are majestic, magnificent birds, and I'm truly grateful for the experiences I've had with them - and yes, that does include the hawk walk that turned into a hunt.

I would hope that the dog owner wouldn't call for a witch hunt if the bird had have been truly wild 

JMO


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

My falcon flying. Click to play


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

For me, there is a clear divide. If someone kills an animal JUST for fun, just for the pleasure of knowing they've 'won' and killed something, I cannot abide it. It totally rubs me up the wrong way, and makes me disappointed that a supposedly advanced species can still find pleasure in the suffering of another.

However, hunting when done for a purpose, ie, food, population control, is not the same, for me.
I had this dilemma recently regarding my ferrets. I feed them raw, where I cannot honestly say hand on heart that I know 100% how those animals were treated beforehand. I can do my best to buy what is labelled as 'humane', but without being there, we just don't know how those animals are treated. 
So I began wondering if I should take my male out rabbiting. He's a rescue who was worked in his previous home, and it would purely be so he could catch his own food, nothing more, no fun, no 'sport', just enough for him to feed himself.
Seemed more humane for him to catch something in a 'natural' way than for me to throw him meat that I can't guarantee was treated well.
I thought hard about it, but in the end, kinda wimped out. 
That doesn't mean that if he was out walking with me and he caught something himself that I wouldn't let him have it, I probably would. 
But going out and setting an animal on another......its not my nature, even though I can see the logic!
Its very strange. Its head vs heart. 
I eat meat, so Im aware I'd be a complete hypocrite saying my ferret can't go out and kill his own food, Im very aware of that. Its just a hard mental block to get over. 

But ultimately, if someone is working an animal to provide food for that animal, to avoid having to buy meat from the supermarket where god only knows where its come from, or feeder chicks/rats/mice/rabbits which usually don't have a good life, I can't honestly say I can oppose that. 
Its when it becomes 'fun' and a 'sport' and people get giddy excited over killing that I hate. Its just......creepy for someone to enjoy killing something else. 

Im odd though, because I cannot abide the killing of rats, in any form, for any 'purpose', and it makes my physically sick when people speak of killing rats (true, I've actually had to throw up once when I saw a video of someone ratting). Its an emotional response, and I can't help it. I've owned these animals for 16 years, I know how intelligent and emotionally developed they are, how family orientated they are, how they care for their sick and old, they're amazing animals, to me, and I just can't shake that mental block that comes with rats.
My rats are as dear to me as my human family, not a word of a lie. So seeing one killed just strikes up the same horrible, emotional response that someone else would have seeing their child hurt or killed. Its completely involuntary. 
I can't do anything about it. 
And I know it makes me a massive hypocrite to say I considered taking my ferret out to catch a rabbit or two, but I can't stand people who go ratting. Im aware of this.
I think if the people who went ratting actually ate what they killed, it would be different. But it just seems like slaughter, to me. And the videos I have watched of it (against my will, I stumbled on some) people seem to think its all a big game, and show glee at the terrified rats trying to escape. 
Thats just dark, to me. I hate it. I hate those who do it.
For those who find this mind-set hard to understand (and I do realise that people do), take the rats and replace them with puppies, or kittens, or whatever animal you hold very dear, and think how you'd feel seeing them terrified and slaughtered by a bunch of guys with dogs. Then you'll come close to feeling as I feel.

But as always on this subject, its full of hypocrisy and emotion, and it'll never be solved as to what is 'right' and what isn't. 
You just have to have your own morals, and stick to those. 
For me, killing for food is ok..
Killing for fun, or resorting to killing when it is not necessary and other more humane options could be used to control a population, is not.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

I don;t think any one has said they enjoy killing things


----------



## LinznMilly (Jun 24, 2011)

hawksport said:


> I don;t think any one has said they enjoy killing things


I could be wrong, but I think Shadowrat might be misinterpreting something I said in my earlier post:



> Yes, I felt sorry for the prey animal, but at the same time, I did get a primal thrill to have been part of it


Just to clear up any misunderstanding, I do not - nor have I ever - enjoyed seeing any animal ripped apart and/or killed.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

Phoolf said:


> Added to which Ang, 'hoping' just screams that you are being wilfully ignorant of where your meat comes from. Ignorance is not bliss, nor does it give you much of a leg to stand on when you want to criticise others.


Are you purposefully missing the point? My first post said "I cant understand how a supposed animal lover can watch another animal being killed and get pleasure from it".

Do you think I am single handedly responsible for the way animals destined for the food chain are treated/slaughtered? Do you think its a job I could do/watch? Do you think that if someone eats meat they are automatially subscribed to animal cruelty?

Going back to the title of this thread 'Ooops'. Some poor dog has had its tongue ripped out which is hardly a call for 'Ooops'!


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Ang2 said:


> Are you purposefully missing the point? My first post said "I cant understand how a supposed animal lover can watch another animal being killed and get pleasure from it".
> 
> Do you think I am single handedly responsible for the way animals destined for the food chain are treated/slaughtered? Do you think its a job I could do/watch? Do you think that if someone eats meat they are automatially subscribed to animal cruelty?
> 
> Going back to the title of this thread 'Ooops'. Some poor dog has had its tongue ripped out which is hardly a call for 'Ooops'!


I think you purposefully missed the point to begin with. Hawksport has never stated getting any pleasure from an animal getting killed. But of course you don't likek addressing that simple misunderstanding on your crusade to wind people up (as usual).


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Phoolf said:


> I think you purposefully missed the point to begin with. Hawksport has never stated getting any pleasure from an animal getting killed. But of course you don't likek addressing that simple misunderstanding on your crusade to wind people up (as usual).


She only had to do a little bit of research to find that I have spent most of this season training the falcon I'm flying now not to go and kill things because that isn't the part I enjoy.
Never mind, why let facts get in the way when you can just make assumptions about someone you don't even know
That of course is assuming Ang is a she


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Ang2 said:


> Are you purposefully missing the point? My first post said "I cant understand how a supposed animal lover can watch another animal being killed and get pleasure from it".


Who said they did?



Ang2 said:


> Do you think I am single handedly responsible for the way animals destined for the food chain are treated/slaughtered? Do you think its a job I could do/watch? Do you think that if someone eats meat they are automatially subscribed to animal cruelty?


Whether you do something yourself or pay someone else to do it for you the outcome is the same



Ang2 said:


> Going back to the title of this thread 'Ooops'. Some poor dog has had its tongue ripped out which is hardly a call for 'Ooops'!


Get over it


----------



## GingerRogers (Sep 13, 2012)

I have been watching this thread with interest and not really sure what to say in response. I have grown up in the countryside, my OH works for a farmer, he works on a country estate, they run a shoot and he works with a game keeper, I have a admiration for the way hunting breeds, dogs/ferrets/birds whatever, carry out their tasks and being a bumpkin am a bit  at those who oppose these things so strongly - on the other hand we have kept the location of fox dens secret so the gamekeeper doesn't deal with them, OH has spent a long time educating him on the local birds of prey and how to protect his rearing chicks and he does now have an deep admiration for the wildlife he 'patrols' but I openly find the enjoyment he and others take in the control of the deer, foxes, rabbits pretty abhorrent, and totally fail to see the point of the pheasant shoots, especially when they don't eat them 

In response to one point in shadowrats post I totally get why ratting is gruesome to you when you spend so much time caring for them but - wild rats are a real problem (and to my mind almost a different breed to domesticated ones - urgh cant find an emoticon for a shudder ) I would rather see them controlled by dogs/birds/ferrets or whatever natural means than poison or other 'man made' methods - I am not saying that to have a go but it is a contradiction (which you fully admit, I know ) in your post between the beginning where you say (However, hunting when done for a purpose, ie, food, population control, is not the same, for me.) and the end (I think if the people who went ratting actually ate what they killed, it would be different. But it just seems like slaughter, to me.)

To add to the whole thread and those opposed to hunting for sport, I have and still am toying with the idea of working Ginge, this would be considered a sport Yes? she certainly has some natural instinct and *SHE *clearly enjoys doing what her ancestors were bred to do (look in my garden, we have 4 holes, started out as mouse holes which she now patrols on a daily basis, one of which she can now hide in  Are any of these holes in the bit of waste land at the back, no they are all in the 'garden' bit naturally). The only thing stopping me is a (slight) squeamishness, with that and the above in mind I certainly would not enjoy watching an animal die or like the fact that my dog enjoys doing it, but I would *love *the fact that my dog is happy doing what she is bred to do.

I agree with shadowrat on one thing (people seem to think its all a big game, and show glee at the terrified rats trying to escape) - that is the main reason I haven't really taken my thoughts of working her any further because I know what that world is like and know I wouldn't fit in there .


----------



## brackenhwv (Mar 28, 2010)

I know not a lot here have experiance of BOPs, I do , we have 2 harris and a redtail. Anything our birds catch are taken home and used to feed themselves or the ferrets and dogs. What many of you may no realise is that the falconer will head towards the catch to dispatch as soon as possible not stand back and watch the hawk/falcon kill the prey. This is really frowned upon. Bops in captivity are not domestcated or tame as we think, they are still baciscally wild animals whose instinct is to hunt and it is a need to be fufilled, wether on a lure or hunting prey. The enjoyment for most hawkers/falconers is watching the flights of the birds as the arial dislays of a BOP chasing prey can be awesome. all the hunting boys that I know loathe cruelty and care about the animals they have and hunt. And sometimes, like with everything , things happen, especially with animals ,that you can't control, be they cat , dog , horse etc. the situation with the dog and hawk is just that an unfortunate accident.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Ang2 said:


> Are you purposefully missing the point? My first post said "I cant understand how a supposed animal lover can watch another animal being killed and get pleasure from it".
> 
> Do you think I am single handedly responsible for the way animals destined for the food chain are treated/slaughtered? Do you think its a job I could do/watch? Do you think that if someone eats meat they are automatially subscribed to animal cruelty?
> 
> Going back to the title of this thread 'Ooops'. Some poor dog has had its tongue ripped out which is hardly a call for 'Ooops'!


The OP has admitted themselves they weren't sure what to call the thread, and aren't that good with words. And depending where you source your meat, yes, I think you are involved in animal cruelty to a greater or lesser degree. I'm lucky in that I have a butchers about 5 mins away who only stock meat from locations where the animal welfare standards are high, you can actually look at where the meat comes from on their chalk boards, not just 'British' but a farm location. Much different than your two for a fiver supermarket birds which are subjected to awful living conditions, a short life and a nightmare death, although possibly more humane to kill them than allow them to live, poor deformed things that they are. So yes, you are responsible because every single person who purchases animals where they are unaware of the standard of animal husbandry, but happy in that ignorance, contributes towards one of the largest forms of animal cruelty in the country, probably second only to ignorant pet owners who mistreat their pets either through direct abuse or misplaced and inappropriate care, such as overfeeding.



GingerRogers said:


> I have been watching this thread with interest and not really sure what to say in response. I have grown up in the countryside, my OH works for a farmer, he works on a country estate, they run a shoot and he works with a game keeper, I have a admiration for the way hunting breeds, dogs/ferrets/birds whatever, carry out their tasks and being a bumpkin am a bit  at those who oppose these things so strongly - on the other hand we have kept the location of fox dens secret so the gamekeeper doesn't deal with them, OH has spent a long time educating him on the local birds of prey and how to protect his rearing chicks and he does now have an deep admiration for the wildlife he 'patrols' but I openly find the enjoyment he and others take in the control of the deer, foxes, rabbits pretty abhorrent, and totally fail to see the point of the pheasant shoots, especially when they don't eat them
> 
> In response to one point in shadowrats post I totally get why ratting is gruesome to you when you spend so much time caring for them but - wild rats are a real problem (and to my mind almost a different breed to domesticated ones - urgh cant find an emoticon for a shudder ) I would rather see them controlled by dogs/birds/ferrets or whatever natural means than poison or other 'man made' methods - I am not saying that to have a go but it is a contradiction (which you fully admit, I know ) in your post between the beginning where you say (However, hunting when done for a purpose, ie, food, population control, is not the same, for me.) and the end (I think if the people who went ratting actually ate what they killed, it would be different. But it just seems like slaughter, to me.)
> 
> ...


Any of the shoots the OH is involved with either sell their game, or those involved with the shoot get a brace or two to take home. And of the gamekeepers I know, not one would kill a fox just because it is there, or a bird of prey, times are changing for the better. I don't know any shoots that wouldn't find an outlet for the game they shoot, in fact the local butcher stocks game off the shoots round here as well as making some of the best pies in the country. 

Deer need to be controlled otherwise the government steps in, and believe me when I say the gamekeepers and professional stalkers make a much better job of controlling numbers humanely than the means used by the government.


----------



## GingerRogers (Sep 13, 2012)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Any of the shoots the OH is involved with either sell their game, or those involved with the shoot get a brace or two to take home. And of the gamekeepers I know, not one would kill a fox just because it is there, or a bird of prey, times are changing for the better. I don't know any shoots that wouldn't find an outlet for the game they shoot, in fact the local butcher stocks game off the shoots round here as well as making some of the best pies in the country.
> 
> Deer need to be controlled otherwise the government steps in, and believe me when I say the gamekeepers and professional stalkers make a much better job of controlling numbers humanely than the means used by the government.


Unless I am missing your point obviously my 'carefully' worded post didn't come across quite how I intended it 

Of course they sell the birds and I guess I am a hypocrite too  because I am gutted not to get any of the spares since they found a butcher who takes all the surplus game, I meant I fail to see the point for the people who pay £100's if not nearer the £1k mark for a days shoot and often go home with only a brace or none at all . Times are certainly changing for the better which was in my point about how the OH has educated the gamekeeper who now has more appreciation of the animals he controls as part of his remit. I know they don't kill anything just 'because' but when there are problems with the lambs or the birds or it comes time for the deer cull, he is charged with stepping in for what is essentially 'economic' reasons. Its just that he and his cronies take particular pleasure in the process of, not just the tracking and shooting, which I can appreciate they enjoy even if its not something I would take to, but the boasting and racking up of numbers is not something I really care to understand.

One particular time we kept quiet was because we were fairly sure the fox was one of three cubs I had come across several times as they were growing up :001_wub: this was despite the fact that it was quite possibly the reason why hubby had a couple of extra dead lambs to pick up every morning .


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

GingerRogers said:


> but - wild rats are a real problem (and to my mind almost a different breed to domesticated ones - urgh cant find an emoticon for a shudder )


Thats the thing, though....they're not. I think people like to tell themselves they are, I see it a lot, even among some rat people, but the fact is, they're all the same species; rattus norvegicus. Thats the species we have in the UK. The other main species, rattus rattus (the black rat, the one falsely blamed for the plague) is so rare here as to be thought almost extinct, and is one of our rarest mammals. You're so lucky if you ever see one.
But the species you'll see is the brown rat, same species as all pet rats and all lab rats.

One is just a domesticated version bred in pretty colours for the last hundred years or so and had better PR. There isn't much difference between a wild and domestic rat. In fact, a close friend of mine owns several half wild and full wild rats as pets that she saved. They don't act much different, if at all, from her domesticated rats. The behavioural differences there are are minor enough that only rat people would notice them.

I have a half wild rat too, Worf (domestic mummy, wild daddy) This is he:










He's a babe. Now....looking at him, can you see any difference between him and a 'sewer' rat? Nope, I can't either. If you saw him wandering about, you'd probably shudder at him too, but he's a complete doll.

The main difference between the two is their attitude to people. Domestic rats are bred to be comfortable with us, wild rats tend to fear us and try to avoid us. But hell, I've had some domestics that acted like nut cases that had never been handled, and known some wildies who were pretty chilled out around humans! I've had an abused domestic rip a hole in my hand, but the wildies I've dealt with have been far too timid to even want to approach me.

And the other difference is disease. Pet rats can't transmit anything to their humans. Wild rats can carry a couple of diseases, but no more than any other wild animal (foxes, squirrels, etc, they all carry something) and the risks of disease from a wild rat are hugely overstated. Only 14% of wild rats actually carry weils (most people's main fear) and there were only 50-60 cases of weils in humans across england and wales each year, thats about one case per million people, per year. A drop in the ocean when you consider how many cases of diseases from human to human there were, or even dog or cat to human. I fear humans giving me disease moreso than rats!

I don't expect everyone to love rats, or to welcome them into their homes, but I do wish people would learn a bit more about them rather than just going along with the media hype and thinking all wildies are red eyed, evil, fanged beasts dripping with disease who are all lurking in your walls waiting for you to come home so they can attack you. 
They, like wolves, are hugely misunderstood animals who generally flee from humans, and want to be left alone.

I understand this appeals to people more than Worf, though 










Not having a go, I just get disheartened when people think rats are all gross, or that they're a vastly different species to what you see above. The truth is, they're not. Little man above is as much rat as what you see in the sewers and barns, he's just been bred to be a silly colour and have silly shaped ears  (he was also very unwell from day one, hence the anaemia)


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

GingerRogers said:


> Unless I am missing your point obviously my 'carefully' worded post didn't come across quite how I intended it
> 
> Of course they sell the birds and I guess I am a hypocrite too  because I am gutted not to get any of the spares since they found a butcher who takes all the surplus game, I meant I fail to see the point for the people who pay £100's if not nearer the £1k mark for a days shoot and often go home with only a brace or none at all . Times are certainly changing for the better which was in my point about how the OH has educated the gamekeeper who now has more appreciation of the animals he controls as part of his remit. I know they don't kill anything just 'because' but when there are problems with the lambs or the birds or it comes time for the deer cull, he is charged with stepping in for what is essentially 'economic' reasons. Its just that he and his cronies take particular pleasure in the process of, not just the tracking and shooting, which I can appreciate they enjoy even if its not something I would take to, but the boasting and racking up of numbers is not something I really care to understand.
> 
> One particular time we kept quiet was because we were fairly sure the fox was one of three cubs I had come across several times as they were growing up :001_wub: this was despite the fact that it was quite possibly the reason why hubby had a couple of extra dead lambs to pick up every morning .


I did think when you put that they didn't eat them, that they didn't get eaten 

It's not uncommon for some guns to go home empty handed, they simply enjoy the challenge of shooting a bird, but you do get those who are what would be termed as 'unsporting'; the OH comes across them from time to time when he goes shooting, and he hasn't got the time of day for them. One particular guy who shot everything that moved even when it was far too close, asked the OH to send his dog to retrieve a bird he'd shot at close range, to which the OH replied 'which bit', and walked off.

I suppose as far as numbers go, it's all part of the whole process, you wouldn't boast about culling a fawn, but if you stalked and shot ten stags you'd probably, as a hunter, feel you'd gone after an animal that had at least lived a bit, and had chance to mature into a nice animal, and yes, unfortunately to meet numbers, sometimes hinds/does and young are culled. Still better than the alternative.


----------



## GingerRogers (Sep 13, 2012)

Shadowrat said:


> Thats the thing, though....they're not. I think people like to tell themselves they are, I see it a lot, even among some rat people, but the fact is, they're all the same species; rattus norvegicus. Thats the species we have in the UK. The other main species, rattus rattus (the black rat, the one falsely blamed for the plague) is so rare here as to be thought almost extinct, and is one of our rarest mammals. You're so lucky if you ever see one.
> But the species you'll see is the brown rat, same species as all pet rats and all lab rats.
> 
> One is just a domesticated version bred in pretty colours for the last hundred years or so and had better PR. There isn't much difference between a wild and domestic rat. In fact, a close friend of mine owns several half wild and full wild rats as pets that she saved. They don't act much different, if at all, from her domesticated rats. The behavioural differences there are are minor enough that only rat people would notice them.
> ...


I knew I would offend and I really didn't want to I think Worf looks lovely (nicer than scoot actually) I don't have a thing about rats in general, but sorry IMO the rats I saw about the farm and that lived in my loft and woke me up in the night threatening to fall through the ceiling and that cause my shudders look nothing like him (in my head ) , same colour but no they are evil looking creepy things with bashed in faces ready to jump at my jugular, unless that really is just a perception I have  given that they do live in sewers and try to jump in my bed. I might shut up now!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Poor little dog, that is absolutely horrific, i really hope the hawk is spared though.



GingerRogers said:


> Unless I am missing your point obviously my 'carefully' worded post didn't come across quite how I intended it
> 
> Of course they sell the birds and I guess I am a hypocrite too  because I am gutted not to get any of the spares since they found a butcher who takes all the surplus game, I meant I fail to see the point for the people who pay £100's if not nearer the £1k mark for a days shoot and often go home with only a brace or none at all . Times are certainly changing for the better which was in my point about how the OH has educated the gamekeeper who now has more appreciation of the animals he controls as part of his remit. I know they don't kill anything just 'because' but when there are problems with the lambs or the birds or it comes time for the deer cull, he is charged with stepping in for what is essentially 'economic' reasons. Its just that he and his cronies take particular pleasure in the process of, not just the tracking and shooting, which I can appreciate they enjoy even if its not something I would take to, but the boasting and racking up of numbers is not something I really care to understand.
> 
> One particular time we kept quiet was because we were fairly sure the fox was one of three cubs I had come across several times as they were growing up :001_wub: this was despite the fact that it was quite possibly the reason why hubby had a couple of extra dead lambs to pick up every morning .


Well I dont think youre an hypocrite lol. Actually in the UK game birds arnt a popular meat so most never enter the food chain here. BASC 'claim' that 80% of birds killed are exported to the continent, they use to end up in buriel pits so it would be nice if they could provide evidence of this. The money isnt made from the meat its made from people who pay for the 'pleasure' of shooting the poor things.

On Englands driven Grouse moors, which should be prime habitat for our most endangered raptors, they have all but been eradicated.

Predator control is ruthless.

.


----------



## GingerRogers (Sep 13, 2012)

When I first started working on the estate 10 years ago I was told each pheasant bird was worth £17 in price to rear and price to shoot, that got me slowing down in my car! I have no idea how much it is now but with the price of grain presumably reflected in the shoot price a lot, lot, more I reckon.

I think the wild food enthusiasts have increased the popularity of game in the UK in recent years as I say the last couple of years they have a butcher who buys the lot off them, admittedly for only about 20p a bird, if that, it is not a money earner, before they couldn't give it away so we had roast pheasant several times a month as well as partridge, pigeon (yum), goose and duck.


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

GingerRogers said:


> I knew I would offend and I really didn't want to I think Worf looks lovely (nicer than scoot actually) I don't have a thing about rats in general, but sorry IMO the rats I saw about the farm and that lived in my loft and woke me up in the night threatening to fall through the ceiling and that cause my shudders look nothing like him (in my head ) , same colour but no they are evil looking creepy things with bashed in faces ready to jump at my jugular, unless that really is just a perception I have  given that they do live in sewers and try to jump in my bed. I might shut up now!


Oh, Im not offended, Im used to it, and I can tell you have no real malice toward rats, I don't expect everyone to love them. 
Its the people who just want to leap to slaughter straight away, or believe everything they read, or think its ok to inflict abuse on this species that they'd never tolerate on a dog or cat that bug me.

But I'd say its mainly your perception, as there really is no visual difference between a wild rat and an agouti domestic rat  
They can live in sewers, sure. But the reason they do is because its safe from humans and they can be left alone. They're smart enough to know we don't go down there, its not that they love filth, they just know its safe. 
They also live in woodland, and prefer this set up ideally. Its just that we encroach so much into their homes that they're forced more and more to live alongside us, and they choose to do so in the way that will keep them best hidden: underground.

Below is the little wildie who used to live in my shed, she is 100% wild, and I can't see any difference between her and any of my pet agoutis. In fact, when I first saw her, I panicked and thought one of mine had escaped! It was only when I checked my lot that I realised she was a wild girl. Her behaviour was far more timid, too. It took about 6 months to get her to the point where she'd sit like this and look at me. Prior to that, she'd scarper and hide her head whenever I appeared :laugh: (excuse the blood, when she first appeared, she had an injured toe)










But these are just some of my agoutis over the years, and Im stumped on seeing a difference:



























I think wild rats are possibly more likely to be in poor condition, maybe not always as plump with as nice coats, but you can trust me when I say they're physically no different to a pet rat. 
In fact, the similarities are so huge that rescuers like me can have an issue when someone calls up about what they think is a released domestic rat that needs saving. If that rat is an agouti in colouration, it can be extremely hard to tell if it is a released pet or a genuine wild rat.

But I won't take this further off topic. I just hope one day people will respect rats like they respect other british wildlife like hedgehogs, foxes, birds etc. They're no different, they just don't have the PR that other species get!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

In my ideal world no animal would ever be killed, but its not ideal so imo the most eco friendly meat is true wild game such as rabbits, these animals are left to their own devices & not managed by gamekeepers. The gamebird industry is built upon cruelty & suffering, all this talk of gamekeepers controlling wildlife is ridiculous when millions of gamebirds are released into the countryside every year, this 'control' is extremely one sided. I think its dreadful that our indiginous predators are ruthlessly persecuted so people can 'enjoy' a days killing.

Definition of a blood sport.. Cambridge dictionary....

any sport that involves animals being killed or hurt to make the people watching or taking part feel excitement

No i'll never understand how people can find pleasure in taking an animals life, that feeling is alien to me ,thank god.

.


----------



## Goldstar (Nov 12, 2011)

Shadowrat - they are all gorgeous. Brings back memories of my beautiful boys Colin an albino and Wilson an agouti.
They were my last ever rats. Wilson had a brain tumour and had to be PTS. He wasn't even 2 years old 
Colin died of old age a few weeks before 

I'd love more but their short lives just breaks my heart. 

Next door still has their little visitor. I watch him sometimes and he acts and looks the same as my Wilson did. Potter around, having a little wash now and then. Almost makes me want to steal him (obviously I couldnt) but the memories he brings back are very sad.


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2012)

I wonder how far removed you have to be from Mother Nature to be offended at an animal killing another. Its not about getting a thrill from watching it happen, its about having a certain respect for how the animal world works, and for an animal doing efficiently and often very beautifully, what it was designed to do. 

Do people not understand that when your cute little fluffy pup pounces on his favorite toy and shakes it, thats predatory behavior?


----------



## momentofmadness (Jul 19, 2008)

Far too many people wander around this world thinking they have all rights and have no consideration/respect for other people or property..


^^^Sickening... 

There are mineshafts and al sorts on some farmers land... I remember a friend riding on a field she shouldn't and her pony fell down a shaft.. took the fire brigade to get the pony out.. Her mother was saying she was gona Sue the owner of the field.. when in reality he could of had her daughter charged for trespassing...

I think we all loose sight of things.. 


If the dog was on private property without permission and the bird was there with permission.. then the bird is not at fault.. Thats the black and white...

But obviously we all feel for both animals..


----------



## momentofmadness (Jul 19, 2008)

Another thought..

Hawksports title.. It got all of your attention.. and isn't that what titles are there for..


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

There was once a time when people took responsibility for their own actions, then came no win no fee


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

ouesi said:


> I wonder how far removed you have to be from Mother Nature to be offended at an animal killing another. Its not about getting a thrill from watching it happen, its about having a certain respect for how the animal world works, and for an animal doing efficiently and often very beautifully, what it was designed to do.
> 
> Do people not understand that when your cute little fluffy pup pounces on his favorite toy and shakes it, thats predatory behavior?


I cant speak for anyone else but wild animals predating other wild animals in a food chain certainly doesnt offend me. Infact many of my favourite species happen to be predators. I have respect for the chap who goes out & kills for the pot, hes far removed from those who support industries where animals are hunted primarily for entertainment purposes & at the detriment of wild predators.


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

Goldstar said:


> Shadowrat - they are all gorgeous. Brings back memories of my beautiful boys Colin an albino and Wilson an agouti.
> They were my last ever rats. Wilson had a brain tumour and had to be PTS. He wasn't even 2 years old
> Colin died of old age a few weeks before
> 
> ...


Yeah, its their one downfall. You grow to love them as much as a dog, or even human family member, but they barely live over 2  I've lost a lot lately, old age and such. When you have so many, and they're all rescues who have not had great starts, you lose them a lot  
Its really sad, but the one thing I can glean from it is that when one passes, its a space for another needy rat to come in.
We're off to Bury St Edmunds to pick up another ratty in need tomorrow.


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2012)

Shadowrat said:


> Yeah, its their one downfall. You grow to love them as much as a dog, or even human family member, but they barely live over 2  I've lost a lot lately, old age and such. When you have so many, and they're all rescues who have not had great starts, you lose them a lot
> Its really sad, but the one thing I can glean from it is that when one passes, its a space for another needy rat to come in.
> We're off to Bury St Edmunds to pick up another ratty in need tomorrow.


Thats why I could never own a rat. I miss my hamsters like crazy and feel like a part of me is missing and it flew by, and rats have about the same life span. Its too hard when they go so soon  Also my Mum hates rats they just aren`t "Her" sort of pet. I love rats and would love to own some but I think their life span is just too short for me.


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

New Puppy Mum said:


> Thats why I could never own a rat. I miss my hamsters like crazy and feel like a part of me is missing and it flew by, and rats have about the same life span. Its too hard when they go so soon  Also my Mum hates rats they just aren`t "Her" sort of pet. I love rats and would love to own some but I think their life span is just too short for me.


Yeah, 2-3 years is nothing for an animal you get SO attached to.
They are _very_ different to hamsters though. Their personalities are more like dogs than any other small furry, they really bond with their owners and are so intelligent. 
In some ways, certain rats of mine have shown intelligence greater than that of my dog. 
I remember one time I gave one of my boys a bonio biscuit, and he tried to carry it into his bed, but it wouldn't fit through the door.
Whereas my dog in a similar situation wouldn't understand why he couldn't get through the door and would keep trying to push through with it in his mouth, the rat simply stopped, turned his head to the side and passed right through!
I was rather impressed.


----------



## Firedog (Oct 19, 2011)

Shadowrat i am inclined to agree with you about what you are saying about rats.Compared to rats hamsters are dumb.I used to have rats many years ago and i have always said they are like small dogs.I loved my rats so much and miss them alot but i became highly allergic and unfortunately had to rehome them and i have never been able to touch one since.I would be interested too know how the wild/domestic mating came about.


----------



## blitzens mum (Jul 15, 2012)

man was made to hunt simple,there hasn't always been supermarkets and corner shops if animals and men hunt to feed themselves then whats the problem, i have seen hawks kill in the wild after having lived in scotland for years and it is quick, 
i have also been to an abbatoir and to be honest its not pleasant at all, we can all live in delusion of where our meat comes from but at the end of the day it comes from animals that are bred for it or hunted


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2012)

Shadowrat said:


> Yeah, 2-3 years is nothing for an animal you get SO attached to.
> They are _very_ different to hamsters though. Their personalities are more like dogs than any other small furry, they really bond with their owners and are so intelligent.
> In some ways, certain rats of mine have shown intelligence greater than that of my dog.
> I remember one time I gave one of my boys a bonio biscuit, and he tried to carry it into his bed, but it wouldn't fit through the door.
> ...


I understand they are different to hamsters. No 2 species are the same. 
I wouldn`t consider hamsters to be dumb, my hamsters like all hammys, stored food in case they run out and when they went under furniture when free roaming they knew they had to come out for example however I understand rats may be more intelligent but if I was to get another rodent then it would probably be another hammy. I`ve never touched a rat never mind owned one but from what I`ve read their lovely. I do get annoyed when people (Not on here on websites I`ve been looking at) compare species because a hamster like you say, is nothing like a rat, so its really quite absurd to compare them. Your rats are lovely though x


----------



## WelshOneEmma (Apr 11, 2009)

Shadowrat said:


> Yeah, its their one downfall. You grow to love them as much as a dog, or even human family member, but they barely live over 2  I've lost a lot lately, old age and such. When you have so many, and they're all rescues who have not had great starts, you lose them a lot
> Its really sad, but the one thing I can glean from it is that when one passes, its a space for another needy rat to come in.
> We're off to Bury St Edmunds to pick up another ratty in need tomorrow.


We used to have rats (hubby always wanted them growing up but wasnt allowed). Funnily enough our cats seemed to know the difference as one was a real hunter and would catch wild rats if they were in the garden, but was never interested in the pet ones.

We had one who lived for nearly 4 years and we had to have her put down in the end. I didnt want to, but she had respiratory disease and tumour the size of a tennis ball and the vets said it wasnt fair. We had 4 sisters living with her too and they all died at about 2 years old. We decided after that to not have any more.

However, when it comes to our kids wanting a pet we have decided they cant have a hamster but they can have rats - when they are old enough.


----------



## blitzens mum (Jul 15, 2012)

rats are awesome pets i used to rescue and re home them from all over the uk and i hate the stigma attatched to them, at one point i had 22 of them and nearly every one of them knew thier names and would come if i called them


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

momentofmadness said:


> Another thought..
> 
> Hawksports title.. It got all of your attention.. and isn't that what titles are there for..


He could have used the title "Free Sex" and avoided the argument.. or at least got into a different argument.


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2012)

I never said I was offended by wild predators killing. However, I do not enjoy it, do not get 'enjoyment' from watching the 'skill'. I am old and have seen many deaths, I know what has to be done. The sooner the prey is killed, the less chance the predator, quite often smaller, is likely to be hurt. I understood and could see what was being done, many, many years ago. I understood what was happening. There is no point in continually watching, unless you still don't understand what is going on, or you are actually enjoying it. To be still watching it, in middle age, with admiration, does mirror a personality I don't want to claim as mine. 

The title of this thread has nothing to do with word skills. It is flippant, uncaring and offensive. NO ONE, appalled by an animals suffering, whether or not either animal/owner was at fault, would think 'oops'. It's not the word I would be screaming, and without the implied smirk. I don't think the BOP should be put down. It shouldn't be an option.

BOP are magnificent. I just wish they could live in healthy populations, wild and unharried by the greedy and morons who want total control of the land they legally own, or again the primitive morons who want to boast they kill predators of all kinds and therefore are alpha men. 

I have to say, some BOP owners do seem to think controlling such birds somehow makes them 'real', alpha men, and some I think have simply escaped from the dress up, historic re enactors of pre 18th century battles, and gone looking for a trump for wearing armour and waving swords and brandishing bows and arrows. The enactors, you really have to be a little fond of, it's really the fantasy we all had, as 7 yr olds, and the earnest bickering about who wears what, really takes you back to really intelligent and obsessive 7 yos, and apart from a few self inflicted injuries, they are often the meekest and gentlest accountants and public servants.

I do understand the deep distress of knowing rats are seen as literally vermin, and worthy of no consideration. I SO OFTEN wish I could somehow offer a gentle cared for life, in return for no breeding. Sadly, if they didn't have the hormones rushing, I think many rats are intelligent enough, if they could understand the offer, to see the it as a viable, acceptable offer - or at least, the females would... :laugh:


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

househens said:


> I never said I was offended by wild predators killing. However, I do not enjoy it, do not get 'enjoyment' from watching the 'skill'. I am old and have seen many deaths, I know what has to be done. The sooner the prey is killed, the less chance the predator, quite often smaller, is likely to be hurt. I understood and could see what was being done, many, many years ago. I understood what was happening. There is no point in continually watching, unless you still don't understand what is going on, or you are actually enjoying it. To be still watching it, in middle age, with admiration, does mirror a personality I don't want to claim as mine.
> 
> The title of this thread has nothing to do with word skills. It is flippant, uncaring and offensive. NO ONE, appalled by an animals suffering, whether or not either animal/owner was at fault, would think 'oops'. It's not the word I would be screaming, and without the implied smirk. I don't think the BOP should be put down. It shouldn't be an option.
> 
> ...


BOP do live in healthy populations, some species to the degree that they are becoming a nuisance.

I've looked death square in the face a few times, and I stand by my principles that I would rather see a bird shot cleanly out of the sky, than farmed.

The title of this thread has been explained by the OP several times, why it's not understood still, is beyond me.


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2012)

househens said:


> The title of this thread has nothing to do with word skills. It is flippant, uncaring and offensive. NO ONE, appalled by an animals suffering, whether or not either animal/owner was at fault, would think 'oops'.


Not everyone reacts to tragedy the same way though do they?

I have driven by a terrible looking car wreck on the interstate and said oops, thats gotta hurt. Not meant disrespectfully or flippantly to the victims, just how I tend to react to something very upsetting.
People who work as first responders, police officers, emergency medical personnel... Spend a day with them, around their humor, and youd think theyre the most uncaring, callous bunch of people in existence. Theyre not, its just how they cope.

I wouldnt judge someone on their choice of words or because they dont show emotions how you think they should


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2012)

The explanation for the title is a complete DUD. It was clearly what expressed his opinion of the incident, and he? has backed off it, because of the offence caused. The psychology of the choice has NOTHING to do with vocabulary. Oops is simply not a word used by the horrified, saddened, regretful, distressed. It's universally chosen to imply an unimportant or slightly amusing mistake. So, no, the excuse given, after, when pulled up by it, by a number of people, isn't believable or accepted.

Can anyone name an incident, anywhere in the world, where there has been a distressing violence or suffering witnessed, and ANYONE involved or observing, has been heard screaming OOPS? See someone split their pants, a bosom fall out, asking a non pregnant woman when she is due... THAT is oops... 

No distress at the dog, just a rather savage observation that HE? wouldn't be pay for anything, and basically saying they deserved what they got, as they had no right to be there. The title hasn't been dropped as a subject, because it IS offensive. 

I am well aware of the black humour of emergency services, I know a number of the volunteers for car accidents, bushfires, etc, and at no time, in an incident causing suffering, have I ever heard the term, oops used. It has been used in relief, when a potentially terrible accident has proved to be frightening but with only minor or no injuries. It is, in it's very nature, a frivolous word.

I DON'T understand WHY the information had to be shared on a pet lovers forum, anyway. To warn us all to scan the skies in terror, falling down dips in paddocks, on every walk, JUST IN CASE some middle aged man with a fantasy of being a Feudal Lord, is letting his metaphorical, huge p***s out for a romp?


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> BOP do live in healthy populations


Apart from hen harriers and white- tailed eagles - I wonder why that is?



Sleeping_Lion said:


> I've looked death square in the face a few times, and I stand by my principles that I would rather see a bird shot cleanly out of the sky, than farmed.


So it can safely be assumed that you're against the pheasent and partridge industry? where the birds are farmed (often intensively and often abroad) before being released to be shot 'cleanly' out of the sky.


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2012)

Househens, Im impressed that you are able to glean that much information about the character of a person based on a few forum posts.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

househens said:


> The explanation for the title is a complete DUD. It was clearly what expressed his opinion of the incident, and he? has backed off it, because of the offence caused. The psychology of the choice has NOTHING to do with vocabulary. Oops is simply not a word used by the horrified, saddened, regretful, distressed. It's universally chosen to imply an unimportant or slightly amusing mistake. So, no, the excuse given, after, when pulled up by it, by a number of people, isn't believable or accepted.
> 
> Can anyone name an incident, anywhere in the world, where there has been a distressing violence or suffering witnessed, and ANYONE involved or observing, has been heard screaming OOPS? See someone split their pants, a bosom fall out, asking a non pregnant woman when she is due... THAT is oops...
> 
> ...


The OP explained their title, why you need to question it is up to your integrity, not theirs.



lennythecloud said:


> Apart from hen harriers and white- tailed eagles - I wonder why that is?
> 
> So it can safely be assumed that you're against the pheasent and partridge industry? where the birds are farmed (often intensively and often abroad) before being released to be shot 'cleanly' out of the sky.


I WONDERED when this would come up, nope, many game keepers are not against hen harriers, and the RSPB allowed the predation of hen harrier chicks and eggs on their own reserve by an alien species. How many people think of the RSPB as anti BOP?

No idea with sea eagles, not something I've looked into, they're nowhere near where I live, I do know they were reintroduced without local consultation in Scotland, so unsurprised there has been some persecution of the species.

Sorry, but the shoots I know raise their own chicks, and whilst I'm fully against importing eggs and poults from abroad where there are intensive farming practices, can you tell me how much worse those practices are against intensive chicken rearing practices?


----------



## LexiLou2 (Mar 15, 2011)

For all those people that think 'blood sports' are horrendous but are happy to sit eating their supermarket bought chicken have you any idea how these chickens are reared??
My grandad was a chicken farmer, and a good quality chicken farmer, not free range but ethical. The chicks arrive into the sheds at a day old, there are heaters, food and water pumped continously into the sheds, by 6 weeks old these chickens are fully grown, and loaded into crates where they are taken to slaughter.
So the average chicken you get from the supermarket will be no more that 6 weeks old, even the ethically raised ones. The only time they will have seen outdoors is their trip to the shed and the trip to the slaughter house.
Your free range chickens will be a bit older, they are normally at slaughter size at no more than 4 months.
The average grouse is about 12 months old when shot, pheasents slightly less, and have lived the majority of their lives if not all their lives as the should do out on the moors
Yes as a child I was there and have witnessed chickens been slaughtered, was it pleasent not massively, but I know where my food comes from, I was brought up around farms, I have seen calves born and cows slaughtered, i have seen chicks hatch and chickens be slaughtered I have seen terriers ratting and guns out on a shoot.
For all those that are quick to judge a blood sport, go watch you cow been slaughtered, and the chickens, then attend a shoot and you tell me which is more humane, which animal is less stressed?
You say prey animals feel stress when been hunted, how so you think your cows, sheep, chickens (yes even your free range one) feel been loaded into trucks and vans and driven to the slaughter house? That stress has to last a lot longer than the minute or so the rabbit or grouse etc feels stressed for?!


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> I WONDERED when this would come up, nope, many game keepers are not against hen harriers, and the RSPB allowed the predation of hen harrier chicks and eggs on their own reserve by an alien species. How many people think of the RSPB as anti BOP?


Eagle owls are not the reason hen harriers are so close to English extinction and if it wasn't for the RSPB they almost certainly would be extinct. What to do about eagle owls isn't the RSPBs call, that's up to DEFRA.



Sleeping_Lion said:


> No idea with sea eagles, not something I've looked into, they're nowhere near where I live, I do know they were reintroduced without local consultation in Scotland, so unsurprised there has been some persecution of the species.


Absolutely no reason why they shouldn't have been re-introduced, they are native and should have been there all along.



Sleeping_Lion said:


> Sorry, but the shoots I know raise their own chicks, and whilst I'm fully against importing eggs and poults from abroad where there are intensive farming practices, can you tell me how much worse those practices are against intensive chicken rearing practices?


If shoots you know raise their own chicks then they aint from the wild and are therefore farmed. Why not just slaughter them in the pens?

Intensive game farms are not restricted to abroad, DEFRA states that the biggest cage systems in the UK produce up to 3 million eggs EACH per year. Defra also states that over 40 million FARMED game birds are released to be shot each year.

It's pretty damning if you're putting the practices of the gamebird industry on a par with the caged hen industry. Intensive phessie rearing and chicken rearing are just as bad as each other - apart from that phessies are not included in the recent EU welfare changes to caged chickens nor do caged chickens have specticles and bits fitted that routinely cause injury to their beak structures. The consumer also has no way to distiguish the birds that are 'ethically' farmed from those that are not - most don't even know that they are farmed due to the industry making out like millions of non-native birds appear by magic in the british countryside each year.

DEFRA doc page 9 - http://archive.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/farmanimal/welfare/documents/ia-gamebirds100915.pdf


----------



## Guest (Nov 10, 2012)

As I said, there are free range properties that have approved portable slaughter/butchers come to their properties, the animals don't leave the property, have LESS than a minutes foreknowledge of danger. The meat is sold direct to the public, often shipped, and altho it isn't cheap, it isn't outrageously expensive, as the farmer gets all the profit.

Pigeons, too, are eaten at 6 weeks, just feathered up, never to fly. It is awful. I don't eat em. 

My major guilt is cheese and milk. If there was anyone who had a house cow, that didn't bobby calf, I would go to them and buy direct, but I'm in a dry hot area, and no one bothers with housecows, as they make it awkward to go anywhere without a major organisation.

None of my animals are slaughtered. They are all here until illness, accident or old age can no longer be treated. My sheep are true pets, and I would no sooner eat sheep, as dogs. My hen eggs are sterile, as I don't have a rooster. In fact, my hens, all 3 of them, haven't laid in 11 months, spend 1/2 the day trying to come in the house, and have been known to bully my little terrier out of her dog bed, and hog it. I spend a lot of time yelling at them to go and behave like normal chooks, or grinning when they sprint to me, like huge bosomy Women's Institute ladies, with skirts hitched up, showing scrawny marathon runner's legs. Or I see them very busily sunning themselves, or see them sending up clouds of dirt, as they reenact the last week before The Great Escape breakout. Luckily, they can all be one of the three Home Runs of the Great Escape. They sneak inside, and PRETEND to be laying eggs under the coffee table, but I suspect that's to watch tv. They watch a lot of quizz shows and military doco's and when they first experienced the ceiling fan last summer, I swear I heard one of them scream INCOMING, as they ran for sofas. I enjoy laughing at them, but I'm not anthropomorphic, just find them all such a laugh, and could never kill any of them, unless to prevent suffering. Think I'd have to find someone. I don't think I could do it. My sheep usually are PTS at the vets, with needle, and buried, and feed a fruit tree. I rescue worms from drowning, and from birds, if I see them first, and I think my small world is pretty good. I DO feel bad about meat eating pets, but they do eat a lot of the unwanted scraps of wastage from slaughter, that humans in the 1st world won't eat. 

Cheesy cauliflower and roast spuds beat anything flesh, by millions of miles. When I have no eggs, I buy from a neighbour who has backyard chooks and no rooster. I don't have leather shoes, or leather coats, or leather furniture.

I feed native galahs, cockatoos and native, top knotted pigeons, (plus other species), and periodically BOP will come here, when desperate, and pick off a feeding bird. They are under huge pressure. It is a privilege, they are hunting very successful species, but it is also distressing to see. I watched a few, early on, learnt a lot, tho it distressed me, and now, I try not to see anything. I know when a BOP is about, as suddenly, my backyard is empty and silent, and the hens come inside, or sit under the picnic table.


----------



## momentofmadness (Jul 19, 2008)

OOOPspub.com...


----------



## Guest (Nov 10, 2012)

I do know about the psychology of what draws a lot of men to working with birds of prey. Granted not all, but a good proportion. It doesn't mean they aren't highly responsible owners. The condition, health... The admiration of those who are knowledgeable is worth far more than ignorant admiration, to those who aspire to be the best in everything. 

I know the issue of trust has to be earnt and that you AREN'T an alpha male because you APPEAR to be in control of a magnificent BOP. Yet to the ignorant public, BOP ownership is a complete and exotic mystery. You are still a centre of attention, of admiring ignorance and curiosity. You still get that psychological pay off. Whether or not, behind the scenes you are basically the 24 hour servant to an evolutionarily evolved killer chook.

Just as I know a V8 car does not mean a man is alpha, nor a ridiculously expensive and impractical sports car. Nor is anyone fooled that a wealthy, wizened old man with a 25 yr old playboy bunny is a great lover, or has her for any other reason than great wealth or power. Nor does wearing 2 kgs of vulgar jewellery announce anything more than you have more money than taste, and a pretty vacuous intellect BUT it does attract those same uneducated, tasteless and vacuous, who equate that to ultimate success, and to them, this is advertising alpha status.

You DO have a glamorous, and to the ignorant, dangerous and impressive dog. I adore dobes, incredibly intelligent, and when well socialised, fabulous, calm dogs, but you DO have a dog that sends a frisson of fear or ignorant excitement through the great uneducated, nondoggy populace. I didn't want to get to individuals, and I'm not angry or aggressive OR wanting to be smart a*se here, but if we look at the photos/bits and pieces that people choose to use to identify themselves on pf, or to belong, we have those who don't bother, not worried about quickly finding or attracting those of similar interests, or announcing their interests, then we get those who want to attract those with similar dogs, or just I am a doggy person/cat person, usually puppy shot/cute shot/one of each shot. We unconsciously choose the shot we want identified with us. The photo of our pet as we want the world to see identified with US. eg NO ONE puts up a permanent photo of a dog looking uncared for and frighteningly thin and scared - unless next to the 'after' shot, to show the miracle worked...

You have your birds of prey, BIG attention getter, but you want to identify with all other BOP owners, the extra attention, you never asked for... but I just don't recall, and it MAY be MY memory at fault, but no one else, no matter how successful, put up their dog's photo, not happy, at ease, cute, but sitting in front of a wheelbarrow of silver plate, which IMPLIES they won... You can be proud of your dog, but it isn't your stud's home page. This is a very strong pointer to how your ego is connected to your dog. We all like to feel we are represented by the images we choose, and the things we own. We choose, even when we aren't aware of what we are doing. Our houses, cars, the dogs we choose. The obsession with a breed, with purebreds, with scruffy junkyard dogs, wth small fluffy girly dogs, with dogs of one type, or a mad bag of anything needing a safe place to live. Dogs are very telling, as there is such a range.

I do think you identity yourself through the magnificent animals you choose. You aren't alone, and you clearly want them to be deeply admired, so take great care of them, but to deny that, is to have very little knowledge of the human psyche.

PS memory at fault. Dog sitting BEHIND, (yes, I could query the actual subject of the photo), silver plate, and I had thought there was much more, in the background. NOT a dig, just remembered lots of silver. I'm sure completely deserved. I've told you I think your dog IS magnificent, and magnificently turned out, but I would have said that, if he'd only been a pet. He is magnificent.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

househens said:


> I never said I was offended by wild predators killing. However, I do not enjoy it, do not get 'enjoyment' from watching the 'skill'. I am old and have seen many deaths, I know what has to be done. The sooner the prey is killed, the less chance the predator, quite often smaller, is likely to be hurt. I understood and could see what was being done, many, many years ago. I understood what was happening. There is no point in continually watching, unless you still don't understand what is going on, or you are actually enjoying it. To be still watching it, in middle age, with admiration, does mirror a personality I don't want to claim as mine.


I find it quite sad that you don't admire nature and millions of years of evolution



househens said:


> The title of this thread has nothing to do with word skills. It is flippant, uncaring and offensive. NO ONE, appalled by an animals suffering, whether or not either animal/owner was at fault, would think 'oops'. It's not the word I would be screaming, and without the implied smirk. I don't think the BOP should be put down. It shouldn't be an option.


Another assumption, the last person that did that has an 11 page diary to show just how wrong their assumption was. I doubt they will bother though 



househens said:


> BOP are magnificent. I just wish they could live in healthy populations, wild and unharried by the greedy and morons who want total control of the land they legally own, or again the primitive morons who want to boast they kill predators of all kinds and therefore are alpha men.


So do I or I wouldn't of spent 3 years feeding the first pair of Buzzards that came here to get them to stay. I now get to see a dozen or more every day. That sometimes means I have to wait for them to move on before I can fly but that's no problem. I've not seen them make a kill yet but I hope to



househens said:


> I have to say, some BOP owners do seem to think controlling such birds somehow makes them 'real', alpha men, and some I think have simply escaped from the dress up, historic re enactors of pre 18th century battles, and gone looking for a trump for wearing armour and waving swords and brandishing bows and arrows. The enactors, you really have to be a little fond of, it's really the fantasy we all had, as 7 yr olds, and the earnest bickering about who wears what, really takes you back to really intelligent and obsessive 7 yos, and apart from a few self inflicted injuries, they are often the meekest and gentlest accountants and public servants.


If you had the slightest clue what you were talking about you would know that the relationship between a falconer and the falcon was heavily biased in favour of the falcon. A falcon or hawk won't do anything for it's owner all it is interested in is serving itself. I gave up my job, holidays. my free time and a fair bit of money to serve my hawks and falcons, every day of my life revolves around them. They control me. If i really wanted to control something to be the "alpha man" I'd buy myself a big dog


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

househens said:


> I do know about the psychology of what draws a lot of men to working with birds of prey. Granted not all, but a good proportion. It doesn't mean they aren't highly responsible owners. The condition, health... The admiration of those who are knowledgeable is worth far more than ignorant admiration, to those who aspire to be the best in everything.
> 
> I know the issue of trust has to be earnt and that you AREN'T an alpha male because you APPEAR to be in control of a magnificent BOP. Yet to the ignorant public, BOP ownership is a complete and exotic mystery. You are still a centre of attention, of admiring ignorance and curiosity. You still get that psychological pay off. Whether or not, behind the scenes you are basically the 24 hour servant to an evolutionarily evolved killer chook.


How can we be the centre of attention when what we do is done away from the public 

*BOP ownership is a complete and exotic mystery* It is which is why I made a thread detailing the preparation and training of Kane for anyone that was interested although some would assume that was done to get attention



househens said:


> Just as I know a V8 car does not mean a man is alpha, nor a ridiculously expensive and impractical sports car. Nor is anyone fooled that a wealthy, wizened old man with a 25 yr old playboy bunny is a great lover, or has her for any other reason than great wealth or power. Nor does wearing 2 kgs of vulgar jewellery announce anything more than you have more money than taste, and a pretty vacuous intellect BUT it does attract those same uneducated, tasteless and vacuous, who equate that to ultimate success, and to them, this is advertising alpha status.


Just 



househens said:


> You DO have a glamorous, and to the ignorant, dangerous and impressive dog. I adore dobes, incredibly intelligent, and when well socialised, fabulous, calm dogs, but you DO have a dog that sends a frisson of fear or ignorant excitement through the great uneducated, nondoggy populace. I didn't want to get to individuals, and I'm not angry or aggressive OR wanting to be smart a*se here, but if we look at the photos/bits and pieces that people choose to use to identify themselves on pf, or to belong, we have those who don't bother, not worried about quickly finding or attracting those of similar interests, or announcing their interests, then we get those who want to attract those with similar dogs, or just I am a doggy person/cat person, usually puppy shot/cute shot/one of each shot. We unconsciously choose the shot we want identified with us. The photo of our pet as we want the world to see identified with US. eg NO ONE puts up a permanent photo of a dog looking uncared for and frighteningly thin and scared - unless next to the 'after' shot, to show the miracle worked...
> 
> You have your birds of prey, BIG attention getter, but you want to identify with all other BOP owners, the extra attention, you never asked for... but I just don't recall, and it MAY be MY memory at fault, but no one else, no matter how successful, put up their dog's photo, not happy, at ease, cute, but sitting in front of a wheelbarrow of silver plate, which IMPLIES they won... You can be proud of your dog, but it isn't your stud's home page. This is a very strong pointer to how your ego is connected to your dog. We all like to feel we are represented by the images we choose, and the things we own. We choose, even when we aren't aware of what we are doing. Our houses, cars, the dogs we choose. The obsession with a breed, with purebreds, with scruffy junkyard dogs, wth small fluffy girly dogs, with dogs of one type, or a mad bag of anything needing a safe place to live. Dogs are very telling, as there is such a range.


I have BOPs and a Dobermann. What would you like me to post pictures of, my slippers?

*you DO have a dog that sends a frisson of fear or ignorant excitement through the great uneducated,*

That doesn;t do anything for me at all. Which is why I give up the only night I don't work to help other, mainly Dobermann owners get through the good citizens test and promote my chosen breed as well behaved, safe dogs at my own expence. I also spend 4 days every year at discover dogs educating anyone that will listen about my breed.

* it MAY be MY memory at fault, but no one else, no matter how successful, put up their dog's photo, not happy, at ease, cute, but sitting in front of a wheelbarrow of silver plate, which IMPLIES they won..*

There are plenty of people here that have posted pics of there dogs with ribbons, silverware or just a KCGCS certificate and whether they have been from crufts or the local charity show if I have seen them I have given a like to them



househens said:


> I do think you identity yourself through the magnificent animals you choose. You aren't alone, and you clearly want them to be deeply admired, so take great care of them, but to deny that, is to have very little knowledge of the human psyche.


I don't care about big fancy houses, I drive an N reg corsa because I don't care about cars. I do care about my animals though and if having them perform and look the best they can is a personality fault I can live with that



househens said:


> PS memory at fault. Dog sitting BEHIND, (yes, I could query the actual subject of the photo), silver plate, and I had thought there was much more, in the background. NOT a dig, just remembered lots of silver. I'm sure completely deserved. I've told you I think your dog IS magnificent, and magnificently turned out, but I would have said that, if he'd only been a pet. He is magnificent.


----------



## canuckjill (Jun 25, 2008)

Well HS I for one have enjoyed all your threads on the Hawks etc. and I love to show off my dogs cause I think they are super so I'm quite happy to see you show off yours I luv Dobes one of best buds has a red and tan Dobe. Never thought of them as a status type dog though....must be cause I'm over here


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

canuckjill said:


> Well HS I for one have enjoyed all your threads on the Hawks etc. and I love to show off my dogs cause I think they are super so I'm quite happy to see you show off yours I luv Dobes one of best buds has a red and tan Dobe. Never thought of them as a status type dog though....must be cause I'm over here


Careful, my ego won't fit through the door in the morning


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Oops, more people with ego problems http://www.petforums.co.uk/cats-shows-events/246565-rosettes-trophies.html


----------



## ozrex (Aug 30, 2011)

I can see where you're coming from Househens and I admire your principles. I have to confess I'm far less evolved.

I love and respect the raptors for their beauty and integrity. I love to see them fly and stoop. I've never actually seen a bird of prey kill but I would regard it as a privilege to do so. 

I am also interested in history and appreciate the sense of continuity in ongoing falconry.

I think Hawksport has an amazing access to the life of his birds. They are not domesticated in the sense of a dog being being domesticated. They strike me as being creatures who tolerate people up to a point but creatures that have not compromised their own independence, instincts and behaviour. Turn a bird of prey out and it will not only survive, it will flourish and not miss its humans.

Turn a dog out and it would probably die. Rex is a good hunter and might survive but Tess would die from her own woolliness. Most dogs are too dependent on us and/or too "modified" to be able to do the dog-thing. They have adapted to us to the point that they are our creatures. I care for my dogs; they need me to do that. We share a very intimate connection and mutual adaptation.

I think that the bond between a person and a bird of prey must be one of respect, great respect for the bird's essential nature. The bird compromises very little. it remains what it is, a killing machine of awesome beauty and power. It is not a gentle,cuddly lap-bird as Tess is a gentle cuddly lap-dog. 

Perhaps people who genuinely admire a wild creature's true nature and movement are attracted to birds of prey? They wouldn't be for the sentimental.


----------



## WelshOneEmma (Apr 11, 2009)

househens said:


> I never said I was offended by wild predators killing. However, I do not enjoy it, do not get 'enjoyment' from watching the 'skill'. I am old and have seen many deaths, I know what has to be done. The sooner the prey is killed, the less chance the predator, quite often smaller, is likely to be hurt. I understood and could see what was being done, many, many years ago. I understood what was happening. *There is no point in continually watching, unless you still don't understand what is going on, or you are actually enjoying it. To be still watching it, in middle age, with admiration, does mirror a personality I don't want to claim as mine. *


So do you never watch wildlife programs? We know a kill will take place, yet we often still watch. Do you never watch your hens squabble over a worm? I have had a number of animals over the years and my hens are one of the most vicious ones I have had when it comes to food!

I do admire your principals, but I have watched BOP and whilst witnessing any death is hard, there is something majestic about them, more so than a lion etc.

I struggle watching the death of an animal and cried my eyes out all day when I killed a squirrel who ran out in front of me, but nature is different and a BOP working is nature at its most raw.

There is a difference between a BOP being worked to do what it does naturally and say someone badger baiting (where they do take pleasure from the kill) and training an animal (ie dog) to specifically go after another animal for pleasure as these dogs are not trained to do an immediate kill.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> BOP do live in healthy populations, some species to the degree that they are becoming a nuisance.
> 
> I've looked death square in the face a few times, and I stand by my principles that I would rather see a bird shot cleanly out of the sky, than farmed.
> 
> The title of this thread has been explained by the OP several times, why it's not understood still, is beyond me.


After years of persecution most of our BOPs were endangered & so they had to be afforded protections. Some species have made an amazing comeback, sadly though not all and today in this country, there are raptors on the very brink of of extinction due in large, to yet again, the illegal persecution by Gamekeepers!!

Again its on the whole those with vested interests, gamebird shoots, pigeon fanciers, that find the comebacks of buzzards,red kite, peregrine & sparrow hawk a 'nuisance' & these birds along with critically endangered species are still being illegally killed, infact only last month there was a chance for Defras Richard Benyon to ban the poison Carbofuron, its not used for anything else only by game keepers to poison BOP's 

*The Wildlife minister, Richard Benyon, has been accused of being "the gamekeeper's friend" by refusing to outlaw a poison used by some to kill protected birds of prey on shooting estates.*

*Mr Benyon, a millionaire landowner who is strongly associated with shooting interests and owns both a pheasant shoot in Berkshire and a Scottish grouse moor, has declined a request from senior MPs to make possession of the poison, carbofuran, a criminal offence  as is the case in Scotland.*

*The effect of his refusal is to make a substance which is particularly deadly to birds of prey, despite it being a banned chemical with no legitimate use whatsoever, still available to any gamekeepers who wish to get rid of raptors illegally when they are perceived to be predating on gamebirds*.

[*COLOR="Red"]His stance, which is only the latest controversy arising from Mr Benyon's personal involvement with game shooting policy, met with fierce criticism yesterday. "The minister's shocking refusal to outlaw the possession of a poison used only by rogue gamekeepers to illegally kill birds of prey would be inexplicable were it not for his own cosy links to the shooting lobby," said the Green Party MP, Caroline Lucas.*

[/COLOR]
Fury at minister Richard Benyon's 'astounding' refusal to ban deadly bird poison - Nature - Environment - The Independent


----------



## Guest (Nov 10, 2012)

househens said:


> I do know about the psychology of what draws a lot of men to working with birds of prey. Granted not all, but a good proportion. It doesn't mean they aren't highly responsible owners. The condition, health... The admiration of those who are knowledgeable is worth far more than ignorant admiration, to those who aspire to be the best in everything.
> 
> I know the issue of trust has to be earnt and that you AREN'T an alpha male because you APPEAR to be in control of a magnificent BOP. Yet to the ignorant public, BOP ownership is a complete and exotic mystery. You are still a centre of attention, of admiring ignorance and curiosity. You still get that psychological pay off. Whether or not, behind the scenes you are basically the 24 hour servant to an evolutionarily evolved killer chook.
> 
> ...


Okay, this actually made me laugh out loud 
Armchair psychology at its best. Which BTW actually tells me far more about the person judging than the person being judged. IME anyway...

Even Freud said sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

I dont know hawksport from Adam, Im not even 100% sure if hes a guy or a gal. But without even knowing him I can assuredly say the above, based on my life experience, is total baloney. Make those sort of assumptions and youll find that you were dead wrong far more than being right.

Reminds me of my friend who is deaf and how often people assume she is rude when she ignores them and then when she does talk, people think shes mentally retarded. Both couldnt be further from the truth, yet that is what people assume because it doesnt occur to them to think outside their own world paradigm.

Househens you got your degree in psychology where again?


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Here's my car. £230 off ebay. It has muddy boot prints on the bonnet and roof from where I have stood on it. It has odd wheels on the other side. The tail pipe fell off driving across a field and the cam rattles.










It's the car that is parked at the front of my house for all to see while my "majestic" animals are kept out of public view
It the car I can bee seen driving through the streets on my way to exercise my "majestic" animals on private land away from public view.
The car I drive 500 miles a week that everyone associates with me.
*That might tell you something about my need to boost my ego*
Had this been a car forum I might of posted more pics of it, but I probably wouldn't of joined anyway
As it is a *pet*forum most of the pics I post are surprisingly of pets. Some of them may be a bit unusual, one of them might be a little bit scary to some people but they are pets and this is a pet forum.


----------



## Guest (Nov 10, 2012)

Well hawksport, clearly you are overcompensating for your car with your birds 

I mean, after all, the only reason you take care of you dog is because you want him to be deeply admired. Not because you love the dog or anything...


----------



## Goldstar (Nov 12, 2011)

No one should be made to feel that they have to explain or justify themselves by posting photos of things they wouldn't normally.

I also think its amazing that someone's whole personality and ego status can be explained in such detail from posts on here. 

Assumption is worthless.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

I like to read about peoples success with their dogs, whether it's in the show ring, in one of the dog sports or just a pet that has had a problem the owner has worked on. I just can't understand why a supposed animal lover would be so offended by anyone taking pride in making the best of their pets they possibly can


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> After years of persecution most of our BOPs were endangered & so they had to be afforded protections. Some species have made an amazing comeback, sadly though not all and today in this country, there are raptors on the very brink of of extinction due in large, to yet again, the illegal persecution by Gamekeepers!!
> 
> Again its on the whole those with vested interests, gamebird shoots, pigeon fanciers, that find the comebacks of buzzards,red kite, peregrine & sparrow hawk a 'nuisance' & these birds along with critically endangered species are still being illegally killed, infact only last month there was a chance for Defras Richard Benyon to ban the poison Carbofuron, its not used for anything else only by game keepers to poison BOP's
> 
> ...


Time and again we have the same old argument, I haven't heard of the poison you mentioned, I don't know anyone that uses it. I have never said there aren't gamekeepers who are stuck in the past and willing to break the law to persecute birds of prey, and other species, but you never seem to acknowledge that many gamekeepers are changing how they approach *pest* control, in a much more pro conservation way when it relates to an endangered species, such as the hen harrier. Yet at the same time we're seeing numbers of sparrowhawks and buzzards soar (no pun intended), and whilst these birds have an impact on what is a multi million pound industry, and also have an impact on other birds and animals which are struggling to maintain numbers, why is it that DEFRA won't grant one person, and many have applied, a licence to control numbers of common raptors in their area? Because the RSPB would be on them like a shot, not that they should have any say in what is a political matter, but like the RSPCA these two organisations are too big for their own boots, and need to get their own houses in order first. Let's be clear here, no-one is asking or believes these birds of prey don't have their place, we are talking about controlling numbers within an area, and even those who were completely opposed to the idea that birds of prey have an impact on the number of gamebirds that survive through to adulthood, have been shown with the study on grouse, that they have a very negative impact. If you haven't got a grouse moor to shoot on, who is going to pay for the upkeep of the moor, because contrary to belief, it takes a lot of work to maintain grouse moors, they're not just wild uninhabited places with no intervention. And yet again, the RSPB famously bought and let a grouse moor look after itself, with the end result that it was simply uninhabitable, the predators ate everything, the moor wasn't managed so no fresh growth came through it just died back, so b*gga all could live there. I wonder who else has done something similar, oh yes, the league against cruel sports, with their deer reserve where they allow animals to die a slow and tortured death, although sometimes admittedly they stab them to death with a pretty blunt instrument to put them out of their misery. It's funny how these conservation organisations don't seem to be able to conserve much.

And, btw, I regularly see birds of prey out walking the dogs, right on a grouse moor, if someone's trying to poison them round here they're not making a very good bl**dy job of it!


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

I thought carbofuran was banned

BBC News - Skibo worker had &#039;enough poison to wipe out eagles&#039;


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

hawksport said:


> I thought carbofuran was banned
> 
> BBC News - Skibo worker had 'enough poison to wipe out eagles'


Maybe they want it banning again, just to make sure!


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Maybe they want it banning again, just to make sure!


After reading Noushkas post it is only banned in Scotland


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> And yet again, the RSPB famously bought and let a grouse moor look after itself, with the end result that it was simply uninhabitable, the predators ate everything, the moor wasn't managed so no fresh growth came through it just died back, so b*gga all could live there.


No they didn't. As I've told you before Langholm moor is owned by a shooting estates group and RSPB are only partners in the projects that have occured there. The whole project is about the improvement of grouse moor management. As an experimental scientific project it's pretty much expected that things don't always work out perfectly first time. The Langholm Moor Demonstration Project: Welcome

Some grouse moors are obviously still not being responsibly managed, typfied by the ongoing mess at Walshaw moor. It seems innappropriate drainage, burning and track building (all for the grouse shoot) may not only have damaged one of the most protected areas in England but also be partly to blame for the devistating floods in Hebden bridge this summer.

Who's messing with Hebden Bridge's vital flood barrier? -- New Internationalist
RSPB lodges EU complaint over Walshaw Moor controversy | Environment | guardian.co.uk

The European commission are now investigating and it will be very interesting to see what they say.


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

hawksport said:


> Here's my car. £230 off ebay. It has muddy boot prints on the bonnet and roof from where I have stood on it. It has odd wheels on the other side. The tail pipe fell off driving across a field and the cam rattles.


It doesn't matter what it looks like on the outside. I saw your article in custom car magazine. With that V8 under the bonnet and the water bed you've installed in the back it's a pure pussy wagon.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

hawksport said:


> After reading Noushkas post it is only banned in Scotland


Thanks for the clarification, still never heard of it, and don't know anyone who would use it.



lennythecloud said:


> No they didn't. As I've told you before Langholm moor is owned by a shooting estates group and RSPB are only partners in the projects that have occured there. The whole project is about the improvement of grouse moor management. As an experimental scientific project it's pretty much expected that things don't always work out perfectly first time. The Langholm Moor Demonstration Project: Welcome
> 
> Some grouse moors are obviously still not being responsibly managed, typfied by the ongoing mess at Walshaw moor. It seems innappropriate drainage, burning and track building (all for the grouse shoot) may not only have damaged one of the most protected areas in England but also be partly to blame for the devistating floods in Hebden bridge this summer.
> 
> ...


www.land-care.org.uk

My apologies, keep pressing the wrong buttons tonight, and closing the wrong tabs! I meant to add, perhaps they don't own Langholm, but the RSPB made a right c*ck up of managing it, and managed to raise hen harrier numbers for a short while, until they had nothing left to eat, then they died off!


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

diefenbaker said:


> It doesn't matter what it looks like on the outside. I saw your article in custom car magazine. With that V8 under the bonnet and the water bed you've installed in the back it's a pure pussy wagon.


I didn't think anyone would recognise it once I had took the blower off that was sticking through the bonnet


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> www.land-care.org.uk
> 
> My apologies, keep pressing the wrong buttons tonight, and closing the wrong tabs! I meant to add, perhaps they don't own Langholm, but the RSPB made a right c*ck up of managing it, and managed to raise hen harrier numbers for a short while, until they had nothing left to eat, then they died off!


That link tells me that a) The RSPB definately don't own Langholm, Buccleuch Estates did then and they do now. b) gamekeepers didn't like the project. Nothing really new in that 

Even though game keepers didn't like it, important lessons were still learnt about moor management from it. If mistakes were made in the joint raptor study, they were made nearly two decades ago. The fact that a new project on the moor was started and continues to this day (with government funding and the full backing of Buccleuch) shows that things haven't been a complete disaster.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

lennythecloud said:


> That link tells me that a) The RSPB definately don't own Langholm, Buccleuch Estates did then and they do now. b) gamekeepers didn't like the project. Nothing really new in that
> 
> Even though game keepers didn't like it, important lessons were still learnt about moor management from it. If mistakes were made in the joint raptor study, they were made nearly two decades ago. The fact that a new project on the moor was started and continues to this day (with government funding and the full backing of Buccleuch) shows that things haven't been a complete disaster.


I'm not surprised the gamekeepers didn't like it, they lost their jobs, because there were no game left! 

For the benefit of those who haven't clicked on the link, the most pertinent part:

"Then, in 1992, the owner proposed that the RSPB's theory should finally be put to the test. He would instruct the five gamekeepers on his 12,000-acre Langholm Moor estate in the Scottish Borders to protect the birds of prey, or raptors as they are known, from egg-collectors, or anybody seeking to control their numbers, for five years. The experiment would be monitored by the RSPB, SNH and by other conservation bodies, so that it was fairly conducted. At the end of the five-year period, they would take stock, and see what had happened. All the parties involved agreed to accept the results.

By 1997, there was little doubt about the outcome. The number of hen harriers had increased from two to 28 breeding females, the peregrine from two to seven pairs. The grouse had fared less well. They had been virtually wiped out. What had once been one of the most successful moors in Britain had ceased to be viable as a commercial proposition.

Given the terms of the experiment, the RSPB should, at this point, have accepted the conclusions and got together to find means of reducing the harrier numbers. Various approaches were suggested, such as scaring off the harriers at nesting time. The most realistic, from the Game Conservancy Board, was an extensive programme of relocation - moving the harrier and peregrine to areas where there were none at present, so that they could continue their breeding.

Instead of this, however, the RSPB simply moved the goalposts. The decline of grouse, they said, had nothing to do with the raptors. It was due to the poor state of the moor, the lack of heather cover, and the way the earl's sheep had grazed the hills over the years. If only sheep were removed, and heather allowed to grow, the grouse would find somewhere to hide.

Not surprisingly, the owner protested. None of this had been raised at the outset, and grouse had always flourished alongside the sheep in this supposedly poor habitat. Who was to pay for the moor now? With no grouse to shoot, and therefore no income, he would have to lay off his keepers. Surely, the point of the experiment had been to find a solution, not to destroy the only local source of employment.

The conservationists then came up with their own solution. It had a sort of mad logic to it. If only the harriers - the real killers of the moor - could be persuaded to eat something else, perhaps they would give the grouse a chance. Thus, it has transpired that every day a supply of dead rats (white ones are favoured) is put out on the moor to provide the harriers with a ready-made larder. The rats are shipped up from England, no expense spared. The harriers are delighted. Instead of having to cruise the hills in search of elusive grouse, they are given their feed, almost literally on a plate.

Despite the alternative-feeding programme running for 2 seasons following the experiment, in 2000, hen harrier nests were down to 7 as the natural food supply (grouse, meadow pipits, skylarks etc) dried up. Because of the lack of keepers, foxes predated 2 of the harriers nests and only 5 nests were successful.

What of the grouse? They have not thrived. Their numbers remain so low that shooting has had to be suspended. The five keepers have been reduced to one part time. Net result: raptors 20, grouse nil, keepers nil, landowner distraught.

Everybody knows it is lunatic, but the RSPB cannot publicly admit it. The society is, of course, a prisoner of its members who would never agree to interfere with these magnificent hunters of the skies. Nature must be allowed to take its course, goes the argument, even if that means sacrificing large numbers of rats (who nobody minds about) and the grouse, which come lower down the pecking order.

To suggest that feeding dead rats to wild hen harriers is restoring natures balance is not just dotty - it is offensive. The habitat is entirely unnatural in the first place, and has been for centuries. Man has cut down the trees, introduced sheep and cattle, allowed the heather to grow by burning it in rotation. The scenery so cherished by ramblers and tourists alike - rolling purple hills, rocks and golden bracken - is in fact preserved by gamekeepers, who know how to maintain the balance of wildlife in the countryside and who are able to sustain biodiversity and employment in rural areas by creating a shootable surplus and farming that crop carefully. Take away one element - the grouse - and all that is at risk."

Can you honestly not see the hypocrisy of the RSPB, which was suppposed to run Langholm and conserve species, which just let all the raptor species eat anything they could, and then imported white rats, and God only knows why they had to be white, to feed the hen harriers, and numbers still didn't do any better after the drop off once they'd eaten everything.

A well run moor might be able to support a number of raptors of various species given careful consideration, and these days, this is the route that enlightened gamekeepers are taking, ie managing the whole moor for the benefit of all species, including us.

And it's not just grouse moors, many shoots are encouraging numbers of some of the rarer raptors, including barn owls, to nest on their land.


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Can you honestly not see the hypocrisy of the RSPB, which was suppposed to run Langholm and conserve species, which just let all the raptor species eat anything they could, and then imported white rats, and God only knows why they had to be white, to feed the hen harriers, and numbers still didn't do any better after the drop off once they'd eaten everything.


Supplementry feeding is a conservation technique used all over the world with success in many species. If it had worked it would have been a extremely helpful tool in allowing grouse keepers and hen harriers to live side by side so was worth a try. It didn't work so a lesson was learnt. The rats were white probably because they were lab bred.

Your link is pretty outdated, Langholm moor now has a team of keepers and is doing pretty well despite the RSPB still being heavily involved.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

lennythecloud said:


> Supplementry feeding is a conservation technique used all over the world with success in many species. If it had worked it would have been a extremely helpful tool in allowing grouse keepers and hen harriers to live side by side so was worth a try. It didn't work so a lesson was learnt. The rats were white probably because they were lab bred.
> 
> Your link is pretty outdated, Langholm moor now has a team of keepers and is doing pretty well despite the RSPB still being heavily involved.


I hope you noticed my past tence in the way I referred to the RSPB 'was' supposed to run Langholm Moor? They might be involved still, but they were also involved from the conception.

In what way is the information outdated? It shows that the RSPB had a great chance to get things right first time on Langholm Moor, and yet they chose the wrong methods, and made an almighty c*ck up allowing what was once a prospering moor to decline and numbers of hen harriers to plummet, lost several people their jobs and ensured the moor had no means of income. Supplementary feeding I can understand, but not when it's because you've made such a huge mistake as to ensure a species eats itself out of survival. The RSPB were offered a good solution, they chose to ignore it and stick their heads in the sand, funny that isn't it


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> I hope you noticed my past tence in the way I referred to the RSPB 'was' supposed to run Langholm Moor? They might be involved still, but they were also involved from the conception.
> 
> In what way is the information outdated? It shows that the RSPB had a great chance to get things right first time on Langholm Moor, and yet they chose the wrong methods, and made an almighty c*ck up allowing what was once a prospering moor to decline and numbers of hen harriers to plummet, lost several people their jobs and ensured the moor had no means of income. Supplementary feeding I can understand, but not when it's because you've made such a huge mistake as to ensure a species eats itself out of survival. The RSPB were offered a good solution, they chose to ignore it and stick their heads in the sand, funny that isn't it


As I said if mistake were made, they were made a while ago and important lessons have been learnt. The RSPB also wasn't totally responsible for the moor at that time, the government and other groups also had involvements. It's a good job that the Buccleuch familly don't hold the sort of grudge you obviously do, it's their moor after all and they are still happy for the RSPB to help run it.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

lennythecloud said:


> As I said if mistake were made, they were made a while ago and important lessons have been learnt. The RSPB also wasn't totally responsible for the moor at that time, the government and other groups also had involvements. It's a good job that the Buccleuch familly don't hold the sort of grudge you obviously do, it's their moor after all and they are still happy for the RSPB to help run it.


If you'd read the link it's obvious that other agencies were/are involved, but the RSPB still chose to ignore all of them and continue to allow the decline of grouse, and for the hen harrier population to eat itself out of existence.

It's a good job the Buccleuch family are so lenient, I'd have told the RSPB to shove it, it's alright to sit and pontificate about lessons learnt, and they're getting it right now, but what about those people who lost their jobs? I'd imagine they'd hold a grudge as well?! Maybe they took up breeding white rats in anticipation of the conservation management skills of the RSPB? Who knows?


----------



## tashax (Jun 25, 2011)

First of all poor dog and i hope he isnt kept alive in that state 

Second of all what is the whole hawksport is the devil for flying his birds??

I plan on going rabbiting with the ferrets very soon, they can source their own dinner and i will be helping the farmers out that use my friends rabbiting company. Some people need to get off their high horse, what other people do with their own time and how they live their lives is none of your business.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Time and again we have the same old argument, I haven't heard of the poison you mentioned, I don't know anyone that uses it. I have never said there aren't gamekeepers who are stuck in the past and willing to break the law to persecute birds of prey, and other species, but you never seem to acknowledge that many gamekeepers are changing how they approach *pest* control, in a much more pro conservation way when it relates to an endangered species, such as the hen harrier. Yet at the same time we're seeing numbers of sparrowhawks and buzzards soar (no pun intended), and whilst these birds have an impact on what is a multi million pound industry, and also have an impact on other birds and animals which are struggling to maintain numbers, why is it that DEFRA won't grant one person, and many have applied, a licence to control numbers of common raptors in their area? Because the RSPB would be on them like a shot, not that they should have any say in what is a political matter, but like the RSPCA these two organisations are too big for their own boots, and need to get their own houses in order first. Let's be clear here, no-one is asking or believes these birds of prey don't have their place, we are talking about controlling numbers within an area, and even those who were completely opposed to the idea that birds of prey have an impact on the number of gamebirds that survive through to adulthood, have been shown with the study on grouse, that they have a very negative impact. If you haven't got a grouse moor to shoot on, who is going to pay for the upkeep of the moor, because contrary to belief, it takes a lot of work to maintain grouse moors, they're not just wild uninhabited places with no intervention. And yet again, the RSPB famously bought and let a grouse moor look after itself, with the end result that it was simply uninhabitable, the predators ate everything, the moor wasn't managed so no fresh growth came through it just died back, so b*gga all could live there. I wonder who else has done something similar, oh yes, the league against cruel sports, with their deer reserve where they allow animals to die a slow and tortured death, although sometimes admittedly they stab them to death with a pretty blunt instrument to put them out of their misery. It's funny how these conservation organisations don't seem to be able to conserve much.
> 
> And, btw, I regularly see birds of prey out walking the dogs, right on a grouse moor, if someone's trying to poison them round here they're not making a very good bl**dy job of it!


I dont expect game keepers broadcast they are poisoning bops afterall it is illegal and i have said before im sure some gamekeepers predator persecution is more sensitive than others.

But if some gamekeepers are much more pro conservation on Englands Grouse moors in particular, how come the hen harrier has been all but wiped out? when it should be prime habitat for them... also disappeaering fast from the grouse moors are the goshawk and the peregrine.

Can you show me any peer reviewed scientific evidence that Buzzards & sparrow hawks are having a big impact on the game bird industry and on other birds and animals?? or like Benyons attack on the Buzzards is your evidence also anecdotal?

The Hen Harrier is Dead, Long Live the Hen Harrier!



What can be done next you are all thinking, well sadly we appear to have run out of viable options in respect to Hen Harriers in England. Why more was not done before the inevitable happened that's a question we are unable to answer.

The warnings signs were always there, and yet national conservations organisations failed to act early enough to make a difference. Natural England's Hen Harrier Recovery Project was one important initiate which we all hoped would succeed. With the advantage of hind sight we now know the project in reality was always domed to failure because the bulk of Red Grouse moor owners were never prepared to change their opinion of Hen Harriers by accepting their presence on Red Grouse moors.

There are two old sayings "Leopards never change their spots" and "Old habits never die." I have to say unless fundamental changes to wildlife legislation are made forcing grouse moor landowners to accept Hen Harriers on the property they own via a well thought out licensing scheme as proposed by the RSPB, the Hen Harrier may never be allowed to return to England's uplands in any useful number in the foreseeable future.

Talks hoasted by the Environment Council between shooting representatives and raptor conservation organisations held over a number of years importantly gave the shooting fraternity years to stall for time. While these talks were then on-going this allowed Harriers on red grouse moorlands in England to be exterminated and no action was instigated to stop what was taking place.

*The warning signs were clearly verified following the loss of Harriers from the northern Pennines in 2006 and should have been a wake up call. Now in 2012 the Harrier has also been lost from England's core breeding area in Lancashire's Forest of Bowland. Significantly a prediction made in 2007 by Ian Grindy, United Utilities Bowland estate manager, warned that if gamekeepers were ever appointed onto the United Utilities estate the Harrier would disappear within one year from this last English sanctuary. The fact that it took a little more time for this prediction to come true is immaterial, because it was Mr. Grindy who approved the return of gamekeepers together with several shooting syndicates onto the estate*




hawksport said:


> I thought carbofuran was banned
> 
> BBC News - Skibo worker had 'enough poison to wipe out eagles'


yes its banned in Scotland but Benyon wont implement a ban in England. How can someone who cares nothing for wildlife be Minister for it!

From 2002 to 2011, there were 633 confirmed bird-poisoning incidents in the UK, of which 316 cases-50%-involved carbofuran.[67] Carbofuran, which is marketed under the trade name Furadan, is a carbamate insecticide, and its approval for use as such was withdrawn in the UK in 2001.[68] There is therefore no legal purpose for which anyone might possess carbofuran in the UK. Carbofuran is especially toxic to birds, and a single grain would kill a large bird of prey such as a golden eagle by breaking down its central nervous system.[69] Carrion-feeding raptors are especially susceptible to carbofuran poisoning, where the poison is administered via a laced bait. A gamekeeper who was convicted of poisoning birds of prey in Skibo, Scotland, in 2011 was found to possess 10 kilogrammes of carbofuran, which would have been sufficient to kill every bird of prey in the UK.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> I dont expect game keepers broadcast they are poisoning bops afterall it is illegal and i have said before im sure some gamekeepers predator persecution is more sensitive than others.
> 
> But if some gamekeepers are much more pro conservation on Englands Grouse moors in particular, how come the hen harrier has been all but wiped out? when it should be prime habitat for them... also disappeaering fast from the grouse moors are the goshawk and the peregrine.
> 
> ...


Maybe you should take some time to read the past posts about how the RSPB mismanaged Langholm Moor, and managed to take a breeding population of 28 hen harriers down to 7, by letting them eat themselves out of house and home? I'm sure you also wouldn't agree with their corrective method of importing dead rats (preferrably white) to try and rectify their short sightedness.

There have been plenty of calls from various quarters for a cull of sparrowhawks and buzzards where necessary, ie where they are now in such numbers they are causing a problem. I'm too busy watching strictly to be bothered to find yet more links.

It just beggars belief that people are prepared to defend to the end a 'we must save all' attitude, when it is blatantly clear you cannot ever save every individual of every species. And you MUST be prepared to control numbers of a species. We have mucked things up with many species over the years, the longer we have a them and us the worse it is for all species concerned, there has to be a middle ground.

But just for you, from the RSPB's own website:

Re: sparrow hawk problem - Wildlife questions - Wildlife - The RSPB Community

But sparrowhawks remain a protected species.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

Blimey! Just read all 19 pages of this thread, and some very interesting points have been made.

Raptors are amazing creatures but it should never be forgotten that they are a wild bird and should be treated with caution and respect. It is a dreadful tale to read and I do, of course, have sympathy for the dog and his owner. I do hope he manages to have a good quality of life and, if not, then he is given a peaceful and quick end. 

I do not think the hawk's owner should take his responsibility any further than he did. He had permission to fly his bird on the land, and the dog owner had no permission to be there. The hawk's owner offered to pay for any vet bills incurred and he also drove the dog and owner to the vets.

It was just an accident, a tragic accident.

It seems that in modern society there must always be someone to blame 

(Cracking shots of your birds Hawksport).


----------



## MyMillie (Jun 17, 2012)

ouesi said:


> Okay, this actually made me laugh out loud
> *Armchair psychology at its best. * Which BTW actually tells me far more about the person judging than the person being judged. IME anyway...
> 
> Even Freud said sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
> ...


How disgustingly rude of you!! (reason highlighted!!):thumbdown:....and I won't comment further!!


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

MyMillie said:


> How disgustingly rude of you!! (reason highlighted!!):thumbdown:....and I won't comment further!!


I wouldn't consider it was rude if someone asked what qualifications or experience I had based an opinion on.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Maybe you should take some time to read the past posts about how the RSPB mismanaged Langholm Moor, and managed to take a breeding population of 28 hen harriers down to 7, by letting them eat themselves out of house and home? I'm sure you also wouldn't agree with their corrective method of importing dead rats (preferrably white) to try and rectify their short sightedness.
> 
> There have been plenty of calls from various quarters for a cull of sparrowhawks and buzzards where necessary, ie where they are now in such numbers they are causing a problem. I'm too busy watching strictly to be bothered to find yet more links.
> 
> ...


The Hen Harriers havent eaten all the grouse on the grouse moors & starved though have they

What is that link suppose to prove? that sparrowhawks ambush feeding stations? lol

The calls to cull Buzzards and Sparrowhawkes come from those with vested interests or those who ignorantly believe unfounded claims that they are wiping out song birds. The BTO(highly respected by All) have dont the most robust study on avian predators & their impact on prey species...

_In this paper, the authors look at how prey and predator numbers have changed over nearly forty years, to see if there are associations between trends for particular prey species and their predators. This is the most sophisticated, long-term and large-scale analysis of its kind ever undertaken. It examines the effects of three avian predators of juvenile and adult birds (Buzzard, Sparrowhawk and Kestrel) and of four avian and one mammalian nest predators (Great Spotted Woodpecker, Magpie, Jay, Carrion Crow and Grey Squirrel).

This is a high quality study based on unique long-term and large-scale datasets. Despite the limitations noted below (notes to editors) this robust study found that, for the majority of the songbird species examined, there is no evidence that increases in common avian predators and grey squirrels are associated with large-scale depression of prey abundance or population declines. It is also clear that, for the majority of declining species with unfavourable conservation status population, declines appear to be due to factors other than predation.

Other studies have suggested that over the period of this study, songbird population changes have been influenced by a range of other factors, most notably changes in farmland and woodland management_

Defra freely admitted Benyons claims on Buzzards were purely anecdotal...."Research supporting this view is practically non-existent and the policy is freely admitted by his department to be based on 'anecdotal evidence' ". If that link is the best you can do SL, Im guessing you can do no better than Benyon?

Sparrowhawks like all BOP's are protected for a reason, i think we're all well aware what that reason is:thumbdown:


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Maybe you should take some time to read the past posts about how the RSPB mismanaged Langholm Moor, and managed to take a breeding population of 28 hen harriers down to 7, by letting them eat themselves out of house and home? I'm sure you also wouldn't agree with their corrective method of importing dead rats (preferrably white) to try and rectify their short sightedness.


7 hen harrier nests is far better than the grand total of zero that most grouse moors now have. The population of 28 occured because of the joint raptor study and numbers declined afterwards to a similar level to that pre-study. Just been reading that diversionary feeding is still used on Langholm, but it doesn't say whether they still use white rats 

"Food is provided to all known territories from late-March until the incubation period begins and then continued when the hen harrier chicks hatch, in an attempt to divert hen harriers away from predating on red grouse chicks. This method, which was trialed in 1998 and 1999, reduced by up to 86% in the numbers of red grouse chicks fed to hen harrier brood. It did not, however, lead to an increase in grouse stocks. " - The Langholm Moor Demonstration Project: Raptors


----------



## Guest (Nov 10, 2012)

MyMillie said:


> How disgustingly rude of you!! (reason highlighted!!):thumbdown:....and I won't comment further!!


Really? There was plenty in my post that could have been interpreted as rude (not to mention househens assumptions about another member) and out of all that, the part you found rude was asking someone what their qualifications were to make a psychological study of another member?
Interesting...


----------



## koekemakranka (Aug 2, 2010)

Ang2 said:


> Sorry, but how anyone would want to own a killing machine and get pleasure out of watching it do exactly that - is totally alien to me!
> 
> *Its not that long ago that I posted a picture of an owl taking a cat. These birds of prey dont belong in residential areas and you are risking the lives of other peoples much loved pets*.


 I'm sorry, but that doesn't make sense. How are you going to keep wild birds of prey out of residential areas? Most people are thrilled to have wild birds in their gardens. I know I am, and I am a cat lover (I also have a catproofed garden). As much as I love cats, I do realise that the birds have more right to be there than my cat does, being non-indigenous.


----------



## koekemakranka (Aug 2, 2010)

Moobli said:


> *It was just an accident, a tragic accident*.
> 
> It seems that in modern society there must always be someone to blame
> 
> .


Hear hear! Sometimes terrible things just happen and we have to live with it. That's all.


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

Nature and natural selection is horrendously cruel. I was watching an episode of QI the other day. Google what the jewel wasp does to cockroaches. It's straight out of Alien and I wouldn't blame you for not believing it. TV wildlife programs are sometimes difficult to watch. The lions eating an elephant alive over the course of several days is hard to stomach. In comparison a bird of prey taking a rabbit is highly palettable. I've never walked my dog in full camouflage. I'm inclined to think the chap was up to a little mischief and an unfortunate sequence of events led to an awful accident for the dog.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

koekemakranka said:


> I'm sorry, but that doesn't make sense. How are you going to keep wild birds of prey out of residential areas? Most people are thrilled to have wild birds in their gardens. I know I am, and I am a cat lover (I also have a catproofed garden). As much as I love cats, I do realise that the birds have more right to be there than my cat does, being non-indigenous.


We could have huge domes over our towns to keep wild life out. Or we could just do like you do and take responsibility for the pets we choose to keep


----------



## sailor (Feb 5, 2010)

Wow, what alot of posts... some very imformative ones too!

By the time I got to the last post, and read all... all I can think is "Live and let live" on all accounts :sosp:
Poor Ollie, what a traumatic and horrible way to lose your tongue 

Btw loving the car hawksport.... my first car looked like yours (altho I will boast on how mine had a full matching set of chipped and scratched alloys), work horse Clios really do boost your confidence and ego don't they


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

I have just ploughed through the last 15 pages 

Not really on topic but I wanted to say I saw a hen harrier the other day, also a sparrowhawk and what could have been a sea eagle but was too far away to identify - it was huge though.
I love watching birds of prey working -wild ones that is. I have been to falconry displays and enjoy them but feel a little sorry for the row of birds that are sitting on their perches all day.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

sailor said:


> Btw loving the car hawksport.... my first car looked like yours (altho I will boast on how mine had a full matching set of chipped and scratched alloys), work horse Clios really do boost your confidence and ego don't they


Clios are hair dressers cars. mine is a corsa, a MANS car


----------



## sailor (Feb 5, 2010)

hawksport said:


> Clios are hair dressers cars. mine is a corsa, a MANS car


D'oh!!! It was the same colour and I got confused :lol:
*swift sudden exit*


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Blitz said:


> I have just ploughed through the last 15 pages
> 
> Not really on topic but I wanted to say I saw a hen harrier the other day, also a sparrowhawk and what could have been a sea eagle but was too far away to identify - it was huge though.
> I love watching birds of prey working -wild ones that is. I have been to falconry displays and enjoy them but feel a little sorry for the row of birds that are sitting on their perches all day.


I hate to see tethered birds too but in nature once fed they wouldn't do much different


----------



## koekemakranka (Aug 2, 2010)

BoPs are magnificent, even though I have had very limited experience with them. We did once go to a bird rehabilitation centre near Dullstroom where they kept various birds of prey which had been injured and which the rehabilitated with vet care and exercise until ready for re-release. They had a gorgeous peregrine (sp?) falcon there, as well as some black shouldered kites and a lovely eagle owl. It was lovely watching them in action: a great day out


----------

