A set of strong ascertains any references that support these robustly held views?
How many sheep/ lambs do these references estimate the lynx will kill p.a.
Could you compare to those killed by; dogs, foxes, traffic, failures in animal husbandry
TJ, you're a bit optimistic there about the size of red deer in Scotland. They probably 'should' be up to 150kg but in reality these days, it's rare for a big stag to be much more than about 90kg. There are several reasons for the substandard sizes compared to the past and to their very close genetic cousins, the elk of N America; lack of woodland shelter and overgrazing has led to a shrinking in size. Basically, they're starving, living out in the open instead of in the forests and have pygmied as a result. Plus, the Victorians and later generations have selectively shot the largest males, cutting back variation in the population significantly. Many estates are doing their best to reverse this trend (Ben Alder, Ossian, Feshie being examples) but there are still offenders yet, selling the killing of a big stag to the highest bidders.
These days, an adult hind might be as small as 8 stone/ 50 odd kg so if in any distress at all, a big strong lynx would certainly be interested.
We know that we need to cut back hill sheep numbers for environmental reasons- drainage, biodiversity/monoculture and atmospheric emissions reasons, among others. Win-win..?
I think I got my lbs and kilos muddled
Having worked with Slovak Erasmus colleagues in the Tatra and visited the Polish side as well, there's great experience of apex predators in Europe. This is in a farmer, upland area with many visitors.
They have full time monitoring of the bears and wolf pack. They advise daily where to not walk on the Polish side, Slovak was a nature reserve with a more nature is first approach.
They don't have the volume of sheep we do - the farms seemed to be more cattle and crops.
They also have marmot, chamois, goat, red deer, more rodents etc. This means that the lynx are well fed without the need to often stray out of the high hills and woods. It meant the wolves too don't range too far or run hungry. There were issues, I'm not sure if the farmers were compensated.
There was a really healthy concern about keeping the bears and humans apart.
This discussion should take notice of work all across Europe, where people live with the reality of a 'wilder', although less crowded, landscape and economy.
Just in case anyone was under any illusion about what utter shits are working and campaigning for the right to shoot. This exposes their vile psychopathic behaviour. Yes I am aware not all hunters and shooters are like this but ................
Also leadhills estate has been caught with carbofuran again. Its illegal to own and its main( only?) possible use is to poison raptors
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/illegal-toxic-poison-discovered-scots-23523011
this is after they were successfully prosecuted for using carbofuran baits to kill birds 10 ears ago.
A few bad apples? Rogue emplyees or a concerted criminal conspiracy
what utter shits are working and campaigning for the right to shoot. This exposes their vile psychopathic behaviour
For balance, some of those campaigning against shooting are no better.
Pot and Kettle
Errmmm - its hardly equivalent to rape threats, having dead animals hung on your gate, having your personal telephone number published etc etc
The gamekeepers complaining of abuse are actually the main perpetrators of abuse. Its a hugely one way traffic. Yes there will be some the other way and yes all abuse is to be condemned. Thats a pro hunting site ( obviously) with one non corroborated report compared to many corroborated reports
its a part of their propaganda campaign to make out they are the victims
go on - where are the screenshots of this supposed online abuse? Where are the police reports? where is the evidence?
Idiots on both sides.
That said, it seems there's far more fear from the landowner/gamekeeper side, and more regular breaches of law or guidance on that side too.
I'd struggle beyond anecdotal evidence, and even if I could find statistics on "who's the naughtier", it's an irrelevance to the real debate.
IIRC Brads insists he is a responsible hunter / shooter.
should folk like you not be splitting off from the criminal conspiracies that are proven to be in grouse shooting circles?
Edit - it need not be conservationists v gamekeepers. It could be law abiding v criminals
I've no time whatsoever for imbeciles who give shooters a bad name. Anyone shooting a raptor needs a good kicking.
They should be sacked and never employed in the industry again.
But, and it's a big but, animal rights activists can be the utter scum of the earth. They are as guilty of lying and fabricating "evidence" as bad gamekeepers and shooters are for hiding evidence.
There are bad on both sides of this fence.
I'm with none of them.
Fair do's. I'm the same.
It just seems such a polarising debate, finding shared ground (literally and figuratively) is the key.
fair do indeed
They are as guilty of lying and fabricating “evidence” as bad gamekeepers and shooters are for hiding evidence.
Any evidence of this? The hunting shooting lobby keep claiming this but as far as I am aware there is no evidence of this ever been produced
Lynx will not take red deer. they might take smaller deer young. Lynx will take sheep and lambs.
Interesting
The main point still stands tho - a small number of Lynx wlll have no significant effect on red deer numbers
Would eating more venison have an effect on deer numbers, if lots of us did it?
Yup.
If estates can make money from it they will shoot it. If they can't they won't, and Govt bodies are left to step in.
Brads - I am serious about wanting to see evidence of the conservation side lying and fabricating evidence
Because of my sources of info i will never see this, rarely seeing anything other than press releases from the shooting lobby and would be really interested to see any evidence of anti shooting lies and fabrication
The main point still stands tho – a small number of Lynx wlll have no significant effect on red deer numbers
I'm not getting on to you, Im just showing there is clear evidence.
But it's not just deer is it ?, a lot of people go camping with their small children.
You introduce wolves or lynx into Scotland, it's highly likely there will be incidents involving people. How vocal would supporters be in such an instance ?, I reckon the silence would be deafening.
Personally I cant see the need to do such. I mean WHY exactly do we need wolves or lynx ?.
As regards people attacks - Lynx attacks are pretty unheard of and Wolves only attack people if they are really desperate which with all those deer and smaller game is unlikely
I would like to see apex predators reintroduced but it needs a lot more than wishful thinking and good intentions
European brown bears would be nice as well
sorry - the why:
rebalancing the ecology. wildlife tourism are two main reasons but it must be done without turing the highlands into a park or a zoo
Don't confuse conservationists with animal rights activists / anti shooting activists.
Google is your friend regards the latter. Not hard to find out what kind of people they are.
Even Packham (not a conservationist when talking about wild justice, purely an anti shooting outfit)
has been caught lying recently in a case concerning circus tigers in Europe.
He even had the gall to ask for help from the GCWT when his Welsh court case was flung out.
As I said. Arseholes on both sides so one is no better than the other in my book.
I know of no instances of anyone from the conservation side making up things and falsifying evidence. its something the hunting shooting fishing lobby claim happens but as far as I am aware have never presented any evidence.
If you want to make allegations you should be able to support them
Arseholes on both sides
Tim Bonner being such an example. I’d rather spend time with Chris Packham any day of the week
I know of no instances of anyone from the conservation side making up things
Good to know you don't read my replies.
I have read every one. No evidence just allegations. If you have evidence I would love to read it. the better informed we are the better the debate
I’d rather spend time with Chris Packham any day of the week
A lying arsehole, as I've said. Blindly trying to stop shooting regardless of the affect on wildlife or agriculture.
Happy to ask for help when he gets spanked though.
Anyway, I made my view clear and am not getting suckered in to the usual crap.
You may now proceed to say it's because I'm a liar/stupid/uneducated/wrong, whatever makes you happy..
I suspect its because you have no evidence to back up your allegations
simple things like screenshots of the online abuse or police reports or some evidence of the lies or falsifying of evidence?
So do you have any evidence - or not?
You may now proceed to say it’s because I’m a liar/stupid/uneducated/wrong, whatever makes you happy..
I would never say this of you. You have a different opinion and are happy to express it. I am happy to express mine. You do however seem quite keen to suggest others are liars though.
Why make out you are interested when all you want is to make me a liar ?
Because of my sources of info i will never see this, rarely seeing anything other than press releases from the shooting lobby and would be really interested
Seriosuly mate ?, I laughed but went with it.
I'll not be any more though.
Or maybe , just a wee one.
How about Packam tweeting about UK hunters traveling to shoot Puffins ? Total bollocks. But that's just a wee fib.
As was his stories about German tigers and his partners outfit "wildheart"
Making up complete lies (well proven in Spanish and German courts) and using it to obtain donations for his "charity" (another wee fib)
He is not adverse to using his BBC status to have lies put in print, but that's ok, he's lovable.
Or have a look at Luke Steele. Founder of Moorland Monitors. Criminal liar enough for you?
But I've no patience for it tonight, I've a Special Karachi to wash down before I burst into flames.
How about Packam tweeting about UK hunters traveling to shoot Puffins ? Total bollocks. But that’s just a wee fib.
He actually shared a Telegraph article on the subject. Shouldn’t your criticism be focused on the news provider?
Seriously Brad - I don't read the hunting shooting fishing magazines, I don't read the telegraph. I have heard of the shooting lobby making allegations of falsifying evidence but I have never actually seen any evidence of the conservation side falsifying anything
I am not calling you a liar. I have actually found your contributions to this debate interesting and thought provoking
Luke Steele has been dropped like a hot tattie and all claims of him being founder of Moorland Monitors are being denied etc.
He posted mail through a streets letterboxes claiming a scientist was a rapist.
That was just for starters. He's a nasty little shit. But besties with Mark Avery.
Doctoring "secret" (illegal) footage inside an abattoir was another that had him laughed out of court.
He did 18 months for one crime, cannae remember what one just now though.
Moorland Monitors was his pet. People with absolutely zero knowledge of moorland management screaming carnage just for the sake of it.
I will stress again though don't confuse conservationists with anti hunters. Most moors are working with conservation outfits nowadays and quite rightly so. Shooting shouldn't cost serious damage to wildlife.
Most if not all organisations mentioned here are the latter.
Shooting shouldn’t cost serious damage to wildlife.
Shame that is simply not so for grouse moors - the main subject of this thread
1) muirburn degrades the soils, reduces biodiversity and causes erosion
2) Grouse moors routinely kill all predators they can legally
3) many grouse moors illegally kill raptors
Grouse moors are "green deserts" with hugely reduced biodiversity and the damage they do is proven
Luke Steele has been dropped like a hot tattie and all claims of him being founder of Moorland Monitors are being denied etc.
He posted mail through a streets letterboxes claiming a scientist was a rapist.
That was just for starters. He’s a nasty little shit. But besties with Mark Avery.Doctoring “secret” (illegal) footage inside an abattoir was another that had him laughed out of court.
He did 18 months for one crime, cannae remember what one just now though.
Moorland Monitors was his pet. People with absolutely zero knowledge of moorland management screaming carnage just for the sake of it.I will stress again though don’t confuse conservationists with anti hunters. Most moors are working with conservation outfits nowadays and quite rightly so. Shooting shouldn’t cost serious damage to wildlife.
Most if not all organisations mentioned here are the latter.
Sources? Otherwise it’s just words.
Particularly to someone like me that pays no attention to either pro or anti hunting groups.
I did look up luke Steele - the only info I could find was rather nasty pro hunting groups but even allowing for that he sounds a shit and he did do some time.
Yet another peregrine poisoned. Proven. Poison bait left near a known nesting site in the dark peak
You cannot hide from the fact that grouse moors routinely do this and that during lockdown the illegal killing of raptors increased
Yet another peregrine poisoned. Proven. Poison bait left near a known nesting site in the dark peak
You cannot hide from the fact that grouse moors routinely do this and that during lockdown the illegal killing of raptors increased
But the RSPB did it, or Chris Packham, or urban people who don't understand the country, or the bird picked up the poison elsewhere and flew in to the area before eating it, or its because of 'so called access laws', or it was a person walking their dog off the lead, or its because we protect all of the wildlife, or it was a mountain hare, or, or, or, PROVE IT WAS US!!!!!
There you go, proof we can self police and don't need licencing.
You don't understand, you don't even live in the countryside.
It was found on top of the poison bait!
But of course the bait was planted by the folk who want to discredit grouse moors! 🙂
But of course the bait was planted by
the folk who want to discredit grouse moorsChris Packham!
Fixed it for you, you bad townie.
*ducks head in shame and tugs forelock*
sorry guv
The Scottish Gamekeepers Association had a FB post up on 11 Feb bemoaning how someone 'from the south' abusing 'so called access laws' had their dog off a lead and it disturbed deer, thereby potentially stopping the deer from eating. Their post included the fabulous quote
If people remain unaware of impacts of their leisure pursuits on the health of iconic species, Government agencies have not done their work properly in encouraging Access rights which match up with responsibilities.
impacts of their leisure pursuits on the health of iconic species
Their members quite literally shoot iconic species for leisure!!!
Couldn't see the Angus glens for smoke at the weekend because of the Moor burn. Anybody see the disgusting exchanges between the pres of the Scottish gamekeepers association and his acolytes on their forum? Somebody shared it on the Scottish rewilding page on Facebook.
