Yes I am bored, day 4 of 10 day isolation,and what about when the leaves fall off then?

And where are the light sensing organs on a tree then? Dont forget they sense all these environmental changes with no discernable organs as far as I know, even in winter when the leaves fall.

But the tree is already being attacked , it has gained nothing in this act, its still getting eaten. It appears to me to be a completely altruistic act.The messenger chemical and defence chemical are two different compounds,theres no need to produce a messenger unless its for the benefit of others.
Now then, oaks grow as lone trees in fields, etc, because theyre planted that way. Most trees grow in groves or woods of the same species. I wonder if anyone has genetically tested these groves to see if, as I suspect, these groves are all related to eaxh other. Are we seeing some version of family sticking together?

Genuine question.
Foxhounds are bred to hound foxes, obviously. Yes you can train them to follow aniseed, but hundreds of years of breeding have turned non-fox obsessed dogs into fox -obsessed dogs.
Can you ever turn off this instinct ? Is aniseed really more of an attraction than foxpiss?
Also, if theyre serious about NOT killing foxes, can they not devise some kind of muzzle just in case they happen to encounter a fox whilst on their aniseed chase? We can muzzle Police dogs well enough so that they can do their job properly, slightly different kettle of fish with hounds I know, but surely it must have been tried, IF they were serious about NOT killing foxes (or cats, or small dogs, or hedgehogs,etc) accidentally.

I understand temperature thresholds, cold dormancy, etc, but the phenomenon of oak trees exuding chemical warnings to surrounding oaks whilst under caterpillar attack suggests some type of community . There is nothing in it for the attacked tree.

https://www.nathab.com/blog/the-trees-are-talking/#:~:text=It%20was%20found%20that%20the%20trees%20did%20not,pheromone%29%20to%20warn%20their%20neighbors%20of%20the%20danger.

@brads, thank you for replying, glad to be educated here.
So you would ONLY dig foxes or cubs as the very last resort, for foxes who were proving uncontrollable in any other way?
Would you prefer to drop a fox cleanly at distance, or do you prefer the up close and personal approach to be sure that the problem is eradicated?
I take it you do it in your line of work, as in not much different to Rentokill etc? This is a different proposition to someone who does it unpaid in my eyes, not the profession for me though.
I have heard fox hunters in my locale killing foxes with dogs, its a terrible sound. Does it bother you if the dogs actually get hold of a fox? Obviously you cant shoot because you run the risk of hitting your dog, do you just let the dog carry on? How does this make you feel? Would you take that specific dog out again if he behaved like that?
I get the rest of it, it might be similar to the feeling i get whilst out fishing. The goal is to target and close with a wild, crafty creature who has reached the stage of its life it has through guile, without the need necessarily to destroy it in my case.
I dont live in an area where commercial /estate hunting is really a thing,it seems you might work on a shooting estate. The only hunting I see here is bloodthirsty bellends with bull cross lurchers, idiots badger baiting and the tally ho brigade. My concept of what you do is therefore tainted . Its the element of fear and trepidation by a doomed animal i cant gel with, not the shooting outright of problem animals.
My tendency is live and let live, I could never do your job with animals, I guess were just wired differently.

Anyeay, the point im making is, IF it were to happen, would we be morally obliged to process food from its source nutrients without a living intermediate, or would it, as Drac suggests, level the playing field, meaning all life is equal and therefore fair game with nothing to choose between it other than aesthetics.
Also, would the artificial propogation of plants via cuttings, grafting,etc, be ethical? We villify anyone who does it to animals. Witness the reaction to the dog head transplant experiments by Vladimir Demokhov.

Educate me then, Mr.Howard.

And i never said they did, I said they were interconnected like Avatar.

Yes sentient might not be the right word then. Plants are definitely sentient. Ever heard of tge experiments where they connected a polygraph or similar to a houseplant and boiled various things, some inanimate some inanimate, only to see supposed spikes when lifeforms were boiled? I suppose im talking about awareness of being connected to the living web then.

Well think about this:
Plants know when the seasons are changing, take the trees around me for example, as soon as high summer passed they were starting to show signs of leaves withering, and not just due to dehydration like in the Teak forests. They were sensing that autumn was upon us, yet temperatures were still hovering around the 15 to 20c mark, higher than most springtime temps. So they are definitely sentient, yet have no eyes to monitor light levels. Remember, once the leaves fall, they know when to rise the sap again, so its not leaves sensing the light either.
Yes you can quote auxins and giberellins,etc but the fact is the plants are only reacting to these compounds which are self produced, how do they know when and why? Theres a lot going on here under the surface. When I last did any formal education in these matters , we knew all about how but not why, id be interested to know if anything has changed in tge last 12 years or so.

https://teachingkidsnews.com/2012/06/26/3-scientists-discovers-corn-plants-make-a-noise/#:~:text=They%20used%20a%20sound%20that%20was%20in%20the,%E2%80%9Cclicking%20sounds%E2%80%9D%20the%20corn%20seedlings%20made.%20Sweetcorn%20seeding.

The method is the same, as far as I can tell. Using dogs to terrify an animal whilst the 12 bore cavalry arrive is almost the same as chasing them for miles. Barbaric and unnecessary, vermin or not they still deserve a quick pain free death, its not their fault they were born ‘vermin’.
You make an interesting point though, and that is a badly taken shot maiming an animal. The animal would need to be finished off ,I think the majority on here would agree that. Would digging a fox out and dispatching it be any more cruel than having to use dogs to hound an injured one down and then dispatch it? I dont know the answer here.
The answer is to only take a guaranteed shot, but I know enough about firearms and moving targets to know that this is never a given.
As an aside, if anyone following this thread wants to have their opinions swayed back and fore , listen to the Radiolab podcast on Rhino hunting. Very interesting I thought.

If theres a cleaner better way, that generally becomes the default method in the rest of the world, but hunting clings on to traditional ways constantly. Now I cant see any benefit to digging out foxes over shooting them, which is why I ask the question to the initiated before condemning them outright.

Why not just shoot them then? Even a baited stand ? Targetted, clean kill, remote kill so no need to be up close and personal to the dying animal? Seems unnecessary to go the lengths of taking the dogs out, digging, etc. To pretend that fox doesnt feel terror when its getting dug out,even if the dogs dont get at it before its shot, is dishonest.
Not gonna lie, im not a gamekeeper, dont eat meat, though i do eat fish, so am at a different end of the spectrum to those here that hunt.
However, whenever they try to justify their actions, it always seems that there is a cleaner, less barbaric, or more efficient way to carry out the activity they claim to get zero pleasure from. Seems like either hiding the truth or hiding from the truth, to me at least.

Also, how do you view the fox, both before you kill it and after youve killed it? Do you get any pleasure at all from seeing a beautiful red fox going about its business, or do you just see vermin? Genuinely curious.

To those advocating terriering for foxes, you say you gain zero pleasure from it. Why would you do it then? Is this some kind of paid arrangement between you and a landowner? You must have gone out of your way to gain their permission to dig on their land, or have I got this completely wrong. Digging is a lot of effort for an unpaid venture with zero benefits to be gained from it?
I had an acquaintance who would lamp for foxes with dogs, usually some type of greyhound or deerhound mix with almost always a bit of bull or staff terrier thrown in, for the killer instinct he told me. Kept about 16 dogs all in, terriers as well
. Again, claimed zero enjoyment from the kill. Thats a lot of mouths to feed, lots of vets bills and a lot of turds to shovel for no monetary gain and no enjoyment. Can you , with much more insight than me,explain this to me at all?
Shooting for food I have zero problem with, abbatoir killing I do which is why I wont eat farmed mammals. Shooting for pest control is a necessary evil sometimes, and is always preferrable to poisoning as that is just indiscriminate and cruel. I just cant for the life of me imagine what is to be gained from terriering.

As above, the only thing that worked for mine, which was very persistent and in a **** of a place, was to cut it more or less to the core every so often with a blade ( I used the blades off a paint scraper, long 4″ long stanley blades, flexible and sharp af) .
One day just realised it had gone, didnt even notice.

Fair enough point, happy to be corrected, pardon my ignorance. So what scent do drag hunters use then? How do they overcome the prey drive of foxhounds?

With regards to the ethics of drag hunting, I think it very much depends how the hounds are raised.
For example, I know of shooters who used to train their spaniel puppies by giving them a stuffed rabbit skin as a toy , so that they associate the smell and texture of rabbit fur with playing a game, much in the same way police and army units train their dogs, except hopefully without the hefty boot in the liver which I believe was standard practise.
Now, if the hounds involved had never been trained to target foxes using similar techniques as above, except with live ‘toys’

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/animal-cruelty-fox-hounds-hunting-16358138

and the unencouraged instinct to hunt foxes can be overcome, then in theory I can see no problem. However, as a former owner of a beagle, I very much doubt the innate urge to scent hunt will be overcome, and foxes getting ripped apart will be regarded as unintended collateral damage of a jolly good drag hunt to some, but others will secretly be getting off on it. At least the red coated brigade are honest and unashamed of their cruel intentions.
Unless you could guarantee the behaviour of the hounds, which you definitely cant, their tenacity to following animal scents is what makes them such a force, at best I think drag hunters are naive or optimistic , at worst bloodthirsty and cowardly.

Plus theres this, hounds running rampant over private property and savaging family pets .
Yes, I know the source, but the pro hunt lobby arent going to advertise their failings, are they?

https://www.wildlifeguardian.co.uk/hunting/pets/

For the record, I am not against any competent shooter killing a fox, a deer , whatever , outright, and I fish myself, but only for wild game fish which I would eat if I ever caught anything.
The chasing, terrifying and savaging an innocent is not sport, the odds are not even, its got very little to do with pest control either, much more effective and discreet methods exist.Its an excuse for the horsey set to dress up , have a couple of drinks and satisfy bloodlust. Hence the blooding of newcomers, who in their right mind does that?
Just look at how they treat hunt sabs, beatings abound. They put a red coat on and think theyre the **** Cavalry. And the argument that some only go along for the ride, the killing is done far from them on the ‘front line’, that is no excuse at all, I view them as equally complicit. There is no condoning this.

I saw a video yesterday on a newspaper site, cant remember which one, of a hunt exercising hounds in a very large walled garden. It seemed to me they were using it as a means to sort the wheat from the chaff, as sure enough, as dyna-ti describes, the huntmaster or whatever he calls himself, shot two dogs dead, one taking 2 shots to finish off, at point blank range too. Im talking literally an arms distance against a stationary target. Then just carted off in a barrow to be disposed of somehow.
It disturbed me greatly. I was going to post it here for the hunt apologists to explain but decided against it. You can find it very easily if you look.
Its the Independent, i just looked.
My friend once killed some hunt hounds after they jumped over a hedge straight in front of him on the M4 by Bridgend. No apologies from the hunters, they just tossed the dead hounds into the ditch explaining someone will be along to fetch them, and then carried on the way he told me anyway.

Well i think its a bit much to expect empathy from people who go out of their way to rip innocent animals apart. Plus the vets cost and bullets are cheap.

Makes a bloody big difference to the elements of UK wildlife on tbe arse end of a pack of hounds though.

I find it amazing that the rich and connected (i am assuming this here, btw), havent got anything better to do than chase and torture wild animals simply going about their lives. You would think all that wealth and influence would open doors to a lifestyle unattainable to the average person. If you hate foxes, just stay up late one night and shoot them, no need to exhaust, terrify and mutilate them to death.
You wouldnt do it to a vindictive serial killer ( of people, let alone chickens) so why is it OK to do it to a fox.

I think martinhutch has pretty much hit the nail on the head there, as I see it.
Seeing as he is selling ,you wont be neighbours long, so go very hard indeed.

My thinking is, he asking you to name a price. Figure in to that the cheeky **** pinched it in the first place, how desperate is he to settle this quickly, how far are you prepared to go to dispute this? How much value would this acquisition add to his houses selling price? I assume that there is no love lost here, followi g his cheeky land grab. If he legitimately thought he owned that land, why would he offer you a price anyway? Theres probably more to it than that, but Id be thinking along those lines.
Offer to buy it off him, seeing as he ‘owns’ it, then double the price he offers you, for his brass neck. I wouldnt normally advocate tit for tat, but **** ‘im, he created this mess, he can cough up to sort it.
And its not about the size of the strip of land, its about how much value it adds to a house which is unsellable as is, but eminently more sellable with your little strip flattened and tarmaced.

So to the English (or any of the home nations) people who consider themselves European over British, can I ask why that is? Genuinely curious, not trying to wind anyone up,I dont know or know of anyone in these parts who consider themselves European over their birth nationality.

Halfords advanced are great. Ive had one of their socket sets fir 25 years+, the chrome hasnt even peeled off, nothings worn or broken, and you can sometimes get great deals on them.

And I would say it very much matters what you consider yourself. If a person from , say, USA were to assume I was English I would politely put them straight, Im not. And I would expect the same if I had called a Canadian an American. Funny thing is, I just dont know why? Nothing wrong with being English, im just not English. I was wondering if the Cornish had this strength of feeling, or would they just go along with it?

So Northumbrians are Northumbrians first, and Cumbrians Cumbrian first? Wow, I would never have called that, I thought pretty much all of England considered themselves English. Every day is a school day..
Happy to learn more about all this, by the way. Is it the same as how Noth Wales and South Wales are two different countries (not really, but there is a definite marked difference), but non-Welsh tend to lump them in as Wales?

So most places in UK with place names with a Brythonic root , there is a very strong non-English identity. Not anti-English, for the most part, but just not English at all.
I was wondering if English people regard Cornwall as England ? They definitely dont regard Wales or Scotland as England, both countries which they share a border with.

well yes, this is part of why I was thinking this too. The Cornish language , writtten, is very similar to Welsh, a form of which was spoken throughout mainland Britain ( i think the word Britain is derived from the Welsh word Prydain, meaning….Britain)
When spoken though, its not very similar to my ear at least.
When I was in school, we would have exchange visits with schools from Brittany, never other parts of France. A quick look shows the Bretons to be people who emigrated from Cornwall in 6th Century.

Im home awaiting my PCR results so Im bored as ****, and reading the thread about moving to Wales had me wondering, thats all.
The comment about an English person being made to feel uneasy in Cornwall specifically.
I have seen a video ,i think, of a surfer being told to **** off back to England, and also you never really see the St.Georges cross there, unless during sporting events where England are competing. The St.Pirans flag is much more common, in fact its everywhere, to me evidence of a national identity other than English.

Lots of second hand tool bargains to be had on ebay. Lots of my tools are upwards of 40 years old, but they were made to last so are still perfectly useable.

To back up IdleJon, its about attitude not accent. As long as you dont treat the area as if it was put there for your own leisure use, or treat the locals and the local culture as an inconvenience, you will be absolutely fine. We’re only people, same as everywhere else in UK.

Not an expert mate, might have something to do with the amount of iron mass you need to heat to get it to radiate heat or something? Maybe a medium fire in a small stove gives better heat than a medium fire in a bigger, colder mass of iron? Following on from this, if you scaled up appropriately, the amount of wood/fuel required to heat the bigger stoves’ extra mass is increased for the same output heat, thus meaning you burn through your woodpile quicker for the same heat output. I’d love to hear what the experts or pro’s on here say.
I once made the mistake of burning proper heart of oak which was bone dry when it was only slightly chilly out. I had to strip down to my kegs and open the front door I was that hot, and my house is a high ceilinged, draughty 1930’s shithole.

People really cant see the advantage in having ready made , glowing embers in order to kick the start the fire again on a freezing cold morning? Im surprised. Also, keeping the stove giving out heat all night can help season and dry damp logs overnight ready for said freezing morning. Works well for me anyway.Those warm logs are already gassing so will catch much quicker and burn easier, and if youre burning fig tree thinnings, fills the house with the delicious smell of caramel. Beautiful start to the day.

I have a Carron enamel stove, had it for about 15 years, we love it. Currently looking at replacing our draughty , hungry open fire with a Carron inset stove so we can control the draw and wood consumption easier, whilst also cutting out the draught.
The stove burns very cleanly and hot with seasoned wood, even shitty , knotty, resiny pine logs burn with very little smoke or residue. The glass is original and is easily cleaned of any soot or burnt resin by spraying with Mr.Sheen whilst cold.
Doesnt burn so well with coal, the cheap coal around here is very dirty and sulphurous, but the anthracite needs serious draught to get any decent heat out of it. Hardly ever burn coal though, maybe 5 times in those 15 years, logs are so much easier and free too. Oak and hawthorn were good, and Ash wood is possibly the best option around here, plentiful, easy to season and burns well even if not quite ready yet.
Definitely worth getting a stove which injects air at the top of the fire, burns much more cleanly and hotter, especially if that incoming air is preheated whilst burning logs.
Anyway, its way better than the Rayburn thing my parents had in the 90s.

Like I said, it is what it is, just cos you dont like it doesnt make it untrue.

Why would English people casually commenting on a funny looking Welsh word give a shit about Welsh grammar? Lighten up mate , its not lefel A.

Because to English people used to seeing a,e,i,o,or u, functioning words without them look strange. Its a common comment I hear from people from the Midlands,etc who come here to work, along with what does the word araf mean, because they see it painted on roads.