Do you agree with the killing of animals/birds ?

[squeek]

i just wondered how many here think its ok with killing animals or birds

please let us know your reasons , why you agree or dissagree

thankyou

[eeyore]

you know my reasons already from other threads but to swiftly recap i feel that its okay to kill by humane means only (where it is allowed by law ie not protected species) for the purposes of ecological managagement (e.g deer where there is no top predator, foxes to protect ground nesting birds etc, grey squirels to protect the red), to protect your livelihood if non lethal means have already been tried and failed, for the reasons of public health ( dealing with rat infestations etc), or for food.

It is not in my opinion warranted to kill animals purely for the enjoyment of sport or for their fur (unless you need their fur to stay alive as with the inuit tribal hunting)

[tufftie]

Well you don't get any guesses or points for knowing what i voted! However I'm too shattered to do a succunct recap but for my main reasons i can only echo Eeyore's last paragraph.

Me thinks you may have started a lively one here!

[earthdragon64]

My opinion pretty much agrees with eeyore's on this. I've never liked "sport" killing, I can't see that shooting birds that are being driven towards you is much of a sport. Killing animals to eat or for conservation of endangered species or pest control is ok as long as it is done as humanely and as quickly as possible. In the case of pest control and conservation, it should only be done when other means aren't possible.

I've often thought that Fox-hunting would have been banned around the same time as Cock fighting, Dog fighting, Badger baiting etc if it had been a "Sport" of the working classes rather than the upper classes at that time. Emphasis is because in more recent times the followers of Fox-hunting are from all classes.

[willing to learn]

I have no problem with fieldsports, as long as it revolves around game species, which end up in the food chain (A must in my book). In fact Wild game "while living gets a better quality of life" than intensive farmed animals. I can also live with pest control, if it is required to protect a vunrable species or to control invasive non native invaders. As for hunting foxes with hounds, again have no problem, with those that wish to, but its not for me. In fact I am worried since the "Ban with hunting with Hounds?" the fox in some area's are being exterminated.This I have a problem with.
Regards
Colin

[Johnny Redgate]

I'd just throw another argument into the mix (and as a small flock sheep breeder nothing concentrates your mind on this issue like sending your own stock off for slaughter). Many of our currently most highly valued habitats depend on stock grazing for their conservation (e.g. chalk downland, heathland, moorland) and others have been created as part of the requirements of stock rearing (species-rich hay meadows). If you accept that these habitats require/are worth conserving then you should accept the need for livestock farming and hence farming of animals for meat production (I know wool production was at least equally important for sheep in the past). It is also clearly true that over-grazing is a big problem in parts of the uplands and that species-rich grasslands have been destroyed through agricultural improvement, but these are problems caused by the intensity of livestock farming and do not in my view counter the argument that it is necessary.

[Nightranger]

Hi Squeek,

An interesting poll although you may have inadvertently limited the options. To quote Jonathon Scott 'death is a natural part of the cycle of life and we should not make excuses for it'. Avoiding needless killing is always preferable but in a world manipulated by us, it is sad to admit that artificial control (to use a wider term) is now often a necessity. We must not forget that this is not just animals after all and who in the UK would happily see Himalayan balsam completely eradicated (for example)?

[TheSeagull]

I agree with the killing of domestic, farmed animals for consumption. I disagree with everything else, including sport and hunting for consumption. For population control, well we wouldn't need to do that if we never hunted our top predators to extirpation, we could reintroduce them. I do agree with population control for alien/non-native species though. Though a bit of me does feel guilt, I mean we introduced them, it's not their fault, they just do what they do. I do agree with hunting for consumption in non-british situations though, like Amazonian and African tribes etc.

[DunkeryMunkery]

Originally Posted by TheSeagull

I agree with the killing of domestic, farmed animals for consumption. I disagree with everything else, including sport and hunting for consumption. For population control, well we wouldn't need to do that if we never hunted our top predators to extirpation, we could reintroduce them. I do agree with population control for alien/non-native species though. Though a bit of me does feel guilt, I mean we introduced them, it's not their fault, they just do what they do. I do agree with hunting for consumption in non-british situations though, like Amazonian and African tribes etc.

Hi Seagull

I think it is great news that you agree with killing farmed animals for food.

But during the summer months, I sometimes go down to the river and get a couple of wild trout for breakfast.

Is that something you could agree with?

[TheSeagull]

Originally Posted by DunkeryMunkery

Hi Seagull

I think it is great news that you agree with killing farmed animals for food.

But during the summer months, I sometimes go down to the river and get a couple of wild trout for breakfast.

Is that something you could agree with?

Personally I only eat farmed fish as I'm not comfortable with eating an animal that was itself once wild. I have conflicted views with myself on fishing, one side of my brain tells me it's ok, the other side doesn't.