Just to confirm that hunters are treated like anyone else when it all goes pear shaped:
Un chasseur a été mis en examen mercredi à Mende pour "homicide involontaire" après avoir tué un ami d'un coup de fusil au thorax lors d'un accident de chasse, lundi à Saint-Alban-sur-Limagnole (Lozère), a-t-on appris de source judiciaire.
Ok hastily back to hunting , I agree we should know where our meat comes from , where I don't like hunting is when its viewed as a sport , in my mind it would be more sporting if the hare had a 12 bore too ;-)
What I really don't like is the fact I have to choose carefully where I run or take the dogs and I want freedom of choice too without feeling unsafe .. I don't know many sports that interfere with the public in such a big way , whether that be real or perceived threat
it's a beauty, Brian. my record was a similar sized Barramundi off the coast of Darwin, Australia. these days I'm downsized to trout, as I won't eat eel, pike, or carp. There is nothing like the feeling of laying out dinner for people and knowing YOU provided it.
I'm glad we're still friends Zoe! I prefer wild food myself when I can catch it! Thank you for your kind comment that fish was not on the menu! It's a very big Rock Snapper I caught in Panama but the Tuna, Dorado, Red Snapper and Red Mullet Snapper we caught fed everybody at the resort for a week - in delicious fashion! The Black Marlin also went back!
Zoe, pink coats and hounds please!
No worries, Brian, I have a similar stance, I will not eat factory farmed meats, and absolutely prefer the idea of having gone out and humanely killed my own dinner. That's quite a fish you've got there, may I ask what it is??and Where?
Apologies Zoe if I offended you. I guess I reacted because I have put with a lot of rubbish over the years and I am passionate about my outdoor pursuits which include everything in the fresh air and I abhor cruelty to wildlife although I will eat game and fish.
I don't know where slavery came into the hunting thread - was it when I used the word "Christian"? This was meant as a humanitarian reference and not religious. I really didn't want to include slavery - or sweatshops or human trafficking - I'm only concerned with the hunting aspect of this which seems to be objective so thanks to everybody. I must ensure my English 12 bore is oiled and ready for tomorrow's chasse now.
Carolyn, exactly the right kind of point. Slavery was supported and encouraged by churches who grew rich on its back. One of the things we social anthropologists have inherited is the aftermath of that period although the overt trade ended in the first half of the 19th century. It nonetheless persists today and often those who practice it in its contemporary forms will claim to be pious Christians. Hunters, never saw a grain of religion in it anywhere, so don't think so.
Hunters they are so special!!! they tend to try to keep all shooting mistakes in the family!!!less to inherit:) or inherit sooner:)) they own all the land and there for can hunt anywhere and if the kids are in there own garden and they get 3 shots in a wild boar 20m from the garden the kids are in the wrong for being outside and they wonder why i get upset with them and call the gendarme of the Chasse ( my daughters classmates father ! very handy indeed) !! not to mention our dog that was mysteriously poisoned and died last year!!! As you can imagine I do not like these people at all!!!
I think that's very much a minority thankfully that go to those extremes , Christian ermm .. its not so long ago that they supported slavery .. sorry going off topic . I'm sure being dressed in a red coat makes no difference at all .. there will be mindless idiots in most walks of life
Brian, please don't paint me as a hunt sab. terrorism is not my thing. I'm just saying, I much prefer being able to put food on my table after hunting or fishing.
Brian F. Thanks, I used to shoot and use my bow on an estate. It is privately owned, not that enormous and was just near where I was living. The owner was a fellow student of my ex-wife, his standards of pheasant rearing were very high and the other animals shot were simply wild (hares and rabbits). When activists raided the places where the pheasants were reared (not in cages but simply fenced of copses in which they were not overcrowded or underfed) they killed more than some hunts. I do not like fox hunting and was at cross swords with out local hunt whose master was also deputy to my chairing the parish council at one stage. I like less people who use pepper sprays on horses (riders usually too high to be sprayed), dogs and so on. Hunts get very few foxes at the end of the day, but for that I do not like the way they do it. I nonetheless believe hunt saboteurs to be generally reckless, inconsiderate and more than a few hangers on are out for a bit of trouble.
Well out of date Zoe - if you refer to the UK!
I've seen the hunt saboteurs and protesters in the UK bravely attacking dogs, women, the occasional man, and horses and followed the news of their daring exploits of exhumation of bodies of former huntsmen from consecrated ground in the dead of night - all in their own uniform. Not redcoats but balaclavas and black clothing. I guess we all choose our own direction but at least the "mindless" redcoats operate(d) within the law and generally acceptable and Christian guidelines.
I prefer the hunting here (looking for pheasant, deer,or rabbit to put on the table) than the mindless red coats that go out with the sole intention of letting their dogs rip a fox to shreds.
meant: within hearing distance - not without!
Just had a ricochet scream without hearing distance this morning. They are in a wood less that 100m from the house but no warning or indiction until we heard very loud, close shots.
OK, Terry it happens. In England hunting is on estates where most of the animals are released for the shooting parties to begin with. The place where I used to go was across a very busy country road into the village I lived in and partly along a railway line. There was strict supervision of not shooting toward either albeit hunters may have been a few metres away from either with backs to it. On the other hand, paying 'hunters' were often with people who owned/held the weapon and put it in their hands to shoot the birds or deer. Not only did some of those people not cope with the kick of the shotgun and were not good at aiming properly but nobody tested their eyes, ears or any other important 'bit'. I remember one very slight man spinning with the kick and somehow pulling to fire the second barrel in the direction of and as a very large grain truck was passing. Fortunately he could not even hit that, but thinking about had he done so how many people in the party might also have been killed and/or injured under other circumstances. Is it better? Not sure, think I'll pass. In all cases, eyesight and hearing (yes, the latter matters a lot) need to be tested as too heart and various other physical tests to ensure people are up to it. Age should not matter - I have known 20 odd year olds I would have disqualified and others in their 90s I trusted impeccably. As long as their health is certified correctly to allow them or not, it is fine. Liquid lunches and so on are totally unacceptable anywhere as too all regulations people disregard because 'they used to do' X.
Hi Terry, unfortunately I think the aveyron and lozère are pretty much the same mind set and hunting is part of the local scene with the problems that go with it.