View Full Version : What's the difference?
As an occasional archer .. and don't get me wrong here, as I would only reluctantly shoot Bambi or Thumper if I was hungry enough .. what is the difference and or justification behind the law that bans all bow hunting in the UK and other forms of hunting?... I have heard that it was something to do with the trauma associated with bow hunting.. although I can't see the difference between an animal gnawing it's foot out of a trap in it's desperation, etc. (I know that you are supposed to check snares and traps regularly) ... and the trauma of being hit with an arrow?
what is the difference and or justification behind the law that bans all bow hunting in the UK
There was a disscussion on this some time ago. If I remember correctly (and please don't quote me, I could be wrong) That there was an acident where someone was shot with an arrow.... and typical reaction.... ban bow hunting.
:-(
Ed
that kinda explains it if you take in to consideration Freudian Projection and the foibles of human nature :shock: ... it was the arrow's fault :nono:
I would suggest it's also got something to do with keeping hunting out of the hands of "common" folks and reducing poaching with silent weapons.
George
reducing poaching with silent weapons.
Poachers who want to hunt in silence use nets ;-)
Ed
Poachers who want to hunt in silence use nets ;-)
EdAre nets legal Ed?
Saw this (http://www.rspca.org.uk/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RSPCA/Utility/FAQAnimals&articleid=1002646978169) about snares on the RSPCA website the other day "If you find an animal caught in a snare, report it to the RSPCA's 24-hour cruelty line". Scary to think that they might regard it as cruelty...
Thats probably directed at domestic animal (Edited)...What refugees get up to is not relevant to the thread..
As for farmers or Ed snaring rabbits in the country side away from domesticated pets etc I can't see the RSPCA having a problem with it. I might be wrong of course - worlds getting crazier by thew day.
Are nets legal Ed?
Only if you have a license.... issued to people like gamekeepers etc
"If you find an animal caught in a snare, report it to the RSPCA's 24-hour cruelty line".
...because it would be on publicly accessable land and therefore illegal to snare there, you need to have the landowners permission on privately owned land..... and nowhere near public footpaths (or areas the public may go) if the right of way goes through the privately owned land.
;-)
Ed
Justin Time
16-08-2004, 09:04
Gary
There are campaigns about to ban snaring totally, and not just from the Animal Rights people. Some folk don't see a difference between snaring animals to eat them and good old British traditions like badger baiting, which is still a problem here in Wales. I'm sure decisions about which animals are suitable prey/food are partly cultural and partly financial, either way it's hard to make a value judgement one way or the other. I've heard that another name for cat is Urban rabbit....For many Hindus we're barbaric for eating beef.
On the other hand organised and indiscriminate industrial poaching isn't a new thing either certainly not something to be used to scapegoat recent immigrants with.
Buckshot
16-08-2004, 09:05
Getting back to the bow hunting question, I think it's also because of the same reason rifles under .240 calibre are not allowed for shooting deer in England and Wales.
Because although a .22-250 or a .223 is powerfull enough to do the job on the smaller deer there needs to be greater accuracy from the shooter. A larger more powerfull rifle gives more margin for error.
Also bear in mind a lot of these laws were made when rifle technology was poor incomparrison to todays ultra fast, quick expanding bullets we have now.
Cheers
Mark
Thats probably directed at domestic animal - the had a family of immigrants from Somarlia housed in our street not so long ago and they were snaring cats down the back alleys.
:yikes: :yikes: :yikes: :yikes: :yikes:
Not scapegoating anybody - those are examples I have come across recently, and when my daughters cat came home with a single strand wire around its throat its hard not to be judgemental - that plus the fact I then checked the alleys around my area and found several snares set and ready to go.
Culteral, social, religious differences aside, I believe when in Rome do what the romans do.
Gary
There are campaigns about to ban snaring totally, and not just from the Animal Rights people. Some folk don't see a difference between snaring animals to eat them and good old British traditions like badger baiting, which is still a problem here in Wales. I'm sure decisions about which animals are suitable prey/food are partly cultural and partly financial, either way it's hard to make a value judgement one way or the other. I've heard that another name for cat is Urban rabbit....For many Hindus we're barbaric for eating beef.
The civilised nature of denial and contrived ignorance .. we want our bacon but we aren't prepared to know how we get it :nono:
godaluvdaflock :?:
That used to be a problem around Reading a few years ago too. Apparently they were being caught for food in a few chinese resteraunts and the 'better quality' cats (like my two persians which disappered) for their fur.
A tramp found a load of carcasses in black bags under a road bridge and the police found refrigerated lorry full of pelts...
Reference edit to thread - it is actualy relevant, as I was able to study the type of snare used and the trigger they used also. This in itself was educational
As for making snaring illegal in the countryside - how will game keepers and gillies control their vermin and pests? aS SIMON points out another example of nannyism.
As I say world's getting crazier!
C_Claycomb
16-08-2004, 13:07
Getting back to the bow hunting question... :wink:
I don’t know the exact reasons for the law here. I can only guess that someone mixed a cocktail involving poaching, lack of licensing, pictures of animals shot by vandals with target points, and possibly some gun hunters who felt a vested interest in keeping archers out of the woods, and fed it to the law makers. All that would have been needed would have been some photos of animals crawling around with targets arrows stuck in them and a news story about how this was being allowed by the law and the general public would demand a ban. If there weren’t all that many people hunting with bows to begin with it would be a walk over. That is just my thought.
I did hear a rumour that someone published a picture of a duck with a target arrow in it. The rumour said that the picture had actually been taken in Central Park NYC, but that the reporter hadn't bothered to cloud the cruelty issue with such facts. Have no idea if it is true, but it seems exactly the sort of thing that could have triggered a knee jerk law change.
The debate as to whether shooting an animal with a broad head is more cruel than shooting the same animal with a rifle has been going on for some time in the US. One could argue that unless you get a human guinea pig to experience both, you will never know for sure! Last time I paid it any attention the general opinion seemed to be that a well placed shot from a bow was just as quickly lethal as a well placed rifle bullet on deer. The important part is the placement, bows being harder to use and more unforgiving of error. I would go so far as to say that in my opinion the majority of archers I have seen shooting Field Archery are not good enough to go hunting humanely. I include myself in that. The advice given in the US to people who are planning to bow-hunt is to shoot something like 40 arrows a day for 2 months before hunting season starts. That is, shoot as they mean to hunt, not just at a clear target at known range.
I remember 2 stories, one was a swan somewhere ridiculous like in regents park and there was also a picture in the paper, probably the Mail, of a cat with a crossbow bolt in it's head. not exactly the same as licenced hunting :roll: