Foxes after baby owls.

[silva]

Out having a bit of a mooch around midnight a few nights ago. There have been some baby owls on the branches for the last week or so, little furry ones that can't hoot properly making a lot of racket !
Anyway there was a fox lurking around in the field below the tree. He either saw or winded me as it was quite bright and soon cleared off but I could still see glimpses of him with the red filter on about 75 yds away in the hedge, so he was hanging about, probably a young one.
When I went up the hedgeline the owlets weren't up in the tree, instead they were in an old hedgerow hazel only about two to three feet off the ground, alongside a bank. I chivvied them up into the higher branches and had a wee at the bottom of the tree, only hope they wise up before they become fox food.

[greensurfingbear]

poor fox lost his supper then :P

[shaggystu]

poor fox lost his supper then :P

WARNING!!! there's swearing in the video

[British Red]

Don't forget - foxes climb trees

[blacktimberwolf]

"Nature red in tooth & claw"............Mind you, if the parent owls are about, that fox is in for a steep learning curve, he'll be lucky if he returns to his den with both eyes intact.

[JonathanD]

I've seen a fox take a full grown Tawny a couple of years ago. It took the owl - and me, completely by surprise.

[silva]

I've seen a fox take a full grown Tawny a couple of years ago. It took the owl - and me, completely by surprise.

That was a rare sight few people will have seen - how did it come together ? Have watched them mousing and seen them stalking and pouncing at birds and darting in trying to grab a rabbit, but never actually catch anything.

[JonathanD]

That was a rare sight few people will have seen - how did it come together ? Have watched them mousing and seen them stalking and pouncing at birds and darting in trying to grab a rabbit, but never actually catch anything.

The Tawny was hunting voles on a field beside a woodland. It landed on one about 3m from the woodland edge at the meeting point dense grass that was about 0.5 of a metre high and recently grazed grass. Just after it struck and was looking up to take off the fox was just there as if from nowhere. From the angle it came from, it looks like it was in the dense grass already.

[ged]

... the fox was just there as if from nowhere. ...

Yup, seen 'em do that. And the other way around:

http://www.bushcraftuk.com/forum/sho...663#post670663

[Dougster]

As the fox numbers are considerably safer than the owl numbers, it's a simple case of maths to shoot the red fella surely?

[greensurfingbear]

As the fox numbers are considerably safer than the owl numbers, it's a simple case of maths to shoot the red fella surely?

.

Where does draw the line in interfering with nature??....that's hours of campfire debate / moral minefield right there. I think that's a discussion for else where.

NB all said in cheerful banter!!!!

[Adze]

As the fox numbers are considerably safer than the owl numbers, it's a simple case of maths to shoot the red fella surely?

Unless higher numbers of foxes than owls is normal, then I'd agree with you. Trouble is, what is 'normal' in the UK any more? After all, we killed all the wolves and bears and look where that got us.

There are some seriously endangered species in the UK... not many of them cute and fluffy. Austropotamobius pallipes is a good example, the UK being one of it's last bastions (owls, otters, seals, water voles and ospreys being somewhat more widespread and numerous - they share a conservation status with the likes of the Siberian Tiger and the Giant Panda) yet they get little airtime by comparison and largely for the reasons in Stu's post.

[British Red]

After all, we killed all the wolves and bears and look where that got us.

Well, it got us safe and fed for a start.

You can't have major carnivorous predators on an unarmed, over populated island that cannot feed itself. Now for me, I'd work on reducing the population and arming it too. But thats not acceptable to the politically correct.

Red

[Adze]

Well, it got us safe and fed for a start.
Red

You're absolutely right, we did it for human reasons, not for conservation (other than of our own hides).

The real import of my post was how little people appreciate some of the genuinely threatened species we're responsible for in the UK, while caring so deeply (in terms of their pockets if nothing else) about species which might be locally threatened but which, Worldwide at least, are really quite abundant. Your avatar's namesake is a very good example as it happens

[silva]

As the fox numbers are considerably safer than the owl numbers, it's a simple case of maths to shoot the red fella surely?

You are right, in terms of protecting livestock, now when the youngsters are out and just before lambing are the best times, otherwise I think there is always a fair number of drifter foxes circulating that just move into the deceased's territory.
For conservation reasons - ground nesting birds, game and suchlike it is best to constantly keep on top of them. Though the same can be said of crows, magpies, stoats and weasels - so you just end up in the situation of shooting creatures all the time. The problem is you hear sorry tales of, "conservation groups", getting hold of wetlands, turfing the wildfowlers off the lease, then not keeping on top of the vermin with disasterous results to the bird numbers, far worse than the sustainable annual shooters bag.
It is a shame though, as these creatures are so beautiful and clever and work so hard to rear their young against the odds, just for someone to come along and shoot them. However lambs going missing, sheep predation and munched up nests probably make it a necessary evil.....

[ged]

As the fox numbers are considerably safer than the owl numbers, it's a simple case of maths to shoot the red fella surely?

Let me see if I've got this right...

Man destroys over 98% of the wildlife habitat in the British Isles. http://www.treesforlife.org.uk/fores...restation.html

Bird populations plummet. http://www.rspb.org.uk/ourwork/teach...e/decline.aspx

So to save the endangered birds Man decides to kill species which kill birds.

Have I got that right?

I think I'd support the idea if we could extend it to its logical conclusion, which seem to me to be that. once we get the fox population down to dangerously low levels. we start killing the species that kill foxes.

As far as I know there's only one of those of any significance.

[British Red]

Ahh now the "British / European Red" is a different species than the US red - and genuinely threatened.

Trouble is, how many people will pay more for their food becuase wolves take lambs? Not just the wealthy few - but the poor? How many will think its worth it when their pet, or even children, are threatened or killed?

Most people don't actually want a serious predator on this island - heck they can't cope with adders and have hysterical red top rag articles about killer foxes!

[Harvestman]

Ahh now the "British / European Red" is a different species than the US red - and genuinely threatened.

Trouble is, how many people will pay more for their food becuase wolves take lambs? Not just the wealthy few - but the poor? How many will think its worth it when their pet, or even children, are threatened or killed?

Most people don't actually want a serious predator on this island - heck they can't cope with adders and have hysterical red top rag articles about killer foxes!

Never mind the panic that ensues if they see a wasp...

[Adze]

Ahh now the "British / European Red" is a different species than the US red - and genuinely threatened.

I was talking about Sciurus vulgaris which definitely isn't threatened - except locally in places in the UK.

http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/20025/0

Trouble is, how many people will pay more for their food becuase wolves take lambs? Not just the wealthy few - but the poor? How many will think its worth it when their pet, or even children, are threatened or killed?

Not even close... the real trouble was the explosion in the popularity of crayfish tail sandwiches in the late 70's to the early 80's. Are you actually reading my posts Red or just making them up as you go along? I only ask as you appear to be under the misapprehension that I'm advocating reintroduction of apex carnivorous predators whereas, in actual fact, I'm bemoaning the decline of the white claw crayfish... (http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/2430/0) there's a whopping difference there me old mucka

[British Red]

I only ask as you appear to be under the misapprehension that I'm advocating reintroduction of apex carnivorous predators whereas, in actual fact, I'm bemoaning the decline of the white claw crayfish... (http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/2430/0) there's a whopping difference there me old mucka

I was responding to your post that said

[After all, we killed all the wolves and bears and look where that got us.

Where do you think it got us?

It simply isn't a one sided discussion sadly - but that post sounded like it was. You can have cheap food, enabling poorer people to feed their kids meat, or you can have apex carniorous predators. I'm unsure which you prefer?

[Adze]

I was responding to your post that said {snip} Where do you think it got us?

My thinking at the time was that it got us into the current cycle of red and roe deer management which currently has to cull thousands of animals per year, costs many many thousands (probably millions) of pounds and has the aminal (sic) rights loonies up in arms occasionally. However this is more or less besides the point because my point in the original post was that...

It simply isn't a one sided discussion sadly - but that post sounded like it was.

...the throw away comment which you have misconstrued might, I agree, have sounded one sided, but the salient point which you have yet to address or respond to in any reply, that being the plight of the humble white clawed cray, is totally unambiguous and very demonstrative of the blinkered fashion in which conservation in the UK is undertaken.

I'm unsure which you prefer?

I shall repeat...

...you appear to be under the misapprehension that I'm advocating reintroduction of apex carnivorous predators whereas, in actual fact, I'm bemoaning the decline of the white claw crayfish... (http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/2430/0)

Cheers!

[silva]

I was responding to your post that said



Where do you think it got us?

It simply isn't a one sided discussion sadly - but that post sounded like it was. You can have cheap food, enabling poorer people to feed their kids meat, or you can have apex carniorous predators. I'm unsure which you prefer?

I don't think its anything to do with helping poor people eat meat, commercial interests and government don't give a monkeys about poor people. Factory farming is about agribusinessmen, processers and supermarkets making the maximum profit for the minimum amount of investment and bother.
If the market was forced to change to higher welfare standards and hence better quality grub, it could be made to turn itself around in no time at a very similar price structure. There is nothing more resourceful than a farmer or supermarketeer.
In the meantime the general population have just become accustomed to eating ropey food and drinking low quality alcohol. have you noticed that you now have to eat gold brand foods, just to get the same quality of food as standard brands from about 30 years ago. How awful cider has become for instance, crap thrushy bacon that shrinks to nothing when you cook it, tasteless pork that won't cook proper crackling, dull androgenous lager that gives you a bad head.

[British Red]

I don't think its anything to do with helping poor people eat meat, commercial interests and government don't give a monkeys about poor people. Factory farming is about agribusinessmen, processers and supermarkets making the maximum profit for the minimum amount of investment and bother.
If the market was forced to change to higher welfare standards and hence better quality grub, it could be made to turn itself around in no time at a very similar price structure. There is nothing more resourceful than a farmer or supermarketeer.
In the meantime the general population have just become accustomed to eating ropey food and drinking low quality alcohol. have you noticed that you now have to eat gold brand foods, just to get the same quality of food as standard brands from about 30 years ago. How awful cider has become for instance, crap thrushy bacon that shrinks to nothing when you cook it, tasteless pork that won't cook proper crackling, dull androgenous lager that gives you a bad head.

Aaah so you think the good old days were better?

My Gandad budgeted to spend one third of his take home pay on food.

In real terms food is cheaper than it was ten, twenty or fifty years ago. Its the consumer that drives the businesses - don't kid yourself. If people wanted high quality food, its out there. But, the vast majority of people want "cheap" so they get it. They shop where the weekly shop is cheapest. This creates large supermarkets with economies of scale, and monster farms.

If people want small farms, they can go to farmers markets, to the farm gate, grow their own etc. But most people want cheap, convenient, accesible food. So they go to Tesco. No-one puts a gun to their head. If Tesco open a new store and people don't shop there because they want local, high quality food, then they would close it. I know, I sued to work for them. But the truth is, food that represents a lower proportion of take home pay is more important to the majority. I wish it wasn't so, but, working for major retailers for thirty years, I know that it is.

I spent three and a half hours making caramalised onion chutney today. I grew the ingredients. I could have earned the money to buy that quantity in twenty minutes. Most people won't make that investment - or pay for those that do.

Sad, but true.

Red

[British Red]

Bemoan away old chap.

All I know on the subject is what I have read - and that is that well meaning amateurs trapping red signals make the problem worse (in that the larger ones are canibals and via the introduction of disease)

So I also am saddened by the decline - but clearly amateur trapping is worse than leaving things alone - so I am intrigued to hear a proposed solution

Red

[Adze]

Bemoan away old chap.

All I know on the subject is what I have read - and that is that well meaning amateurs trapping red signals make the problem worse (in that the larger ones are canibals and via the introduction of disease)

So I also am saddened by the decline - but clearly amateur trapping is worse than leaving things alone - so I am intrigued to hear a proposed solution

Red

Trapping, amateur or otherwise is a moot point regarding increased or decreased numbers - however, since the fungus which kills the native white clawed crays will have been already devastating (to the point of local extinction in the main) to their local population it won't make a jot of difference to their numbers locally.

What WILL make a difference nationally and Globally is preventing the spread of signals and other carriers of the fungus by following a few simple steps - details here: https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/non...ent.cfm?id=683

Sadly there is likely to never be a solution to the existing signal cray problem in the UK - hopefully their spread can be limited to their current range and the remainder left to the native species. The real trouble is it requires continual education and reinforcement of the risks in transporting potentially viable specimens in damp equipment - something the funding for just doesn't exist unless the target species is either cute/fluffy/carnivorous/birdlife

[British Red]

Ahh I agree with you there on the emotion

The logic of "sport angling" would cause an outcry if applied to mammals - lets say...of...breeding foxes, hooking them out of their earths with a steel hook through the face - and then putting them back in order to do it again. There would be a huge outcry. But fish are slimy...so no problem!

It certainly shows the hypocrisy of a hunting ban...or a hare coursing ban come to that

Red

[Chiseller]

It certainly shows the hypocrisy of a hunting ban...or a hare coursing ban come to that

Red

:thumbup:


Sent from my HTC Explorer using Tapatalk 2

[British Red]

I suspect otherwise - people shop down to a price - not up to a quality. I am very lucky - I get to work long days trying to feed my family and preserve food and do it in a sustainable way. I know and work alongside many farmers - their hourly rates are atrocious - most would be far better off selling up. Supermarkets make a profit sure - but people choose to shop there. If they want to they can go to the farms and the farmers markets and get better food - but few do.

I wish it were otherwise, I really do, but its not.

[silva]

Meat farming is booming, farmers are making more money than ever - they just pretend to be poor, its just something they all do.
Theres only a range of supermarkets left to shop at now, theres no choice involved, people have become accustomed to shopping there. Indeed most of the new roads in towns lead to one. Supermarkets could raise the standard of food production with little effect on prices and I think they will be forced to in the end.
The poor people being able to afford food arguement, is just a smokescreen for disinterest and profit. I think us poor people deserve to eat quality grub to sustain us in all the hard work we do.
Anyway I thought this thread was about owls !
Goodnight !

[British Red]

Its a great pretence - my neighbours rising damp, falling apart car and 16 hour days are very convincing.

However any time you want to spent a couple of million on a decent sized farm, another half million on machinery and then make a huge profit, I'll be the first to sign up for your seminars!