Do you, or anyone you know, shoot living things for sport?

aliasojo

Unknown to us at the time, we moved into an area that has pheasant shooting.

The pheasants strut about in the local gardens and fields every day, we have several that visit our garden in particular.

We then hear all the bangs of them being shot in the next field and tbh it's really bothering me.

I've never agreed with fox hunting but have not really thought about game hunting before. However, living here has brought home to us just how popular this 'sport' seems to be. Since the shooting season has started, we hear the bangs pretty much every day and there are notices up on the usual walks to warn people that shooting is taking place in the area.

I don't understand the mentality of someone who can take a life or cause pain to another living thing *just* for fun. These people are not hunting for food, they are hunting for sport. I also don't understand why they can't substitute clay pigeons in place of a live bird. The object is to hit a target so why does it have to be a live one?

Needless to say my (admittedly very sensitive), vegetarian daughter is suffering agonies just now and I can't answer her 'why' questions as I just don't understand myself.

Gigglepig

people do eat pheasants right?

I think it is less hypocritical in a way to shoot your own food and eat it, than buy vacuum packed meat or eggs from caged hens from Mr. T's. Chances are game have had a happier, freer life than many industrially farmed animals?

Is it any worse to kill animals for sport than shop as a hobby, and buy fashion and leather goods also for fun, from countries that have worse animal welfare protection than the UK, or protection for people, or the environment?

That being said, it isn't my cup of tea. But, personally I think there are much worse things than shooting for sport.

fluffnutter

It's the toffs and their traditions. It's probably not much comfort but the season will end at the end of the month.

As an aside, I expect these pheasants are eaten. It's a very popular meat and these birds will probably die a painless death. I'd rather that than a commercially produced chicken, given drugs to fatten up its legs and kept in a tiny cage.

aliasojo

I accept the pheasant will likely be eaten. My point is that this is not the reason why they are killed though, this is just a bonus if you like, the main reason is for sport.

Money_maker

I used to visit (care) for someone who went game shooting. Often saw a couple of woodcocks slung over the back of a chair or pheasants hanging up. These were shot to be eaten, country folk. Strangely, it was the sight of dead ducks which made me feel a little uncomfortable - looked so wrong.

I couldn't shoot anything whether for fun or food but used to target shoot with live ammo.

aliasojo

Gigglepig wrote: »

Is it any worse to kill animals for sport than shop as a hobby, and buy fashion and leather goods also for fun, from countries that have worse animal welfare protection than the UK, or protection for people, or the environment?

I see your point but imo, each situation should be considered on a 'standalone' basis.

Yes, I could come up with loads more (and worse) animal situations but those still don't affect my opinion about what is happening presently in this particular topic.

Mandles

Yeah, if it is going to be eaten then ok , but again , is there a more humane way to kill an animal as it could lay dying for hours, even days.

Cant abide people killing for "sport". I would like to see how fast they could run if i had a gun, that would be fun!

Gigglepig

Well, to me it seems hypocritical to criticise people for having a hobby which entails animals being killed for fun, as long as I myself also participate in activities which entails that animals are being killed, shopping leather goods or meat. That's all.

Edited to say - in most cases, shopping is also for FUN. Most of us don't need the vast amounts of stuff we buy, including stuff made from animals :-)

aliasojo

Gigglepig wrote: »

Well, to me it seems hypocritical to criticise people for having a hobby which entails animals being killed for fun, as long as I myself also participate in activities which entails that animals are being killed, shopping leather goods or meat. That's all.

I look at that differently.

Don't get me wrong, I do see your point and I deeply disagree with a lot of things that happen to animals and wildlife, but I don't think it's hypocritical to not understand why killing for fun is acceptable and/or criticise people for doing it.

Peater

I grew up in the countryside so i know a fair few people who shoot and i have even shot in the past. So i think i can offer an insight into 'the other side'.

First of all, don't forget that all these birds you see are born and reared to be shot. If it wasn't for the shooting, you would very rarely see them as they are not a particually successful species left to thier own devices. They are attracted to gardens etc for easy food (crumbs from bird feeders etc) and are not particually bother by humans as they were hand-reared.

99% of the birds that are shot will be eaten (some don't get found by the gundogs). The 'guns' will take some, some will be given to the landowners of the shoot and the rest are sold to local butchers. They are shot as 'sport' as a live target is much more of a challenge to hit than a clay as they are unpredictable. Many, if not all 'guns' will also shoot clays for recreation.

Sadly for you and your daughter, game shooting has been around longer than you have and will be around long after you aswell. It's an incredibly popular rural activity, not to mention a huge industry. (People will pay up to £3000 a day for the priveledge)

While i don't do it myself, i will defend thier right to do it. If you move to an area, you have to be able to be tolerant of the culture.

Seanymph

Pheasant shooting is a rural industry. For many large estates it's the means to keep intact. A good shoot, well run, will bring people country, indeed from other countries, and provide much needed revenue.

These birds are bought in, incubated, reared, protected, fed, encouraged to remain on the estate that has paid for them - and then ultimately shot (some of them).

In the wild they are tremendously unsuccessful.

However, they represent a deal of investment, provide employment for many in their upbringing, provide more employment for people who service the shoot (from local catering to beaters from the nearby villages) - bring revenue into the estate - and provide a jolly good day out for many many people.

They are invariably eaten. The shooter will take some of the bag, the beaters will be given a brace or two, the rest will be handed out on the estate or sold to a local game retailer and the money returned to support the trade.

It's rearing of meat - the only difference is in the culling.

Anyone who eats meat eats meat that is not reared with anywhere near the care, rarely free range in the same way, and ALWAYS transported for death in a central location often in inhumane and protracted processes.

These birds live a free and wild life, death is instantaneous and takes place without transportation and unexpectedly.

They provide income for hundreds, support estates as part of the income, provide food and sustain an entire way of life and rural existence.

I would defend anybodies right to shoot - and be any part of the process.

I would also commend that you admit your ignorance as to the bigger picture, and that you asked. So many 'bleeding hearts' wring their hands and know nothing of the enormity of the reliance of a local community on such events, and refuse to listen to the arguments that actually it's much MORE humane than other ways of providing meat for the table.