BS: The (in)glorious 12th

Subject: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 06:32 AM

Today's the day that if you are a grouse you start to keep a low profile! Don't get me wrong here. I am a meat eater and I think hunting is probably a better way to get meat than farming it but the grouse shoot does seem to have become yet another 'industry'.

I am led to believe, and I accept that I may have been misled, that the grouse shoot only started to involve beaters driving the grouse towards stationary shooters when Edward the 7th became to unfit to walk across the moors. Prior to that I believe the line of shooters did walk a long way and disturbed their own grouse.

In addition, farming of grouse to shoot and 'management' of grouse moors seems to have added to the issues that are causing flooding lower down the valleys. See this article for details.

Is it not about time that this issue was addressed? Carry on shooting by all means but can we not make sure it is managed in a way that is better for all concerned? Including the grouse!

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 06:36 AM

...and of course there is always ol' Ewan's viewpoint

He called me a louse and said, Think of the grouse
Well I thought but I still couldn't see
Why old Kinder Scout and the moors round about
Couldn't take both the poor grouse and me
He said, All this land is my master's
At that I stood shaking my head
No man has the right to own mountains
Any more than the deep ocean bed

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 07:23 AM

other than on a whisky bottle (and then I confess, it didn't have my full attention) - i'm not sure i've ever seen a grouse.

if the English language were consistent I suppose it would go:-

mouse - mice
grouse -grice

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 07:31 AM

Yes, a lot of shooting up here, The grouse are farmed for "sport", they are so fat they can hardly fly.....The chinless wonders who do the shooting disgust me. mainly Austrians and Germans in this area with a few English townies.....don't know one local who participates.

Locals(gamekeepers etc), usually stick to clays, or deer culling as part of their employment.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Iains
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 07:42 AM

For the argument concerning moor management and flooding I think I would want to see a detailed study over time of river velocity and height against rain gauge data, flooding events and moor management.
It may have some merit but I would want to see a detailed study before making any assumptions, it superficially seems more another means to attack grouse shooting, though I could be wrong..
I suspect intense bursts of rainfall cause the flooding events. Burning heather has been an upland management process for many many years. As the heather gets older, higher and more woody the nutritional value and attractiveness to grazing animals decreases. This is not just an issue for grouse moors, it is valid for all moors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015%E2%80%9316_Great_Britain_and_Ireland_floods
https:
//www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/sep/08/flooding-uk-government-plans-for-more-extreme-rainfall

http://slowtheflow.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/HB_Dissertation_A-Clark-Final.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 07:48 AM

If I call people who spend a fortune killing a few small birds a day using a method that depends on other men disturbing the birds first "brainless oiks," I suppose someone will come along and call me jealous. 😂 For me, the worst aspect is the fact that these idiots are permitted to close vast areas of upland to people while they're having their "sport." For me, all beaches, river banks and high wild places should be open and free for anyone to roam at will all the year round. In my otherwise misspent twenties I roamed all over the northern Highlands through many summer days and the only trouble I ever encountered was from midges. I did once have shots fired over my head by aggressive grouse shooters in Upper Teesdale, a highly illegal act. Until they fired I didn't even know they were there. There was no concept of asking me nicely.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 08:10 AM

It is indeed a question of all moors and I fully accept that this is only part of the problem. Hence my phrase, "seems to have added to the issues that are causing flooding". Nature is such a delicately balanced ecology that even the slightest thing can make a massive difference. Often for the worse but sometimes for the better. I am a great believer in the fact that even small steps will get you to the end of the longest journey. Yes, Ok, I do have little legs so have your fun... We are not going to reforest the planet overnight or reverse the greenhouse effect anytime soon but surely the quick easy wins should be the place to start.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Rapparee
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 09:57 AM

As one who has hunted what we here in Yankdom call "upland birds" (grouse, pheasant, chukar, and others) I must admit that the idea of having the birds driven to the hunters has always puzzled me. People can be shot (witness what Witless Dick Cheney did some years back), and that was a line of shooters walking, not using "beaters." That's totally apart from the land issue -- here you get permission to hunt private land or hunt public land such as National Grasslands and Forests. The concepts of "shooting" in the UK escape me, except as a way to point out how much better one social group is than another. (Yes, there are private "hunting preserves" here and they are spit on by true hunters.)

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 11:38 AM

Grouse moors are highly managed. The heather has to be just so, otherwise no grice. They are very artificial habitats. In fact, much moorland is semi-natural only, vast tracts once having been afforested. There's concern about the erosion of exposed peat in many areas. Increasing temperatures and hot, dry spells are threats to peatland on slopes. Peat acts like a huge sponge, holding rainwater and releasing it gradually, which is what we want. Loss of peat would mean a lot more runoff, increasing the rate of erosion, and there would be more surface water flooding in heavy rain.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Raggytash
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 12:06 PM

Hang about Steve, most of the UK scenery is man made, including things that you and I love like hedgerows and verges.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 12:37 PM

Truth is awful funny, but as funny grows awful goes.

I snigger at all the grouse in my fridge.
My bubbling submerged laughter needs a Merlin
to release the mighty floodgates below.

I've met hunters I don't like, some a smidge.
But that has never kept me from laughing with'em.
In fact laughing always made bonds grow.

I killed 2 grouse with my car on the same ridge
They left a mark on my windshield with their beak.
I never saw them coming , so how would I know.

What some do by gun I do by Datsun and a smirk.
There's plenty of hoary shooters like tight lipped sheep.
They join a group, pick a park and lock the gate.

With bow and arrow there's no sound, they don't work.
But the blast of a gun will delight any creep?
You be judge if they are a villain or soul mate.

Some hit their mark with an instant kill by a quirk.
Feelings fueled by toxic tanks of hate that seep.
Killers in a clique, it needn't be your fate.

In our mind we know who's the saint and who's the jerk.
It is sick to worship the prejudice they keep.
My best medicine is laughing at hate.

Twisting gun nuts upon themselves makes me smile.
Death by amendment with a loving heart makes us weep
Here's laughing at you, and your entire manly group.

They choose sides, load their guns and lock their gate.
They drink and wash from a toxic tank and make communal soup.
AR 15's rule the roost, some say for roast grouse sake

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 12:41 PM

.. something else for the usual suspects to grouse about...!!!...




ok.. sorry mates.. that's too terrible by even my standards... 😜

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 01:32 PM

I think I ducked that remark.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Teribus
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 02:59 PM

Grouse is not farmed, you are thinking of Pheasant.

Controlled burning of sections of heather is essential to provide food (new growth) for the grouse, only a certain limited amount of burning is carried out as the grouse need mature heather to nest

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 03:47 PM

So what does grouse taste like ?

..and is it a basic spuds, veg, and gravy dinner - and leftovers sandwiches;
or foul tasting rotted flesh flavour that toffs seem to like, and dress up with poncey expensive odd ingredients presentation to disguise the flavour...???

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 03:57 PM

There's very little natural wilderness left in Britain. Sea cliffs can come close, as can mountain tops above 3000 feet. True ancient woodland is rare. On Dartmoor, Black Tor Copse and Wistman's Wood come close, as does the stunted oak forest of Dizzard, about ten minutes from my house. The sad fact is that any area determined as natural is inevitably surrounded by less natural habitat and subject to invasive interference therefrom. Great swathes of heather moorland may look very nice in August but they are no more "natural" than a field of waving corn.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Mr Red
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 04:21 PM

a grouse about grouse.

there are more important issues. But I guess homelessness is a much more complicated issue, even at the individual level, to invoke a consensus.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 04:37 PM

My apologies Mr T, you are of course correct. the old brain cells must be diminishing fast :0). Pheasants it is, beautiful birds, they slaughter them by the sack load.
I have never owned or fired a gun in my life and don't understand why people get pleasure from killing animals.

I think it would be good if these so called hunters were obliged to eat all they shoot.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Iains
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 04:37 PM

A quick guide to amplify Steve's contribution.

http://www.macaulay.ac.uk/soilquality/Moorland%20Succession.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Aug 17 - 05:36 PM

Grouse is not farmed

My apologies. Grouse moors are managed rather than farmed. I suppose there must be a huge difference or it would not have been mentioned...

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Iains
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 03:57 AM

I wonder where the truth really is? Some interesting points are raised.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4785582/Sir-Ian-Botham-Cute-No-verminous-killers.html

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 04:44 AM

There are some interesting points indeed, Iains. Underlining the fact that nature is a very delicate balance. Too much of one thing or another will have a great effect. Gamekeepers certainly have been part of country life for generations and I think they do indeed know more than most about their own locality. Maybe if the RSPB employed gamekeepers along the same lines as managed grouse moors they may do a lot better in these areas? I do think, however, that Mr Botham is being rather unfair on the RSPB. They undoubtedly do good work in many areas but an organisation with such a vast remit will not get everything right first time. As to whet the truth is. Well, as I have often said in many threads where opinions are polarized, the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Iains
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 05:11 AM

Dthe G I think the RSPB, rather like the RSPCA and national trust, tend to let ideals get in the way of common sense at times(and I have phrased that as delicately as I could)
Mr Botham also can hardly be regarded as a disinterested observer.
I would take issue with the lack of transparency though- I would make the continued charitable status of the RSPB dependent upon independently verified transparency.
Nature, the environment, ecosystems-call it what you will, Despite continual scientific studies, it has a nasty habit of frequently upsetting deeply held "beliefs". Probably because the many strands making the whole have extremely complex, poorly understood inter relationships and inter-dependencies.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: JHW
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 05:21 AM

Aware of the impending 12th I walked Barden Reservoirs (nr Skipton N. Yorkshire) amongst stunningly purple heather and apologised "Sorry grice" to all those I disturbed; possibly a buzzard too lumbered into the sky from very near me. (Not sure as no call but very big and right colour)
Lovely walk.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 05:31 AM

Can't say I disagree with much of that Iains but even if Ian B is not a 'disinterested observer', he is a cricketer, not a scientist :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 07:17 AM

Botham's article is arrant, ignorant nonsense (and he's a cricketing hero of mine). He reminds me of all those letter-writers to the Western Morning News who call for the destruction of all sparrowhawks. How do these people suppose that the songbirds, etc., managed to live alongside foxes and other predators for thousands of years since the last glaciation? If you want some home truths, Iains, it's that gamekeepers, via nest-wrecking, shooting and poisoning brought hen harriers to the verge of extinction. Golden eagle nests are wrecked every year in Scotland and birds are regularly poisoned. Landowners and their gamekeepers are not interested in maintaining biodiversity or ecological balance. They are interested only in maintaining their extremely limited range of desirable species which can be shot for the sport of brainless gits like Sir Ian and for their profit. Gamekeepers play a massive part in keeping our most magnificent raptors under constant threat, and farming practices, along with domestic cats, are the biggest threat to songbirds. If we all knew a bit more and cared a bit more, we wouldn't allow these countryside vandals to douse fields with neonicotinoid insecticides that wipe out bees and migrate up tbe food chain or plant winter wheat where skylarks breed. Foxes and birds of prey are easy scapegoats and they can't answer back, even though they're a bit brainier than Botham.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 07:48 AM

I think he does make some good points. Steve, but it is not the whole story. Yes, some gamekeepers are guilty of what you say but they know their stuff and some may care more for biodiversity than you give them credit for. Yes, I agree with him on some points but as I said the RSBP does stalwart work in a lot of areas and they should not be written off because they may get some things wrong. If we had the best of both of them we would be on a winner but while a few rich people control the game we do not have much chance. But that is a different topic altogether :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Stu
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 09:07 AM

"poorly understood inter relationships and inter-dependencies."

Not as poorly understood as you might think. We understand very well that an ecosystem is a flow of energy, from sunlight to apex predator. Ecosystems can be stable for very long periods when they reach an equilibrium but that this stability is affected (amongst other things) by the loss of various components that reduce biodiversity, and the loss of apex predators (in the case of the moors birds like hen harriers) has significant affects on the health of an ecosystem.

I can highly recommend this book which is very readable without being dumbed down: The Wolf's Tooth: Keystone Predators, Trophic Cascades, and Biodiversity

If we could make every farmer, gamekeeper, politician and other monetised user of the land read and understand this book, the world would be a better place.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 09:12 AM

His article is basically an anti-fox rant which is predicated on the fact that foxes prey on game birds. The problem there is that game-bird habitat is highly artificial and just happens to be nirvana for foxes. You might as well rail against pigeons for inhabiting Radcliffe bus station in large numbers, where bits of crisps, pasties, pies and butties provide a rich harvest of pigeon grub. Neither Botham's grouse moor nor Radcliffe bus station are remotely natural habitats. Yet he comes out with this piece of egregious ignorance:

"The heart of the problem is that the RSPB's leadership appears to lack the courage to manage nature. Everyone who lives in the countryside knows that nature left to its own devices is a brutal place."

Well nature left to its own devices created the amazing beauty and staggering diversity of the natural world over billions of years well before Sir Ian's shooting fad came along. What's wrong with his simplistic notion is that he doesn't realise that simplifying nature by drastically reducing diversity is at the heart of the predator "problem" he sees. His grouse moor provides habitat in which grouse are unnaturally overcrowded. There are few other bird species and they exist in low numbers. Birds of prey are not suffered to exist. The vegetation is highly restricted as to species and is tailored for grouse only. It's no wonder that foxes see their opportunity. Grouse moors attract foxes for the same reason they attract shooters. They are full of grouse. Duh. So Sir Ian, in order to strengthen his case against the animal that spoils his shoot, lashes out in all sorts of other anti-fox directions. If foxes are "out of control" (which they are not), it's solely because we have created the conditions for that to happen. He's made his grouse moor into a very brutal place by NOT leaving it to its own devices. If you don't believe me, just imagine you're a grouse up there this afternoon, shot at by morons by day and threatened by the foxes that Sir Ian has encouraged by night. The one predator they should be scared of, the bird of prey, doesn't get a look-in. It might even be lying poisoned in a ditch. Now that's what I call mucking about with nature.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 09:39 AM

I still think that some of his points are fine but they are only part of the picture. It is the way these things are presented and all such articles should be taken with a good handful of salt. Nothing wrong with what he says as such but there are lots of things he doesn't say. That is fine, there are other people, such as yourself, who will rectify that and so there should be. It is how we learn.

Stu - Not read the book but refer often to snippets about the trophic cascade at Yellowstone once wolves were reintroduced. There is talk of lynx in Scotland but imagine the fuss the shooters will make then!

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 09:40 AM

"Everyone who lives in the countryside knows that nature left to its own devices is a brutal place."

Odd. OK there are things that I don't find pleasant, and even once just in our garden (OK artificial), I can't pretend I enjoyed once seeing a sparrowhawk taking down and proceeding to eat a collard dove.. But the thing about nature in my own innocent/ignorant view is that it, left alone, will always find a balance. In that context, it is irrelevant whether I "approve" of every action a predator (which after all has a perfect right to exist and I believe forms part of the balance) may take. More nature has its ways that are perhaps not for me to question.

Foxes: sure we have kept chicken, ducks and geese in the past and I know what they can do. I don't go as far as blaming them for taking a ready made meal we could have taken better care of though.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Stu
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 10:11 AM

" Everyone who lives in the countryside knows that nature left to its own devices is a brutal place"

A statement that manages to combine both staggering arrogance and ignorance.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 10:35 AM

Agreed, Jon. I'm not saying that we should always just manage the environment by leaving it alone (though that can be a good policy in some circumstances). Most of what we regard as our natural places are, in reality, semi-natural at best. That includes almost all of what we call our ancient woodland. The climax community has usually been deflected away from by our activities and, generally, the climax won't return even if we abandon the land, because we may have removed nutrients or altered the hydrology or degraded the soil or introduced alien species. In those circumstances, management for conservation and biodiversity may be the best policy. What wouldn't work is some ignorant berk with an agenda going out shooting at foxes, thinking he's restoring some kind of balance. He isn't, and he'll make things worse.

Incidentally, sparrowhawks are a native species whereas collared doves are recent aliens, dating back only to the early 1950s.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Iains
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 10:45 AM

Shaw you are having a rant!
1) Botham may be former cricketer but does that mean he can only talk rubbish? If so he is in fine company. How about Albert Einstein:"There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be available.It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will(1932)
or Lord Kelvin:"X rays will prove to be a hoax(1883)
or Hiram Maxim on the role of the machine gun in war:"It will make war impossible)
2)It is also worth pointing out that nature(in the widest sense) has given rise to some major extinction events throuhout the geologic record
3)There is only one dangerous predator-you see it each time you look in a mirror.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 11:03 AM

Don't talk such rubbish yourself. I didn't say he talked rubbish because he was a cricketer. And I absolutely can't see what "extinction events" have got to do with what we're talking about. And I'm not aware that anyone here is making predictions that may turn out to be bollix. You're lowering the tone. Was there a hidden bone in your roast chicken?

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 11:12 AM

I certainly wasn't aware of tat re the dove, Steve and thanks for the other thoughts.

--
I see we are back to cricket... OT but I'm not convinced off hand that I really liked him, maybe a bit "anti cricket establishment" in playing days that was OK but often (to me) a bit pompous. My father disliked him so much that he stopped buying Shreaded wheat!

But I think the comment starting this was about his performance on the field. On that I don't think there is any doubt he was a fine all rounder and one (although I'd have chosen to bad like Viv Richards and bowl like Michael Holding, and probably in all round ability, Imran Khan was my favourite...) that people of my generation wanted to emulate as well as being a player that led other generations older and younger to look for the next England Botham.

That, the way I read it is just passing interest, not a statement as to whether or not being a cricketer qualifies or otherwise for making comment on the environment.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 11:36 AM

The bowler's Holding the batsman's Willey?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 11:48 AM

Seems to be some doubt on that one, Dave although I'd think possible. One that can be verified is Lillee caught Willey bowled Dilley.

Anyway, someone needs to bring us back to topic...

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 11:56 AM

i suppose theres no real difference between the posh git shooting birds for pleasure and the poor sod slitting their throats for Bernard Matthews - morally.

they both take life for their own reasons.

even if the posh git did a lot of good - i still wouldn't like him.
i'm not disagreeing with what you're saying Steve - i just think its an irrelevance.

the rich are all twats.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 12:48 PM

I don't think they are all twats, Al. Just a lot of them. If I was rich I would definitely be a twat (nothing new there then before you say it) but if my Mrs was rich, she would be OK. I suppose if I won the lottery I should give it all to her!

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 01:15 PM

"Anyway, someone needs to bring us back to topic... "

I'll try to keep to that after this but for Dave, maybe this is relevant. Sometimes we seem to have what I think of as the "Pugwash effect" where plausibility seems to override our own memories.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 01:25 PM

No good trying to keep on topic with me about anyway, Jon. I knew about the Pugwash thing but we still like to remember Seaman Stains and Roger the cabin boy anyway :-)

I got another look at Penyghent today. Never noticed before, driving back over the tops from Haworth, as Airedale opens up in front of you, there she is in all he glory beyond the next couple of lines of hills. Eeeeeh, happy for the next few hours at least :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 01:39 PM

Which bit was irrelevant, Al?

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 01:46 PM

To equate killing animals for fun and factory farming is a it disingenuous.....to feed our population I'm afraid factory farming has become a necessity....and don't dare say that is "tacit approval of the process", I have already been accused of that in the Nazification thread....and still have received no apology.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 02:07 PM

To equate killing animals for fun and factory farming is a it disingenuous.

Who the fuck has done that?

I'll have a pint of what he's on...

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 02:32 PM

Ake, I did.
Today we are all awash in false equivalencies DtG.

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 02:56 PM

I'm cooking pork chops, chips, leftover curried veg, and gravy..

How well would grouse go with that instead of pork chops...???

[pfr - grew up on a factory council estate eating affordable food out of tins and cardboard packets...]

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 03:38 PM

Foul/fowl?

I don't think I've even had peasant or any of the game birds.

I have eaten woodpigeon though and rabbit back in a time when mum (a life long vegetarian) was open to cooking a bit more for her then meat eating husband and then (I' not sure who is and isn't now in the family...) carnivorous children and I've long been mostly veg, largely for convenience but seem to loose taste for meat, etc. I could waffle on a while there...

Those were probably reasonably "normal", at least my first time round in a small village in N Wales mid 60s and while, yes, dad was with the Abbey and mum a physio, I struggle to think of it all as being rich/poor. Except to say that where I once lived would be expensive property wise now - any property - the village moved from once "behind the times" to "highly desirable"

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 03:59 PM

.. errrrmmm.. so it wouldn't taste very pheasant...!!!??? 😜

[dedicated to Basil Brush - and all other maligned foxes...]

Subject: RE: BS: The (in)glorious 12th
From: Iains
Date: 13 Aug 17 - 04:01 PM

Surely grouse are a farmed species like many other creatures. You may not agree with the efficiency of the process,the restricted market it serves, or the method of slaughter, but it offers a far higher quality of life to the bird than that of a battery hen. Many acres of moorland has to offer more that being cramped in a cage with many others, in a factory farm.
   Perhaps we should raise them in a feedlot, so they may dine regularly. Perhaps off a table of astro turf.Then there would be no confusion over the artificiality of the environment they are raised in.