crdale

Try looking at http://www.terresdeurope.net/ang_accueil.htm it is a bit out of date but it may give you some pointers   Chris

Have to confess that today is probably the only day when I miss an English newspaper. Replacing with the Today prog on Radio 4. Just heard red fornt door at no 10 on the orders of Her Holiness   I preferred the item at the end of the program which was a report on the UK theme being replaced by a European theme which icluded an arrangement of the van de Valk theme tune, I could see blood pressures reaching boiling point all over the country.   Chris

[quote user="Logan"] It's an interesting concept. The system makes the people not the otherway round. A bit like chicken and egg, which comes first?   [/quote]   Chicken and egg laying in bed together having a cigarette one turns to the other and says I guess thats answered that question![:$] Chris  

How about some Welsh whisky   Chris

[quote user="Dicksmith"] Placebos don't work on broken bones, cancer or loss of limbs, and neither does prayer, laying on of hands or immersion in 'holy' water. [/quote]   But they do work example on radio today, drug X is for stomach ulcers in tests it cures 70% in a month placebo only cures 40% question how does a sugar pill cure 40% of stomach ulcers in a month and no i don't think it is a miracle   Chris

[quote user="jond"]The exception seems to be ash. Ash, is far as I can see, is absolutely the best firewood, and it will burn quite cheerfully when green. Unsurprisingly, ash (frène) is not always easy to come by. [/quote]   Hence the old saying ash green fit for a queen Chris

[quote user="Weedon"]   What is Cuba famous for apart from heels? weedon [/quote]   how about big beards and captain scarlet hats   Chris

[quote user="Logan"]  I think the only glimmer of hope is that IF recombination to a human to human transmissible virus doesn't take place for a year or so, there may be adequate time for vaccine production. [/quote]   That might not be the case because to become human to human transmissible the virus needs to mutate and in doing so it might make all vaccines already produced useless, mind you it might also make the virus virtually harmless at the same time it is largely down to sheer luck   Chris

"The farmer might also consider his farming practices if this is a reguar occurence."   Better evacuate the sheep off the welsh mountains then Chris[&]

[quote user="Deimos"] <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--> There are many, some of which have been discussed through his thread – maybe read back through the thread.  A classic example is the “need to control vermin” and yet captive breed/release.  The area of the countryside I’m referring to is Oxfordshire and the captive breeding “centre” is in the Banbury area. <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--> I can only speak about areas where I have personal experience and re-stocking the fox population does damage relations with farmers.  However, local hunt’s do not seem to care to much about this (in fact their attitude is that they could not care less about anybody that does not fully agree and support whatever they chose to do).  So they do it anyway, hunt anyway, generate all the negative feelings in the local community.  However, most do not live in the local community but visit from the towns so there are well clear of local “ill feeling”. It is such a attitude that probably helps those who wish it banned and gives the pro-hunt people such a hard time to win any public support.  Were they to “court public opinion” a bit then they might have more success, but arrogant attitudes and not caring about the local/farming communities just alienates them from everybody. <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--> [/quote]   Reading back through the thread I see some arguements for hunting are better than others but then I look at some of the twaddle and multiple untruths the antis come up with and as for the vermin arguement it is all relative if you live in an area where foxes take your livestock you might well consider them vermin. Not sure about captive breeding as I have never come across it before other than with thing such as pheasants and the like so I will not comment on that until I know more, however if the local farmers were so upset by this breeding program why did they not ban the hunt from their land, most of the people I hunted with were local to that area  and so were happy to be considerate to others as they were living in the comunity they were hunting in.The most arrogant and abusive attitudes to be seen on hunting day were from the antis, but I will not start a my anti story is worse than your hunt story arguement.  You are right about courting public opinion the antis do have a fairly easy time of it defending such a sweet looking creature however the hunting crowd have done allot of work on that front and many more national UK newspapers are somewhat more pro hunting than they once were.   Chris

If the pro-hunting lobby maintains that they are managing the countryside, then the fact that there is a need to re-stock on an ongoing basis shows that they are incapable of such management as their attempts have failed.  In this I am being generous and have not suggested that they are actually “managing” for short term self-interest (i.e. enjoyment and profit from their sport. Personally I disagree with the type of hunting carried out in the UK as outlawed in the recent new laws – but that is personal opinion.  What irritates me is the continuing untrue arguments and justifications being put forward by the pro-hunting lobby to try and overturn the new laws. Ian   There shouldn't be a need to restock I know there is no such need around here and in some livestock areas of the country it would damage relations with the farmers if it did take place where in the country are you referring to? What are the untrue arguments and justifications being put forward?   Chris 

Never called it anything other than a sport. Don't know enough about the french situation to say anything specific bar that there are nearly 100 packs of fox hounds in the country, plus any english ones that spring up in the next few months. Chris

[quote user="Deimos"] [quote user="crdale"] As are all animal numbers everywhere if there is not enough food to support the population numbers fall if over population occurs disease becomes a problem and numbers fall and so on. Chris   [/quote] <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--> This is a massive over simplification as there are several different mechanisms applying to population dynamics in biology.  There are basically two types of animal in terms of population control “k-selectors” and “r-selectors”.  K-selection control their populations by virtue of the “carrying capacity” of the environment whilst R-selectors optimise on reproductive fate and “failure” of offspring.  The situation becomes more complex because the reproductive rate is not linear with the number of individuals – but rather “bouncy” (difficult to describe without drawing a picture”.  The reproductive rate vs the number of individuals tends to have several “stable” points in terms of feedback.  Under normal circumstances animal populations will remain at their  higher “stable point”.  However, things can happen (particularly when you get humans around) that can cause populations to drop and, should they drop sufficiently then they can move to a lower stable point from which it will be very difficult for the population to recover.  Typical examples as to techniques that can cause such populations drop include “harvesting” using the wrong techniques.  The classic example is fishing quotas based on catches – which, given that the Fisheries Authorities state that the quotas are set at the “maximum sustainable yield”, creates an unstable equilibrium.  Were they to e.g. license appropriately by e.g. gear (e.g. numbers of fishing boat days at sea) they the equilibrium would be stable as, when populations decline, so do catches and everything becomes self correcting.  With e.g. quotas at the maximum sustainable yield, catch one fish above the quote and in theory (if the quota is set exactly as Maximum sustainable yield) then the population will crash to the next lower stable population equilibrium point (normally much much lower population numbers). In situations where there is a need to start captive breeding clearly something in the population dynamics of “harvesting” has gone badly wrong.  Things like disease outbreaks are “self-correcting” and thus are not the cause of the need to captive breed (other than in the very short term).  This the most likely cause is the mismanagement of the fox population by those who claim their interest and abilities are in “managing the countryside”.  In practice I thing the evidence points to them managing their own sport and nothing to do with managing the countryside at all. <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--> Ian <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--> [/quote] Are you using a complicated way of saying that over hunting has wiped out the fox population?   Chris

"That is a red herring ! Or are hunters so blood thirsty that it AS to be a live fox. Says a lot doesn't it?"   Not a red herring at all but simply pointing out that you are telling people to take up a different sport.  A sport that at first glance appear the same but when watched for a short while is quite obviously different. As I pointed out in an earlier post most of the followers do not see a kill so would be dissappointed if they attended for blood thirsty reasons, in fact I have never seen a fox killed while I have been hunting despite tending to ride near the front, I have however seen a fox in a snare (dead) and found a fox that had been shot and wounded and got away and died of its wounds some days later and they are both experiances I would not care to repeat.   Chris 

"Therefore they will be just as happy with drag hunting. ! "   Would you tell a football player he would be just as happy playing rugby or vice versa?   Chris

"Remember that it took the RSPCA some years, but eventually they too backed the anti hunting stance."   Only after they had been targeted and taken over by the animal rights lobby in much the same way as the labour party was targeted by the militant tendancy in the late seventies early eighties   "The whole hunting argument is flawed because the fox numbers are self regulatory (in the countryside) and most farmers do not consider them to be a major pest, in which case you are left with a group of people who hunt for the pleasure of the kill."   As are all animal numbers everywhere if there is not enough food to support the population numbers fall if over population occurs disease becomes a problem and numbers fall and so on. If most farmers today do not consider the fox a major pest it probably has something to do with the fact that the proportion of them that keep livestock that is a potential victim of fox predation is allot lower than it used to be. Do you really think that everybody that hunts does so for the pleasure of the kill, because the vast majority of them would be utterly disappointed if that is the case as the followers rarely see a kill.   Chris  

putting something out of its misery, if you are sure and have the expertise to know that it can't recover with assistance, is not the same as hounding something, digging it out of the ground or sending dogs after it to see if it can get away and then coming to the conclusion that if it can't get away it must have been weak or ill, so we did it a favour and we can go home patting ourselves on the back having saved a few foxes from a natural end.    you are putting words in my mouth I did not say that all hunted foxes are weak or ill.     I do have a problem with "dodgy" (to use your terminology) excuses for carrying out certain acts. It would be preferable if people who like killing foxes were up front about it and just said so, in fact it says something about people that enjoy this "sport" that there is a continual need to justify it as if they were doing the rest of society a great service.   No excuses from me only reasons or how about a quote from Graham Sirl ex Chief officer of the league against cruel sports, campaigner against hunting for 22 years and Burns inquiry team member "hunting offers a balance in the countryside"   Chris  

I don't think that a lame or sick fox is going to provide the 'sport' most hunters seek ! Or have they all got chrystal bowls and can tell which fox is oldest, just about to get some disease etc ? I did not say that only the old weak and diseased are hunted you do not need a crystal ball  to know that those that are in a weaked state will be easier to catch. Chris

Not in France! Whether that is the case or not in the UK you would need to provide evidence If you think that we should go around killing anything that looks as though it may be a bit old, lame (lame?) or infirm for the greater benefit of wildlife, where would you suggest that we draw the line, sparrows. Come on, get serious   I would suggest you get serious I see very little evidence in your dodgy opinions and yes if I saw a sparrow suffering needlessly then I would not walk by on the other side of the road I would put it out of its misery Chris

For what it's worth as this thread seems to have drifted all over the place, my own considered view is that the "requirement" to hunt or cull foxes is a myth.      That may or may not be true but the fox population tends to be healthier in areas where hunting takes place due to the fact the stronger cleaver foxes out smart the hounds and get away the old, lame and infirm get killed without having to suffer a long drawn out death over several days or weeks, no other form of control can sort the weak from the strong in this way.   Chris

Foxes do sometimes leave behind things they kill and come back for them later.   A few years ago a large pig breeding company was having lots of trouble with its outdoor herds large numbers of piglets were dissappearing without a trace thieves were suspected, so the company hired a security firm to guard the farms. They soon discovered that it was foxes taking the piglets and so lost their job to a pest control firm.   Chris

I've always thought that one of the reasons so many of the 'quality' have hunted in the UK is to emphasise their equestrian status - and that so many of the 'ordinary people' have kow-towed to them as part of the semi-feudal country society that so many of them seem to want to perpetuate, all tied cottages and tugged forelocks.   Now let me try and remember what these elite people did for a living when I was employed to qualify a horse for point to points by hunting it a few years ago. There was the Farmer, the green grocer, the farrier, the school teacher, the solicitor, the doctor, another couple of farmers with their wives, a nurse, an exotic dancer a factory owner, a property developer, a stud groom and his girlfriend, a farm labouer and a few other quite ordinary people as well   Chris

[quote user="le bouffon"]Since when did TB or GW tape the beheading of non combatants and put them on the web?And how many did saddam kill with out a second thought since I take it thats what you are on about.[/quote]   It is always a good idea for we superior western democracies to remember that the coup that overthrew the proto-democratic government and replaced it with saddam was largly sponsored by the CIA   Chris

Endurance Riding

Unlike its rebellious cousins across the Atlantic the UK does not have a proper constitution so it is difficult to define any "rights" to free speech etc.that can be defended.    The big advantage of not having a written constitution is that nothing is against the law unless their is a law against it whereas as soon as you write a constitution down you either limit ones freedom it is not allowed unless the constitution says so or it extends it to a ridiculous extent you have a right to bear arms even if you have an arsenal large enough to equip a small army   Chris