another anti huint chav up before the beak

No...I think your actual words were,
"unfortunatley do not have facilities to look after a youngster."
No mention of your having to work on your OH.

So many inconsistencies....ho hum!

Now, back to Moralcampaigner....maybe she's busy private eye work catching the real criminals in the world?? ROFLMAO
 
I think Shils has succintly covered it with the phrase .....

'Keep your frinds close, your enemies closer'

And I wonder which forum you actually tell the real story on? So far your posts on ERR and posts on here totally contradict.

Gosh, what and who should we believe?
 
QR to the start of the thread re taking photos of children.

I am a school teacher.

In order for me to take photos of my students completing their biology A level practical work/GCSE work/Portfolio evidence I have to write a letter to all of their parents seeking their permission. I then have to wait for the parents to send back the reply slips stating if I can or not. Those I can, brilliant and it aids their evidence portfolio. Those I can't well, have to do other work to catch up.

I am a professional, with a completed and clean enhanced CRB check, yet I cannot tale photos of students that I have known for 5 years. Why someone who is completely unknown to these children out hunting can take photos of them and I can't is completely beyond me.
 
I am a professional, with a completed and clean enhanced CRB check, yet I cannot tale photos of students that I have known for 5 years. Why someone who is completely unknown to these children out hunting can take photos of them and I can't is completely beyond me.
Click to expand...

Like I said earlier

"Hunt monitor - paedophile. Hmmm hard to tell the two apart at times"

Both are equally delusional.
 
He apparently doesn't know the difference between hunt monitors and paedophiles (he's not a very bright chap, you're best just to agree with him or he gets upset and confused) :)
 
He apparently doesn't know the difference between hunt monitors and paedophiles (he's not a very bright chap, you're best just to agree with him or he gets upset and confused) :)
Click to expand...


Yet another moronic delusional driveller raises their head from their slop bucket in order to show the world how truly insignificant they are.

Still living in that high rise block in east london Endemic?
 
No, I actually moved house so I could live closer to a playground.

You talk some sh*te!
Click to expand...

Even more moronic delusional drivel from the truly insignificant.

Well you would now all about talking and eating sh*te!
 
You bore the arse off me.
Click to expand...

Likewise. As I have told you many times before.

But then you do know all about arses. As you talk out of yours 99% of the time.

How is life Manor Park?
 
Hey shall we have another argument about whether lynx and wolves kill foxes. I have loads of new references showing that they do :D :D :D
 
Can you smell that? Sniff...sniff..smells like, smells like SH*TE!

would love to see your evidence of lynx hunting in a pack.......

In a TEN year study 29 lynx were found to take only 37 foxes out of a total of 617 prey animals recovered, the bulk of which were roe deer and chamios. That's 37 foxes in ten years between 29 lynx. That's 1.3 foxes per lynx per decade. Hardly predation pressure is it?

It also goes on to say ' It (lynx) cannot tirelessly run down its prey in the same manner that a pack of wolves (or dogs - my comment) can '

Link.
http://www.treesforlife.org.uk/forest/missing/Hetherington_lynx_ECOS.pdf

 
As far as I am aware wolves do hunt coyotes in packs but not foxes. It has been proved that foxes have never had any natural predators.
 
Can you smell that? Sniff...sniff..smells like, smells like SH*TE!

would love to see your evidence of lynx hunting in a pack.......

In a TEN year study 29 lynx were found to take only 37 foxes out of a total of 617 prey animals recovered, the bulk of which were roe deer and chamios. That's 37 foxes in ten years between 29 lynx. That's 1.3 foxes per lynx per decade. Hardly predation pressure is it?
Click to expand...

This sure is sh*te!

The article actually says
"An intensive 10-year
study of the diet of 29 lynx in the Swiss Jura Mountains, where capercaillie are
more abundant than in the Scottish Highlands, recovered the remains of 617
individual prey animals using snow-and radio-tracking.8 As expected, roe deer and
chamois represented the bulk of the remains, but in the 10 years of the study, only
one capercaillie was found to have fallen prey to the local lynx population.
Interestingly, 37 foxes also fell prey to the lynx in the study. Aside from killing large
herbivores, large carnivores also frequently kill smaller carnivores."

From one isolated study.....recovered remains! Hardly conclusive evidence. LOL

I would seem that you're better off being a caper than a fox.

Oh yeah as for the rest.

"The lynx is a solitary ambush hunter requiring large areas of cover from which
to launch a surprise attack on small ungulate prey, such as roe deer Capreolus
capreolus. It cannot tirelessly run down its prey in open habitats in the same
manner that a pack of wolves can."

Yep! Sure smells like sh*te!
 
There are no high rises in manor park. Do I live in a high rise or do I live in manor park???
Click to expand...

More sh*te.

I lifted this off the web.

" Manor Park, London E12
[color:red]Found on the 10th floor is this 2 bedroom, high rise property benefiting from gas central heating (untested) and double glazing. The property offers views across Manor Park and is situated on 10th floor." [/color]

So there are no high rise properties in Manor Park ay? ROTFLMAO
 
What evidence are you using to support your claim that its total nonsense.

The same one you used to claim that wolves dont kill foxes perhaps.
 
Can you smell that? Sniff...sniff..smells like, smells like SH*TE!

would love to see your evidence of lynx hunting in a pack.......

In a TEN year study 29 lynx were found to take only 37 foxes out of a total of 617 prey animals recovered, the bulk of which were roe deer and chamios. That's 37 foxes in ten years between 29 lynx. That's 1.3 foxes per lynx per decade. Hardly predation pressure is it?

It also goes on to say ' It (lynx) cannot tirelessly run down its prey in the same manner that a pack of wolves (or dogs - my comment) can '

Link.
http://www.treesforlife.org.uk/forest/missing/Hetherington_lynx_ECOS.pdf
Click to expand...

The only slight proviso that I would add to your statement is that of course the 617 animals would only have represented a fraction of the total actual kills for those 29 lynx.

Those animals were the prey that the study found. There's no suggestion that it is all the animals killed by the lynx over that period.

Reading some of the literature that suggests a kill rate of one animal per day per lynx the actual total animals killed for those 29 lynx over a ten year period would have been 105,850. On the basis of a 5% kill of foxes then this would equate to 5,292 actual foxes killed by those 29 lynx over a ten year period.

That being said I see no reason to take any notice of research posted on here by a pro.

However I don't think anyone would seriously suggest that 29 lynx only killed 617 prey animals in a ten year period. Nor that that is the conclusion of that study.
 
If the 29 lynx only killed 617 animals in a ten year period then that would mean 2 animals killed per lynx per year.
 
What evidence are you using to support your claim that its total nonsense.

The same one you used to claim that wolves dont kill foxes perhaps.
Click to expand...

No because that article is posted by a pro. It's pro hunt propaganda.

If you note I am being completely objective and am willing to criticise Endyminion's failure to realise that the 617 kills in the study was just a small sample of the overall kills made by the lynx. However the assertion that 5% of them were foxes is highly dubious.
 
and chasing it a pack too! Something antis have assured me wolves would never do lol
Click to expand...
The video shows wolves chasing a COYOTE in a pack NOT a fox! Get your facts right. Wolves would never hunt a fox in a pack.
 
Ok reading through the article here http://psjc.icm.edu.pl/psjc/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?B00-9-26 it gives an average period between kills of 5.5 days (between males and females).

Extrapolating that gives a total of 66 animals killed per lynx per year. Which equates to a total kill of 19245 for those 29 lynx over a ten year period. The study suggests a fox kill of 37/617 = 6%. On the basis of the 617 kills sampled in the study this would suggest that the 29 lynx killed 1154 foxes over that period. 40 foxes per lynx.

The 6% figure for fox kills must therefore be wrong.
 
Are you dim? While you set out the full text what is says actually proves my point. The proportions of fox is the recovered remains is tiny and would not be nearly enough to influence fox pops. 29 lynx kill 37 foxes in ten years? Come on, do the maths!

As for '"The lynx is a solitary ambush hunter requiring large areas of cover from which
to launch a surprise attack on small ungulate prey, such as roe deer Capreolus
capreolus. It cannot tirelessly run down its prey in open habitats in the same
manner that a pack of wolves can." This states that lynx use AMBUSH and SURPRISE and do not run down their prey like hounds. Therefore hunting with hounds does not mimic natural hunting when it comes to lynx and foxes.

Geez. Get an education will you? :smirk:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top