ycbm
Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
It's the age we live in, but I don't think she deserves that. Chris Packham has used his high profile name to set a bad thing in motion here.
.
Horse being hit around the head
- Thread starter StarcatcherWilliam
- Start date
- Status
It's the age we live in, but I don't think she deserves that. Chris Packham has used his high profile name to set a bad thing in motion here.
.
Tiddlypom
Carries on creakily
Indeed, and all who post on this and on any other threads, on hunting in particular, be very aware that undoubtedly they will be being closely followed by antis. Don't post anything that you may later regret.
Last edited:
CanteringCarrot
Well-Known Member
Hunting discredited itself, but I suppose no one would know if no one were looking.
I think also, some people are a bit ignorant when it comes to conservation. They just hear "guns" "shooting" "killing animals" and don't care about the how or why, just that it's being done, and in their mind, it's not right.
There is a certain amount of hunting that is a necessary evil to preserve species and curb over population which leads to suffering. I think this is fine, but sometimes humans interfere too much and get a bit of a power trip from it all, but that's another subject.
If shooting or hunting is of benefit to an ecosystem/species/conservation effort then I have no problem with it as long as it's done properly. As in people are trained to shoot, what is shot is recorded/monitored, and people are licensed. Shooting, when done right, is fairly humane, IMO. Usually can be a quick death.
I don't know that fox hunting on horseback is the most humane option. I also don't know if it is truly in the interests of conservation. Most are caught up in this tradition and the feeling (or vibes? Idk) they get from seeing hounds work, galloping the countryside, and whatever. Obviously, in some situations, the fox population needs to be controlled, but this could possibly be done in another way.
I personally don't care if it's fox hunting or shooting, if someone's acting poorly, they get put on blast ?
if they're not, then no problem. Involving their kid(s) is totally wrong though. Usually vigilantes step in when they feel that there are no controls or enough regulation. I mean, sometimes they can just be irrational and fighting for some cause that they've deemed the ultimate cause in the minds. However, when you see vigilantes taking action, it's important to look at why. Is there a broken system?
I'm not necessarily happy to see vigilantes interrupt anything, but I do think it's worth examining why they're doing it.
I don't know why, but it's incredibly hard for some individuals to not be shady or not be terrible. It sucks when these individuals ruin it for an entire group. However, should we just say, "well, it's not all of them so they can continue" or "well, some is more than none and the only way to stop them is to stop the activity all together" ideally, the bad eggs would be thrown out, and the good ones can stay, but that's way easier said than done.
chocolategirl
Well-Known Member
Daren’t watch ?
Winters100
Well-Known Member
Same. I have never see this sort of thing on any livery yard I have been on. If it happened at the yard my horses are on now the YO would 100% ask the perpetrator to leave.
Regarding her children being filmed (I assume that she is the Mother) I also find it unacceptable. There is however a reality that she knew that the sabs would probably be filming, she knew that if she kicked and punched a horse it would go viral, and she did so anyway with her children present. Keeping our children safe is our own responsibility, if we do not care about it then we cannot expect anyone else to. While I cannot support them sharing images showing the identity of the children there is 1 person who could have avoided all of this, and she choose not to. If I take my dog to the park now and beat him with my children present am I entitled to then complain that someone videos it with them present? I think not, in my opinion this would be 100% my own fault and I would be guilty of putting my children at risk.
Goldenstar
Well-Known Member
How can you be sure she knew she was being filmed ?
CanteringCarrot
Well-Known Member
Consider yourself fortunate if you haven't seen this kind of behavior at livery yards. I've seen this kind and worse here in Germany.
shortstuff99
Well-Known Member
Oh for sure I would be very annoyed and want it removed, but if people think just saying it is illegal is going to stop themselves being filmed and published while hunting it is not going to work.
palo1
Well-Known Member
I agree that it is a parental responsibility to protect children and that 'harm' may come from all manner of things and yes, not behaving appallingly may not lead to being filmed but in reality that isn't always the case with hunting activities.
In any case, her behaviour was dire but the filming sabs should have taken every effort to not publish images of that child. That was wrong regardless of what the woman was doing.
In any case, her behaviour was dire but the filming sabs should have taken every effort to not publish images of that child. That was wrong regardless of what the woman was doing.
ester
Not slacking multitasking
Surely if there are sabs at a hunt you are going to presume they are filming? this isn't new?
Lurfy
Well-Known Member
That woman really pi$$es me off. I can't stand that kind of behaviour.
Winters100
Well-Known Member
Because this is what sabs do, so she must have known that it was highly likely. Even without sabs if I took my dog / horses / children to the street now and started hitting them around the face I would assume than any passer by would film it as evidence.
ihatework
Well-Known Member
I take your point, but my point is that there are other laws to consider. Privacy laws (was this in public or on private land) and also harassment laws. Combined, those could make the taking and/or publishing of this image illegal.
Pearlsasinger
Up in the clouds
It's not actually illegal to film children, or anyone else, in a public place. It is certainly poor practice to publish such films, without prior permission of the parent.
Pearlsasinger
Up in the clouds
And his relationship with BBC, which I feel should be reviewed, after this incitement to a witch hunt.
Goldenstar
Well-Known Member
I don’t think CP should lose his position with the BBC but I do think the BBC need to consider that he is using the profile the BBC has in a way that potentially brings into into disrepute .
ycbm
Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
I think you are mixing up legal sabbing with vigilantes. Vigilantes do unofficial law enforcement. Sabs should not be doing that, which is one answer to why they film everything when they sab hunts, to act as evidence in court, and PR to support their aims.
Birds are bred just to be shot. That breeding destroys the visual impact (and ecology, I'm told) of moors, gamekeepers remove other birds like magpie and buzzard, and the shooting activity itself would be illegal if used to systematically kill almost any other animal. Many are not shot dead and a live injured bird is brought in the mouth of a dog to a person to then have its neck wrung. And that's before you consider that the sole purpose of this activity for the participant (who has often paid many hundreds of pounds for the day, if not thousands) is a day's fun.
On the basis that they are attempting only to prevent the shooting of birds, I would be happy to see shooting sabbed in the same way I'm happy to see people able to demonstrate against other things they don't think are right. The history of this country is littered with things which used to be legal but either died out or became illegal because they were blocked by the evolving public opinion of the day.
.
Ceriann
Well-Known Member
I’m not sure I agree. Whilst I don’t participate in social media witch hunts and certainly don’t agree with her child being identified on social media, this woman has kicked and smacked a horse in a public place. The law protecting animals from this kind of treatment and a lot worse is fairly useless - perhaps this will remind her and others who do the same or worse that this is just not considered acceptable to anyone with any decency. I’m not sure anyone was so offended about the media coverage of those anti-lockdown protestors punching the police horse (who was also charged).
ester
Not slacking multitasking
The BBC have been lobbied re. CP quite a lot in recent years but have opted to have him stay, I don't see this being any different.
Clodagh
Well-Known Member
I think it’s only pro field sports people who dislike him. Who are the minority.
As for shooting, there is good and bad shoots like good and bad everything. On the whole more wildlife is definitely helped than hindered by shooting.
As for shooting, there is good and bad shoots like good and bad everything. On the whole more wildlife is definitely helped than hindered by shooting.
Kaylum
Well-Known Member
#notonmyyard no way would this happen on just any livery yard. Let's just make that very clear. Loosing your temper with a horse you don't hit it. It's unacceptable behaviour and you don't do it. If you hit a dog and people see, something is done about it same with a horse.
Had this with a high up bhs instructor who was meant to be schooling a friends horse when she was away. She beat the horse and saw me watching and stopped (before we had phones that had video). I told my friend who was shocked and upset she had words with said person who denied it ofcourse but didn't use her again.
Last edited:
Goldenstar
Well-Known Member
I have to say I think the good / bad done by shooting is nuanced it’s extremely complicated .
Helping wildlife does not spring to the front of my mind .
Clodagh
Well-Known Member
Well we had a shoot for many years until this one and wildlife, bar foxes, mink and grey squirrels certainly did very well out of it.
Shooting like hunting is not really worth debating as people have strong opinions which are unlikely to change.
canteron
Well-Known Member
It’s made the Telegraph …. I genuine hope that the lady involved now has the humility to learn some better horsemanship.
Birker2020
Well-Known Member
https://www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/report/taking-photographs-in-public-places/#:~:text=There is no law preventing,photos of other people's children.&text=Taking a photo of a,a breach of privacy laws.
In a nursery setting for example it would be illegal without the express permission of the parents or legal guardian.
It's not illegal in a public setting. That said safeguarding issues may arise if those images are going to be used in public by an organisation for example. Reasons for this may be children may not want contact with some members of their family. Similiary if the child or family have experienced abuse they may worry the perpetrator could contact them or they would be traced far easier by the showing of their image.
Some families may have cultural reasons which would mean they do not wish their child to be photographed.
Last edited:
Birker2020
Well-Known Member
Sadly I used to be on a yard where the yard owner would think nothing of punching your horse if it misbehaved and I saw her on more than one occasion kick her young horse in the belly with her boot when it had got loose and she'd then caught it.
ester
Not slacking multitasking
It wasn't a general request ??
honetpot
Well-Known Member
Is not this the shortening of, https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/saboteur, which looking at its descriptions has little positive about it. Is that really what they mean to do, sabotage, and is even legal. Everyone gets wound up about people gluing themselves to the road, but compared to some of the tactics of some anti hunters, that's pretty tame.
I have no objection to anyone protesting or gathering evidence of wrong doing by legal means, but if you have ever been to a meet where children are present, a legal public event and the abuse that is hurled, the line between the well meaning and the downright aggressive is not that visible. Like everyone who does wrong, this is their public face.
There are many people that think its OK to beat the c*** out of horses, and it's usually done in temper, the 'pros' do it with calculation. A quote from a friend who is a BS judge, 'the pro's know when to stop', and it's done behind closed doors.
palo1
Well-Known Member
I don't think there is very much 'legal sabbing' going on at all. That would require peaceful, non-abusive (verbally and physically) protest or presence, sticking to PROWs and not disrupting an activity which is legal. I have seen exactly that kind of monitoring (and have spoken to monitors to explain routes/directions/where hounds were) but the vast majority of sabbing steps off the 'legal' side of protest/activism.
Shooting is, as hunting was, more nuanced than many people realise.
https://www.shootinguk.co.uk/news/w...ds-for-game-and-conservation-announced-110672
From the Moorland's Association re: Plantlife report
It's always interesting to see how others are managing the habitats that include areas of peat in other areas of the UK and the arrival today of Plant life, the quarterly magazine from PlantLife, a conservation charity, includes an article on four of their conservation projects in the Back From the Brink partnership project which, after 4 years, finishes at the end of this year.
One project, in particular, is of interest as it reports how the Lesser Butterfly Orchid has responded to 'controlled burning of dense, tussocky purple moor-grass which gave plants the space and light to grow', in the Dorset Heathland Heart trial into habitat management.
It further states that 'In fact, the number of flowering plants more than doubled from 11 to 25 in two years'
Perhaps, though, the most surprising part of the article is not the fact that a conservation charity is using controlled cool burning on Dorset heathlands ( which include peatland!), but the fact that of the eight funding bodies supporting this partnership project one is the RSPB who are so vocal about how we are damaging peatlands by using controlled cool burning on our moorlands, despite the science and evidence proving otherwise!
#RSPB #controlledcoolburning #plantlife #orchids #nidderdale #NidderdaleMoorlandGroup #gamekeepers #managedmoorlands #COP26Glasgow
The other thing to bear in mind is that shooting can provide a 'free' service to the government in several ways in relation to conservation goals (regardless of any employment benefits) Without shooting there would be additional costs to maintaining and improving those landscapes which are globally significant.
As with hunting though it is extraordinarily difficult to have a discussion about it as views are so polarised.
Backtoblack
Well-Known Member
I hope that woman is prosecuted.
- Status