NG article on Hunting and Wildlife

[Binkybex]

Following posts made earlier concerning pro farmers ruining the countryside I remembered this article I found ages ago, what do you think?

I thought it made interesting reading, don't know whether you have already read it, but enjoy if you haven't.

there are 2 pages btw

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/05/0528_030528_foxhunting.html

 

[antiantianti]

There are lots of reasons that people do conservation work however there is no doubt that hunting and shooting interests are a big motivator. To say that hunting in the uK endangers wildlife is nonsense.

 

[endymion]

I've not read either articles (and don't intend too, just want to make a small comment).

I don't think hunting (with hounds) has a major impact either way. Construction and maintainence of dykes and hedgerows really need to be undertaken by farmers on a huge national scale to halt and reverse declines in wild birds/small mammals and anthropod populations. Luckily this does seem to be happening in some places, and is often beneficial to the farmer.

Shooting is a different matter althogether, having both positive (habitat management on a large scale that can benefit wildlife) and negative (flooding areas with large numbers of [often non-native] birds/shooting of birds of prey by unscrupulous game keepers/trampling ect ect).

Therefore, a much more valid debate can be made about the conservation value of shooting than of hunting with hounds.

 

[antiantianti]

One of the key ways that shooting benefits the ecology is that it gives people a motive to control fox numbers.

It is sometimes claimed that killing foxes doesn't reduce numbers. This is clearly false as research has shown that it benefits other prey species such as ground nesting birds.

It is also claimed by some that it is best for fox numbers to be limited by their food supply alone. This wholely unnatural means of regulating the fox population has negative effects for the ecology and also on fox welfare.

Even more ridiculous is the suggestion that people have to obey the Hunting Act. The best thing to do with this absurd law is to break it. This is particularly so in cases where obeying the law would be worse for animal welfare and the environment.

 

[antiantianti]

ENDY LOOK AWAY NOW!!!!!!







"Wildlife living on hunt farmland was also much more likely to benefit from new hedgerows. Planting was undertaken by all foxhunting landowners who belonged to the government-funded Farming and Wildlife Advisory Group. Less than half of group members not involved in hunting followed suit. In addition, existing hedgerows on hunt land generally contained greater plant diversity."

"Woodland management carried out by foxhunts, such as opening skylights and thinning trees to enhance sporting opportunities, have similar advantages, according to a survey part-funded by the Game Conservancy Trust.

"Researchers discovered that five wood-dwelling butterflies found in southern England—the marsh fritillary, silver-washed fritillary, brown hairstreak, purple hairstreak and white admiral—showed a marked preference for hunt land. "





OK YOU CAN COME OUT NOW WITH YOUR IGNORANCE INTACT.

 

[Eagle_day]

"Therefore, a much more valid debate can be made about the conservation value of shooting than of hunting with hounds."

Why don't you then? But I don't think you mean 'debate'.

 

[antiantianti]

From a conservation point of view Endy, what downsides do you see with Hunting?

 

[endymion]

Are you talking to yourself again dearie?

One passage from somewhere or other doesn't mean anything. If I could be bothered I would find literature to the contrary but, as I said, i just wanted to add my opinion.

E

 

[antiantianti]

No I was asking you a question. I was wondering what conservation downsides you thought there were to hunting?

You seem to think you are an expert in the matter so I thought you might care to enlighten us.

I doubt there is any literature showing that farmers involved in country sports do less conservation work than farmers who aren't. So I would very much doubt you would find any.

 

[endymion]

First of all i don't blame farmers. I think critisisms of how farming has damaged the environment are usually directed at farming practices and not personalised to the individual. The huge loss in biodiversity that this country has suffered since the second world war is almost all attributable to the intensification of farming methods. This is not to blame the farmer, I'm sure most us understand that farming is a business and that many people have no choice but adopt modern methods in order to compete in the market.

As for shooting, what I actually said was that there are positive and negative effects as far as conservation is concerned. I'm not getting into a huge drawn out debate about it, nor will i do your homework for you. However, here is just one example:

RE: Golden Eagle recoveries.

.......Other regions are faring even worse, specifically the Central
Highlands, Cairngorms Massif, North East Glens and
Breadalbane and East Argyll (zones 10, 11, 12 and 15 respectively)
where persecution as an illegal corollary of gamebird
(red grouse Lagopus lagopus) management continues to cause
a relatively severe shortfall in meeting favourable condition
(Whitfield et al., 2003, 2004a,b, submitted for publication),
with signs of continuing deterioration rather than improvement.
Persecution is also probably a key constraint in explaining
the current unfavourable condition of regions south of the
Highlands (mainly zones 19 and 20) both indirectly because of
its effects on eagle demography nationally and the capacity
for population expansion (Whitfield et al., 2004b) and directly
because persecution is relatively high in the regions themselves
(Whitfield et al., 2003).

There are countless other articles about the bad impacts but also lots that show good impacts.

Blood sports, for me, has and always will be a moral matter concerning the rights and welfare of the hunted animal and not in anyway a conservation matter.

And I certainly don't consider myself an expert.

 

[antiantianti]

Ah right so are there any conservation downsides to fox hunting then?

I mean if you think there are I'd be interested to know what they are,

If there aren't fair enough too.

 

[endymion]

Personally, I think it's fairly negligible either way. I'm sure there a few minor benefits and also some minor bad pionts but nothing major that I've heard of - although i could be wrong.

I think that foxes are only really a threat to endangered species such as ground nesting birds and you can't really hunt foxes with hounds in those areas - the hounds and horses would damage nests and destroy eggs more than foxes would. I know some hunts are good and maintaining hedgerows/dykes ect but you could argue that they would do that if they were dragging/trailing too.

Like i said, for me it's just a welfare issue.

E

 

[antiantianti]

"Like i said, for me it's just a welfare issue."

So if an activity causes pain to an animal but has a conservation effect would that effect be irrelevant to whether you disapprove or approve of it?

 

[endymion]

Let me re-phrase to give you a more accurate picture of what i meant:

'I believe the conservation effects of hunting with hounds to be neglible (in either direction), therefore it's remains purely a moral and welfare issue for me.'

Hypothetically speaking, if there was a blood sport that was of such huge conservation value that it was vital to the well-being of our environment then I would have to reconsider. However, I can't think of any examples of this. Certainly not even shooting, which is really a double edged swoprd as for as the environment is concerned. For example, certain mangement techniques:

'.....Moreover burning is a common management technique on uplands. It tends to reduce the number of species and to bring about monoculture (such as the nearly IOO per cent heather cover of some grouse moors) which may
be unbalanced ecosystems liable to sudden change, including soil erosion; shifts in species composition may reduce winter feed in Molitlia-dominant communities....ect'

Ecology and Land Use (Simmons)

 

[antiantianti]

I wonder why those butterlfies showed a preference for hunt land. Maybe they know something you don't Endy?

I'd love to have Marsh Fritillaries. If i did it would be a sign that the conservation work I did was bearing fruit. I wouldn't consider it negligible at all.

 

[endymion]

Like I said there are pluses and minuses. Some hunt land may be good for one or two species of butterfly but I can't imagine it has a huge overall effect on biodiversity one way or another. People can manage land for conservation perfectly well without chasing foxes. It's just a really bad attempt by the pro-hunt lobby to use conservation in a desperate bid to give themselves a better name.

 

[antiantianti]

Ah right I see so you don't think that the presence of rare butterflies has anything to do with the conservation value of an area.

Do you actually have a clue what you are talking about Endy?

Also I assume you don't think planting new hedgerows ans a conservation benefit.

All just pluses and minuses really.

Just out of interests what are the minuses of hunting from a conservation point of view? More butterflies? More hedgerows? Opening skylights?

 

[Eagle_day]

"It's just a really bad attempt by the pro-hunt lobby to use conservation in a desperate bid to give themselves a better name."

We've always done it but just never made anything of it. We, like many other hunts at this time of year, were working on our hunt coverts last weekend. Without hunting, that conservation work wouldn't be done. Isn't that better than nothing? What were you doing over the weekend?

 

[jrp204]

Hunts would not damage ground nesting birds nest or chicks as it is highly unlikely they would be nesting much before the end of the hunting season.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...a99f2e64183e8e4c8b657d7&ie=/sdarticle.pdf
'Would bird species
richness and diversity be greater over upland areas in
the absence of any burning? Yes, if scrub and woodland
developed in open mosaics, but the abundance ofsome key moorland birds would be greatly reduced,
and the actual economic cost of this whole-scale regeneration
would be considerable.'
'On balance, we consider that well-managed grouse
moors, notably those juxtaposed with low-intensity
agricultural farmland, provide for a high biodiversity
and distinctive character in the landscape. The most
satisfactory management for nature conservation could
be achieved by enhancing species diversity in general
rather than by judging results solely on the abundance
of red grouse.'
'Means of achieving objectives through agriculture
Most heather moorland is grazed by sheep and the
most immediate solution to reversing habitat loss and
deterioration must come through a reduction in sheep
numbers on the hill and improved husbandry.' ref.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...6a34aeea1df78f046037b8f&ie=/sdarticle.pdf
Just a few things picked up whilst doing my uni stuff.