Fate of Exmoor Emperor may have been solved

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-16138993

a sad end to a majestic animal

As I said else where,the hotel concerned has now removed it due to threats. I find it more abhorent that a hotelier can be threatened by anonymous thugs.As far as we know it was not the hotelier that shot the deer,which has not been positively identified either,but conclusions are jumped to just the same.
Thousands of deer are farmed and killed annually for the human food chain,just the same as sheep,cattle and pigs.
I think if everyone went to a slaughter house for a visit,peoples opinion would change,most would stop eating meat for a few weeks,some might think that being shot and dieing quickly might actually be a better fate.As we know from the stories about culls having to take place,letting them die of old age,is probably not an option.
We could have packs of Wolves running loose or a few Bears in the woods.
It won't be long before Wild Boar become a problem,some one will either be attacked or one of their pets,then there will be an out cry and most of the same group of people will be asking for them to be culled.
Man has interferred,I'm afraid the countryside will never be the same.

I've been in animal slaughter houses and I agree if most people saw what whent on, it would really make them think. I am a meat eater, and although I do'nt like venison, I do'nt object to people eating it wild or not. But I think it's absolutely wrong for an animal in its prime, even if the meat is eaten after, to be taken for its head and antlers.
WS

WS,I'm with you there,but we know that in various parts of the world,trophy hunters are invited to pay large sums of money,which is then used for conservation work.Tricky one...............

Thats true in some cases, but not all. I saw a programe on Sky some time ago, it was about a reserve that allowed hunting, but the hunters were only allowed to shoot animals that were identified by the guides. The criteria was that the animlas were past breeding age, injured, or sick. The money was used to improve the habitat, and increase the number of species, and animals in the reserve. Now that I can go along with, but in to many cases, hunters are being allowed to kill animals that are in their prime. In other words trophy hunting, this has a devastating effect on the survival of species by destroying strong bloodlines. The affect on predators like lions is a major concern, because not only does it reduce the gene pool, it also causes the break down of the pride system, because younger weaker males, are not capable of holding the prides together in safety. Along with this you have canned hunting where animals are just bread to be shot, with no chance what so ever, and that is something that should be abolished by all countries. Which brings us back to shoots in Britain

WS

I have to say I have little knowledge of what goes on outside of Europe,the only thing I know about Africa is what I've seen on the television.
Europe however is a massively man made environment,due to sheer weight of numbers of people.Man always has and always will have an impact on our wild environment,balancing that and in this day and age,paying for it,is going to bring about conflict of interest.
I don't profess to know all the answers,but over the years I've come to understand that some management is not only inevitable,but vital.Habitat is the key to survival,without it,nothing survives,man has interferred and man is now having to interfere on a daily basis.Be that as a herbivore maintaining a particular habitat by mowing,pruning or just grazing.To being the predator maintaining a balance of species,the easy example is the American Mink and Grey Squirrels,man has to intervene,to fail to respond is to condemn indiginous species to extinction.
I take the position that we farm sustainably to survive or we vanish as a species.Being the type of person that I am,I prefer to see a Deer taken for the human food chain in preference to frois gras or traditional veal,or caged chickens.I guess each is the result of man making a decision,it depends on the person you are as to which is preferable.Mandy chose to be a vegetarian as she didn't want to eat animals(though not fish),my choice is to eat something that has had as good a life as it can,given the circumstances.So it's free range,non intensively grown,local in season,low air miles food,including Venison and other game.Someone usually pays a lot of money to shoot the meat,I think it is not unreasonable to then eat it,rather than waste it.
Shoots maintain the stock,if they didn't there would be nothing to shoot,maybe other industries like the Sea fishing industry could learn from that and not just keep harvesting,without putting anything back.

Well put TB. I'm not vegetarian but was briefly when I was younger, but I have an issue with all sorts of things not only hunting, shooting etc but then realise I am hypocritical because I am eating meat, eggs etc. but in principal what you say makes a lot of sense, we do need management.

Lai

Hope I didn't come across as on my high horse there,I don't shoot any more,took up falconry instead and no longer do that.
I am hopefully trying to convey that,although it might seem barbaric to kill an animal,if it's for food and done properly,then we can eat our beef,lamb, pork or pheasant with a clear conscience(spelling!!).
Deer herds are managed in Britain and have been since at least roman times,keepers and stalkers spend their entire working day watching the herds and selecting which animals can be taken.The management of the herd is vital for sustainability,so if the decision was taken that this particular animal was "ok" to be taken,there would have been a reason.I see in the press a "new royal" has been seen in the same area,maybe he was the reason that the decision was taken.

No you didnt at all. We all have our views and I think you put over yours very well.

My ex husband used to shoot, I couldn't bear it, and although I know people who do, it is not a pastime I accept as being sport. Having said that I tried fishing in my youth!

I've not seen the 'new royal' article.

Lai

Certainly not TB. It's quiet clear you care about wildlife, and our invironment. Your views are pragmatic and take into account the reality that we need food to survive, and room to live. As you say management is the key, but management in the past has been targeted at our needs only without thought to other species, and our invironment. It's been based on what we want, not on what we need, to the detriment of the world we live in. Thats happened in Britain, Europe, and Africa. I have nothing against a person going out, and catching, or shooting their own food, although I could'nt do it myself, providing its sustainable, and with the Deer management of selected animals. However I do'nt view shoots in the same light. The birds are not managed, but raised to be shot, its not just shooting for food, to me its a slaughter for pleasure, and although the estates put money into moor, and heath management which does benifit some other species as a by product, they only do that for their own ends. The devastating affect that they have on natural preditors speaks volumes of their attitude to wildlfe in our country

WS

WS you are indeed right about some shoot management techniques,most,not all,but most still have this archaic(really shouldn't try to use words I'm not sure how to spell!)attitude of kill everything with a tooth or a claw,I am close to some of the biggest culprits.
There is an upside to it though and the land management means we still have some moors.Were it not for shooting the Forestry Commision would have carpeted evey inch with mono culture alien fir trees.
Recently the Forestry Commision have taken to slaughtering deer in massive numbers,leaving the corpses to rot where they fall.Their answer is they feed Eagles and other scavenging birds,seems they shot hundreds of Deer.The Deers crime? they got into forests through deep snow or over broken fences and damaged some trees.
The Field magazine and several big shooting estates have tried to bring this to the publics attention,as they(for maybe selfish reasons)want this sort of thing stopped.
So , shooters shoot Deer in a managed fashion(with their own interests as high as any animal husbandry issues),if they don't then they are "culled",with no thought for herd management at all.
The Deer is between a rock and a hard place,once controlled by their environment and natural predators,their numbers remained sustainable.Along comes man,kills all the predators and fells most of the forest and now has to manage them for all interests as the Deer seem to be doing"too well"

What I think is paramount is we ,"the public",keep a close eye on the goings on,report what we see and keep a high profile.We must however try to understand what is being done and why,living in cities and suburbia may have removed us from the reality of animal and habitat management.
I'd like to think we could trust the politicians to manage it,but frankly none of them of any colour has shown any real verve for the job have they.Even some of the animal charities seemed to have become big businesses and forgot the core role they are supposed to be playing.
There's no instant answer,killing animals will happen,it's up to the consumer to put commercial pressure on the producer,to do it properly.
Shooting is a pleasure sport,I know I've done it,but would we have any Pheasants(not a native bird),Grouse or Partridge without them managing the stock and habitat?The answer is no,the question perhaps is is it a price we have to pay,woodland managed for roosting birds,hedgerows being re-planted and cover crops(which benefit other wildlife)being grown.
As I said it's not easy,.I think we all agree "culling",be it Deer,Badger or even the alien Mink,is the unacceptable side of animal management.Harvesting a crop, is that a bit different?

As you say TB it's not easy. I can see the pleasure, or perhaps a better word would be satisfaction, in a person going out hunting, finding, tracking, something to take home to eat. Thats sustainable, and something thats in humans DNA. However if your just going to be placed in a stand, and shoot Birds, that have been beaten, and flushed into your line of fire then shoot more than you need, I just ca'nt see the pleasure in that at all. Clearly some people do, and are willing to pay lots of money to do it. Resteraunts are also willing to pay money for the Birds that are killed, and big money especialy on the so called Glorious 12th ?. As we have said the estates as a by product of the shoots manage the heaths, and moors that benifits other wildlife, but with all the money these shoots engender, I'm sure they can absorb the losses from Raptors, and land Predators take from their stock. There's a price pay for this, for the people that take part in shoots, it's a price they can afford to pay. For our wildlife like the Raptors, and Preditors it's a cost they have no choice about about whether they want to pay' or not, apart from the fact they ca'nt afford to pay it. Because there's not enough of them left.
Now it sounds like I'm getting on my soapbox , but its getting late now so I'll come back on the rest. Really enjoying this thread TB
WS

I think we're on the same side,to an extent.
Firstly we neither endorse killing predators of game birds ,just because they could affect the stock levels.
Now man is the worst predator,so to try and answer your points on Pheasant(also Partridge) and Grouse,driven to guns.The only thing I can say is the dogs pick every one up that is shot and they go into the human food chain,I eat the Pheasants,not keen on Partridge and have never eaten a Grouse on it's own.I have eaten a game pie that alledgedly had some in it.
It a point we are not going to agree on,my falcon used to chase Pheasants,so I can't be a hippocrite.
I do strongly feel that a law must be reached on the birds of prey and wildcats that are killed,prosecution of the land owner should be the law and it should be enforced,with the understanding that shooting can continue(and falconry)if done humanely,without the persecution.
There is the argument about rural employment and round here it is a big employer,but my final word for the defence is( )shooting/hunting edible ,managed animals,should be allowed as long as it is sustainable,humane and done within the law.


Nearly forgot..................and fishing should be allowed too................

Quite agree TB we're not that far apart, and agree on the main point. I understand the employment issue, and agree with you on Falconry, and Fishing as long as the Fish taken are for eating, and if not, returned as safely as possible. As for the rest sometimes we have to agree to disagree.

WS