It is illegal to release non-native species into the countryside (apart from pheasants). Every year shooters release 47 million pheasants in order to shoot them. While they roam wild they consume vast amounts of insects and seeds that could be feeding native birds. (and there is some evidence that they are directly responsible for the decline of particular species of butterfly – especially Pearl-bordered Fritillary, which has declined 95% since 1970)
About the only positive thing you can say is that by existing they at least turn the hunter’s guns away from native species. If there were no pheasants they would still be out killing something.
> Pheasants are reared and then released into the wild in the summer, ahead of the shooting season which begins in October. If a pheasant causes damage to someone’s garden, or flies in front of a car, causing an accident in September, then they remain classified as wild animals in this instance.
>
> But if a gamekeeper shoots a crow, also in September, then it appears the pheasant would be classified as livestock in this instance, and killing the crow would therefore be legal.
The reads like a horror nursery rhyme.
Hey, diddle, diddle,
The gamekeeper shoots the crow,
the pheasant hits the car,
so it’s legal to kill the crow
> Soon after the licences were revoked, Mr Packham was targeted with dead crows being hung on strings outside his house.
Tory rules, legal to shoot those vandals
The below thread really highlight just how ridiculous it is!
I feel like fiasco would imply that this was an unplanned failure.
This is very much as planned, none of the responsibility but all of the “perks”.
Reminder that Johnson said he loves fox hunting in “a semi sexual way” and that hunters should just break the hunting laws.
Where can I buy pheasant? Never seen it in a supermarket. Does it taste good?
This article is rather misleading.
The Independent and Chris Packham are wrong when they say it is a ‘change of law’, which would suggest the law has been rewritten or reworded. The law governing the ‘General License’ has not changed, DEFRA have simply provided clarification on a condition of the license to prevent any confusion. The law on General License already states that game birds are classified as livestock when they are dependent on man for food, water, and shelter and are classified as wild once they become indented of man (known as ‘wilded’) – which has been clarified by DEFRA. The wording of the guidance is now inline with that of wales and other game bird licenses.
Not often I agree with Packham, but yes, pheasant farming is greatly advantaged by the way it sometimes pretends to be farming and sometimes pretends to be about wild animals.
I don’t really mind breeding them to shoot. I’m no animal rights activist, and although I wouldn’t do it myself, I think it’s a legitimate thing to do. But if you’re breeding and feeding them then they’re farm animals and they should be treated as such – including farmer’s responsibility for letting them out to damage other property or land. I believe other bird farmers (e.g. geese or chickens) are treated that way.
Hunters claim to care about things like animal welfare and conservation, despite the fact that hunting is anathema to both, you do not care for animals nor conserve them by killing them. Packham at least has the balls to call people out on such nonsense and change the laws for the better. We do not own nature and we need to stop trying to control it for our own benefit. We have already destroyed the planet as it stands, we need to stop accelerating that destruction.
Chris Packham categorizes live Tigers as NFTs so probably not taking his word for it.
11 comments
It is illegal to release non-native species into the countryside (apart from pheasants). Every year shooters release 47 million pheasants in order to shoot them. While they roam wild they consume vast amounts of insects and seeds that could be feeding native birds. (and there is some evidence that they are directly responsible for the decline of particular species of butterfly – especially Pearl-bordered Fritillary, which has declined 95% since 1970)
About the only positive thing you can say is that by existing they at least turn the hunter’s guns away from native species. If there were no pheasants they would still be out killing something.
> Pheasants are reared and then released into the wild in the summer, ahead of the shooting season which begins in October. If a pheasant causes damage to someone’s garden, or flies in front of a car, causing an accident in September, then they remain classified as wild animals in this instance.
>
> But if a gamekeeper shoots a crow, also in September, then it appears the pheasant would be classified as livestock in this instance, and killing the crow would therefore be legal.
The reads like a horror nursery rhyme.
Hey, diddle, diddle,
The gamekeeper shoots the crow,
the pheasant hits the car,
so it’s legal to kill the crow
> Soon after the licences were revoked, Mr Packham was targeted with dead crows being hung on strings outside his house.
Tory rules, legal to shoot those vandals
The below thread really highlight just how ridiculous it is!
https://twitter.com/georgemonbiot/status/1478262037864226819
I feel like fiasco would imply that this was an unplanned failure.
This is very much as planned, none of the responsibility but all of the “perks”.
Reminder that Johnson said he loves fox hunting in “a semi sexual way” and that hunters should just break the hunting laws.
Where can I buy pheasant? Never seen it in a supermarket. Does it taste good?
This article is rather misleading.
The Independent and Chris Packham are wrong when they say it is a ‘change of law’, which would suggest the law has been rewritten or reworded. The law governing the ‘General License’ has not changed, DEFRA have simply provided clarification on a condition of the license to prevent any confusion. The law on General License already states that game birds are classified as livestock when they are dependent on man for food, water, and shelter and are classified as wild once they become indented of man (known as ‘wilded’) – which has been clarified by DEFRA. The wording of the guidance is now inline with that of wales and other game bird licenses.
Not often I agree with Packham, but yes, pheasant farming is greatly advantaged by the way it sometimes pretends to be farming and sometimes pretends to be about wild animals.
I don’t really mind breeding them to shoot. I’m no animal rights activist, and although I wouldn’t do it myself, I think it’s a legitimate thing to do. But if you’re breeding and feeding them then they’re farm animals and they should be treated as such – including farmer’s responsibility for letting them out to damage other property or land. I believe other bird farmers (e.g. geese or chickens) are treated that way.
Hunters claim to care about things like animal welfare and conservation, despite the fact that hunting is anathema to both, you do not care for animals nor conserve them by killing them. Packham at least has the balls to call people out on such nonsense and change the laws for the better. We do not own nature and we need to stop trying to control it for our own benefit. We have already destroyed the planet as it stands, we need to stop accelerating that destruction.
Chris Packham categorizes live Tigers as NFTs so probably not taking his word for it.