Goose Shooting ... the alternative thread
Okay, I’ll start.Originally Posted by Bill Fernie
Farmers protecting their livelihood from damage by over-eating animals I get; it’s a necessary part of providing food for us bleeding-heart animal lovers.
I also understand why, given the chance, a farmer might welcome a hunting party (and their £thousands) onto his land for a week to deal with the geese for him.
But I’m completely befuddled by those who turn up to shoot an animal as a ‘holiday excursion’.
The notion that they are going back to nature, somehow proving themselves to be worthy of their position at the top of the food chain, is ridiculous; if they truly wanted to test themselves they’d live in a cave for a week and hunt with a spear.
The few animals they will personally kill don’t justify the idea that they are helping to control stocks.
They don’t need to kill a goose to eat a goose, the supermarkets have that one taken care of; and, as I said, if they want to prove they can kill what they need to survive give them a spear.
The only reason I can think why a person turns up with a gun to shoot an animal for ‘sport’ is that they enjoy the power. When they aim their gun and pull the trigger they have just decided that the animal they are looking at is going to die.
The power of life and death… what a trip!!!
"They don’t need to kill a goose to eat a goose, the supermarkets have that one taken care of"
When you decide to buy a goose from the supermarket you have decided another is going to die, and it will be bred specifically for that purpose.
Apart from that I agree completely.
True; but the goose in the supermarket was almost certainly reared on a farm where it was humanely (well, as humanely as possible) killed quickly and efficiently. By contrast, the wild geese shot in a field or on a loch have a fairly good chance of not being killed outright. Lying in a field dying of a gunshot wound can’t be the nicest way to go.
It has to be said though, that the aim (pardon the pun) is to kill the bird outright. Dogs are employed to retrieve the fallen prey and there should be no birds left lying to die it the suggested manner. Marginally better than omitting the shooting and just letting the dogs rip the prey to bits, a la fox hunting.
Not that this is a pastime (?) that I would want to take part in or one that I can understand others wanting to but as has been said, it's worth a great deal of money to the tourism industry.
What puzzels me is that these geese only come to vistit us on there way south to breed, so they are on holyday, so how would billy bob frenly like it he went on holyiday and some one pop him off just fae fun, But the idea of more guns of masdesruction coming to caithness just for fun is just out of my head.
I can not think why?, why come here? where are the mad flats where you can shoot these vistitors.
Also what happens BIG Bill when one day they do not come at all What ye going to tell the kids big bill. "its ok kids i got a load of guns to blow them a way but i will fraw you a show you some phot'os of what they where like. and what they are like when they are DEAD
There are some well sad men out there who want money from a visiting bird, its about time you woke up bill, we are killing the world any how, without you and your gun's.
Love George
1K.Orger
goose shoot
So what are they feeding "farmed" geese? Ground up bits of other geese I wouldn't be surprised. Look out for mad goose syndrome!
It's healthier to eat animals, birds and fish from the wild. In the case of wild animals and birds the flesh contains trace elements of cardio-protective essential fatty acids that are missing in the factory reared.
I know this may sound strange but I recently interviewed top US nutrtitionist Dr. David Katz author of The WayTo Eat and that's what he told me!
I wonder if the goose hunters heased for Caithness have it in mind to use the goose down for vests or socks or whatever....
As far as I know domesticated geese are, on the whole, inverted, stunned, have their throats slit by hand, and then are scalded...
I would rather take my chances in the wild, yes I would.
.Orger
Um
Would you be happier if they caught the geese through a hook in the mouth, pull them to land and bash them over the head or leave them to suffocate?
How’s the fishing going George?
That's NOT how they catch wild geese?
Why do I see all those guys heading for Strathmore with the rods then?
The fishing is going just fine thank and as i have practise for years a catch and relase polasy its ok thank you why not come along and check out my brbless hooks and other equimpment i have got to make shore that any fish i get GO BACK ALIVE, THATS ALIVE JUST IN CASE YOU CAN NOT READ, NOT DEAD LIKE THE GEESE YOU WANT TO SLARTER,PRAY TELL ME HOW YOU PUT THEM BACK ALIVE.
Over to
LOVE.
GEORGE
You put these fish through what must be a terrifying ordeal merely for your amusement? You don’t eat them?
I am amazed you purport to be concerned at all about animal welfare.
What say these chaps shoot geese with tranquilliser darts, and then play with them a while before leaving them to 'recover'?
I am all for the humane treatment of animals, but the fluid distinction between the real world and the ideal world is needlessly obfuscated by the irrational meanderings of those who choose to examine and judge the activities of others in preference to their own. Trapped are they in the moral hinterland of the hypocrite.
.Orger
etc etc
While I have no issue with the point you're making, it does occur to me that perhaps your response is not entirely considerate when responding to a dyslexic person.
Personally I'm all in favour of the plain English campaign (maybe I'm just a lazy reader who doesn't want to use too much energy processing other people's sentences).
I know you were trying to be sarcastic, Caledonia, but you certainly offer a better alternative to shooting their heads/wings/legs off...
So many words, so little said... what was wrong with:
"I'm all for the humane treatment of animals, but get your own house in order before judging others"
???
(Although I did like your Yoda impression at the end there... )
JJC wrote:
“So many words, so little said... what was wrong with:
"I'm all for the humane treatment of animals, but get your own house in order before judging others"
???”
There is nothing wrong with the sentence you propose.
However, your amendment conveys little of my meaning.
I like to be specific as well as concise, and like to avoid patronising anyone.
<Fluid distinction between the real world and the ideal world>
Constantly evolving compromise distinguishing the realities of how we achieve our ends versus our societal ideals.
(In this case we are talking about entertaining and, to a lesser extent, feeding ourselves.)
<Needlessly obfuscated by the irrational meanderings>
It seems fruitless and specious to enter a debate only to express views diametrical to one’s behaviour, (rather than belief, as playing Devil’s advocate can prove very productive.) The entrance lacking objective rationale, such contributions are rendered the same.
(If one were to declare or express some ambivalence or internal conflict, one could honestly express seemingly contradictory views in the context that they are based on an ideal.)
<Choose to examine and judge the activities of others in preference to their own>
Deliberately restrict oneself to objective analysis of an issue one’s own activities have parallels with.
(Some introspection could afford a more honest, and useful, perspective.)
Far from, “So many words, so little said”, I think restricting myself to three dozen or so words was admirable given the content therein!
Nothing to do with, “Get your own house in order”.
If that is what I meant, that is exactly what I would have said.
I not only do not subscribe to the idea that one has to be ‘faultless’ to pass any judgement on the behaviour of others, but I actively disagree.
George could have thought a bit about it and realised that fishing has its parallels with shooting, and he could have perhaps ‘declared an interest’, so to speak.
Based on normal conversation you are objecting to, maybe, thirty seconds of speech? I do hope you are not one of those fools who are already telling you, “Yeah, I know”, as a concerned bystander opens their flapping face hole in an attempt to warn you you are walking off a cliff.
Drutt wrote:
“While I have no issue with the point you're making, it does occur to me that perhaps your response is not entirely considerate when responding to a dyslexic person.
Personally I'm all in favour of the plain English campaign (maybe I'm just a lazy reader who doesn't want to use too much energy processing other people's sentences).”
A message board is, by its very nature, a place where dyslexia is no more than a time delay hindrance. Even assuming it was, how could I be inconsiderate if I had no knowledge of this?
The Plain English Campaign has got nothing to do with removing all the meaning and nuance from the language in favour of monosyllabic speech. It is primarily a campaign against jargon and verbosity, rather than the use of a well rounded, specific and descriptive vocabulary.
I appreciate my language is not conversational. This is a message board, not a chat room. If it requires so much energy to ‘process’ my post, given its simplicity and the adequate framing of its context, I suggest you take up regular reading to overcome your level of unfitness; it may be affecting your health.
One thing I would say amongst all this confusion is that proper use of the forum quotation system and BB code allows content lifted from other posts to be easily recognised as such. Abstract use of brackets and italics do little to help maintain clarity.
And while we're on the subject of time taken to digest posts, perhaps we should also introduce the preview button which allows you to look at your post before you submit it. This gives you an opportunity to fix and broken quotations and to ensure your post is clear. A quick look at the FAQ (frequently asked questions) and you will find the guide to BB Code and all the other workings of the forum.
Wow! 568 words spread over 72 lines and you’ve still barely said a thing.
The trouble with meandering sentences packed full of unnecessarily long and archaic words is that the only person you are impressing is sitting in a mahogany-lined library wearing a smoking jacket, puffing on an old pipe and drinking brandy from a rather large glass – and he is only nodding along because he feels he should.
That you believe your posts have “simplicity” astounds me. That you believe dyslexia is nothing more than a “time delay hindrance” baffles me. That you attack Drutt and me for questioning you doesn’t surprise me in the slightest.
The Plain English Campaign’s website has an interesting section called “Plain-English Translations”. It gives examples of bad English usage followed by examples of how they might be improved. I would like to draw your attention to the very first one:
Now compare that to this:
Before
High-quality learning environments are a necessary precondition for facilitation and enhancement of the ongoing learning process.
After
Children need good schools if they are to learn properly.
(Although the 'Before' paragraph does not mention it, the situation does involve schoolchildren.)
See the similarity?
.Orger
Yup, it's a message board on a community website - intended to be inclusive and welcoming to all. I can think of better places for you to try demonstrating how clever and knowledgeable you think you are.
My mental health and physical well-being are pretty robust, but thank you for your concern.
I'm pretty well read and do a fair amount of proof reading in my job. I know how to communicate in straightforward terms, not something in evidence in your last two posts.
I just wanted to let you know that I was switching off half way through your sentences and I'm sure I'm not the only one.
Uh huh, right.
Niall>
I write in Word…have done for ten years. To go back and then use the quotation system would be a pain. Were the thread to stretch over several pages I will do so out of consideration…not that anyone really reads my posts!
Anyhow… in the example you have chosen I was firstly adding some extra information in parenthesis, and secondly I was using lovely angle brackets to section my own sentence up for clarity…not really quoting per se, nor particularly abstract.
JJC>
If you could point me to the unnecessarily long and archaic terms I have used please feel free to do so. Befuddled indeed…
Just for me, please leave my remark on dyslexia in the specific context I made it in.
Attacking you and Drutt?
Bonkers. I responded to two individual posts made, and the only needless sarcasm was evident in yours. So what if I am long winded? How many posts does this board get? Not many, and you still have to complain because I use a little space… you didn’t have to read it.
Quote the Plain English website if you haven’t the imagination to illustrate your point alone. Their example is flawed, but I have ridden that pony once already today and it is tired. Anyway I couldn’t give a tinker’s what stuffy old farts in England have to say about how our common language should be moderated for the simple minded.
“There is in us an unquenchable expectation, which at the gloomiest
time persists in inferring that because we are ourselves, there must
be a special future in store for us, though our nature and
antecedents to the remotest particular have been common to
thousands.” (Hardy)
Long live meandering sentences and endless paragraphs.
Drutt, ah Drutt>
“Yup, it's a message board on a community website - intended to be inclusive and welcoming to all. I can think of better places for you to try demonstrating how clever and knowledgeable you think you are.”
I don’t think I am particularly exclusive or unwelcoming. I seriously do not have any ideas about being particularly clever, but on the issue of Animal Rights I would have to say I am least a bit more knowledgeable than the next person. I was brought up on a farm, and moved to the city where I became involved in extreme animal rights activities, to the point where I have gone undercover to take film of intensive farming. My views are at the very least informed, regardless of how clumsily I express them.
With that in mind, let me state one or two things so you have a background on me.
I am a person who goes out and does something about things I feel strongly about. I was out there shaking up the joint, from Free Nelson Mandela to the Poll Tax riots to the Anti-War demos, I was out there, raising dough and raising hell.
I have spent the majority of my life working for the community, whether it is the National Health Service, Social Services or one of the many charities I have been involved in both as a worker and fundraiser. I have worked on the streets, in hospices, in mental health, in all areas.
I am active in Greenpeace and Amnesty, and was long before they became so darn fashionable. I have put my body and soul where my mouth is time and time again.
I was working in Anti Fascist Action and associated movements when we would go out to protest NF rallies in a time when we were outnumbered 50 to 1 and you could count the authorities against us too. I put in the time and effort.
So when I open my mouth on one of these subjects it will be from the point of view of one who has at least some knowledge, and I won’t apologise for coming over that way.
Having said all that, I usually have my tongue stapled to my cheek, (though it is not always obvious as most of my jokes are the worst kind of in jokes, those between my own multiple personalities).
I am a Scottish Nationalist too, though I also feel compromised by the inferences of that term Nationalist.
I forgive you and JJC for your badness and I will let you off with a warning… or a suspended sentence, interminably.
Anyway, I don’t buy your remark about falling asleep reading my sentences. The post you are referring to only had one long sentence in it for goodness sake.
Apart from everything else
My only point here was to point out that this is a messageboard with a formatting system that everyone here understands (mostly).
Your point being that here there is time to work out what someone is saying if you dont imediately understand all of the english.
So to say that you use Word to create your posts only suggests to me that your are ensuring correct spelling and dipping into the thesaurus every now and then.
My point is that all of the formatting you may use in Word is irrelevent here and to facilitate the understanding and following of a thread, the creators of this forum and almost every other like it have worked long and hard to provide a system that allows users to format their message.
I do not believe that even in Word you would have pointed out quotations by the use of brackets and italics in the way that you have here, simply because they are not a recognised method of formatting. Its like posting a message in all-caps, it might still be in english, but the meaning is changed by eveyone who reads it as SHOUTING. You may not realise that people will read your message this way and then be shocked by their response. Who's fault would this be?
Now I can fully understand that you might think, after you've penned your post in word, then formatting it on here is a pain, even time consuming, but how can you then justify asking everyone else to spend more time digesting what you've said when you're not prepared to format it in such a way that everyone understands.
Caledonia,
There is a difference between my using the word “befuddled” and your eloquent “the fluid distinction between the real world and the ideal world is needlessly obfuscated by the irrational meanderings of those who choose to examine and judge the activities of others in preference to their own. Trapped are they in the moral hinterland of the hypocrite.”
As you point out, your sentence was hardly conversational. I probably shouldn’t be proud of this, but I do use ‘befuddled’ fairly regularly when talking (it helps to convey a certain amusement in my confusion). Because I touch-type to a fairly good standard I tend to type as I think and my writing pretty much parodies the way I talk.
Also, my original post in this thread was not aimed at an individual and I had no intention of making myself look clever (or anybody else look stupid).
Certainly.
You made the remark “dyslexia is no more than a time delay” in the context of this messageboard. Your implication – no, your outright claim – was that the only issue a dyslexic person faces is the time it takes to read something. You completely ignore the fact that it isn’t the most confidence-building experience in the world to struggle to read, let alone to be confronted by somebody boosting his own ego by regurgitating a thesaurus.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks