Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think that if you are Royal and want to campaign against wildlife being killed, you shouldn't shoot them?

71 replies

HollyMiamiFLA · 09/02/2014 07:26

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26106137

Granted he's talking about the danger to endangered wildlife in Africa from poachers and he's only shooting boar on a private estate and they're not endangered so that's ok - but it doesn't come across too well.

OP posts:
LtEveDallas · 09/02/2014 07:32

It's oranges and apples.

They are 'campaigning' against poaching and the decimation of species:

As Charles says in the unprecedented video message which launches their anti-poaching campaign, the numbers being killed are "staggering": nearly 100 elephants killed every day - a rhinoceros killed every 11 hours - a wild tiger population which, a century ago, numbered around 100,000 and which, today, has been reduced to an estimated 3,200

Williams hunting trip is on a private estate, where boar and stag have been stocked, bred and reared specifically for hunting and will be used for food.

I don't agree with hunting for sport, but the tabloid press have got their knickers in a twist about bugger all really. Controlled hunting happens and isn't as bad as poaching an animal into extinction.

BikeRunSki · 09/02/2014 07:34

I agree. I don't agree with breeding or shooting anima for sport or gain, but shooting on a managed estate is not the same as shooting endanger animals for commercial gain.

I also think that if you are Imigration Minister you shouldn't have a illegal immigrant doing your cleaning. But he's resigned.

bouncysmiley · 09/02/2014 07:34

I really don't see a problem, the animals he was hunting were not endangered.

Original poster
HollyMiamiFLA · 09/02/2014 07:35

Don't you think it's a bit "off message"?

OP posts:
Original poster
HollyMiamiFLA · 09/02/2014 07:37

But from a PR point of view - William - we're going to talk about not killing endangered animals.

Fine - I'll just finish shooting these animals.

It may be ok to shoot deer - but from a PR point of view, it's not helpful. It's obvious what the media would do and it distracts from his message.

OP posts:
LtEveDallas · 09/02/2014 07:37

No I don't Holly, because I think it's two different messages.

Sirzy · 09/02/2014 07:39

I agree with LtEve

Original poster
HollyMiamiFLA · 09/02/2014 07:39

It's 2 messages - but it's obvious what the media would say and the Royals live off PR.

Sometimes as a Royal - you have to think about your publicity and think about how you come across.

OP posts:
worldgonecrazy · 09/02/2014 07:41

The media are reporting this story very badly. It is a non-story comparing oranges and apples. He is not shooting endangered animals, rather animals that cause major damage if not controlled.

It is stupid anti-monarchy propaganda and fools no one except those who wish to be fooled.

TheDoctorsNewKidneys · 09/02/2014 07:45

But they're two different things.

Shooting endangered wild game in Africa for fun is not the same as shooting animals bred to be hunted on a private estate for food.

Original poster
HollyMiamiFLA · 09/02/2014 07:54

Of course it's anti-monarchy propaganda.

Which William and his PR team have gifted to Republicans.

OP posts:
Treaclepot · 09/02/2014 07:57

It was bloody stupid, a bit like smacking a child for hitting their brother.

Mind I would prefer to shoot a couple of the royal family, just a little cull, just to keep the numbers down...

SunnyL · 09/02/2014 07:59

Yes he should only get his meat from.Tescos wrapped in plastic. Terrible terrible man.

Bearleigh · 09/02/2014 08:03

At least those boar and deer have been leading a natural life up to the time they get shot unlike the vast majority of animals killed of human consumption.

Original poster
HollyMiamiFLA · 09/02/2014 08:10

I have no problem with him shooting deer on an estate.
I am pleased he is trying to protect wildlife.

I just find it amusing that he could not realise that the media and Republicans would use this against him as "it's a good front page story" and we don't actually need to bother with facts.

OP posts:
angelos02 · 09/02/2014 08:24

YANBU. It gives out mixed messages. Bit silly of him really but then the royals aren't known for their brains are they.

diddl · 09/02/2014 09:14

I'm with you OP.

That & the fact that he's going to have to have a few trips to Africa!!

But I don't get hunting for sport.

I don't expect it of them because they're Royal-in fact I'd think more of them if they didn't do it.

AuntieStella · 09/02/2014 09:22

Well, he was shooting boar, and you can get that nicely wrapped and delivered to you door by Ocado.

I agree with LtEve. It's not news that they like (legal) shooting.

It's nothing whatsoever to do with protected and endangered species.

Wishyouwould · 09/02/2014 09:32

YANBU

Totally agree with Treaclepot's analogy.

cory · 09/02/2014 10:16

I agree with LtEve. Plenty of conservationists shoot animals (deer, elks etc) to prevent the sickness and starvation that results from overpopulation.

It is the kind of cull that would normally be performed by predators like wolves (and humans!) but since humans are the only predator left in this country they get to do the job.

I breed rare tropical fish for conservation (because of damage to natural habitats). If I just let all the fry grow up every month, the water would be fouled through overcrowding and they would all die in a nasty way. I also make sure to get rid of any deformed or sickly fry that would be picked off by predators in the wild. If I didn't do this job the fish I breed would be useless and I would risk doing more harm than good. (The alternative would be to keep predatory fish, but in the limited confines of the aquarium it isn't possible to do this in a controlled and humane fashion.)

Prince Charles is not giving mixed messages: he has never said that he is against poaching because he can't bear the thought of killing the fluffy animals.

He is against poaching because it is uncontrolled and carries a serious risk of the extinction of species. Not to mention the fact that there are plenty of non-human predators in Africa to do the job.

The boar is not an animal at the risk of extinction and all boar kills in this country will be carried out by licensed people in a controlled fashion.

Original poster
HollyMiamiFLA · 09/02/2014 10:29

Timing.

The Royals survive because of good PR. They have a good press office and the media go out of the way to present them in a positive light.

So from a PR perspective - it's not exactly good timing despite the fact that shooting deer is perfectly valid.

OP posts:
LackingEnergy · 09/02/2014 11:01

So I guess you and the media would have a problem with him shooting invasive non native species? Killing non native species goes hand in hand with conservation

I have no problem with him shooting animals that have been bred and managed for that nor do I link poaching with that sort of shooting. Baffled that anyone would to be honest

cory · 09/02/2014 11:27

It is only bad PR in this country because conservation issues are poorly understood.

fascicle · 09/02/2014 11:36

Regardless of the distinction between the two, I agree with Holly that it's a poor move from a PR point of view - it evokes old style Royal values, not in keeping with current efforts to portray the monarchy as less of a separate species and instead as warmer, more human-like beings. (From a personal point of view I think it's abhorrant, entitled and a few other things.)

TheWomanTheyCallJayne · 09/02/2014 11:40

Of course of those who use it against them the majority meat eaters would prefer their meat to be driven to the abattoir before being shot or having their throats slit as opposed to being culled quickly in their own environment.