To not want DH to shoot birds in Yorkshire?

[g1itterati]

AIBU or a bit "precious" please? I'm quite wound up about this since Saturday.

I'm a rep at The DC's school with 2 other mums. One of them is quite a "character" - e.g. she turns up to school runs in green wellies, tweeds and a Barbour jacket as if she's on a farm in god knows where, when in actual fact we're in Central London. She talks loudly that she has to dash as she's late for "the shoot" - though I never quite brought myself to enquire where and what she will be shooting.

When we held a coffee morning at her house, she was about to get her "guns" out (yes, actual guns from a gun cupboard) but fortunately most people had to make a quick exit because of the parking metres. She is from Yorkshire and makes no bones about the fact that she wants to move back up there asap, leave her DH working in London for a few more years and put the DC in a boarding prep. Anyway, each to their own. She is very friendly and actually quite funny.

They asked DH and I over for lunch this weekend. I had told her I was vegetarian to which she said, "Why?" I said I was fine to just have veg and sides, so that was that. Anyway, when we got there, she was making a big thing about how she orders whole dead pheasants from Yorkshire and plucks them herself! Apparently she has then hanging in the "pantry!" Then, after lunch, talk turned to shooting and they proceeded to get out what can only be described as a whole arsenal of guns and then talked us through what they have shot with them!

My AIBU is - her DH has now asked my DH to invest in something or other and he has invited him on a two-day shoot of birds in Yorkshire in Jan! DH has accepted this.

This morning I thanked her when I saw her briefly and she said (laughing) "Your DH is a dark horse, how did you two get together?!" Basically, she is alluding to the fact he was once trained and has used guns professionally and I'm anti- the whole thing.

AIBU to ask DH not to go because I am totally anti- fox-hunting and what is the point of shooting birds for no reason as a sport? Personally, I think it should be made illegal. Or should I just accept that some people are different to me and let it go?

If he intends to eat his kill then zero fucks given here, I'm afraid (and I'm the Dr Dolittle of bird lovers).

Seems a far more humane way to consume meat than buying straight from the shops.

Shooting phasents is probably more humane than factory farming. Shoots are amazingly lucrative and keep many businesses away from bankruptcy.

However, it's not a sport. I've got a couple of escapee/refugee phasents in my garden at the moment and a slower, more stupid animal would be impossible to find. My dog has now (very gently) brought one into the house three times, being caught once is unfortunate, twice careless but three times suggests to me that shooting them is only for those who find fish in barrels too evasive.

This thread is quite precious. You would think the meat on the shelves in supermarkets was grown on a bush like berries not created by killing a live animal and then cutting it up.

Some cuddly urban people need to get over themselves and remember how their food and clothes are actually produced.

a slower, more stupid animal would be impossible to find

One word: quail.

Personally for me if you eat meat you shouldn’t have any ethical problems around killing.

Our household rule is if you shoot it you eat it.

We don’t often get the guns out after dinner, but it’s not uncommon to find one around the house

I am aware of meat production . You do not need to be a vegan to object to hunting. Many meat eaters object to it. The fact is we have mountains of unused meat in this country and yes, slaughter conditions are possibly worse in some cases. All this means is that further meat from shooting parties is superfluous to requirements. It's like adding insult to injury. You can't justify it by saying some farming practices are less humane.

sell the land if they didn't allow shoots? Surely it could be used for certain crops, grazing or forestry?

Not all land is equal. Where I live, you could grow crops but the massive amount of improvement and input it would take would send the carbon footprint of those crops skyrocketing. It's not ecologically or economically viable.

Forestry isn't really viable anywhere, that's why there are such massive grants from the EU available for it. We have a fair bit of forestry nearby that was planted about 20 years ago because the grants were so lucrative but the now, fully mature, trees aren't really worth harvesting.

You can't swap and change the use of land and expect to make a living, especially not with marginal land.

Perhaps stop being so controlling and forcing your personal ethics onto your OH? Would you tolerate this kind of ethical interference if the positions were reversed?

p.s. Wearing wellies and Barbour in central London is a bit gauche and comes across as trying too hard, but that's an entirely separate issue!

shooting them is only for those who find fish in barrels too evasive

Ddog and I regularly surprise them when we're out walking and if I could be arsed I'm sure I could catch one by the tail they're so noisy and awkward and slow.

Presumably why they are chosen for shooting as any dimwit in an overly tight tweed jacket can manage to hit a few.

no idea but LOL she sounds hilarious/like someone who could wander into the Ab Fab set as a roaring cliche

How do shoots contribute to wildlife management... a few people have answered this already

Woodlands are planted and maintained as areas for young pheasants to be released to over the summer before the shooting season starts. This also provides a great habitat for lots and lots of other species.

If these areas weren't needed for the shoot, they wouldn't be financially viable to keep and would probably be cut down to make way for more crop production
Hedgerows are maintained for similar reasons which means much more biodiversity than tractor-friendly fences which would be the alternative (they are much easier and cheaper to maintain)

The pheasant chicks are initially released into fox-proof pens when they first arrive at farms, and because they are fox proof, they also provide perfect breeding grounds for other land-nesting bird species who would otherwise be killed by foxes
Whichever poster said pheasants are kept in dark huts and released on the day of the shoot - that's absolute bullshit and doesn't happen at all. Shoots are designed around the known flight paths of the birds.

Cover crops such as corn are planted around the edges of fields and stay there after harvest time to provide 'cover' for pheasants to shelter in.
These provide shelter and food for lots of other species through the winter

Ponds and lakes are maintained for ducks but provide lots of obvious benefits for other wildlife

You seem to have a really weird Disney idea of farms and farming. Yes it would be lovely if all farmers just did all this for the sake of it but the economics of modern farmer mean it just isn't possible.
An economically-viable way of it happening that also makes a huge contribution to the rural economy (take a guess at how many people are employed on shoots) mean shooting has a huge impact

I think if your DH wants to do it then it's up to him. As long as he eats what he kills. I'm a veggie and my husband and his family are very into pheasant shooting. I obviously wouldn't do it myself.

Shoots certainly support the rural economy locally. Apart from the moneys the farmers running shoots make, local lads and the early retired act as beaters, B&B accommodation and self catering are used outside the main season, the pubs and shops benefit from increased visitors. Birds are eaither taken by the party or sold to local gastropub in return for drinks. Then there are gundog trainers who profit and other local businesses. The tracts of sunflowers look beautiful too and as said above our hedgerows and woodlands are maintained in part because of shoots.
Guns are required to be held in cabinets and should be locked away when not in use. We see new guns brought out at supper parties sometimes - but not often.
I can’t see why he wouldn’t go and enjoy himself. He’s not asking to to shoot. Shooting is very different to fox hunting. You could go and enjoy the Yorkshire air, have lovely long walks and then have the evening together.

Thanks for that info sparechange, but the whole culture around this makes me very depressed.

Well for those of you who are so outraged, and are not vegetarian, do you know that a lot of animals are killed by halal methods, this is much more cruel than shooting

"Well for those of you who are so outraged, and are not vegetarian, do you know that a lot of animals are killed by halal methods, this is much more cruel than shooting"

Yep- those prayers can be pretty loud.....

Pheasants are not only shot to be eaten:

www.edp24.co.uk/ten-bin-bags-of-dead-pheasants-dumped-on-persehall-manor-farm-in-bunwell-1-4838543

Pheasants are also not necessarily safe to eat:

www.food.gov.uk/science/advice-to-frequent-eaters-of-game-shot-with-lead

Gl1tterari - similar arguments are made by those people who pay a fortune to go to Africa and shoot rare animals.

Taking pleasure in killing makes you a vile human being IMO.

Lol!

On the grounds of animal welfare, I think you CAN justify shooting by the fact that other methods of animal husbandry are more cruel. I'm vegan so don't eat any of it. However, if someone was to eat a wild caught pheasant for dinner, that means presumably that they aren't eating a chicken from the slaughterhouse for dinner. I just don't see the logic in someone who eats meat, dairy or eggs getting their knickers in a twist about shooting (as long as the animal or bird being shot is eaten and replaces meat from the slaughterhouse). It seems like a class issue for lots of people, and that doesn't help the debate on animal welfare.
And, for the person who joked about the halal prayers being loud, do you realise that a lot of halal and Jewish meat is killed without being stunned? That's why people are against it, including the RSPCA who are clearly not a racist organisation. Its also why a liberal country like Denmark has banned non-stun meat. Its not islamophobia to say that any animal being killed should be stunned and unable to feel pain before they are bled to death.

her DH has now asked my DH to invest in something or other

THis would be my biggest concern.

Don't even get me started on halal practices.

Harshbuttrue - you seem to take a very "all of nothing" stance on this, which is laudable, but probably not that realistic for most people. To be honest, if I was a single person, I would probably be vegan, but I find it too much with 4 DC to get organised and when I have tried I've tended to go underweight.

Surely, as with many things, something is better than nothing? For instance, I know loads of people who have significantly cut back on red meat, not even for ethical reasons, but for health reasons. These kinds of shifts in people's eating habits are far more likely to have an impact in beef farming, than waiting for the world to turn vegan.

The meat industry is a monstrous machine which produces disgusting surpluses year upon year and the hunting industry will have little impact in this. Do you think if hunts increase, Bernard Matthews will close some factories, or MacDonalds or Tesco will be impacted in any way? No, because one is a food production industry, the other is a recreational pastime (with the spin off that it feeds a few local people). Most people in towns and cities rarely, if ever, clap eyes on a pheasant, dead or otherwise.

If you drink milk you are supporting an industry that does equally bad things, g1itteratai.

As for the class issue, I'm not British and a lot of it still mystifies me, but this is how the conversation that led to DH being invited on the shoot went and I am not joking -

friend - How come you don't have as strong an accent as Glitter?
DH - I'm not from there, I'm British
friend - Oh I thought you sounded British, where did you go to school?

Cue talk of "you must know so and so" and the marines and hey presto, he's invited on the shoot!

Maybe he would have been invited anyway, but the fact is, these people are not custodians of the countryside anymore than I am. It's all about networking and money and it's a joke to pretend otherwise.