RF, William, Kate and cruelty to animals

[JumpingJiminy]

We don't often hear much about what the RF are up to with blood sports and sports that involve animal cruelty.

There's another thread on her about polo which I had no idea was such a cruel sport.

Yet William's happy to play. I know he believes his life's grift is pretending to save the environment and end poverty.

But in this age of increased awareness, more young people being vegan, or just more people more aware of cruelty, how does the Wales' involvement in cruelty to animals place them for future success as monarchs. Particularly when said younger people don't support them in the same way older people do.

Or is this all going to be underreported, and they'll do the usual shooting, and polo playing, etcetera, widening the gap between their relevance and younger people's expectations.

Wills in action! Prince of Wales shows off his polo skills in annual Windsor charity match - as cousin Peter Phillips and his new flame Harriet Sperling turn out in support | Daily Mail Online https://share.google/nsikS4mu2WWF6dEHs

Waitrose does a good range of veal products. I'm also very lucky that we have a local farm who produce veal. Well looked after, outdoor bred, and locally sourced. Wonderful.

I've always understood that the gameyness of something depended on how long you hang it. My family chose to hang pheasants a little while but not for too long. Others prefer it stronger, I believe.

Re domestic animals, with the meat sold in the supermarket. My neighbour said local Supermarket A's meat was better than local Supermarket B's. She thought it was because A had their own butchery department and probably hung the meat for longer, presumably to develop a bit more flavour.

Ocado sell veal steaks.

There’s a few different factors apparently - just went down a huge rabbit hole on this because the venison I’ve been eating here in the US has no gamey flavor at all.

Male vs female deer taste different - males in the rutting season with more testosterone taste more gamey

Similar with age - the younger the milder taste

Diet plays a big part - a varied diet of grass and orchard vs just sage brush

And if they’ve been chased and are stressed before being shot then that can make them more gamey.

Does anybody have a link to somewhere you can buy ethically reared duck?

A quick Google provides some suggestions, such as Creedy Carver.

This showed up on my phone feed this morning. I saw red.

https://archive.ph/PYvHt

That's why the government are discussing banning trail hunting, to howls and accusations of 'class warfare'.

Because sadly all too many hunts and supporters have deliberately and regularly broken the law, and claimed (if found out) that it was accidental.

It should be banned. And someone who throws a live fox into a pack of dogs has serious issues. IMHO.

Thank you. The problem is much “ethical”duck farming is anything but-not enough to water to swim in, for example, so I was hoping for a personal recommendation!

I agree.

But it seems a fairly tenuous RF connection? The hunt that KC3 and Camilla 'used to' hunt with pre- hunting ban 20 years ago. Times change.

People used to watch public hangings, bull and bear baiting, cock fighting etc. I hope (and think) that fox hunting will one day be seen the same way.

But I am in my 50s, and grew up in a rural area. Fox hunting was generally accepted, and many friends used to take part (not wealthy, state school rural families). They weren't psychopaths, just grew up in a context where fox hunting was seen as a normal, acceptable activity.

My parents were anti, so I never hunted although I did ride. I was a bit of an outliers, and had offers of ponies to borrow if I wanted to hunt.

Edited to add, I would probably have accepted because it would have been a fun ride - i would have turned a blind eye to the cruelty. Thankfully my parents were very clear on the subject. Otherwise I would now be guilty of having done something I now see as wrong.

Thanks for your perspective. I just hope they take a stand on this.

My family has been involved with feral cat and regular cat rights for a long time. I've had to deal with cruelty issues towards cats so I have sympathy for the foxes.

If everyone around you sees it as normal and the 'right' thing to do (dodgy claims about keeping down the number of predators) it is very easy to go along with that. Especially if it is fun and you don't have to confront the bloody reality (most hunt followers aren't in at the kill).

Luckily for me I had parents who stuck to their principles. My father in particular was an older father when I was born, and was a teenager during WW2. He saw those first news reels of the concentration camps being liberated and revealed to the world.

'Just going along with it for a quiet life' was completely shameful in his view, because he had seen where that could lead. Mind you, he took it to extremes and fell.out with anyone and everyone over the smallest thing 😛

So no matter how tempted I was there was no way I would have been allowed. But I can see the temptation if you enjoy riding.

But it seems a fairly tenuous RF connection? The hunt that KC3 and Camilla 'used to' hunt with pre- hunting ban 20 years ago.

They'd have been late fifties or so then. More than capable of having worked out the inherent cruelty for themselves. C3 took W & H along for the 'fun' as children. C3 and Cam only discontinued their association when fox hunting was (rightly and in a long overdue move) banned.

C3 lobbied the then government against banning the practice claiming it as 'romantic'.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/prince-charles-claimed-fox-hunting-11307532

If health and legalities permitted I'd be entirely unsurprised to see them saddling up on Boxing Day.

It's a constitutional monarchy. I am glad to hear the king has followed the law, whether or not he agrees. As I have posted, I know many 'ordinary' people who disagree with this law. I think they are wrong, and expect them to follow the law, whatever their personal views.

I am glad to hear the king has followed the law, whether or not he agrees

I think it's morally perturbing he didn't want it changed.

Why?

I know people with a range of views, on hunting as well as other topics such as abortion, selective education, the role of the welfare state, whether Jesus was the son of God, animal rights etc

I don't find it 'morally perturbing' that others hold different opinions and beliefs. I do expect them to act within the law.

Why?

I think it's morally reprehensible to take regular part in then go on to defend and indeed lobby for the continuation of an activity focused on and ending with a living target being ripped apart in the most horrific way.

It's disingenuous for anyone to suggest that as 'most' participants aren't present for the kill they should be absolved of the responsibility for their participation in the torture.

No room for ambiguity here IMO.

I have vegan friends who find eating meat morally repugnant. We agree to disagree.

Are you vegan?

BBC running article about being overrun by deer and the damage they are doing to forests, and by extension to bird populations and general biodiversity.

Government is kicking it around because PETA type folk will get in a froth about it. However estimates are that several hundred thousand, yes that many, need to be culled ie: shot.

I don’t find it morally perturbing that others hold different opinions to me. I do find it morally perturbing to kill things for fun.

Doesn't 'fun' include eating meat? We can survive without it.

Killing animals that you are not going to eat just for fun is morally purturbing. Even if they were clean kills-which they often aren’t.
It is also morally perturbing that so many people on here are justifying blood sports.

I don't think fox hunting is justified, as you would realise if you read my posts.

However, I can understand - and tolerate - other opinions, as long as actions remain within the law.

Just as I have vegan friends who would say eating meat is not necessary for health or good nutrition, and as a meat eater I am putting my own.pleasure (not need) first and causing unneccessary suffering and death to animals.

To add, from a purely logical stand point, it's difficult to argue with them! Unless the animals need to be culled e.g. for environmental reasons, and if that is the case then they might as well be eaten.

We're back to shooting again...!