Police run over calf - reasonable?
Discussion
Evanivitch said:
Silvanus said:
Waitrose, Tesco's, Sainsbury's etc all sell British venison permanently, Aldi and Lidl sell it around Christmas. It's very easy to buy British venison and it's relatively inexpensive.
I'm aware it's widely sold, but in nearly all cases it's farmed.Tesco "Highland Game"
Produced in Scotland using venison from UK and New Zealand, see front of pack for declaration
Waitrose
Naturally lean and tender, these British Venison Frying Steaks are quick to cook and full of flavour. Our British Venison comes from grass, grain and forage fed deer, reared by a small group of specialist producers.
Sainsbury's
Here at HFV Parkland & Wild we have selected and processed the finest Venison from sustainably sourced best quality Deer from Parks and the wild across the UK.
ks. Evanivitch said:
Silvanus said:
Waitrose, Tesco's, Sainsbury's etc all sell British venison permanently, Aldi and Lidl sell it around Christmas. It's very easy to buy British venison and it's relatively inexpensive.
I'm aware it's widely sold, but in nearly all cases it's farmed.Tesco "Highland Game"
Produced in Scotland using venison from UK and New Zealand, see front of pack for declaration
Waitrose
Naturally lean and tender, these British Venison Frying Steaks are quick to cook and full of flavour. Our British Venison comes from grass, grain and forage fed deer, reared by a small group of specialist producers.
Sainsbury's
Here at HFV Parkland & Wild we have selected and processed the finest Venison from sustainably sourced best quality Deer from Parks and the wild across the UK.
Silvanus said:
Tesco are now also selling Forestry England venison. Either way, the earlier posters suggestion that the majority of venison shot gets buried is absolute bks.
It's what I was told by an organisation responsible for habitat management in Scotland who were reaching out to a political parties to try to change current practices.ks. DonkeyApple said:
It has to be for supermarket sales as they don't do 'seasonal' and contracts stipulate year round supply which doesn't work for managed herds as the females and males have different seasons for different species. So this drives both farming and import demand. At a game butchers you'll find different venison in different quantities at different prices through the year a this just doesn't work for supermarket customers.
Tesco stipulate year round supply of British fruit and veg?Teeco very, very much do seasonal sales. That was my speciality in my student days.
DonkeyApple said:
Most is sold into the game meat market. The key is that for it to be legal for human consumption it must meet key criteria such as being from a 'managed' herd.
At the other end, such as road kill it must be burned or buried as it has no provenance and can't be deemed fit for consumption/sale.
The real issue with the meat is that the average U.K. consumer seems it far too posh to eat, while others would firebomb the supermarket manager's children so an awful lot of extremely high quality and healthy red meat ends up in dog food.
That bit about having to be from a managed herd just isn't true is it? If your definition of managed is to be commercially farmed or a captive herd like those in Margam or Richmond parks. At the other end, such as road kill it must be burned or buried as it has no provenance and can't be deemed fit for consumption/sale.
The real issue with the meat is that the average U.K. consumer seems it far too posh to eat, while others would firebomb the supermarket manager's children so an awful lot of extremely high quality and healthy red meat ends up in dog food.
Some criteria needs to be met around safe handling, sufficient facilities (chiller etc) and the stalker needs to be suitably qualified but venison can be harvested from pretty much anywhere (not roadkill, humain dispatched animals etc) and be sold into the food chain. There may also be further criteria set by the buyer such as non toxic ammunition to be used.
Many estates will have a stalker who's sole task is manage the wild deer on the land (with manage being defined as keeping the numbers down only) and a lot of this ends up in the food chain as a source of revenue. Non native and invasive species such as Chinese water deer and Muntjac deer are seen as undesirable and don't often enter the food chain via commercial means though they do often find an outlet via sites like giving up the game. Muntjac are reported to be the best tasting of the deer we have here and are about in plague numbers in some areas. They are about the size of a spaniel dog so not always worth the effort to get them into food chain.
It's quite popular within fieldsports to participate in these stalks as a paying gun with the option to keep any animals shot at the going rate for undressed venison in addition to the fees paid to go on the stalk. Ranges around £80 for the stalking fee and then the carcass at around £1-2 per KG. For anyone who wants to get a little closer to their food, where it comes from etc then I would recommend this experience at least once in a lifetime.
The venison you order in a country pub is just as likely to be have been shot and prepared by the landlord or chef as it is to have come from a game dealer or be commercially farmed.
DonkeyApple said:
Most is sold into the game meat market. The key is that for it to be legal for human consumption it must meet key criteria such as being from a 'managed' herd.
I didn't know we.had managed flocks of pigeon these days, I'll have to tell the landlord, he's being a right premium for the shotgun kind!dci said:
That bit about having to be from a managed herd just isn't true is it? If your definition of managed is to be commercially farmed or a captive herd like those in Margam or Richmond parks.
Some criteria needs to be met around safe handling, sufficient facilities (chiller etc) and the stalker needs to be suitably qualified but venison can be harvested from pretty much anywhere (not roadkill, humain dispatched animals etc) and be sold into the food chain. There may also be further criteria set by the buyer such as non toxic ammunition to be used.
Many estates will have a stalker who's sole task is manage the wild deer on the land (with manage being defined as keeping the numbers down only) and a lot of this ends up in the food chain as a source of revenue. Non native and invasive species such as Chinese water deer and Muntjac deer are seen as undesirable and don't often enter the food chain via commercial means though they do often find an outlet via sites like giving up the game. Muntjac are reported to be the best tasting of the deer we have here and are about in plague numbers in some areas. They are about the size of a spaniel dog so not always worth the effort to get them into food chain.
It's quite popular within fieldsports to participate in these stalks as a paying gun with the option to keep any animals shot at the going rate for undressed venison in addition to the fees paid to go on the stalk. Ranges around £80 for the stalking fee and then the carcass at around £1-2 per KG. For anyone who wants to get a little closer to their food, where it comes from etc then I would recommend this experience at least once in a lifetime.
The venison you order in a country pub is just as likely to be have been shot and prepared by the landlord or chef as it is to have come from a game dealer or be commercially farmed.
Yup. The venison needs to be traceable and meet the basic legal requirements in order to legally enter the food chain. Some criteria needs to be met around safe handling, sufficient facilities (chiller etc) and the stalker needs to be suitably qualified but venison can be harvested from pretty much anywhere (not roadkill, humain dispatched animals etc) and be sold into the food chain. There may also be further criteria set by the buyer such as non toxic ammunition to be used.
Many estates will have a stalker who's sole task is manage the wild deer on the land (with manage being defined as keeping the numbers down only) and a lot of this ends up in the food chain as a source of revenue. Non native and invasive species such as Chinese water deer and Muntjac deer are seen as undesirable and don't often enter the food chain via commercial means though they do often find an outlet via sites like giving up the game. Muntjac are reported to be the best tasting of the deer we have here and are about in plague numbers in some areas. They are about the size of a spaniel dog so not always worth the effort to get them into food chain.
It's quite popular within fieldsports to participate in these stalks as a paying gun with the option to keep any animals shot at the going rate for undressed venison in addition to the fees paid to go on the stalk. Ranges around £80 for the stalking fee and then the carcass at around £1-2 per KG. For anyone who wants to get a little closer to their food, where it comes from etc then I would recommend this experience at least once in a lifetime.
The venison you order in a country pub is just as likely to be have been shot and prepared by the landlord or chef as it is to have come from a game dealer or be commercially farmed.
But don't go confusing farmed with managed etc as there are all sorts of different means for the meat to be compliant. This revolves around the definition of 'managed'. A herd of wild deer can still be 'managed' even if they move between land titles. So long as someone is maintaining a basic eye on the herd health and operating a cull etc then wild game will meet the criteria set.
I'd disagree re the country pub statement. I'd agree that this is likely at your real country pub but even then it's more often sourced from the local game keeper who also does all the dressing but the majority of country pubs, especially away from the big red and roe deer herds will be buying in dressed meat whether from a game meat dealer or the local chap.
Re the growth in recent years of 'pay to play' shooting, I'm vehemently against this as the industry doesn't formally test the customer's ability to shoot straight and to do so consistently. Like so many forms of game shooting, stalking has filled with f
kwit punters who are enabled by fkwit estate managers wanting a quick bit of cash (refrained from saying buck;)). I can turn up at a huge number of estates this month with a gun and a hat and make whatever claim I like about ability and be allowed to take crappy shots at deer. Not on. But like with driven game, if you tell these punters they can't participate until they've proven a minimum level of competence then the absolute toddler tantrums you get are shocking.
We need to be massively stepping up culling, we need to massively educate the consumer as to seasons and the different type of venison but the current way many estate operate their 'pay n play' businesses is not acceptable and it will come back to bite the industry in its arse. It's better to put them in a field with a robot gun and get 9 year old Americans to shoot them online as the robot can be set to not allow the shot if it's not a kill shot.
Evanivitch said:
DonkeyApple said:
Most is sold into the game meat market. The key is that for it to be legal for human consumption it must meet key criteria such as being from a 'managed' herd.
I didn't know we.had managed flocks of pigeon these days, I'll have to tell the landlord, he's being a right premium for the shotgun kind!It can be about keeping wild levels at acceptable numbers, removing selected individuals etc some very good books on
https://basc.org.uk/deer-management-plans/
Pigeons - some will state are not Game
In U.K. You cannot legally just go out & kill them for eating, it has to be done as part of a pest management strategy (& nowadays have to demonstrate that some form of non lethal control has been tried/considered first) - pigeons for eating are a by product of pigeon management
DonkeyApple said:
Yup. The venison needs to be traceable and meet the basic legal requirements in order to legally enter the food chain.
But don't go confusing farmed with managed etc as there are all sorts of different means for the meat to be compliant. This revolves around the definition of 'managed'. A herd of wild deer can still be 'managed' even if they move between land titles. So long as someone is maintaining a basic eye on the herd health and operating a cull etc then wild game will meet the criteria set.
I'd disagree re the country pub statement. I'd agree that this is likely at your real country pub but even then it's more often sourced from the local game keeper who also does all the dressing but the majority of country pubs, especially away from the big red and roe deer herds will be buying in dressed meat whether from a game meat dealer or the local chap.
Re the growth in recent years of 'pay to play' shooting, I'm vehemently against this as the industry doesn't formally test the customer's ability to shoot straight and to do so consistently. Like so many forms of game shooting, stalking has filled with fkwit punters who are enabled by fkwit estate managers wanting a quick bit of cash (refrained from saying buck;)).
I can turn up at a huge number of estates this month with a gun and a hat and make whatever claim I like about ability and be allowed to take crappy shots at deer. Not on. But like with driven game, if you tell these punters they can't participate until they've proven a minimum level of competence then the absolute toddler tantrums you get are shocking.
We need to be massively stepping up culling, we need to massively educate the consumer as to seasons and the different type of venison but the current way many estate operate their 'pay n play' businesses is not acceptable and it will come back to bite the industry in its arse. It's better to put them in a field with a robot gun and get 9 year old Americans to shoot them online as the robot can be set to not allow the shot if it's not a kill shot.
Again, that's still not true. Any suitably trained person with the correct facilities to handle deer for the food chain can source their deer from wherever they like and have permission to do so. Be that the local lords estate or an arable field off the M4 it just needs to meet the criteria of being fit for consumption and be traceable. In most cases this is just being gralloched in the field, moved to a chiller within a set time, prepared, bagged and tagged. From there it's off to the game dealer, farm shop, pub kitchen.. That's brief and there are nuances but its near enough the process. Supermarkets may stipulate that their venison comes from a managed or farmed herd but thats only for commercial reasons. But don't go confusing farmed with managed etc as there are all sorts of different means for the meat to be compliant. This revolves around the definition of 'managed'. A herd of wild deer can still be 'managed' even if they move between land titles. So long as someone is maintaining a basic eye on the herd health and operating a cull etc then wild game will meet the criteria set.
I'd disagree re the country pub statement. I'd agree that this is likely at your real country pub but even then it's more often sourced from the local game keeper who also does all the dressing but the majority of country pubs, especially away from the big red and roe deer herds will be buying in dressed meat whether from a game meat dealer or the local chap.
Re the growth in recent years of 'pay to play' shooting, I'm vehemently against this as the industry doesn't formally test the customer's ability to shoot straight and to do so consistently. Like so many forms of game shooting, stalking has filled with f
kwit punters who are enabled by fkwit estate managers wanting a quick bit of cash (refrained from saying buck;)). I can turn up at a huge number of estates this month with a gun and a hat and make whatever claim I like about ability and be allowed to take crappy shots at deer. Not on. But like with driven game, if you tell these punters they can't participate until they've proven a minimum level of competence then the absolute toddler tantrums you get are shocking.
We need to be massively stepping up culling, we need to massively educate the consumer as to seasons and the different type of venison but the current way many estate operate their 'pay n play' businesses is not acceptable and it will come back to bite the industry in its arse. It's better to put them in a field with a robot gun and get 9 year old Americans to shoot them online as the robot can be set to not allow the shot if it's not a kill shot.
It's also a bit unfair to label those who participate in paid shooting to be unworthy, incapable etc. IME a good stalker will have a first timer take a shot at a set target first to prove you can do so (as per the stalking scenes in S3 of Clarksons farm) or have you prove competence by already holding an FAC or sufficient past experience. It's wholly in the interest of the stalker to do so as they'll be relying on the carcass being recoverable in a saleable condition (either to the shooter themselves or the wider food chain). Allowing a 'punter' to gut shoot an animal which then runs on for 3/4 of a mile is a complete waste of time as the stalker then needs to waste time tracking down the animal in which time it can become spoiled or lost entirely. The stalker will want the fee for the stalk, the cost of the animal itself and where the animal isn't a cull animal but a medal worthy animal, they'll also want paying for the medal. They can't recover either of the second two if the animal is poorly shot or unrecoverable.
Any reputable shooting estate will have a member of staff to lead the team of guns who will eject anyone being dangerous, inhumane etc. Turn up at any one of those estates next month and shoot a low flying bird or take a shot below the tree line on the first drive. 9 times from 10 you'll be asked to leave after the first drive horn sounds. In more extreme cases you'll be ejected immediately. I both shoot and beat on these shoots and unacceptable behavior is nearly always clamped down on immediately. There are bad apples as in any industry but luckily people vote with their feet and operations like that don't tend to last too long.
Shooting is near enough on it's arse as it is and it isn't helped by those presenting fiction as fact on a public forum. It has many enemies who are all too happy to spread mistruths to further their agenda and writing things like you have done only serves to help those who want to see all forms of shooting banned.
dci said:
Again, that's still not true. Any suitably trained person with the correct facilities to handle deer for the food chain can source their deer from wherever they like and have permission to do so. Be that the local lords estate or an arable field off the M4 it just needs to meet the criteria of being fit for consumption and be traceable. In most cases this is just being gralloched in the field, moved to a chiller within a set time, prepared, bagged and tagged. From there it's off to the game dealer, farm shop, pub kitchen.. That's brief and there are nuances but its near enough the process. Supermarkets may stipulate that their venison comes from a managed or farmed herd but thats only for commercial reasons.
It's also a bit unfair to label those who participate in paid shooting to be unworthy, incapable etc. IME a good stalker will have a first timer take a shot at a set target first to prove you can do so (as per the stalking scenes in S3 of Clarksons farm) or have you prove competence by already holding an FAC or sufficient past experience. It's wholly in the interest of the stalker to do so as they'll be relying on the carcass being recoverable in a saleable condition (either to the shooter themselves or the wider food chain). Allowing a 'punter' to gut shoot an animal which then runs on for 3/4 of a mile is a complete waste of time as the stalker then needs to waste time tracking down the animal in which time it can become spoiled or lost entirely. The stalker will want the fee for the stalk, the cost of the animal itself and where the animal isn't a cull animal but a medal worthy animal, they'll also want paying for the medal. They can't recover either of the second two if the animal is poorly shot or unrecoverable.
Any reputable shooting estate will have a member of staff to lead the team of guns who will eject anyone being dangerous, inhumane etc. Turn up at any one of those estates next month and shoot a low flying bird or take a shot below the tree line on the first drive. 9 times from 10 you'll be asked to leave after the first drive horn sounds. In more extreme cases you'll be ejected immediately. I both shoot and beat on these shoots and unacceptable behavior is nearly always clamped down on immediately. There are bad apples as in any industry but luckily people vote with their feet and operations like that don't tend to last too long.
Shooting is near enough on it's arse as it is and it isn't helped by those presenting fiction as fact on a public forum. It has many enemies who are all too happy to spread mistruths to further their agenda and writing things like you have done only serves to help those who want to see all forms of shooting banned.
But none of that is countering what I said but confirming. It's also a bit unfair to label those who participate in paid shooting to be unworthy, incapable etc. IME a good stalker will have a first timer take a shot at a set target first to prove you can do so (as per the stalking scenes in S3 of Clarksons farm) or have you prove competence by already holding an FAC or sufficient past experience. It's wholly in the interest of the stalker to do so as they'll be relying on the carcass being recoverable in a saleable condition (either to the shooter themselves or the wider food chain). Allowing a 'punter' to gut shoot an animal which then runs on for 3/4 of a mile is a complete waste of time as the stalker then needs to waste time tracking down the animal in which time it can become spoiled or lost entirely. The stalker will want the fee for the stalk, the cost of the animal itself and where the animal isn't a cull animal but a medal worthy animal, they'll also want paying for the medal. They can't recover either of the second two if the animal is poorly shot or unrecoverable.
Any reputable shooting estate will have a member of staff to lead the team of guns who will eject anyone being dangerous, inhumane etc. Turn up at any one of those estates next month and shoot a low flying bird or take a shot below the tree line on the first drive. 9 times from 10 you'll be asked to leave after the first drive horn sounds. In more extreme cases you'll be ejected immediately. I both shoot and beat on these shoots and unacceptable behavior is nearly always clamped down on immediately. There are bad apples as in any industry but luckily people vote with their feet and operations like that don't tend to last too long.
Shooting is near enough on it's arse as it is and it isn't helped by those presenting fiction as fact on a public forum. It has many enemies who are all too happy to spread mistruths to further their agenda and writing things like you have done only serves to help those who want to see all forms of shooting banned.
The meet needs to be traceable and conform to the set rules for public sale/consumption and good shoots make sure their clientele can hit the target. The problem is the shoots that don't of which they are not rare. Game shooting today has far too many adults in the field who need considerably more education first.
DonkeyApple said:
But none of that is countering what I said but confirming.
The meet needs to be traceable and conform to the set rules for public sale/consumption and good shoots make sure their clientele can hit the target. The problem is the shoots that don't of which they are not rare. Game shooting today has far too many adults in the field who need considerably more education first.
The meet needs to be traceable and conform to the set rules for public sale/consumption and good shoots make sure their clientele can hit the target. The problem is the shoots that don't of which they are not rare. Game shooting today has far too many adults in the field who need considerably more education first.
DonkeyApple said:
A herd of wild deer can still be 'managed' even if they move between land titles. So long as someone is maintaining a basic eye on the herd health and operating a cull etc then wild game will meet the criteria set.
You are persisting with the thought that the herd needs to be managed to fulfill a criteria. They don't, the deer can come from anywhere and be entered into the food chain. Some estates may monitor the deer on their land as a part of an overall wildlife management plan but it's not mandatory or really connected to entering deer into the food chain. It's more likely to be done to evidence to Natural England that they are doing something about deer numbers. In much the same way an estate may monitor its badger or red listed bird species populations for conservation reasons. On the last part, I'm sure that you know every conceivable thing there is to know about shooting and everything you've ever shot at has died instantly so sure of the fact you are that others cannot be trusted to take part in shooting. The arrogance..
dci said:
You are persisting with the thought that the herd needs to be managed to fulfill a criteria. They don't, the deer can come from anywhere and be entered into the food chain. Some estates may monitor the deer on their land as a part of an overall wildlife management plan but it's not mandatory or really connected to entering deer into the food chain. It's more likely to be done to evidence to Natural England that they are doing something about deer numbers. In much the same way an estate may monitor its badger or red listed bird species populations for conservation reasons.
On the last part, I'm sure that you know every conceivable thing there is to know about shooting and everything you've ever shot at has died instantly so sure of the fact you are that others cannot be trusted to take part in shooting. The arrogance..
On the last part, there is no arrogance and I have no idea why you would head off on that tangent as it has no merit on either side, either trying to claim that I am being arrogant for hold an obvious opinion when it comes to animal welfare or that it is somehow remotely acceptable to not collect evidence that the customer can shoot to an appropriate level. In fact, you even appear to hold the same view but have just chosen to head off on some grievance?On the last part, I'm sure that you know every conceivable thing there is to know about shooting and everything you've ever shot at has died instantly so sure of the fact you are that others cannot be trusted to take part in shooting. The arrogance..
Re the former, I suspect you are applying too literal a meaning to what meets the criteria of 'managed'. Just operating a formal cull of a wild herd will typically suffice. It bears little correlation to 'farmed' stock.
What you are actually appearing confused by are the regulation and the current exemption under which typically a single carcass can be supplied but the retailer still has to know the source if questioned.
Seems our local Police did a far better job of apprehending an escaped bovine.
https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/24723456.hampshir...
https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/24723456.hampshir...
DonkeyApple said:
On the last part, there is no arrogance and I have no idea why you would head off on that tangent as it has no merit on either side, either trying to claim that I am being arrogant for hold an obvious opinion when it comes to animal welfare or that it is somehow remotely acceptable to not collect evidence that the customer can shoot to an appropriate level. In fact, you even appear to hold the same view but have just chosen to head off on some grievance?
Re the former, I suspect you are applying too literal a meaning to what meets the criteria of 'managed'. Just operating a formal cull of a wild herd will typically suffice. It bears little correlation to 'farmed' stock.
What you are actually appearing confused by are the regulation and the current exemption under which typically a single carcass can be supplied but the retailer still has to know the source if questioned.
I would agree that managed can be broad term when applied to wildlife. Deer are typically transient and go where the food is, the human pressure is lesser etc. Outside of fenced in populations they can't really be managed outside of doing a count one week and a resulting cull the next.Re the former, I suspect you are applying too literal a meaning to what meets the criteria of 'managed'. Just operating a formal cull of a wild herd will typically suffice. It bears little correlation to 'farmed' stock.
What you are actually appearing confused by are the regulation and the current exemption under which typically a single carcass can be supplied but the retailer still has to know the source if questioned.
With regards to source when questioned it would be no more than it would for a line caught salmon or tuna i.e Source = Burford, Cotswolds. They don't have the same requirements as a farmed animal would where the DOB, farmer, lineage etc is recorded.
Maybe arrogant is a bit strong so I'll take that back and offer an apology but judging others to be dangerous, inhumane etc in an activity which is fraught with variables, differences in opinion and skill level is not right. To Dave Carrie, any pheasant shot lower than 45 yards may be a waste of time, cruel and so on whereas someone who lives and shoots in the flat lands of Norfolk may not see a 45 yard shot presentation from one season to the next and as such shooting lower birds, shooting lower in the sky is more common out of necessity. As said, there are bad apples as there is in just about any other activity but these are few and far between and if you do witness any wrongdoing then it's everyone's responsibility to speak out to the correct channels and put it right.
It's not sure its right to highlight things on a public forum which are untrue or least very uncommon and extremely looked down upon such as professional stalkers allowing anyone with £80 to spend to carry out unethical practices or game shoots to be done by well off beer swilling louts on a stag do shooting at anything that moves. Outside of a British sitcom or Netflix drama that sort behavior isn't really all that common and if you do take part in fieldsports then you should be well aware of just how irresponsible and damaging that sort of misinformation is. The recent game shooting scenes depicted in the TV show Rivals with David Tennant is especially reputationally damaging showing just how dangerous someone with little knowledge of a subject but a big audience can be.
I would fully expect the open spread of mistruths from the likes Chris Packham and his cult following of blue haired animal rights lunatics and envy politics enthusiasts but not from someone who appears knowledgeable on the subject like yourself.
dci said:
I would agree that managed can be broad term when applied to wildlife. Deer are typically transient and go where the food is, the human pressure is lesser etc. Outside of fenced in populations they can't really be managed outside of doing a count one week and a resulting cull the next.
With regards to source when questioned it would be no more than it would for a line caught salmon or tuna i.e Source = Burford, Cotswolds. They don't have the same requirements as a farmed animal would where the DOB, farmer, lineage etc is recorded.
Maybe arrogant is a bit strong so I'll take that back and offer an apology but judging others to be dangerous, inhumane etc in an activity which is fraught with variables, differences in opinion and skill level is not right. To Dave Carrie, any pheasant shot lower than 45 yards may be a waste of time, cruel and so on whereas someone who lives and shoots in the flat lands of Norfolk may not see a 45 yard shot presentation from one season to the next and as such shooting lower birds, shooting lower in the sky is more common out of necessity. As said, there are bad apples as there is in just about any other activity but these are few and far between and if you do witness any wrongdoing then it's everyone's responsibility to speak out to the correct channels and put it right.
It's not sure its right to highlight things on a public forum which are untrue or least very uncommon and extremely looked down upon such as professional stalkers allowing anyone with £80 to spend to carry out unethical practices or game shoots to be done by well off beer swilling louts on a stag do shooting at anything that moves. Outside of a British sitcom or Netflix drama that sort behavior isn't really all that common and if you do take part in fieldsports then you should be well aware of just how irresponsible and damaging that sort of misinformation is. The recent game shooting scenes depicted in the TV show Rivals with David Tennant is especially reputationally damaging showing just how dangerous someone with little knowledge of a subject but a big audience can be.
I would fully expect the open spread of mistruths from the likes Chris Packham and his cult following of blue haired animal rights lunatics and envy politics enthusiasts but not from someone who appears knowledgeable on the subject like yourself.
The likes of Chris Packham are given the ammunition they desire by the very people who should not be put in the field until they have learned how to behave in the field. That's the modern issue. The huge growth in sporting game has led to parts of the industry favouring had cash in the back pocket over professionalism. This isn't about reputable shoots or estates but the growth in operations where guns are allowed into the field without any appropriate checks and even worse, no one in the field to take them to one side and adjust their attitude. With regards to source when questioned it would be no more than it would for a line caught salmon or tuna i.e Source = Burford, Cotswolds. They don't have the same requirements as a farmed animal would where the DOB, farmer, lineage etc is recorded.
Maybe arrogant is a bit strong so I'll take that back and offer an apology but judging others to be dangerous, inhumane etc in an activity which is fraught with variables, differences in opinion and skill level is not right. To Dave Carrie, any pheasant shot lower than 45 yards may be a waste of time, cruel and so on whereas someone who lives and shoots in the flat lands of Norfolk may not see a 45 yard shot presentation from one season to the next and as such shooting lower birds, shooting lower in the sky is more common out of necessity. As said, there are bad apples as there is in just about any other activity but these are few and far between and if you do witness any wrongdoing then it's everyone's responsibility to speak out to the correct channels and put it right.
It's not sure its right to highlight things on a public forum which are untrue or least very uncommon and extremely looked down upon such as professional stalkers allowing anyone with £80 to spend to carry out unethical practices or game shoots to be done by well off beer swilling louts on a stag do shooting at anything that moves. Outside of a British sitcom or Netflix drama that sort behavior isn't really all that common and if you do take part in fieldsports then you should be well aware of just how irresponsible and damaging that sort of misinformation is. The recent game shooting scenes depicted in the TV show Rivals with David Tennant is especially reputationally damaging showing just how dangerous someone with little knowledge of a subject but a big audience can be.
I would fully expect the open spread of mistruths from the likes Chris Packham and his cult following of blue haired animal rights lunatics and envy politics enthusiasts but not from someone who appears knowledgeable on the subject like yourself.
It's not arrogance to lament a decline in standards and it should not be kept quiet for fear of what damage it may bring upon the sport, those people are the damage.
I departed two days last year in the hope that the people running those days would realise their behaviour was below par. I've not done that before. One of them was due to a fellow gun being down right dangerous but due to being off ov TV no one dared to have a word bar myself and the person I shoot with. He was very clearly going to hit a beater at some point but all he cared about was getting his value for money.
And there are stalking days in the West Country which are being run purely for the money and make next to no attempt to establish whether the client can hit anything. That's not on. It's morally wrong to put cash ahead of welfare.
Keeping quiet is to enable and will only give ammunition to those who wish to force their extremism on others. With any luck 'Rivals' will lead to fewer media types taking to the fields unchecked?
DonkeyApple said:
It has to be for supermarket sales as they don't do 'seasonal' and contracts stipulate year round supply which doesn't work for managed herds as the females and males have different seasons for different species. So this drives both farming and import demand. At a game butchers you'll find different venison in different quantities at different prices through the year a this just doesn't work for supermarket customers.
Having supplied supermarkets for over 20 years I can assure you that pricing does fluctuate as there would be nothing on the shelves if it didn't and seasonal products are very much a thing as is local planograming whereby they will deal with local producers and range in a small number of stores. SURREY POLICE -
Following events which led to a cow being injured in Staines-upon-Thames in the early hours of 15 June, we can confirm that this incident has been thoroughly investigated as both a criminal and internal misconduct matter and has now concluded.
Led by our Professional Standards Department and overseen by a Sussex Police Senior Investigating Officer (SIO) from the Surrey Police and Sussex Police Major Crime Team, the comprehensive investigation reviewed over 250 pieces of video footage, 75 witness statements and obtained the expert opinions of animal welfare specialists to determine if the actions of those involved on the night amounted to the offence of causing unnecessary suffering to an animal.
The SIO has now completed their investigation and determined that while footage of the incident was distressing in nature, those involved in the incident acted within their duties, and the tactics adopted were both lawful and necessary to prevent harm to the public and property. As such, no further action will be taken in either the criminal investigation, or the internal misconduct matter.
Deputy Chief Constable, Nev Kemp, said; “We appreciate the strength of feeling which remains in relation to this incident, which is why we committed to conducting a diligent and thorough investigation to determine whether any criminal offences had taken place in relation to the actions taken by Surrey Police on the night.
“This involved gathering substantial amounts of video evidence, as well as speaking to witnesses, and animal welfare specialists to help inform the SIOs decision making. After investigating for five months, the SIO found that while there is necessary organisational learning in relation to how we handle loose livestock, no criminal offences were made out and therefore no further action should be taken against those who were involved.
“This determination was supported by the Head of Professional Standards for Surrey Police who subsequently reviewed whether there was any potential misconduct. They determined a need for individual learning, but that no further action is taken in relation to misconduct. The driver of the vehicle will return to frontline duties in due course.
“This incident has highlighted several issues in relation to how the police respond to a loose livestock incident and therefore, as a Force, we want to do what we can to reduce the possibility of any event like this happening again, not just in Surrey but anywhere in the country. We have reviewed the recommendations made by the SIO and experts in this area, and will be working to address these promptly, sharing any best practice with Forces across the UK."
The cow, Beau Lucy, is well and remains at the farm with her herd.
“We have already made changes to our protocol for loose livestock. These changes were developed in partnership with a new national advice working group, which we established following the incident, to seek guidance from experts including the British Animal Rescue and Trauma Care Association, British Cattle Veterinary Association, National Farmers Union, and the National Rural Crime Unit. I am grateful to them for their support and guidance.”
Our revised protocol now ensures that in the event of a loose livestock incident, our specialist roads policing team will be deployed to support road and public safety and that early contact is made with Surrey Fire and Rescue Service to utilise their capability and expertise. This protocol will be supported by guidance and training to assist the decision making of those involved in any possible future livestock incidents.
Following events which led to a cow being injured in Staines-upon-Thames in the early hours of 15 June, we can confirm that this incident has been thoroughly investigated as both a criminal and internal misconduct matter and has now concluded.
Led by our Professional Standards Department and overseen by a Sussex Police Senior Investigating Officer (SIO) from the Surrey Police and Sussex Police Major Crime Team, the comprehensive investigation reviewed over 250 pieces of video footage, 75 witness statements and obtained the expert opinions of animal welfare specialists to determine if the actions of those involved on the night amounted to the offence of causing unnecessary suffering to an animal.
The SIO has now completed their investigation and determined that while footage of the incident was distressing in nature, those involved in the incident acted within their duties, and the tactics adopted were both lawful and necessary to prevent harm to the public and property. As such, no further action will be taken in either the criminal investigation, or the internal misconduct matter.
Deputy Chief Constable, Nev Kemp, said; “We appreciate the strength of feeling which remains in relation to this incident, which is why we committed to conducting a diligent and thorough investigation to determine whether any criminal offences had taken place in relation to the actions taken by Surrey Police on the night.
“This involved gathering substantial amounts of video evidence, as well as speaking to witnesses, and animal welfare specialists to help inform the SIOs decision making. After investigating for five months, the SIO found that while there is necessary organisational learning in relation to how we handle loose livestock, no criminal offences were made out and therefore no further action should be taken against those who were involved.
“This determination was supported by the Head of Professional Standards for Surrey Police who subsequently reviewed whether there was any potential misconduct. They determined a need for individual learning, but that no further action is taken in relation to misconduct. The driver of the vehicle will return to frontline duties in due course.
“This incident has highlighted several issues in relation to how the police respond to a loose livestock incident and therefore, as a Force, we want to do what we can to reduce the possibility of any event like this happening again, not just in Surrey but anywhere in the country. We have reviewed the recommendations made by the SIO and experts in this area, and will be working to address these promptly, sharing any best practice with Forces across the UK."
The cow, Beau Lucy, is well and remains at the farm with her herd.
“We have already made changes to our protocol for loose livestock. These changes were developed in partnership with a new national advice working group, which we established following the incident, to seek guidance from experts including the British Animal Rescue and Trauma Care Association, British Cattle Veterinary Association, National Farmers Union, and the National Rural Crime Unit. I am grateful to them for their support and guidance.”
Our revised protocol now ensures that in the event of a loose livestock incident, our specialist roads policing team will be deployed to support road and public safety and that early contact is made with Surrey Fire and Rescue Service to utilise their capability and expertise. This protocol will be supported by guidance and training to assist the decision making of those involved in any possible future livestock incidents.
Nibbles_bits said:
SURREY POLICE -
Following events which led to a cow being injured in Staines-upon-Thames in the early hours of 15 June, we can confirm that this incident has been thoroughly investigated as both a criminal and internal misconduct matter and has now concluded.
Led by our Professional Standards Department and overseen by a Sussex Police Senior Investigating Officer (SIO) from the Surrey Police and Sussex Police Major Crime Team, the comprehensive investigation reviewed over 250 pieces of video footage, 75 witness statements and obtained the expert opinions of animal welfare specialists to determine if the actions of those involved on the night amounted to the offence of causing unnecessary suffering to an animal.
The SIO has now completed their investigation and determined that while footage of the incident was distressing in nature, those involved in the incident acted within their duties, and the tactics adopted were both lawful and necessary to prevent harm to the public and property. As such, no further action will be taken in either the criminal investigation, or the internal misconduct matter.
Deputy Chief Constable, Nev Kemp, said; “We appreciate the strength of feeling which remains in relation to this incident, which is why we committed to conducting a diligent and thorough investigation to determine whether any criminal offences had taken place in relation to the actions taken by Surrey Police on the night.
“This involved gathering substantial amounts of video evidence, as well as speaking to witnesses, and animal welfare specialists to help inform the SIOs decision making. After investigating for five months, the SIO found that while there is necessary organisational learning in relation to how we handle loose livestock, no criminal offences were made out and therefore no further action should be taken against those who were involved.
“This determination was supported by the Head of Professional Standards for Surrey Police who subsequently reviewed whether there was any potential misconduct. They determined a need for individual learning, but that no further action is taken in relation to misconduct. The driver of the vehicle will return to frontline duties in due course.
“This incident has highlighted several issues in relation to how the police respond to a loose livestock incident and therefore, as a Force, we want to do what we can to reduce the possibility of any event like this happening again, not just in Surrey but anywhere in the country. We have reviewed the recommendations made by the SIO and experts in this area, and will be working to address these promptly, sharing any best practice with Forces across the UK."
The cow, Beau Lucy, is well and remains at the farm with her herd.
“We have already made changes to our protocol for loose livestock. These changes were developed in partnership with a new national advice working group, which we established following the incident, to seek guidance from experts including the British Animal Rescue and Trauma Care Association, British Cattle Veterinary Association, National Farmers Union, and the National Rural Crime Unit. I am grateful to them for their support and guidance.”
Our revised protocol now ensures that in the event of a loose livestock incident, our specialist roads policing team will be deployed to support road and public safety and that early contact is made with Surrey Fire and Rescue Service to utilise their capability and expertise. ?This protocol will be supported by guidance and training to assist the decision making of those involved in any possible future livestock incidents.
Yeh like firefighters are good at that.........Following events which led to a cow being injured in Staines-upon-Thames in the early hours of 15 June, we can confirm that this incident has been thoroughly investigated as both a criminal and internal misconduct matter and has now concluded.
Led by our Professional Standards Department and overseen by a Sussex Police Senior Investigating Officer (SIO) from the Surrey Police and Sussex Police Major Crime Team, the comprehensive investigation reviewed over 250 pieces of video footage, 75 witness statements and obtained the expert opinions of animal welfare specialists to determine if the actions of those involved on the night amounted to the offence of causing unnecessary suffering to an animal.
The SIO has now completed their investigation and determined that while footage of the incident was distressing in nature, those involved in the incident acted within their duties, and the tactics adopted were both lawful and necessary to prevent harm to the public and property. As such, no further action will be taken in either the criminal investigation, or the internal misconduct matter.
Deputy Chief Constable, Nev Kemp, said; “We appreciate the strength of feeling which remains in relation to this incident, which is why we committed to conducting a diligent and thorough investigation to determine whether any criminal offences had taken place in relation to the actions taken by Surrey Police on the night.
“This involved gathering substantial amounts of video evidence, as well as speaking to witnesses, and animal welfare specialists to help inform the SIOs decision making. After investigating for five months, the SIO found that while there is necessary organisational learning in relation to how we handle loose livestock, no criminal offences were made out and therefore no further action should be taken against those who were involved.
“This determination was supported by the Head of Professional Standards for Surrey Police who subsequently reviewed whether there was any potential misconduct. They determined a need for individual learning, but that no further action is taken in relation to misconduct. The driver of the vehicle will return to frontline duties in due course.
“This incident has highlighted several issues in relation to how the police respond to a loose livestock incident and therefore, as a Force, we want to do what we can to reduce the possibility of any event like this happening again, not just in Surrey but anywhere in the country. We have reviewed the recommendations made by the SIO and experts in this area, and will be working to address these promptly, sharing any best practice with Forces across the UK."
The cow, Beau Lucy, is well and remains at the farm with her herd.
“We have already made changes to our protocol for loose livestock. These changes were developed in partnership with a new national advice working group, which we established following the incident, to seek guidance from experts including the British Animal Rescue and Trauma Care Association, British Cattle Veterinary Association, National Farmers Union, and the National Rural Crime Unit. I am grateful to them for their support and guidance.”
Our revised protocol now ensures that in the event of a loose livestock incident, our specialist roads policing team will be deployed to support road and public safety and that early contact is made with Surrey Fire and Rescue Service to utilise their capability and expertise. ?This protocol will be supported by guidance and training to assist the decision making of those involved in any possible future livestock incidents.
dickymint said:
Nibbles_bits said:
SURREY POLICE -
Following events which led to a cow being injured in Staines-upon-Thames in the early hours of 15 June, we can confirm that this incident has been thoroughly investigated as both a criminal and internal misconduct matter and has now concluded.
Led by our Professional Standards Department and overseen by a Sussex Police Senior Investigating Officer (SIO) from the Surrey Police and Sussex Police Major Crime Team, the comprehensive investigation reviewed over 250 pieces of video footage, 75 witness statements and obtained the expert opinions of animal welfare specialists to determine if the actions of those involved on the night amounted to the offence of causing unnecessary suffering to an animal.
The SIO has now completed their investigation and determined that while footage of the incident was distressing in nature, those involved in the incident acted within their duties, and the tactics adopted were both lawful and necessary to prevent harm to the public and property. As such, no further action will be taken in either the criminal investigation, or the internal misconduct matter.
Deputy Chief Constable, Nev Kemp, said; “We appreciate the strength of feeling which remains in relation to this incident, which is why we committed to conducting a diligent and thorough investigation to determine whether any criminal offences had taken place in relation to the actions taken by Surrey Police on the night.
“This involved gathering substantial amounts of video evidence, as well as speaking to witnesses, and animal welfare specialists to help inform the SIOs decision making. After investigating for five months, the SIO found that while there is necessary organisational learning in relation to how we handle loose livestock, no criminal offences were made out and therefore no further action should be taken against those who were involved.
“This determination was supported by the Head of Professional Standards for Surrey Police who subsequently reviewed whether there was any potential misconduct. They determined a need for individual learning, but that no further action is taken in relation to misconduct. The driver of the vehicle will return to frontline duties in due course.
“This incident has highlighted several issues in relation to how the police respond to a loose livestock incident and therefore, as a Force, we want to do what we can to reduce the possibility of any event like this happening again, not just in Surrey but anywhere in the country. We have reviewed the recommendations made by the SIO and experts in this area, and will be working to address these promptly, sharing any best practice with Forces across the UK."
The cow, Beau Lucy, is well and remains at the farm with her herd.
“We have already made changes to our protocol for loose livestock. These changes were developed in partnership with a new national advice working group, which we established following the incident, to seek guidance from experts including the British Animal Rescue and Trauma Care Association, British Cattle Veterinary Association, National Farmers Union, and the National Rural Crime Unit. I am grateful to them for their support and guidance.”
Our revised protocol now ensures that in the event of a loose livestock incident, our specialist roads policing team will be deployed to support road and public safety and that early contact is made with Surrey Fire and Rescue Service to utilise their capability and expertise. ?This protocol will be supported by guidance and training to assist the decision making of those involved in any possible future livestock incidents.
Yeh like firefighters are good at that.........Following events which led to a cow being injured in Staines-upon-Thames in the early hours of 15 June, we can confirm that this incident has been thoroughly investigated as both a criminal and internal misconduct matter and has now concluded.
Led by our Professional Standards Department and overseen by a Sussex Police Senior Investigating Officer (SIO) from the Surrey Police and Sussex Police Major Crime Team, the comprehensive investigation reviewed over 250 pieces of video footage, 75 witness statements and obtained the expert opinions of animal welfare specialists to determine if the actions of those involved on the night amounted to the offence of causing unnecessary suffering to an animal.
The SIO has now completed their investigation and determined that while footage of the incident was distressing in nature, those involved in the incident acted within their duties, and the tactics adopted were both lawful and necessary to prevent harm to the public and property. As such, no further action will be taken in either the criminal investigation, or the internal misconduct matter.
Deputy Chief Constable, Nev Kemp, said; “We appreciate the strength of feeling which remains in relation to this incident, which is why we committed to conducting a diligent and thorough investigation to determine whether any criminal offences had taken place in relation to the actions taken by Surrey Police on the night.
“This involved gathering substantial amounts of video evidence, as well as speaking to witnesses, and animal welfare specialists to help inform the SIOs decision making. After investigating for five months, the SIO found that while there is necessary organisational learning in relation to how we handle loose livestock, no criminal offences were made out and therefore no further action should be taken against those who were involved.
“This determination was supported by the Head of Professional Standards for Surrey Police who subsequently reviewed whether there was any potential misconduct. They determined a need for individual learning, but that no further action is taken in relation to misconduct. The driver of the vehicle will return to frontline duties in due course.
“This incident has highlighted several issues in relation to how the police respond to a loose livestock incident and therefore, as a Force, we want to do what we can to reduce the possibility of any event like this happening again, not just in Surrey but anywhere in the country. We have reviewed the recommendations made by the SIO and experts in this area, and will be working to address these promptly, sharing any best practice with Forces across the UK."
The cow, Beau Lucy, is well and remains at the farm with her herd.
“We have already made changes to our protocol for loose livestock. These changes were developed in partnership with a new national advice working group, which we established following the incident, to seek guidance from experts including the British Animal Rescue and Trauma Care Association, British Cattle Veterinary Association, National Farmers Union, and the National Rural Crime Unit. I am grateful to them for their support and guidance.”
Our revised protocol now ensures that in the event of a loose livestock incident, our specialist roads policing team will be deployed to support road and public safety and that early contact is made with Surrey Fire and Rescue Service to utilise their capability and expertise. ?This protocol will be supported by guidance and training to assist the decision making of those involved in any possible future livestock incidents.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff