Deere-est Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 I don't know what you guys make of this but personally I think jobs should be binned. Whoever gave the go ahead, the police in authorityu for the case and the hunt master should all lose their jobs as far as I am concerned for instructing and allowing this to be done in such a disgusting way, in full view of the public beside a road. Makes me sick that farmers can be had up in court for a single dead animal being found in a field and yet those 'in charge' of animal welfare can dispose of animals be them healthy or otherwise in this way. Sick. http://www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/news/towns/wiltshire/4195738.Shotgun_slaughter_of_Bromham_pigs/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fendt-the deere killer Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 HEAR HEAR.totally agree tris.make's a mockery of the law. same old saying "one rule for one,a different rule for the other" a bit like britain and the rest of europe!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deere-est Posted March 15, 2009 Author Share Posted March 15, 2009 You got it there sonny jim! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
civilpek Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 i agree too, pigs as in this case are one of the most intelligent animals you can get, they sense whats going on, im pretty much anti hunting anyway within reason, but killing animals in such a way as that is disgusting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ploughmaster Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 You'd rather they beat them to death with a club I suppose?? I can't really see anything inhumane about shooting them in this case, and I see no reason to start throwing mud at the hunt - the fact that one of the people involved is joint master of the local hunt is coincidental. The hunt were not involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deere-est Posted March 15, 2009 Author Share Posted March 15, 2009 Why would I rather them beat the pigs to death with a club? I never said the hunt was involved, he is a councillor also. Councillors are usually people with some kind of upstanding in the community. Especially a community as small and as close nit as Urchfont, 3 miles from me. This is not the kind of thing an upstanding member of the community does. The fact they were shooting pigs in a field, with a shotgun, beside a road is what I was getting at mainly. Aswell as the fact it was ok by local animal welfare and the police when just around the corner is a very well know slaughterhouse in my area. This is why I think there should be a serious investigation into who gave the go ahead for such a cowboy way of going about it when any other member of the public would be had over a barrel for doing this if the public shopped the offender in. Not to mention the fact if you report an injured deer to the police and the desicion to shoot it is taken, it is done by either a registered deer stalker or by a vet. Neither of which would use a shotgun. So to use a shotgun on a moving animal the size of a pig is hardly a professional way to do things is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ploughmaster Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 I never said the hunt was involved, I know you didn't, but the journalist who wrote the article picked up on the fact that one of the shooters was joint master of the local hunt, and was obviously trying to implicate the hunt as a whole, when the hunt itself was not involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schw84 Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 I disagree a shot gun is an effective way of neutralising the animal. So long as it is done correctly. Through the eye into the brain would be instant. A human killer/rifel could not work first shot. So long as it is done at close range and doesnt look like a gang land shooting nothing wrong with it. would like to point out that I couldnt take the sound if it didnt work the first time so personally wouldnt use a shotgun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted March 16, 2009 Share Posted March 16, 2009 I remember a number of years ago when there was the country wide slaughter of livestock (Foot and Mouth?) They put down a field of sheep near us using guns. They did close the road mind you, since all of our school buses were diverted. I do recall one of the guys there commenting that it was the most unsavoury thing he had seen. The typical slaughterhouse calm was thrown out the window of course, with the animals panicing. So I think as far as a single or small group of animals are concerned, and done in the correct manner, a gun may be fine. A large group though I don't think is suited to this method. No doubt it comes down to costs though? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbo Posted March 16, 2009 Share Posted March 16, 2009 Whilst I agree with you about the location of the cull being insensitive I would question the weapon used. The slaughterman does state that he is licensed to kill animals and so he is not just some numpty brought it off the street. Also, having been on a Police firearms unit for a while I know the type of cartridge that would have been used. It is not a standard shotgun cartridge with lots of pellets inside, it is a 1 ounce rifled slug, a solid lump of lead that will stop an elephant. Using it turns the shotgun into a section 1 Firearm and only a registered user can have them, it does give the gun a hell of a kick though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tractorman810 Posted March 16, 2009 Share Posted March 16, 2009 seem to remember when the farm had swine fever in the early 80's all of the pigs were bolt gunned,right between the eyes, yes pigs are dam intelligent, having farmed them for 15 years when old enough to help you soon realise that, can't see any reason to do it in the open like that mind, ours were all done in the barns, 1 or 2 small pens at a time then over to another unit same again , and thus back and forth between barns till the job was done , kept the animals call that way,then hauled away, the bolt gun doesn't make anywhere near as much noise as the shotgun,to be honest that's about the only way to kill pigs quickly in a on farm situation, bolt gun, or last resort i guess shot gun,but the 1st would be preferred,to use injections would be slowish and very time consuming, and bear in mind a pigs hide is pretty dam tough, and using a laced feed, well the amount of problems we had from trying to get medicines into them that way, its just not worth it having been there when it happend at the age of 12 or 13 there abouts ,its certainly not the most plesent of things to whitness even in controlled manor like we had, to watch them racing arroud from the noise of the gun ect, well must have been chaos is all i can say Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshman Posted March 16, 2009 Share Posted March 16, 2009 I think its abosoutly sick. Im pretty anti hunting really but im not going to try and stop it, as i dont agree with everything being banned. But this is just wrong, perfetly heathy animals being shot like that. NO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tractorman810 Posted March 16, 2009 Share Posted March 16, 2009 You'd rather they beat them to death with a club I suppose?? I can't really see anything inhumane about shooting them in this case, and I see no reason to start throwing mud at the hunt - the fact that one of the people involved is joint master of the local hunt is coincidental. The hunt were not involved. i think you kind of misread tris's topic mate, hes more about being in the open beside a main road, not necessarily the method used ??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted March 16, 2009 Share Posted March 16, 2009 It seems to me another example of several government departments who have limited or no understanding of a situation or the implications fudging it up. I have had my fill of officialdom last week - HMCS, local council, DEFRA, Animal Health etc - and I can vouch first hand that they are the most incompetent bunch of cretins who have ever had the good fortune to escape the hessian sack at birth. No one will take responsibility for controlling a situation and this leads to the kind of cluster f*** we are seeing here. If anyone there had half a brain they would not have left these animals under the charge of a farmer who is probably seeing his world crumble further than it already had.... a man who was probably in no fit state to look after himself, never mind his livestock on a declining pot of cash and supplies..... That only hastened the onset of the chaos seen there. I'm sure that the dispatch was done in a technically correct manner but I would suggest that it was the beurocracy and buck passing of the civil servants involved which caused it to be carried out in such a ill executed method. And out of all of this who will be the bad guy? Not the shadowy government backed faceless groups of paper pushers who no doubt caused it but a farmer who has probably been struggling to survive for years, drowning in a sea of irrelevant paperwork, falling prices and rising input costs We will all find that as the economy declines further, civil servants will become more tenacious and officious as they all fight to hold on to their [ill deserved] jobs with a declining pool of work and employer income [ie taxes paid]. With the likes of planning and building control offices, environmental health, HMRC, VOSA and the general hustle and bustle of a booming economy falling quiet, more minor and irrelevant misdemeanours or 'unticked boxes' will be seen to be jumped on by these idiots in a desperate bid to justify their employment. Sack 2 thirds of them seems sensible to me but that's just my suggestion as to how to save billions of wasted tax pounds a year.... This will see more incidences such as this where more clueless and frankly unemployable monkeys stick their oar in and turn simple situations into a blur of paperwork, broken chains of circular communication, reports and inspections like you've never seen before.... The end is nigh so far as I can see \ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ploughmaster Posted March 16, 2009 Share Posted March 16, 2009 i think you kind of misread tris's topic mate, hes more about being in the open beside a main road, not necessarily the method used ??? I didn't mis read anything. Read his post again! The OP referred to the position and the method used. Also, twice in this thread, anti hunt posts have been made. The hunt had nothing to do with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke DeWitt Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 I am a bit confused, I assume the new declaration by the veterinary medical directorate made it too expensive to keep the pigs so the farm decided to kill the pigs? If he could not sell them at market why not keep them for himself and raise them until they are ready then over time "harvest" the animals and keep the meat for himself? Better yet why not sell them to another farm. It seems like there should be more to this story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leakeyvale Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 In the article the pigs were described as “... poor but didn’t require destruction on welfare grounds, rather it was Mr Beale who decided to put them down as they were valueless and he was running out of food to feed them.†I have been following this topic and feel this was a form of cruelty by shooting them in a large group and out in the open. A client of mine told me his brother went out during the Foot & Mouth epidemic and shot cattle. Nick is no softy, he shoots, used to hunt and started his working life as a shepherd with 2000 ewes. He has no problems with using a humane killer when necessary but he said he could never walk into a field and shoot standing animals. His brother said "never again" afterwards. The only thing I can say in defence of the action is that the pigs were not left to starve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 In the article the pigs were described as “... poor but didn’t require destruction on welfare grounds, rather it was Mr Beale who decided to put them down as they were valueless and he was running out of food to feed them.” I have been following this topic and feel this was a form of cruelty by shooting them in a large group and out in the open. A client of mine told me his brother went out during the Foot & Mouth epidemic and shot cattle. Nick is no softy, he shoots, used to hunt and started his working life as a shepherd with 2000 ewes. He has no problems with using a humane killer when necessary but he said he could never walk into a field and shoot standing animals. His brother said "never again" afterwards. The only thing I can say in defence of the action is that the pigs were not left to starve. I think that's the whole crux of it Sue... Mr Beale obviously saw slaughter as the lesser of two evils.... I imagine he was under total restriction of movement and the wheels of authority had left his hands tied. Sure, he may not have been the best farmer in the world, but there will be more to this story than can be written in the local press and I'd place money on it it all starts with an over zealous, ill educated and underworked official with little better to do.... \ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deere-est Posted March 17, 2009 Author Share Posted March 17, 2009 Simon and Sue - Thank You! I'm not against the need for the slaughter of these animals if that was deemed the best way to end what seemed like a slow death anyway. It's the fact it was a turkey shoot way of doing it. No calm, no organisation and no respect for the animals. Before I questioned the weapon used it was the fact they were 'picked off' one by one, at loose in a field. Every second pig new what was coming, passers by had a good, that just isn't on. Animals must be slaughtered in as stress free manner as possible, that's a law for christs sake. The weapon used, if classed as a section 1 firearm shouldn't have been lean't out to the farmer (as far as I know but I'm not fully jee'd up on that). If it was 'trunk slugs' then I hope to god there were no body shots. If it wasn't 'trunk slug' cartridges then this is a misuse of a shotgun, at ground level in the open. I bet footpaths wern't identified or sealed off and I bet also he was within 100yrds of the road. It disgusts me still. (Whatever parallels were drawn to the hunt wern't mine, I'm a hunt supporter) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tractorman810 Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 if they were shooting from a distance so the pigs could run then yes wrong way to do it, up close in controlled methods is fine, otherwise that could be 1 shot to stop the animal, another to finish it, which if it wasnt done straight away is barbarric, even 15 secs laid there is wrong, 1 clean shot is the way to do it as mentioned via the eye or between the eye, instant,why they couldnt have been rounded up into a barn or something lord only knows Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.