News RSS Feed


Grouse shooting returning to Moor

3:54am Tuesday 8th April 2008

comment Comments (60)   Have your say »


Grouse shooting could return to Ilkley Moor a decade after it was controversially scrapped for being offensive.

Bradford Council is drawing up plans which would allow shooting parties back on the famous moorland for the first time in 11 years.

It is inviting companies to submit tenders for a contract for a ten-year grouse shooting lease which will start next month.

Campaigners hit out at the "blatant cruelty" of using birds as "feathered targets" and said a host of other indigenous species which interfere with grouse shooting would be trapped, shot and poisoned, should shooting be brought back.

An Animal Aid spokesman said: "It would be a huge step backwards to allow shooting on Ilkley Moor again."

There was a row in 1997 when the Council, which has managed the moor since 1974, decided not to renew the shooting licence. Opponents of the decision argued it would be detrimental to the management of the moor and amounted to an attack on the hunting and shooting lobby.

Supporters claimed that good management of the moorland was not dependent on grouse shooting.

Two years later, the Council produced a ten-year management plan for Ilkley Moor that outlined objectives for nature conservation, recreation and the area's archaeological features.

Danny Jackson, the Council's countryside and rights of way service manager, said: "We are asking people to tender for grouse shooting rights on Ilkley Moor.

"It was stopped in 1997 when the Council decided not to renew the licence.

"However we have continued to manage the moor and monitor the wild bird population. We are also working closely with the owners of neighbouring moors, all of which are shot for grouse.

"In the past few years the Council has allowed grouse to be driven from Ilkley Moor as grouse stocks increased.

"Grouse shooting does assist moorland management because of the practices that go with it such as heather burning and bracken control."

However Animal Aid campaigner Fiona Pereira said: "Aside from the obvious and blatant cruelty of using birds as feathered targets, the management' of moorland for grouse shooting interests means the legal and illegal destruction - through trapping, shooting and poisoning - of a host of indigenous species that interfere with shooting."

The grouse population soared to such a high level in 2004, that Bradford Council employed professional beaters to drive birds on to privately-owned adjoining moors where grouse shoots were still taking place.

The move followed fears that the moor's grouse population could be wiped out by disease unless their numbers are reduced.

At the time, RSPB conservation officer Tim Melling said: "It is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard to say you are shooting to protect the species."

Print article » Email to a friend »

Related links


Your Say YourBradford Telegraph and Argus

Andy Bairsto, bradford says...
6:57am Tue 8 Apr 08

It still is offensive

Report this post »

Andy Bairsto, bradford says...
6:57am Tue 8 Apr 08

It still is offensive

Report this post »

Andy Bairsto, bradford says...
6:57am Tue 8 Apr 08

It still is offensive

Report this post »

Andy Bairsto, bradford says...
6:57am Tue 8 Apr 08

It still is offensive

Report this post »

sajenkin, Odsal says...
9:36am Tue 8 Apr 08

as ever the only views are those with polarised opposition. Where is the reasoned and intelligent view of the value or otherwise of allowing shooting? I do not shoot, but I can understand that there are advantages to managing the stock of birds. As moorland is steadily lost, what we have left cannot be left to its own devices (as is clearly evident by the need to drive grouse onto neighbouring land. Those grouse will no doubt still be shot at anyway so its hardly true to suggest that birds lives will be saved by not shooting. Licensed grouse shooting is a legal activity which if correctly controlled allows the birds to have a good life and a fairly instant death - better than many forms of factory farming! Again, as far as I am aware, all the birds that are shot end up being eaten. OK, if you are a veggie then one might find that distasteful, but for the majority of us omnivores thats a reasonable outcome. There are far worse forms of bloodsport and despite the snide and disingenuous comments of Mr Melling, animal conservationists often need to manage population to protect the welfare of an indigenous population, and I am sure he will be well aware of that fact. Shooting brings in revenue and that goes towards funding the maintenance of the moor. Having said all of this, I return to my original point - there needs to be a balanced view of the pro's and con's. Perhaps it is better to ban shooting to protect other forms of wildlife, but what then should be done to curb a burgeoning (and hence ultimately doomed) grouse population that might itself cause damage to other species' habitats?

Report this post »

sajenkin, Odsal says...
9:36am Tue 8 Apr 08

as ever the only views are those with polarised opposition. Where is the reasoned and intelligent view of the value or otherwise of allowing shooting? I do not shoot, but I can understand that there are advantages to managing the stock of birds. As moorland is steadily lost, what we have left cannot be left to its own devices (as is clearly evident by the need to drive grouse onto neighbouring land. Those grouse will no doubt still be shot at anyway so its hardly true to suggest that birds lives will be saved by not shooting. Licensed grouse shooting is a legal activity which if correctly controlled allows the birds to have a good life and a fairly instant death - better than many forms of factory farming! Again, as far as I am aware, all the birds that are shot end up being eaten. OK, if you are a veggie then one might find that distasteful, but for the majority of us omnivores thats a reasonable outcome. There are far worse forms of bloodsport and despite the snide and disingenuous comments of Mr Melling, animal conservationists often need to manage population to protect the welfare of an indigenous population, and I am sure he will be well aware of that fact. Shooting brings in revenue and that goes towards funding the maintenance of the moor. Having said all of this, I return to my original point - there needs to be a balanced view of the pro's and con's. Perhaps it is better to ban shooting to protect other forms of wildlife, but what then should be done to curb a burgeoning (and hence ultimately doomed) grouse population that might itself cause damage to other species' habitats?

Report this post »

sajenkin, Odsal says...
9:36am Tue 8 Apr 08

as ever the only views are those with polarised opposition. Where is the reasoned and intelligent view of the value or otherwise of allowing shooting? I do not shoot, but I can understand that there are advantages to managing the stock of birds. As moorland is steadily lost, what we have left cannot be left to its own devices (as is clearly evident by the need to drive grouse onto neighbouring land. Those grouse will no doubt still be shot at anyway so its hardly true to suggest that birds lives will be saved by not shooting. Licensed grouse shooting is a legal activity which if correctly controlled allows the birds to have a good life and a fairly instant death - better than many forms of factory farming! Again, as far as I am aware, all the birds that are shot end up being eaten. OK, if you are a veggie then one might find that distasteful, but for the majority of us omnivores thats a reasonable outcome. There are far worse forms of bloodsport and despite the snide and disingenuous comments of Mr Melling, animal conservationists often need to manage population to protect the welfare of an indigenous population, and I am sure he will be well aware of that fact. Shooting brings in revenue and that goes towards funding the maintenance of the moor. Having said all of this, I return to my original point - there needs to be a balanced view of the pro's and con's. Perhaps it is better to ban shooting to protect other forms of wildlife, but what then should be done to curb a burgeoning (and hence ultimately doomed) grouse population that might itself cause damage to other species' habitats?

Report this post »

sajenkin, Odsal says...
9:36am Tue 8 Apr 08

as ever the only views are those with polarised opposition. Where is the reasoned and intelligent view of the value or otherwise of allowing shooting? I do not shoot, but I can understand that there are advantages to managing the stock of birds. As moorland is steadily lost, what we have left cannot be left to its own devices (as is clearly evident by the need to drive grouse onto neighbouring land. Those grouse will no doubt still be shot at anyway so its hardly true to suggest that birds lives will be saved by not shooting. Licensed grouse shooting is a legal activity which if correctly controlled allows the birds to have a good life and a fairly instant death - better than many forms of factory farming! Again, as far as I am aware, all the birds that are shot end up being eaten. OK, if you are a veggie then one might find that distasteful, but for the majority of us omnivores thats a reasonable outcome. There are far worse forms of bloodsport and despite the snide and disingenuous comments of Mr Melling, animal conservationists often need to manage population to protect the welfare of an indigenous population, and I am sure he will be well aware of that fact. Shooting brings in revenue and that goes towards funding the maintenance of the moor. Having said all of this, I return to my original point - there needs to be a balanced view of the pro's and con's. Perhaps it is better to ban shooting to protect other forms of wildlife, but what then should be done to curb a burgeoning (and hence ultimately doomed) grouse population that might itself cause damage to other species' habitats?

Report this post »

nutty mum, bradford says...
10:29am Tue 8 Apr 08

How many of these personages who are anti shoot have ever seen a grouse and live in nice cosy house in the middle of the city and only venture into the countryside for recreation. People who live and work in the country and on the moors do really know what they are talking about and need to be listened to, many people livlyhoods where seriously affected by people blindly listening to these soft namby papmby ideals put out previously by these people on banning hunting, many hunt dogs had to be put down and people lost their jobs and now foxes are becoming a nuisance not only in the country but in innercity areas.
Or would it be better to these people that when managing the moor land by burning heather and bracken control that these birds die long suffering deaths, Oh but then I forgot all these anti shooting people must all be veggie, as the birds that are shot are also eaten. LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD FOR A CHANGE.

Report this post »

nutty mum, bradford says...
10:29am Tue 8 Apr 08

How many of these personages who are anti shoot have ever seen a grouse and live in nice cosy house in the middle of the city and only venture into the countryside for recreation. People who live and work in the country and on the moors do really know what they are talking about and need to be listened to, many people livlyhoods where seriously affected by people blindly listening to these soft namby papmby ideals put out previously by these people on banning hunting, many hunt dogs had to be put down and people lost their jobs and now foxes are becoming a nuisance not only in the country but in innercity areas.
Or would it be better to these people that when managing the moor land by burning heather and bracken control that these birds die long suffering deaths, Oh but then I forgot all these anti shooting people must all be veggie, as the birds that are shot are also eaten. LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD FOR A CHANGE.

Report this post »

nutty mum, bradford says...
10:29am Tue 8 Apr 08

How many of these personages who are anti shoot have ever seen a grouse and live in nice cosy house in the middle of the city and only venture into the countryside for recreation. People who live and work in the country and on the moors do really know what they are talking about and need to be listened to, many people livlyhoods where seriously affected by people blindly listening to these soft namby papmby ideals put out previously by these people on banning hunting, many hunt dogs had to be put down and people lost their jobs and now foxes are becoming a nuisance not only in the country but in innercity areas.
Or would it be better to these people that when managing the moor land by burning heather and bracken control that these birds die long suffering deaths, Oh but then I forgot all these anti shooting people must all be veggie, as the birds that are shot are also eaten. LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD FOR A CHANGE.

Report this post »

nutty mum, bradford says...
10:29am Tue 8 Apr 08

How many of these personages who are anti shoot have ever seen a grouse and live in nice cosy house in the middle of the city and only venture into the countryside for recreation. People who live and work in the country and on the moors do really know what they are talking about and need to be listened to, many people livlyhoods where seriously affected by people blindly listening to these soft namby papmby ideals put out previously by these people on banning hunting, many hunt dogs had to be put down and people lost their jobs and now foxes are becoming a nuisance not only in the country but in innercity areas.
Or would it be better to these people that when managing the moor land by burning heather and bracken control that these birds die long suffering deaths, Oh but then I forgot all these anti shooting people must all be veggie, as the birds that are shot are also eaten. LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD FOR A CHANGE.

Report this post »

albion, west riding says...
11:05am Tue 8 Apr 08

I used to live very near to the moor and crossed it many times and in all weather conditions, its condition since shooting stopped and the re-organisation of the water authorities has deteriorated considerably.

Report this post »

albion, west riding says...
11:05am Tue 8 Apr 08

I used to live very near to the moor and crossed it many times and in all weather conditions, its condition since shooting stopped and the re-organisation of the water authorities has deteriorated considerably.

Report this post »

albion, west riding says...
11:05am Tue 8 Apr 08

I used to live very near to the moor and crossed it many times and in all weather conditions, its condition since shooting stopped and the re-organisation of the water authorities has deteriorated considerably.

Report this post »

albion, west riding says...
11:05am Tue 8 Apr 08

I used to live very near to the moor and crossed it many times and in all weather conditions, its condition since shooting stopped and the re-organisation of the water authorities has deteriorated considerably.

Report this post »

Rule Britannia, Bradford says...
12:26pm Tue 8 Apr 08

I hear the grouse are unhappy already and are complaining...

Report this post »

Rule Britannia, Bradford says...
12:26pm Tue 8 Apr 08

I hear the grouse are unhappy already and are complaining...

Report this post »

Rule Britannia, Bradford says...
12:26pm Tue 8 Apr 08

I hear the grouse are unhappy already and are complaining...

Report this post »

Rule Britannia, Bradford says...
12:26pm Tue 8 Apr 08

I hear the grouse are unhappy already and are complaining...

Report this post »

Gentleman Jim, Yooohooo over here says...
12:31pm Tue 8 Apr 08

So we are ok to blast away at defenceless animals, but call a spade a spade in the wrong palce and you find yourself in court. I am neither pro shooting/hunting nor anti, but a lot more damage will be caused and is caused by people with guns than people calling names. I still think a firearm ban should be blanket across the country, if you are a skilled huntsman use a trap, that way guns can't fall into the wrong hands and anyone caught with one should serve a minimum 20 years. No guns and tough gun law. But instead, we have guns and tough talking laws, in case we hurt individuals who may or may not be highly strung, or who may just fancy an injured pride claim through our fantastic court system. 4 rants in one, and none make sense.

Report this post »

Gentleman Jim, Yooohooo over here says...
12:31pm Tue 8 Apr 08

So we are ok to blast away at defenceless animals, but call a spade a spade in the wrong palce and you find yourself in court. I am neither pro shooting/hunting nor anti, but a lot more damage will be caused and is caused by people with guns than people calling names. I still think a firearm ban should be blanket across the country, if you are a skilled huntsman use a trap, that way guns can't fall into the wrong hands and anyone caught with one should serve a minimum 20 years. No guns and tough gun law. But instead, we have guns and tough talking laws, in case we hurt individuals who may or may not be highly strung, or who may just fancy an injured pride claim through our fantastic court system. 4 rants in one, and none make sense.

Report this post »

Gentleman Jim, Yooohooo over here says...
12:31pm Tue 8 Apr 08

So we are ok to blast away at defenceless animals, but call a spade a spade in the wrong palce and you find yourself in court. I am neither pro shooting/hunting nor anti, but a lot more damage will be caused and is caused by people with guns than people calling names. I still think a firearm ban should be blanket across the country, if you are a skilled huntsman use a trap, that way guns can't fall into the wrong hands and anyone caught with one should serve a minimum 20 years. No guns and tough gun law. But instead, we have guns and tough talking laws, in case we hurt individuals who may or may not be highly strung, or who may just fancy an injured pride claim through our fantastic court system. 4 rants in one, and none make sense.

Report this post »

Gentleman Jim, Yooohooo over here says...
12:31pm Tue 8 Apr 08

So we are ok to blast away at defenceless animals, but call a spade a spade in the wrong palce and you find yourself in court. I am neither pro shooting/hunting nor anti, but a lot more damage will be caused and is caused by people with guns than people calling names. I still think a firearm ban should be blanket across the country, if you are a skilled huntsman use a trap, that way guns can't fall into the wrong hands and anyone caught with one should serve a minimum 20 years. No guns and tough gun law. But instead, we have guns and tough talking laws, in case we hurt individuals who may or may not be highly strung, or who may just fancy an injured pride claim through our fantastic court system. 4 rants in one, and none make sense.

Report this post »

albion, west riding says...
1:18pm Tue 8 Apr 08

The only thing against that Jim, is that most of todays firearm crimes are carried out using black market imports and or converted replicas, indeed since thousands of handguns belonging to gun club members were handed in, the situation has got many times worse.
I would agree with your remarks about straight talking, having been censored many times myself (sometimes justifiably sometimes not).

Report this post »

albion, west riding says...
1:18pm Tue 8 Apr 08

The only thing against that Jim, is that most of todays firearm crimes are carried out using black market imports and or converted replicas, indeed since thousands of handguns belonging to gun club members were handed in, the situation has got many times worse.
I would agree with your remarks about straight talking, having been censored many times myself (sometimes justifiably sometimes not).

Report this post »

albion, west riding says...
1:18pm Tue 8 Apr 08

The only thing against that Jim, is that most of todays firearm crimes are carried out using black market imports and or converted replicas, indeed since thousands of handguns belonging to gun club members were handed in, the situation has got many times worse.
I would agree with your remarks about straight talking, having been censored many times myself (sometimes justifiably sometimes not).

Report this post »

albion, west riding says...
1:18pm Tue 8 Apr 08

The only thing against that Jim, is that most of todays firearm crimes are carried out using black market imports and or converted replicas, indeed since thousands of handguns belonging to gun club members were handed in, the situation has got many times worse.
I would agree with your remarks about straight talking, having been censored many times myself (sometimes justifiably sometimes not).

Report this post »

Gentleman Jim, Yooohooo over here says...
2:35pm Tue 8 Apr 08

True enough, but the sentencing really isn't a deterent. My argument is stronger sentencing for specific crimes would be a deterent, the sentences handed out in this country, unless for financial crimes, are no deterent to anyone, people spend longer in an unhappy marriage than they do in jail.
And as for free speech, well that is becoming a hate crime in itself, the fact people have a mind and use it to convey a message means they have chosen to have a thought and this govt doesn't like this.

Report this post »

Gentleman Jim, Yooohooo over here says...
2:35pm Tue 8 Apr 08

True enough, but the sentencing really isn't a deterent. My argument is stronger sentencing for specific crimes would be a deterent, the sentences handed out in this country, unless for financial crimes, are no deterent to anyone, people spend longer in an unhappy marriage than they do in jail.
And as for free speech, well that is becoming a hate crime in itself, the fact people have a mind and use it to convey a message means they have chosen to have a thought and this govt doesn't like this.

Report this post »

Gentleman Jim, Yooohooo over here says...
2:35pm Tue 8 Apr 08

True enough, but the sentencing really isn't a deterent. My argument is stronger sentencing for specific crimes would be a deterent, the sentences handed out in this country, unless for financial crimes, are no deterent to anyone, people spend longer in an unhappy marriage than they do in jail.
And as for free speech, well that is becoming a hate crime in itself, the fact people have a mind and use it to convey a message means they have chosen to have a thought and this govt doesn't like this.

Report this post »

Gentleman Jim, Yooohooo over here says...
2:35pm Tue 8 Apr 08

True enough, but the sentencing really isn't a deterent. My argument is stronger sentencing for specific crimes would be a deterent, the sentences handed out in this country, unless for financial crimes, are no deterent to anyone, people spend longer in an unhappy marriage than they do in jail.
And as for free speech, well that is becoming a hate crime in itself, the fact people have a mind and use it to convey a message means they have chosen to have a thought and this govt doesn't like this.

Report this post »

nutty mum, bradford says...
7:38pm Tue 8 Apr 08

Gentleman Jim wrote:
So we are ok to blast away at defenceless animals, but call a spade a spade in the wrong palce and you find yourself in court. I am neither pro shooting/hunting nor anti, but a lot more damage will be caused and is caused by people with guns than people calling names. I still think a firearm ban should be blanket across the country, if you are a skilled huntsman use a trap, that way guns can't fall into the wrong hands and anyone caught with one should serve a minimum 20 years. No guns and tough gun law. But instead, we have guns and tough talking laws, in case we hurt individuals who may or may not be highly strung, or who may just fancy an injured pride claim through our fantastic court system. 4 rants in one, and none make sense.
Trapping has been banned for many years as it causes undue suffering to animals and people or are you too young to remember like most do gooders. My brother-in-law is a gamekeeper and has a gun licence, these licences are strictly controlled and one small mistake and they are taken away, and as 'albion' says most gun crime in this country is commited with illegal or replica firearms. Before you tar everyone with your own brush find out the facts before you speak and upset a lot of law abiding people.

Report this post »

nutty mum, bradford says...
7:38pm Tue 8 Apr 08

Gentleman Jim wrote:
So we are ok to blast away at defenceless animals, but call a spade a spade in the wrong palce and you find yourself in court. I am neither pro shooting/hunting nor anti, but a lot more damage will be caused and is caused by people with guns than people calling names. I still think a firearm ban should be blanket across the country, if you are a skilled huntsman use a trap, that way guns can't fall into the wrong hands and anyone caught with one should serve a minimum 20 years. No guns and tough gun law. But instead, we have guns and tough talking laws, in case we hurt individuals who may or may not be highly strung, or who may just fancy an injured pride claim through our fantastic court system. 4 rants in one, and none make sense.
Trapping has been banned for many years as it causes undue suffering to animals and people or are you too young to remember like most do gooders. My brother-in-law is a gamekeeper and has a gun licence, these licences are strictly controlled and one small mistake and they are taken away, and as 'albion' says most gun crime in this country is commited with illegal or replica firearms. Before you tar everyone with your own brush find out the facts before you speak and upset a lot of law abiding people.

Report this post »

nutty mum, bradford says...
7:38pm Tue 8 Apr 08

Gentleman Jim wrote:
So we are ok to blast away at defenceless animals, but call a spade a spade in the wrong palce and you find yourself in court. I am neither pro shooting/hunting nor anti, but a lot more damage will be caused and is caused by people with guns than people calling names. I still think a firearm ban should be blanket across the country, if you are a skilled huntsman use a trap, that way guns can't fall into the wrong hands and anyone caught with one should serve a minimum 20 years. No guns and tough gun law. But instead, we have guns and tough talking laws, in case we hurt individuals who may or may not be highly strung, or who may just fancy an injured pride claim through our fantastic court system. 4 rants in one, and none make sense.
Trapping has been banned for many years as it causes undue suffering to animals and people or are you too young to remember like most do gooders. My brother-in-law is a gamekeeper and has a gun licence, these licences are strictly controlled and one small mistake and they are taken away, and as 'albion' says most gun crime in this country is commited with illegal or replica firearms. Before you tar everyone with your own brush find out the facts before you speak and upset a lot of law abiding people.

Report this post »

nutty mum, bradford says...
7:38pm Tue 8 Apr 08

Gentleman Jim wrote:
So we are ok to blast away at defenceless animals, but call a spade a spade in the wrong palce and you find yourself in court. I am neither pro shooting/hunting nor anti, but a lot more damage will be caused and is caused by people with guns than people calling names. I still think a firearm ban should be blanket across the country, if you are a skilled huntsman use a trap, that way guns can't fall into the wrong hands and anyone caught with one should serve a minimum 20 years. No guns and tough gun law. But instead, we have guns and tough talking laws, in case we hurt individuals who may or may not be highly strung, or who may just fancy an injured pride claim through our fantastic court system. 4 rants in one, and none make sense.
Trapping has been banned for many years as it causes undue suffering to animals and people or are you too young to remember like most do gooders. My brother-in-law is a gamekeeper and has a gun licence, these licences are strictly controlled and one small mistake and they are taken away, and as 'albion' says most gun crime in this country is commited with illegal or replica firearms. Before you tar everyone with your own brush find out the facts before you speak and upset a lot of law abiding people.

Report this post »

mrs walker, round here says...
12:05am Wed 9 Apr 08

wooh, nutty mum, same to you! I'm vegetarian and have no problem with people hunting with guns as long as they shoot to kill, and eat what they destroy. I don't approve of traps or hunting with dogs. Chasing traumatised animals until they're torn apart by dogs for fun is in no way acceptable. Shame the little doggies had to be put down, but I bet the foxes would have preferred that humane option, given a choice. And as pest control it's hardly efficient - a troupe of riders, horses and dogs to catch and kill a fox when an accomplished marksman could do it in a fraction of the time...?

Incidentally, gentleman Jim, what WAS the first British number one sung in a foreign language please? I've been curious ever since you posted on the Mannville thread...

Report this post »

mrs walker, round here says...
12:05am Wed 9 Apr 08

wooh, nutty mum, same to you! I'm vegetarian and have no problem with people hunting with guns as long as they shoot to kill, and eat what they destroy. I don't approve of traps or hunting with dogs. Chasing traumatised animals until they're torn apart by dogs for fun is in no way acceptable. Shame the little doggies had to be put down, but I bet the foxes would have preferred that humane option, given a choice. And as pest control it's hardly efficient - a troupe of riders, horses and dogs to catch and kill a fox when an accomplished marksman could do it in a fraction of the time...?

Incidentally, gentleman Jim, what WAS the first British number one sung in a foreign language please? I've been curious ever since you posted on the Mannville thread...

Report this post »

mrs walker, round here says...
12:05am Wed 9 Apr 08

wooh, nutty mum, same to you! I'm vegetarian and have no problem with people hunting with guns as long as they shoot to kill, and eat what they destroy. I don't approve of traps or hunting with dogs. Chasing traumatised animals until they're torn apart by dogs for fun is in no way acceptable. Shame the little doggies had to be put down, but I bet the foxes would have preferred that humane option, given a choice. And as pest control it's hardly efficient - a troupe of riders, horses and dogs to catch and kill a fox when an accomplished marksman could do it in a fraction of the time...?

Incidentally, gentleman Jim, what WAS the first British number one sung in a foreign language please? I've been curious ever since you posted on the Mannville thread...

Report this post »

mrs walker, round here says...
12:05am Wed 9 Apr 08

wooh, nutty mum, same to you! I'm vegetarian and have no problem with people hunting with guns as long as they shoot to kill, and eat what they destroy. I don't approve of traps or hunting with dogs. Chasing traumatised animals until they're torn apart by dogs for fun is in no way acceptable. Shame the little doggies had to be put down, but I bet the foxes would have preferred that humane option, given a choice. And as pest control it's hardly efficient - a troupe of riders, horses and dogs to catch and kill a fox when an accomplished marksman could do it in a fraction of the time...?

Incidentally, gentleman Jim, what WAS the first British number one sung in a foreign language please? I've been curious ever since you posted on the Mannville thread...

Report this post »

Steven McLean, Bradford says...
2:06am Wed 9 Apr 08

mrs walker .. you say that you are vegetarian but you have no problem with people hunting with guns??
Judging by what you say .. you must be vegetarian for health reasons only ..

nutty mum ( you certainly live up to your name :):):) ) .. grouse shooting is not going to happen on Ilkley Moor .. its as simple as that!!

Report this post »

Steven McLean, Bradford says...
2:06am Wed 9 Apr 08

mrs walker .. you say that you are vegetarian but you have no problem with people hunting with guns??
Judging by what you say .. you must be vegetarian for health reasons only ..

nutty mum ( you certainly live up to your name :):):) ) .. grouse shooting is not going to happen on Ilkley Moor .. its as simple as that!!

Report this post »

Steven McLean, Bradford says...
2:06am Wed 9 Apr 08

mrs walker .. you say that you are vegetarian but you have no problem with people hunting with guns??
Judging by what you say .. you must be vegetarian for health reasons only ..

nutty mum ( you certainly live up to your name :):):) ) .. grouse shooting is not going to happen on Ilkley Moor .. its as simple as that!!

Report this post »

Steven McLean, Bradford says...
2:06am Wed 9 Apr 08

mrs walker .. you say that you are vegetarian but you have no problem with people hunting with guns??
Judging by what you say .. you must be vegetarian for health reasons only ..

nutty mum ( you certainly live up to your name :):):) ) .. grouse shooting is not going to happen on Ilkley Moor .. its as simple as that!!

Report this post »

nutty mum, bradford says...
9:32am Wed 9 Apr 08

I'm sorry Steve McLean but who died and put you in charge, and lets put one thing right before you start, these are desistions made by people more informed on the management of moor land than you or I, it is a difficult enough job as it is to balance nature and if keeping that delicate balance upsets a few people it still has to be done for the greater good. As for trapping and poisoning how do you tell the other wildlife it's only for the grouse.

Report this post »

nutty mum, bradford says...
9:32am Wed 9 Apr 08

I'm sorry Steve McLean but who died and put you in charge, and lets put one thing right before you start, these are desistions made by people more informed on the management of moor land than you or I, it is a difficult enough job as it is to balance nature and if keeping that delicate balance upsets a few people it still has to be done for the greater good. As for trapping and poisoning how do you tell the other wildlife it's only for the grouse.

Report this post »

nutty mum, bradford says...
9:32am Wed 9 Apr 08

I'm sorry Steve McLean but who died and put you in charge, and lets put one thing right before you start, these are desistions made by people more informed on the management of moor land than you or I, it is a difficult enough job as it is to balance nature and if keeping that delicate balance upsets a few people it still has to be done for the greater good. As for trapping and poisoning how do you tell the other wildlife it's only for the grouse.

Report this post »

nutty mum, bradford says...
9:32am Wed 9 Apr 08

I'm sorry Steve McLean but who died and put you in charge, and lets put one thing right before you start, these are desistions made by people more informed on the management of moor land than you or I, it is a difficult enough job as it is to balance nature and if keeping that delicate balance upsets a few people it still has to be done for the greater good. As for trapping and poisoning how do you tell the other wildlife it's only for the grouse.

Report this post »

Steven McLean, Bradford says...
1:19am Thu 10 Apr 08

Nobody died and put me in charge.
Ps .. Nutty mum .. the correct spelling of desistions is decisions :) ..
I will comment more .. as soon as i can find time to escape from my busy schedule .. but in the meantime .. i will enjoy reading comments from this thread ...

Report this post »

Steven McLean, Bradford says...
1:19am Thu 10 Apr 08

Nobody died and put me in charge.
Ps .. Nutty mum .. the correct spelling of desistions is decisions :) ..
I will comment more .. as soon as i can find time to escape from my busy schedule .. but in the meantime .. i will enjoy reading comments from this thread ...

Report this post »

Steven McLean, Bradford says...
1:19am Thu 10 Apr 08

Nobody died and put me in charge.
Ps .. Nutty mum .. the correct spelling of desistions is decisions :) ..
I will comment more .. as soon as i can find time to escape from my busy schedule .. but in the meantime .. i will enjoy reading comments from this thread ...

Report this post »

Steven McLean, Bradford says...
1:19am Thu 10 Apr 08

Nobody died and put me in charge.
Ps .. Nutty mum .. the correct spelling of desistions is decisions :) ..
I will comment more .. as soon as i can find time to escape from my busy schedule .. but in the meantime .. i will enjoy reading comments from this thread ...

Report this post »

mrs walker, round here says...
12:31pm Fri 11 Apr 08

no, Steve, I'm vegetarian because I disapprove of factory farming. Intensive production methods are cruel, and unhealthy for us as well as the animals. At least game can enjoy a free life before being blasted into oblivion. My stance on the matter is, if you kill it you should eat it. And if you're not prepared to eat it you shouldn't kill it...

(However I'm struggling with my principles when it comes to slugs, flies, fleas and wasps...)

Report this post »

mrs walker, round here says...
12:31pm Fri 11 Apr 08

no, Steve, I'm vegetarian because I disapprove of factory farming. Intensive production methods are cruel, and unhealthy for us as well as the animals. At least game can enjoy a free life before being blasted into oblivion. My stance on the matter is, if you kill it you should eat it. And if you're not prepared to eat it you shouldn't kill it...

(However I'm struggling with my principles when it comes to slugs, flies, fleas and wasps...)

Report this post »

mrs walker, round here says...
12:31pm Fri 11 Apr 08

no, Steve, I'm vegetarian because I disapprove of factory farming. Intensive production methods are cruel, and unhealthy for us as well as the animals. At least game can enjoy a free life before being blasted into oblivion. My stance on the matter is, if you kill it you should eat it. And if you're not prepared to eat it you shouldn't kill it...

(However I'm struggling with my principles when it comes to slugs, flies, fleas and wasps...)

Report this post »

mrs walker, round here says...
12:31pm Fri 11 Apr 08

no, Steve, I'm vegetarian because I disapprove of factory farming. Intensive production methods are cruel, and unhealthy for us as well as the animals. At least game can enjoy a free life before being blasted into oblivion. My stance on the matter is, if you kill it you should eat it. And if you're not prepared to eat it you shouldn't kill it...

(However I'm struggling with my principles when it comes to slugs, flies, fleas and wasps...)

Report this post »

Alex, Ilkley says...
11:31am Mon 21 Apr 08

Here's a great recipe that could be used for Grouse...

Having shot your cormorant, hold it well away from you as you carry it home; these birds are exceedingly verminous & lice are said to be not entirely host-specific. Hang up by the feet with a piece of wire, soak in petrol & set on fire. This treatment both removes most of the feathers and kills the lice.

When the smoke has cleared away, take the cormorant down & cut off its beak…. bury the carcass preferablely in light sandy soil & leave it there for a fortnight. This is said to improve the flavour by, in part at least, removing the taste of rotting fish. Dig up & skin the bird. Place in a strong salt & water solution & soak for 48 hours. Remove, dry, stuff with whole unpeeled onions: the onion skins are supposed to bleach the meat to a small extent so that it is very dark brown as opposed to entirely black.

Simmer gently in seawater, to which two tablespoons of chloride of lime has been added, for a further 6 hours. This has a further tenderising effect. Take out of the water & allow to dry, meanwhile mixing up a stiff paste of methylated spirit & curry powder. Spread this mixture liberally over the breast of the bird. Finally, roast in a very hot oven for 3 hours. The result is unbelievable. Throw it away. Not even a starving vulture would eat it

Report this post »

Alex, Ilkley says...
11:31am Mon 21 Apr 08

Here's a great recipe that could be used for Grouse...

Having shot your cormorant, hold it well away from you as you carry it home; these birds are exceedingly verminous & lice are said to be not entirely host-specific. Hang up by the feet with a piece of wire, soak in petrol & set on fire. This treatment both removes most of the feathers and kills the lice.

When the smoke has cleared away, take the cormorant down & cut off its beakÂ…. bury the carcass preferablely in light sandy soil & leave it there for a fortnight. This is said to improve the flavour by, in part at least, removing the taste of rotting fish. Dig up & skin the bird. Place in a strong salt & water solution & soak for 48 hours. Remove, dry, stuff with whole unpeeled onions: the onion skins are supposed to bleach the meat to a small extent so that it is very dark brown as opposed to entirely black.

Simmer gently in seawater, to which two tablespoons of chloride of lime has been added, for a further 6 hours. This has a further tenderising effect. Take out of the water & allow to dry, meanwhile mixing up a stiff paste of methylated spirit & curry powder. Spread this mixture liberally over the breast of the bird. Finally, roast in a very hot oven for 3 hours. The result is unbelievable. Throw it away. Not even a starving vulture would eat it

Report this post »

Alex, Ilkley says...
11:31am Mon 21 Apr 08

Here's a great recipe that could be used for Grouse...

Having shot your cormorant, hold it well away from you as you carry it home; these birds are exceedingly verminous & lice are said to be not entirely host-specific. Hang up by the feet with a piece of wire, soak in petrol & set on fire. This treatment both removes most of the feathers and kills the lice.

When the smoke has cleared away, take the cormorant down & cut off its beakÂ…. bury the carcass preferablely in light sandy soil & leave it there for a fortnight. This is said to improve the flavour by, in part at least, removing the taste of rotting fish. Dig up & skin the bird. Place in a strong salt & water solution & soak for 48 hours. Remove, dry, stuff with whole unpeeled onions: the onion skins are supposed to bleach the meat to a small extent so that it is very dark brown as opposed to entirely black.

Simmer gently in seawater, to which two tablespoons of chloride of lime has been added, for a further 6 hours. This has a further tenderising effect. Take out of the water & allow to dry, meanwhile mixing up a stiff paste of methylated spirit & curry powder. Spread this mixture liberally over the breast of the bird. Finally, roast in a very hot oven for 3 hours. The result is unbelievable. Throw it away. Not even a starving vulture would eat it

Report this post »

Alex, Ilkley says...
11:31am Mon 21 Apr 08

Here's a great recipe that could be used for Grouse...

Having shot your cormorant, hold it well away from you as you carry it home; these birds are exceedingly verminous & lice are said to be not entirely host-specific. Hang up by the feet with a piece of wire, soak in petrol & set on fire. This treatment both removes most of the feathers and kills the lice.

When the smoke has cleared away, take the cormorant down & cut off its beakÂ…. bury the carcass preferablely in light sandy soil & leave it there for a fortnight. This is said to improve the flavour by, in part at least, removing the taste of rotting fish. Dig up & skin the bird. Place in a strong salt & water solution & soak for 48 hours. Remove, dry, stuff with whole unpeeled onions: the onion skins are supposed to bleach the meat to a small extent so that it is very dark brown as opposed to entirely black.

Simmer gently in seawater, to which two tablespoons of chloride of lime has been added, for a further 6 hours. This has a further tenderising effect. Take out of the water & allow to dry, meanwhile mixing up a stiff paste of methylated spirit & curry powder. Spread this mixture liberally over the breast of the bird. Finally, roast in a very hot oven for 3 hours. The result is unbelievable. Throw it away. Not even a starving vulture would eat it

Report this post »

Comments are closed on this article.

In this section

Essential Links

Sponsored Links






Local Advertisers


Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »