horse/ dog racing

[ivans82]

Quite a few years ago i believe the animal rights activists freed some mink from some laboratories , which is all well and good ,but again these are killing machines released into the British countryside , which had a huge detrimental affect on our other wild life .

[graveyard johnny]

1 hour ago, hw88 said:

These people won't be happy until we are all vegan and the only sports permitted are yoga and non-contact tai chi.

just waiting for someone to put the statistics up on the % of people killed each year doing yoga!

[graveyard johnny]

peoples moronic attitude towards animals never fails to astound me - for instance police horses outside football matches and the idiots that kick and alarm them because they actually think they are part of the police

[Bedford Roughyed]

Public opinion is moving.

 

[The Masked Poster]

1 hour ago, graveyard johnny said:

peoples moronic attitude towards animals never fails to astound me - for instance police horses outside football matches and the idiots that kick and alarm them because they actually think they are part of the police

Not sure that's anything to do with the GN. 

But the fact is, if using horses for sport is wrong (because they can't consent) then any human involvement with animals has to be wrong to. We can't have it both ways. 

[graveyard johnny]

8 minutes ago, The Masked Poster said:

Not sure that's anything to do with the GN. 

But the fact is, if using horses for sport is wrong (because they can't consent) then any human involvement with animals has to be wrong to. We can't have it both ways. 

the animals cant have it any way - without the capicity to think with the cess pit of the human mind

[The Masked Poster]

16 minutes ago, graveyard johnny said:

the animals cant have it any way - without the capicity to think with the cess pit of the human mind

Animals do quite nasty things to each other. They can be less than cuddly sometimes. 

But using your logic, humans should have no interaction with animals as they can't speak and agree to their use. No animals can speak, so no interaction can be allowed in any shape or form - including the ones you might find acceptable. 

[hw88]

1 hour ago, The Masked Poster said:

Not sure that's anything to do with the GN. 

But the fact is, if using horses for sport is wrong (because they can't consent) then any human involvement with animals has to be wrong to. We can't have it both ways. 

Owning a pet is just animal slavery no matter how good an owner, or should that be overseer, you are.

[The Masked Poster]

1 hour ago, hw88 said:

Owning a pet is just animal slavery no matter how good an owner, or should that be overseer, you are.

Well yes, exactly my point. This is the logical end to the protestors argument.

If animals cannot voice their opinions, then they must be left to their own devices. 

[graveyard johnny]

10 hours ago, hw88 said:

Owning a pet is just animal slavery no matter how good an owner, or should that be overseer, you are.

dont get me started on these people who keep snakes and lizards in glass cases- why? just why?

[gingerjon]

13 hours ago, Bedford Roughyed said:

Public opinion is moving.

 

They should have tried not being cruel to horses and seeing how that worked out for them.

[The Masked Poster]

2 hours ago, graveyard johnny said:

dont get me started on these people who keep snakes and lizards in glass cases- why? just why?

Possibly to stop them slithering around the house or garden? 

[hw88]

11 hours ago, The Masked Poster said:

Well yes, exactly my point. This is the logical end to the protestors argument.

If animals cannot voice their opinions, then they must be left to their own devices. 

Quite!

The whole human-animal interaction thing is a minefield of problems riddled with contradictions and hypocracy. Nature is 'red in tooth and claw' as they say, and we are part of nature. Zoos, for instance, a valuable tool for better learning and understanding, or just a prison for animals? The way the world's population is rising and natural habitat is decreasing soon the only place animals will exist is in zoos!

 

[JohnM]

Easy solution: ban everything, anywhere, all the time.

[The Masked Poster]

8 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Easy solution: ban everything, anywhere, all the time.

I'm sure you are being flippant but it's an aim for many. 

And even if it isn't, it's the slope we are on. 

[The Masked Poster]

21 minutes ago, hw88 said:

Quite!

The whole human-animal interaction thing is a minefield of problems riddled with contradictions and hypocracy. Nature is 'red in tooth and claw' as they say, and we are part of nature. Zoos, for instance, a valuable tool for better learning and understanding, or just a prison for animals? The way the world's population is rising and natural habitat is decreasing soon the only place animals will exist is in zoos!

 

Then the answer is to let them die out. We can't intervene, as they can't consent, so tough luck. 

Of course, I don't subscribe to such a ludicrous idea but it's the thick end of their wedge. 

[Wolford6]

On 18/04/2023 at 09:34, The Masked Poster said:

Then the answer is to let them die out. We can't intervene, as they can't consent, so tough luck. 

Of course, I don't subscribe to such a ludicrous idea but it's the thick end of their wedge. 

It's the wedge end of the thick.

[The Masked Poster]

1 hour ago, Wolford6 said:

It's the wedge end of the thick.

They genuinely think they can cherry pick and ignore the wider points raised. If we can’t eat or use animals for tasks, then they will be left wild..but where would they go? Leeds?
There would be no use for animals so they would either eat each other or just wander in packs…but without the habitat of a few thousand years ago. Their argument is nonsense and goes against thousands of years of mankind. 

[Bostik Bailey]

On 17/04/2023 at 15:09, ivans82 said:

Quite a few years ago i believe the animal rights activists freed some mink from some laboratories , which is all well and good ,but again these are killing machines released into the British countryside , which had a huge detrimental affect on our other wild life .

This is not as clear cut as it appears, the UK has many mustelides each evolved into their own niche with some cross over. We had a very large aquatic mustelide in the otter. Now the success of the released mink is puzzling since there would no be no vacuum for it to fill, one theory to this is that the persecution of otters resulted in a vacuum for an aquatic mustelide which the mink filled. It is now becoming apparent that where otters are gaining a foothold the mink are being pushed out through predation from the otter and natural competition.

[Wolford6]

Having seen both, i don't think an otter could take out a mink.

[DavidM]

48 minutes ago, Wolford6 said:

Having seen both, i don't think an otter could take out a mink.

Not even with sweet talk , chocolates and flowers ? 

[hw88]

10 hours ago, The Masked Poster said:

They genuinely think they can cherry pick and ignore the wider points raised. If we can’t eat or use animals for tasks, then they will be left wild..but where would they go? Leeds?
There would be no use for animals so they would either eat each other or just wander in packs…but without the habitat of a few thousand years ago. Their argument is nonsense and goes against thousands of years of mankind. 

All farm animals would disappear, there would be no use for them. All the available land would have to be turned over to arable production, even land that really isn't suitable for such. Without animal manure chemical fertilizer would have to be used, not very eco-friendly, to maintain production levels. With more land given over to farming, wildlife habitat would be further reduced leading to a greater chance of extinction of our increasingly fragile wild populations.

As you said, these people are a sandwich short of a picnic.

[The Masked Poster]

2 hours ago, hw88 said:

All farm animals would disappear, there would be no use for them. All the available land would have to be turned over to arable production, even land that really isn't suitable for such. Without animal manure chemical fertilizer would have to be used, not very eco-friendly, to maintain production levels. With more land given over to farming, wildlife habitat would be further reduced leading to a greater chance of extinction of our increasingly fragile wild populations.

As you said, these people are a sandwich short of a picnic.

And let's imagine we had to feed everyone on plant based food. Do you imagine it wouldn't be produced on a humongous industrial scale? Thus rendering any romantic notions of some sort of cottage industry in the bin. 

We *could* go back to living in huts and a feudal type system. But I wouldn't fancy the chances of most modern people surviving it (me included..... definitely me)

Edited April 21, 2023 by The Masked Poster

[hw88]

17 hours ago, The Masked Poster said:

And let's imagine we had to feed everyone on plant based food. Do you imagine it wouldn't be produced on a humongous industrial scale? Thus rendering any romantic notions of some sort of cottage industry in the bin. 

We *could* go back to living in huts and a feudal type system. But I wouldn't fancy the chances of most modern people surviving it (me included..... definitely me)

Exactly. We, as a society, are so divorced from the natural world hardly anyone would survive. I sometimes watch the 'Naked and Afraid' type programmes were people who fancy themselves as hunters and outdoorsmen/women try to survive for a couple of weeks with next to nothing. They all end up starving - nobody thrives.

[DavidM]

I came out in sympathy for Sandy Thompson and backed Flower of Scotland in the Scottish National , and then he withdrew it just before the race knackering my round robin so my sympathy went down a tiny notch