On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 17:23:05 +0000, Malcolm Ogilvie
wrote:


In article , Mary Fisher
writes

Since 1994 when I got
really cross about it, the tally is 40+

Oh Tina ...

:-(((((

Mary, just to put Tina's 40 in perspective, the best estimate of the
number of foxes, of all ages from cubs to adults, which die in the UK
*every* year is about 400,000, which means that, since 1994, some 3 to
3.5 million foxes have died from all causes, including hunting,
shooting, trapping, poisoning, starvation and old age.

And, you have a point?


537,877 human deaths were registered in 2000, which means that, since
1994, some 3222000 people have died from all causes, including
hunting, shooting, trapping, poisoning, starvation and old age,
amongst others things including swallowing your own tongue.

Of the 400000 foxes killed, 3/4 are killed deliberately by kooks like
that slag Tina, the rest in road accidents etc.



**********************************************




'You can't win 'em all.'
Lord Haw Haw.

Since I stopped donating money to CONservation hooligan charities
Like the RSPB, Woodland Trust and all the other fat cat charities
I am in the top 0.801% richest people in the world.
There are 5,951,930,035 people poorer than me

If you're really interested I am the 48,069,965
richest person in the world.

And I'm keeping the bloody lot.

So sue me.

http://www.globalrichlist.com/

Newsgroup ettiquette

1) Tell everyone the Trolls don't bother you.
2) Say you've killfiled them, yet continue to respond.
3) Tell other people off who repsond despite doing so yourself.
4) Continually talk about Trolls while maintaining
they're having no effect.
5) Publicly post killfile rules so the Trolls know
how to avoid them.
6) Make lame legal threats and other barrel scraping
manoeuvres when your abuse reports are ignored.
7) Eat vast quantities of pies.
8) Forget to brush your teeth for several decades.
9) Help a demon.local poster with their email while
secretly reading it.
10) Pretend you're a hard ******* when in fact you're
as bent as a roundabout.
11) Become the laughing stock of Usenet like Mabbet
12) Die of old age
13) Keep paying Dr Chartham his fees and hope one day you
will have a penis the girls can see.

---------------------------------------

"If you would'nt talk to them in a bar, don't *uckin' vote for them"

"Australia was not *discovered* it was invaded"
The Big Yin.

In article ,
(Jaques d'Alltrades) wrote:

There's no excuse for such arrogance, but however hard it is to not
to, you shouldn't tar all hunts and hunting with the same brush.

Life is too short to do otherwise.

Steve Harris - Cheltenham - Real address steve AT netservs DOT com

Malcolm Ogilvie wrote in message
...

In article , Mary Fisher
writes

Since 1994 when I got
really cross about it, the tally is 40+

Oh Tina ...

:-(((((

Mary, just to put Tina's 40 in perspective, the best estimate of the
number of foxes, of all ages from cubs to adults, which die in the UK
*every* year is about 400,000, which means that, since 1994, some 3 to
3.5 million foxes have died from all causes, including hunting,
shooting, trapping, poisoning, starvation and old age.

--
Malcolm Ogilvie


I rather took Mary's post to be a sympathetic one. Like omigod you had to
kill 40+ foxes and you didn't really want to.. but only Mary can tell us
what she really meant.
And thank you, Malcolm, for seeming to come to my defence.
When foxes cause me a problem, I shall continue to deal with them in any way
I think fit. And if they don't I won't. I don't like to but if I have to, I
have to.

(don't forget road kill, every week on my way to work I see one or more
squashed foxes)

Tina

On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 23:01:51 -0000, "Christina Websell"
christina.websell@zoomdotcodotuk wrote:


Malcolm Ogilvie wrote in message
...

In article , Mary Fisher
writes

Since 1994 when I got
really cross about it, the tally is 40+

Oh Tina ...

:-(((((

Mary, just to put Tina's 40 in perspective, the best estimate of the
number of foxes, of all ages from cubs to adults, which die in the UK
*every* year is about 400,000, which means that, since 1994, some 3 to
3.5 million foxes have died from all causes, including hunting,
shooting, trapping, poisoning, starvation and old age.

--
Malcolm Ogilvie


I rather took Mary's post to be a sympathetic one. Like omigod you had to
kill 40+ foxes and you didn't really want to.. but only Mary can tell us
what she really meant.
And thank you, Malcolm, for seeming to come to my defence.
When foxes cause me a problem, I shall continue to deal with them in any way
I think fit. And if they don't I won't. I don't like to but if I have to, I
have to.

Bullshit, you relish the fact that you "appear" to get one over the
ARs advocates by boasting how many foxes you kill, when in reality
most free range farms have no trouble with foxes because they take
obvious security measures like guard dogs, fox proof fencing which
really is quite cheap and a very necessary part of a free range
business.

You deliberately set out to slaughter foxes and actually go to great
length to entice them onto your property, and claim great pride for
doing it.

So quit lying bitch tramp.



**********************************************




'You can't win 'em all.'
Lord Haw Haw.

Since I stopped donating money to CONservation hooligan charities
Like the RSPB, Woodland Trust and all the other fat cat charities
I am in the top 0.801% richest people in the world.
There are 5,951,930,035 people poorer than me

If you're really interested I am the 48,069,965
richest person in the world.

And I'm keeping the bloody lot.

So sue me.

http://www.globalrichlist.com/

Newsgroup ettiquette

1) Tell everyone the Trolls don't bother you.
2) Say you've killfiled them, yet continue to respond.
3) Tell other people off who repsond despite doing so yourself.
4) Continually talk about Trolls while maintaining
they're having no effect.
5) Publicly post killfile rules so the Trolls know
how to avoid them.
6) Make lame legal threats and other barrel scraping
manoeuvres when your abuse reports are ignored.
7) Eat vast quantities of pies.
8) Forget to brush your teeth for several decades.
9) Help a demon.local poster with their email while
secretly reading it.
10) Pretend you're a hard ******* when in fact you're
as bent as a roundabout.
11) Become the laughing stock of Usenet like Mabbet
12) Die of old age
13) Keep paying Dr Chartham his fees and hope one day you
will have a penis the girls can see.

---------------------------------------

"If you would'nt talk to them in a bar, don't *uckin' vote for them"

"Australia was not *discovered* it was invaded"
The Big Yin.

LordSnooty wrote:
Bullshit, you relish the fact that you "appear" to get one over the
ARs advocates by boasting how many foxes you kill, when in reality
most free range farms have no trouble with foxes because they take
obvious security measures like guard dogs, fox proof fencing which
really is quite cheap and a very necessary part of a free range
business.

It's easy to see that you "know" your subject )))))))))
I doubt anyone could accuse "you" of being ignorant towards the subject of
vermin control.

You deliberately set out to slaughter foxes and actually go to great
length to entice them onto your property, and claim great pride for
doing it.

Best not tell you my yearly tally, gosh I'd never get in to heaven if your
on the pearly gates


So quit lying bitch tramp.

And you know this for a fact then?

John


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 05/12/2003

"LordSnooty" wrote in message
...
Some bullshit.

Don't try to change the tack here Snotty, YOU offered to send your mates
round to see the lady, I offered an alternative venue that is all.
If you are now backing down on your thinly veiled threat, say so, and give
us all a reason why.
Its easy really, no need to try and muddy the waters and twist the plot,
come and see me (with your mates if you feel that is necessary).
Whats so hard to understand about that?
I've been indoors all day waiting for you as well.
See you soon?

Anthony

"George Orwell" wrote in message
...
Strange, neither he is listed for the part of Wales he "claims" to
live in, and her name appears to be unknown as well. So much for using
your real name then.

Another anonymous dickhead talking crap!
Its a pity you didn't take note of your own sig. line.

Anthony


Samson.

It's better to keep your mouth shut and give the impression that
you're stupid than to open it and remove all doubt.

-Rami Belson


--
'Live in Hope die in Caergwrle'
begin OEisbrokenreadknowledgebaseQ265230

"Michael Saunby" wrote in message ...
"Bob Hobden" wrote in message
...


True, but as it's difficult, to say the least, to get a certificate for a
rifle for use in the open, I have a problem if someone tries to kill
foxes
with a shotgun having come across one that had just died having been
badly
wounded in the hind legs. It must have starved to death in agony over
some
weeks.


You may have a problem with it, but the LACS, the Labour Animal Welfare
Group, and the majority of MPs do not. They wish to ban hunting with dogs,
and only hunting with dogs. Clearly other methods of control are by
definition less cruel because if they were more cruel the Government would
be breaking its own rules used to test the need for a ban based on cruelty
and utility. If there were no utility in killing foxes then killing foxes
would be banned as is killing badgers, if other methods of killing are more
cruel than hunting with dogs then these would have been considered for
bans - they were not.

I am therefore quite content to use snares and shotgun to control foxes and
I'm confident that it's no more cruel than necessary.

Michael Saunby


If the Labour party and the AR's were really interested in fox welfare
they would have made sure snaring was banned before they moved on to
foxhunting. When farmers can't call on the hunt to kill foxes the
first thing they will reach for is a snare - it's simple to set, works
24-7, requires little maintenance and costs very little. It is silent,
unobtrusive and very effective. It is also more cruel IMO than the use
of hounds/lurchers to control fox numbers. Unfortunately, those who
screech the loudest about animal welfare usually have the least
practical experience.

Jonathan

Jonathan wrote:
. Unfortunately, those who
screech the loudest about animal welfare usually have the least
practical experience.

Exceptionally true words.

John


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 05/12/2003

In article 3fd3b2b7$0$13877$afc38c87@vipnews, Christina Websell
writes

Malcolm Ogilvie wrote in message
...

In article , Mary Fisher
writes

Since 1994 when I got
really cross about it, the tally is 40+

Oh Tina ...

:-(((((

Mary, just to put Tina's 40 in perspective, the best estimate of the
number of foxes, of all ages from cubs to adults, which die in the UK
*every* year is about 400,000, which means that, since 1994, some 3 to
3.5 million foxes have died from all causes, including hunting,
shooting, trapping, poisoning, starvation and old age.

--
Malcolm Ogilvie


I rather took Mary's post to be a sympathetic one. Like omigod you had to
kill 40+ foxes and you didn't really want to.. but only Mary can tell us
what she really meant.
And thank you, Malcolm, for seeming to come to my defence.
When foxes cause me a problem, I shall continue to deal with them in any way
I think fit. And if they don't I won't. I don't like to but if I have to, I
have to.

(don't forget road kill, every week on my way to work I see one or more
squashed foxes)

It has been suggested that 100,000 may be killed on our roads annually.

--
Malcolm Ogilvie

On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 00:51:35 -0000, "Anthony"
wrote:


"LordSnooty" wrote in message
.. .
Some bullshit.

Don't try to change the tack here Snotty,

Oh dear I smell bullshit or is it CHICKENshit coming?

YOU offered to send your mates
round to see the lady,

Wrong again yellow troll, I said

"LordSnoty" wrote in message
...

Lying fat slag, least I hope you're lying, I'd hate the thought of
vigilantes discovering what you were up to and knowing where you
lived, is your surname spelt correctly?

Which part of that "offers to send my mates around"?

I offered an alternative venue that is all.

No, you jumped up and down pretending to be tough guy and your bluff
was called, you're yellow. Tough guys don't talk about it they just
do it.

If you are now backing down on your thinly veiled threat, say so, and give
us all a reason why

I stand by everything I have ever said, why what are you going to do
about it coward?
..
Its easy really, no need to try and muddy the waters and twist the plot,
come and see me (with your mates if you feel that is necessary).
Whats so hard to understand about that?
I've been indoors all day waiting for you as well.
See you soon?

Should anyone want to take you up on that kind offer you appear to
have ONCE AGAIN omitted your name, address and phone number, surely
the least one would do when playing tough guy is to TRY and make it
convincing.

So we await cluck, cluck.

Name:

Address:





Tel:


Go on, if you're going to do something at least try to do it properly.



**********************************************




'You can't win 'em all.'
Lord Haw Haw.

Since I stopped donating money to CONservation hooligan charities
Like the RSPB, Woodland Trust and all the other fat cat charities
I am in the top 0.801% richest people in the world.
There are 5,951,930,035 people poorer than me

If you're really interested I am the 48,069,965
richest person in the world.

And I'm keeping the bloody lot.

So sue me.

http://www.globalrichlist.com/

Newsgroup ettiquette

1) Tell everyone the Trolls don't bother you.
2) Say you've killfiled them, yet continue to respond.
3) Tell other people off who repsond despite doing so yourself.
4) Continually talk about Trolls while maintaining
they're having no effect.
5) Publicly post killfile rules so the Trolls know
how to avoid them.
6) Make lame legal threats and other barrel scraping
manoeuvres when your abuse reports are ignored.
7) Eat vast quantities of pies.
8) Forget to brush your teeth for several decades.
9) Help a demon.local poster with their email while
secretly reading it.
10) Pretend you're a hard ******* when in fact you're
as bent as a roundabout.
11) Become the laughing stock of Usenet like Mabbet
12) Die of old age
13) Keep paying Dr Chartham his fees and hope one day you
will have a penis the girls can see.

---------------------------------------

"If you would'nt talk to them in a bar, don't *uckin' vote for them"

"Australia was not *discovered* it was invaded"
The Big Yin.

On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 00:53:47 -0000, "Anthony"
wrote:


"George Orwell" wrote in message
t...

Strange, neither he is listed for the part of Wales he "claims" to
live in, and her name appears to be unknown as well. So much for using
your real name then.

Another anonymous dickhead talking crap!

Well is it true, are you listed? perhaps you're using a false name,
beard and moustache. We know for certain you write cheques you cannot
cash by sending out invites but not giving people names, addresses and
phone numbers for where the party is. I wonder why. I don't suppose
it's because you're a little steam engine pervert pedophile in hiding
is it?

Why would a tough guy try to hide?


Samson.

It's better to keep your mouth shut and give the impression that
you're stupid than to open it and remove all doubt.

Advice you could have done with earlier, now I suggest you take it and
stop relying on our pity.

If you don't like what someone says, then do something about it, it's
hardly rocket science.





**********************************************




'You can't win 'em all.'
Lord Haw Haw.

Since I stopped donating money to CONservation hooligan charities
Like the RSPB, Woodland Trust and all the other fat cat charities
I am in the top 0.801% richest people in the world.
There are 5,951,930,035 people poorer than me

If you're really interested I am the 48,069,965
richest person in the world.

And I'm keeping the bloody lot.

So sue me.

http://www.globalrichlist.com/

Newsgroup ettiquette

1) Tell everyone the Trolls don't bother you.
2) Say you've killfiled them, yet continue to respond.
3) Tell other people off who repsond despite doing so yourself.
4) Continually talk about Trolls while maintaining
they're having no effect.
5) Publicly post killfile rules so the Trolls know
how to avoid them.
6) Make lame legal threats and other barrel scraping
manoeuvres when your abuse reports are ignored.
7) Eat vast quantities of pies.
8) Forget to brush your teeth for several decades.
9) Help a demon.local poster with their email while
secretly reading it.
10) Pretend you're a hard ******* when in fact you're
as bent as a roundabout.
11) Become the laughing stock of Usenet like Mabbet
12) Die of old age
13) Keep paying Dr Chartham his fees and hope one day you
will have a penis the girls can see.

---------------------------------------

"If you would'nt talk to them in a bar, don't *uckin' vote for them"

"Australia was not *discovered* it was invaded"
The Big Yin.

"Anthony" wrote in message
...
[snip]

Why is there an attachment associated with your contribution, and what is in
it?

Franz

On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 09:26:08 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
wrote:


"Anthony" wrote in message
...
[snip]

Why is there an attachment associated with your contribution, and what is in
it?

It's a worm virus, like him. do not double click it.





**********************************************




'You can't win 'em all.'
Lord Haw Haw.

Since I stopped donating money to CONservation hooligan charities
Like the RSPB, Woodland Trust and all the other fat cat charities
I am in the top 0.801% richest people in the world.
There are 5,951,930,035 people poorer than me

If you're really interested I am the 48,069,965
richest person in the world.

And I'm keeping the bloody lot.

So sue me.

http://www.globalrichlist.com/

Newsgroup ettiquette

1) Tell everyone the Trolls don't bother you.
2) Say you've killfiled them, yet continue to respond.
3) Tell other people off who repsond despite doing so yourself.
4) Continually talk about Trolls while maintaining
they're having no effect.
5) Publicly post killfile rules so the Trolls know
how to avoid them.
6) Make lame legal threats and other barrel scraping
manoeuvres when your abuse reports are ignored.
7) Eat vast quantities of pies.
8) Forget to brush your teeth for several decades.
9) Help a demon.local poster with their email while
secretly reading it.
10) Pretend you're a hard ******* when in fact you're
as bent as a roundabout.
11) Become the laughing stock of Usenet like Mabbet
12) Die of old age
13) Keep paying Dr Chartham his fees and hope one day you
will have a penis the girls can see.

---------------------------------------

"If you would'nt talk to them in a bar, don't *uckin' vote for them"

"Australia was not *discovered* it was invaded"
The Big Yin.

"Jonathan" wrote in message
om...
"Michael Saunby" wrote in message
...
"Bob Hobden" wrote in message
...


True, but as it's difficult, to say the least, to get a certificate
for a
rifle for use in the open, I have a problem if someone tries to kill
foxes
with a shotgun having come across one that had just died having been
badly
wounded in the hind legs. It must have starved to death in agony over
some
weeks.


You may have a problem with it, but the LACS, the Labour Animal Welfare
Group, and the majority of MPs do not. They wish to ban hunting with
dogs,
and only hunting with dogs. Clearly other methods of control are by
definition less cruel because if they were more cruel the Government
would
be breaking its own rules used to test the need for a ban based on
cruelty
and utility. If there were no utility in killing foxes then killing
foxes
would be banned as is killing badgers, if other methods of killing are
more
cruel than hunting with dogs then these would have been considered for
bans - they were not.

I am therefore quite content to use snares and shotgun to control foxes
and
I'm confident that it's no more cruel than necessary.

Michael Saunby


If the Labour party and the AR's were really interested in fox welfare
they would have made sure snaring was banned before they moved on to
foxhunting. When farmers can't call on the hunt to kill foxes the
first thing they will reach for is a snare - it's simple to set, works
24-7, requires little maintenance and costs very little. It is silent,
unobtrusive and very effective. It is also more cruel IMO than the use
of hounds/lurchers to control fox numbers. Unfortunately, those who
screech the loudest about animal welfare usually have the least
practical experience.


AR and anti-hunting is not motivated by welfare, it's about puritanism,
that's why it's really only found in protestant countries. Read the sort
of stuff these AR folks post, references to "deviant", "pleasure", etc.
Setting snares is no more a sport than setting a mouse trap, and is not
thought by these folks to have an adverse effect on the morality of the
person doing so (with a few extreme exceptions - several of whom post
here). On the other hand chasing a fox for pleasure, or drinking, or
gambling is considered harmful by folks concerned for human morality.

The issue of banning hunting *for sport* is about the sport aspect, not
cruelty. It has always been that way. Similarly ARists try to make a big
argument about the lack of utility in animal based experiments - they know
their puritanical supporters are concerned primarily with bans on what they
consider trivial human endeavors, not the welfare of animals. Many of
these folks don't even keep animals, quite a lot probably don't even have
family, they're just trapped in a world they consider highly immoral -
inside their own heads.

Michael Saunby