Campaign to put "corrosive" country sport magazines on top shelf
| Posted: August 29, 2012
Shooting magazines do not glorify shooting of animals but provide advice on nature, conservation, shooting safety and cooking, says the Countryside Alliance
An animal rights group is campaigning for country sports magazines to be relegated to the top shelf, alongside pornography, because of their "corrosive" effect on young minds.
Animal Aid is calling for a ban on their sale to under-18s, and will soon be leafleting major retailers with claims that such magazines celebrate "casual cruelty" and can effect the emotional development of children.
Yesterday, the Westcountry's country sports community rounded on the "ridiculous" comments, citing the discipline which shooting instils and lauding it as a way to encourage young people to get out into the countryside.
And Farming Minister Jim Paice said the campaign failed to recognise the contribution that country sports made to rural economies.
He said: "Animal Aid doesn't want to understand the reality of what goes on in the countryside – the value of these sports to local communities, to their economies and to conservation."
Adam Fox-Edwards, managing director of the Arundell Arms in Lifton, West Devon, which promotes shooting activities, said: "The Animal Aid people ignore the fact that those who fish and shoot care more proactively about the countryside than anyone else. Country sports are a major driving force behind conservation, and in a large part why the countryside looks the way it does."
Mike Hockin, a Plymouth businessman who runs a shoot near Yealmpton in Devon, dismissed the campaign as a "load of rubbish".
He said: "Getting involved in shooting gets children away from sitting in front of the computer, and it teaches them to be responsible, as well as to get involved with wildlife.
"In our case, the pheasant goes to the people who take part to eat, or it goes to local restaurants where there's enormous demand."
But Animal Aid director Andrew Tyler said the campaign aimed to "restrict the blood supply to a gun lobby that sees its core constituency slipping away and is desperate for young recruits".
The organisation has produced a report, and won support from Peter Squires, Professor of Criminology and Public Policy at the University of Brighton. He said organisations which promote the shooting of animals should not be allowed to promote their activities to children."
Mr Tyler said: "Children who kill animals for sport in urban areas are considered dysfunctional and a social menace.
"Yet Britain has a gun lobby, composed of well-connected groups such as the British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC) and the Countryside Alliance (CA), that devotes considerable resources towards encouraging children to take up guns at a young age. Their actions are damaging not just to wildlife but also to the emotional development of young people."
Gunmaker Tony Kennedy, based in Launceston, said the calls were "nonsense", saying he read gun magazines from the age of six.
"They're far better than playing violent video games that are available today," he said.
"Since Great Britain had a gold medal in the Olympics for shooting more young people than ever are keen to take up this sport and continue to be at the top of the tree."
Alison Hawes, the regional director for the Countryside Alliance, said pornographic material was stored out of reach because of the legal age of consent, and said: "There's no minimum legal age for young people to take part in country sports.
"Shooting magazines do not glorify the shooting of animals. They provide advice on nature, conservation, shooting safety and cooking.
"Animal Aid is an extremist organisation which is against the use of animals for food. If they are going to talk about glorifying violence, couldn't that also apply to martial arts magazines?"
BASC spokesman Simon Clarke also lambasted the cause. He said: "This is one of the more ridiculous campaigns to come from extreme animal rights activists with a vegan agenda.
"Shooting magazines promote best practice in pest control and game shooting – both vital elements of the countryside.
"Trying to ban magazines because you happen to disagree with their content is crass censorship at its worst."
Comments
Badger culling is "ineffective", the expert behind the UK's biggest review of the links between badgers and tuberculosis in cattle, said on Monday. Professor Lord John Krebs was the government adviser responsible for the scientific review in the 1990s which found that badgers were a "reservoir" of bovine TB and could transmit the disease to cattle. He called for trial culls, which were then carried out. But he said on Monday the results of the trials showed that culling was "not an effective policy" and would be a mistake." http://tinyurl.com/69sqykf We need 100,000 people to sign now. Please share, tell your friends and sign. We need your help. There are 65,000 people who reach 1.5m friends so please share and sign NOW http://tinyurl.com/8odb3eg https://submissions.epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/38257/signature/new
homerjay, "No matter how you twist the argument Charles, teaching children to kill animals is an abuse of the child and the animal. Many murderers started their perverse lives by first torturing and abusing animals. We don't beat women any more, nor do we keep slaves, and neither do we teach children to abuse animals just because they are more powerful (armed) and protected. These people are mainly dysfunctional, immature, maladjusted 'adults', they kill because they can and because no one stops them or hits back in the same way humans inflict suffering on other humans." Here we go again. Antis who believe anything they don't like is "child abuse". I know of murderers who beheaded cats. Are you seriously comparing shooting to that? If you are, it is ridiculous. Most people can see the world of difference between beheading a cat and shooting a pheasant/rabbit/pigeon/whatever. What about eating meat? Animals still die for someone's pleasure, whether that's shooting or meat eating. Going shooting does not make anyone "dysfunctional". What about shooting for pest control or for food, both of which are covered in these magazines. Even pheasants et al shot for sport are eaten later. Shooting Times, for example, does have game recipes in it if you read through it. Shooting does not make anyone morally superior or inferior to anyone else. It's just a different lifestyle choice. Just what moral authority do you have over other people's children? None.
The official policy in Britain (and the rest of the European Union) is to eradicate bovine TB from cattle. This is laid out in 'The Bovine TB Eradication Programme For England' (DEFRA 2011b ). It is true that disease eradication has been achieved for smallpox in humans, and has recently been claimed for rinderpest in cattle. These diseases, however, have single maintenance hosts and hence eradication is a meaninful objective (CFSPH, 2008 ). But no disease with multiple maintenance hosts has ever been eradicated - and may never be. Moreover global eradication programmes are extremely expensive and can have very adverse side-effects, especially in relation to diverting resources from effective control methods (see Caplan, 2009 on 'Is eradication ethical?'). Even disease elimination - namely reduction to zero in the incidence of infection within a specified geographical area - is impractical when you have several wild maintenance hosts as with bovine TB. TB infected cattle can be removed using the 'test and cull' approach, with affected herds put under movement restriction and re-tested periodically to eliminate cattle that may shed the organism. But this approach cannot be used for wildlife reservoir species, which in Britain means badgers and fallow deer. Because sick badgers are more likely to get culled, large scale pro-active culls (actually a misuse of the term 'cull') may sometimes reduce the disease prevalence in badgers (Corner et al., 2008 ), but cannot possibly eliminate infections in a wild population, therefore given these facts, could it be the UK government has adopted a dysfunctional disease control policy merely to placate wealthy livestock farmers and avoid spending money? If so, it is almost as unfair to farmers as it is to the badgers... http://tinyurl.com/9ra96cg https://http://tinyurl.com/9nmca3q http://tinyurl.com/8czg2ej
If any of you sporting people are interested there is a Country Fair being held at Frampton Court, Frampton on Severn, Gloucestershire on 9th September. Country crafts alongside falconry, dog show, etc etc. and normal countryside pursuits included.
or even "than I first thought"
Ha!ha! perhaps "I will survive" was more appropriate that I first thought. They seem to be knocking people down like nine pins. Still onwards and upwards. There is always a way round these things. ;))))
it's ok 2lady I understand keep taking the tablets. lol xx grumpy cant log in any more. freedom of speech, not in ndj
Forgive me GG I am rambling now ........Gloria Gaynor......."I will survive" The way this country is going with the all these daft ideas being put forward I have my doubts!!
Hey GG, that's an improvement......;))))) I have come to the conclusion that by us keep commenting on the badger culls etc. we are just aiding and abetting the badgerists. We are giving them centre stage which is just what they need.
just think of all those poor harmless lives you drivers kill every day in the summer just so you can drive your cars, you should say a prayer for all the dead bodies you have on the windscreen or number plate. those poor insects just because they are not covered with fur you think their lives dont count!