Re: Secret breeding programs of Ruddy Ducks

On Sat, 2 Sep 2006 22:06:37 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


In article <tonjf255gp54mtv1nj3dq46s0i461e5oo1@xxxxxxx>,
amacmil304@xxxxxxx writes
On Sat, 2 Sep 2006 16:33:49 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


In article <l82jf2d7si6e04hr8uro7pbj629b6hdcu6@xxxxxxx>,
amacmil304@xxxxxxx writes
On Sat, 2 Sep 2006 12:42:04 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


In article <s3nif2tb878bemhi3fqcnlo7sussg10oc7@xxxxxxx>,
amacmil304@xxxxxxx writes
On Sat, 2 Sep 2006 10:50:45 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


In article <5qiif2tgsv9ln4h99hovfod789ukqv6dm9@xxxxxxx>,
amacmil304@xxxxxxx writes
I heard the Ruddy Ducks are being rescued in England and being used
for secret breeding programs to undermine DEFRA's slaughter.

How are the Ruddy Ducks being "rescued"? Do you know?

If I knew, I wouldn't say.

I didn't say where, I said how. I'm interested because while catching
Ruddy Ducks in traps is possible, it is so inefficient that it was not
pursued as a method for culling. And catching them to take into
captivity without a licence is against the law. Collecting eggs is
another possible method and that is against the law, too. You then have
the non-trivial problem of hatching and rearing enough birds to affect
the cull. By the way, releasing Ruddy Ducks into the wild is also
against the law.


If I knew I wouldn't say.

Ignorance on your part is, after all, nothing new.

You've got a comprehension problem based on your ignorance. I'll
spell it out for you:

I said "why" they might be being rescued and if I knew "how" they
might be being rescued, I wouldn't say.

Got that now, Malcolm?

I don't know how I could make it much clearer.

You have made it abundantly clear, Angus, that you haven't a clue.


You still don't understand? Tell me why?


Good luck to the breeders.

Nice to see you condoning the breaking of the law when it suits your
agenda :-(

If it is taking place of course I would condone it.

Fine. You condone breaking of the law. Thought you did.


I condone saving wildlife from extermination at the hands of
conservation nazis.

As there are no such people as "conservation nazis", you're can't
actually condone anything they do.

Of course there are. They were even referred to in a BBC magazine as
"fascists".

By an outside contributing author, Angus.


And very respected columnist Richard Mabey if I remember correctly.



They treat wildlife in the same manner as Hitler and his
thugs treated the Jews

You seem to know all about it, but then you appear to be obsessed with
Hitler and the nazis.

snip

You seem embarrassed about the RSPB.

But no need to snip it out :-)

Here it is again:


Here's the copy of a letter I sent to Dr Paul Walton some months ago
accompanied by a copy of his letter in the Herald:


Dr Paul Walton
Species and Habitats Policy Officer
RSPB Scotland
25 Ravelston Terrace
Edinburgh


An Open Letter

Dear Dr Walton

RSPB Thugs!

I was very interested to read your letter in the (Glasgow) Herald on 1
June 2006 and welcome your suggestion that those who would seek to
kill gulls could be determined as "thugs". How right you are!

For years I have branded organisations such as the RSPB, The Woodland
Trust and Wildlife Trusts as "conservation thugs" because they
deliberately kill numerous species of wildlife to suit their
particular agendas. It seems you have now endorsed my accusations.

So where does this leave the RSPB?

Does it continue with its thuggish behaviour towards wildlife or is it
about to take the advice of its Policy and Habitats Officer and
co-exist peacefully with other species?

I look forward to your reply.


Yours sincerely


Angus Macmillan
www.killhunting.org.uk
www.con-servation.org.uk


PS. For the benefit of those who did not have the opportunity to read
your letter, I have copied it below.


Letter published in the (Glasgow) Herald 1 June 2006


Gulls are not thugs, but wild animals
THE tone of your article about gulls (May 30) is unhelpful. These are
wild birds; they require food and a place to breed. RSPB Scotland
regularly advises that, where gulls are causing distress, action needs
to be taken well ahead of the breeding season to reduce the
availability of waste food on city streets and to install the simple
proofing measures that deter birds from nesting on roofs.
Nonetheless, when each breeding season arrives, so do the hysterical
headlines demonising "seagull thugs". In turn, each year, gulls are
killed as an impulsive response.
Swooping gulls can, indeed, be frightening but these are not thugs:
they are wild animals defending and feeding their young.
Have we become so disconnected from the natural world that we can no
longer co-exist peacefully? Some gulls are in national decline. Rather
than lashing out, we should invest time and effort in discouraging
them from areas where they will cause people distress. Otherwise
perhaps it is we who are the thugs.
Dr Paul Walton, Species and Habitats Policy Officer, RSPB Scotland, 25
Ravelston Terrace, Edinburgh.



But I do notice you condone breaking the law.


Of course I do, where wildlife is at risk. I make no bones about it.

Does your approval of breaking the law include the digging up of graves?

I don' think that had anything to do with the killing of wildlife. But
I think a huge fuss was made about it by the media.

Anyone can dig up my bones when I no longer need them; it'll not worry
me.


The more Ruddy
Ducks saved from slaughter the better.


What makes you think they will be "saved from slaughter"? Your original
post said that it would "undermine" the DEFRA cull and now you say that
their future in the UK might be assured. Are you claiming that releasing
"rescued" Ruddy Ducks into the wild will stop the cull? Because if not,
all your friends are doing is to release ducks to be culled. Are you
sure that that's what you want to happen?

If ruddy ducks started turning up in village duck ponds and city parks
I doubt whether there would be much support for their shooting.

More wishful thinking. Ruddy Ducks already occur on city park lakes.
That hasn't stopped them being culled. And if the released birds didn't
stay on the village ponds but flew to the nearest large lake or
reservoir, they could be relatively easy to shoot because birds that
have been in captivity, or have been reared in captivity, are often
tamer than fully wild birds.

And more likely to stay near human contact.

More likely not to fly away from shooters.

Not in urban duck ponds ot town parks.



So, as you clearly think that releasing "rescued" Ruddy Ducks into the
wild is a good thing regardless of the fact that it would be against the
law, and as you know that there is a cull of Ruddy Ducks in operation,
are you really saying that you condone (to use your word of the moment)
the deliberate releasing of birds that will then be shot - indeed could
be easier to shoot than the wild ones?

See above

So while you are against releasing Pheasants to be shot you are quite
happy to see Ruddy Ducks released to be shot. Strange, that.


I'm against all shooting.



Is that what you want, Angus?


What I want is the cessation of Nazi conservation.

It doesn't exist, Angus, except in your mind, so there's no need to want
it to cease.

I see, abit like your claim that fake conservationists don't exist.

You really have a problem with this because you don't have an argument
against it. The reason they are fakes is that they say they are
conserving the natural environment but in reality they are indulging
in and encouraging environmentally damaging activities which make them
attractive to the general public. They also pump out masses of junk
mail and publications which are environmentally damaging in their
production, distribution and disposal and con the public into thinking
these are environmentally friendly by printing "100% recycled paper".
What a bunch of crooks these people really are!

But it doesn't stop there.

The whole conservation industry is a con from top to bottom!

The Kyoto Protocol scam got over 100 countries including the UK to
sign up to reducing emissions but excluded the emerging economies from
such limitations. Despite signing the commitment and making great
claims about it the UK is importing masses of produce from countries
of the emerging economies, so all that's happening is that we are
"exporting" our environmental so-called responsibilities to the likes
of China. Indeed, in Canada last year a last minute agreement was
manufactured to keep the scam going.

Another example of fake conservation was the RSPB's news release of
February 2005 in which they said "cooking our planet will disrupt and
devastate all life and giving this process the cosy name global
warming only makes it easier for all of us, especially politicians, to
ignore the consequences", yet at the same time they were accepting
pages of world wide travel advertisements in their Birds magazine. Is
there any reason I should not call into question the honesty of these
people and call them fakes? That's exactly what they are!

So Malcolm, wise up to the fact that the whole conservation industry
is bent from the top down and I've yet to see an exception.


Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident.
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Secret breeding programs of Ruddy Ducks
    ... Ruddy Ducks already occur on city park lakes. ... And if the released birds didn't ... suitable breeding waters and get shot. ... as you clearly think that releasing "rescued" Ruddy Ducks into the ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)
  • Re: Secret breeding programs of Ruddy Ducks
    ... Ruddy Ducks in traps is possible, it is so inefficient that it was not ... releasing Ruddy Ducks into the wild is also ... kill gulls could be determined as "thugs". ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)
  • Re: Secret breeding programs of Ruddy Ducks
    ... Ruddy Ducks in traps is possible, it is so inefficient that it was not ... another possible method and that is against the law, ... If it is taking place of course I would condone it. ... And if the released birds didn't ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)
  • Re: Secret breeding programs of Ruddy Ducks
    ... Ruddy Ducks in traps is possible, it is so inefficient that it was not ... another possible method and that is against the law, ... If it is taking place of course I would condone it. ... And if the released birds didn't ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)