It seems the RSPB think if you feed birds in your garden you're
helping them.

They say:

"Did you know you're already helping us? Just by feeding the birds in
your garden you're encouraging many threatened species to thrive"

Well, I've got news for the RSPB.

We've fed birds in our garden for decades and it's not to help the
RSPB; it's to help the birds.

And we buy our birdseed at Costco for under a fiver for 10 kilos.and
I'd rather spend the money on seed than support a multi-million pound
business that discriminates against wildlife including birds.

For the price of an annual family membership you could buy
approximately 85 kilos of seed which could be better spent on keeping
wild birds fat and happy than contributing to executives salaries of
up to £100k per annum


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

On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 09:48:30 +0100, amacmil304 [at] aol.com wrote:

>It seems the RSPB think if you feed birds in your garden you're
>helping them.
>
>They say:
>
>"Did you know you're already helping us? Just by feeding the birds in
>your garden you're encouraging many threatened species to thrive"
>
>Well, I've got news for the RSPB.
>
>We've fed birds in our garden for decades and it's not to help the
>RSPB; it's to help the birds.
>
>And we buy our birdseed at Costco for under a fiver for 10 kilos.and
>I'd rather spend the money on seed than support a multi-million pound
>business that discriminates against wildlife including birds.
>
>For the price of an annual family membership you could buy
>approximately 85 kilos of seed which could be better spent on keeping
>wild birds fat and happy than contributing to executives salaries of
>up to £100k per annum
>
>
>Angus Macmillan
>www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
>www.killhunting.org
>www.con-servation.org.uk


Well said. This multi-million pound business spares no effort to
increase its profits. Just the other day, the new 'Chair' of the
Labour Party, Ms Hazel Blears, indicated that because of concern about
the drastically declining party membership they intended to link with
mass-membership organisations such as the RAC and the RSPB. No doubt
this will mean that these organisations will sell their membership
lists to the Labour Party (or donate them if honours and titles are in
prospect). Members may expect to be pestered by junk mail inviting
them to join the Labour Party. As an RAC member of 40 years standing,
if I receive such an approach I shall cancel my membership.

On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 22:26:24 +0100, Jupiter <Jupiter [at] shotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 09:48:30 +0100, amacmil304 [at] aol.com wrote:
>
>>It seems the RSPB think if you feed birds in your garden you're
>>helping them.
>>
>>They say:
>>
>>"Did you know you're already helping us? Just by feeding the birds in
>>your garden you're encouraging many threatened species to thrive"
>>
>>Well, I've got news for the RSPB.
>>
>>We've fed birds in our garden for decades and it's not to help the
>>RSPB; it's to help the birds.
>>
>>And we buy our birdseed at Costco for under a fiver for 10 kilos.and
>>I'd rather spend the money on seed than support a multi-million pound
>>business that discriminates against wildlife including birds.
>>
>>For the price of an annual family membership you could buy
>>approximately 85 kilos of seed which could be better spent on keeping
>>wild birds fat and happy than contributing to executives salaries of
>>up to £100k per annum
>>
>>
>>Angus Macmillan
>>www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
>>www.killhunting.org
>>www.con-servation.org.uk
>
>
>Well said. This multi-million pound business spares no effort to
>increase its profits. Just the other day, the new 'Chair' of the
>Labour Party, Ms Hazel Blears, indicated that because of concern about
>the drastically declining party membership they intended to link with
>mass-membership organisations such as the RAC and the RSPB. No doubt
>this will mean that these organisations will sell their membership
>lists to the Labour Party (or donate them if honours and titles are in
>prospect). Members may expect to be pestered by junk mail inviting
>them to join the Labour Party. As an RAC member of 40 years standing,
>if I receive such an approach I shall cancel my membership.


It's all about money; that's the problem. And the green energy scheme
is much the same. Its the equivalent of creative accounting and gives
the RSPB money in return to access to the members.

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

Jupiter wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 09:48:30 +0100, amacmil304 [at] aol.com wrote:
>
> >It seems the RSPB think if you feed birds in your garden you're
> >helping them.
> >
> >They say:
> >
> >"Did you know you're already helping us? Just by feeding the birds in
> >your garden you're encouraging many threatened species to thrive"
> >
> >Well, I've got news for the RSPB.
> >
> >We've fed birds in our garden for decades and it's not to help the
> >RSPB; it's to help the birds.
> >
> >And we buy our birdseed at Costco for under a fiver for 10 kilos.and
> >I'd rather spend the money on seed than support a multi-million pound
> >business that discriminates against wildlife including birds.
> >
> >For the price of an annual family membership you could buy
> >approximately 85 kilos of seed which could be better spent on keeping
> >wild birds fat and happy than contributing to executives salaries of
> >up to =A3100k per annum
> >
> >
> >Angus Macmillan
> >www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
> >www.killhunting.org
> >www.con-servation.org.uk
>
>
> Well said. This multi-million pound business spares no effort to
> increase its profits. Just the other day, the new 'Chair' of the
> Labour Party, Ms Hazel Blears, indicated that because of concern about
> the drastically declining party membership they intended to link with
> mass-membership organisations such as the RAC and the RSPB. No doubt
> this will mean that these organisations will sell their membership
> lists to the Labour Party (or donate them if honours and titles are in
> prospect). Members may expect to be pestered by junk mail inviting
> them to join the Labour Party. As an RAC member of 40 years standing,
> if I receive such an approach I shall cancel my membership.

I congratulate Angus for feeding the Birds for decades, but have you
checked out the content of the bird seed from Costco. I looked at it,
as it contained the majority of seeds from Amoreica, did not buy it.

Who is doing most injury to the indigenous flora, someone spreading
foreign plants or the RSPB?

Could you expand on the problem you seem to have with the RSPB?

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

On 17 Jun 2006 14:46:38 -0700, "davec" <dnorthumbria [at] aol.com> wrote:

>
>Jupiter wrote:
>> On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 09:48:30 +0100, amacmil304 [at] aol.com wrote:
>>
>> >It seems the RSPB think if you feed birds in your garden you're
>> >helping them.
>> >
>> >They say:
>> >
>> >"Did you know you're already helping us? Just by feeding the birds in
>> >your garden you're encouraging many threatened species to thrive"
>> >
>> >Well, I've got news for the RSPB.
>> >
>> >We've fed birds in our garden for decades and it's not to help the
>> >RSPB; it's to help the birds.
>> >
>> >And we buy our birdseed at Costco for under a fiver for 10 kilos.and
>> >I'd rather spend the money on seed than support a multi-million pound
>> >business that discriminates against wildlife including birds.
>> >
>> >For the price of an annual family membership you could buy
>> >approximately 85 kilos of seed which could be better spent on keeping
>> >wild birds fat and happy than contributing to executives salaries of
>> >up to £100k per annum
>> >
>> >
>> >Angus Macmillan
>> >www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
>> >www.killhunting.org
>> >www.con-servation.org.uk
>>
>>
>> Well said. This multi-million pound business spares no effort to
>> increase its profits. Just the other day, the new 'Chair' of the
>> Labour Party, Ms Hazel Blears, indicated that because of concern about
>> the drastically declining party membership they intended to link with
>> mass-membership organisations such as the RAC and the RSPB. No doubt
>> this will mean that these organisations will sell their membership
>> lists to the Labour Party (or donate them if honours and titles are in
>> prospect). Members may expect to be pestered by junk mail inviting
>> them to join the Labour Party. As an RAC member of 40 years standing,
>> if I receive such an approach I shall cancel my membership.
>
>I congratulate Angus for feeding the Birds for decades, but have you
>checked out the content of the bird seed from Costco. I looked at it,
>as it contained the majority of seeds from Amoreica, did not buy it.
>
>Who is doing most injury to the indigenous flora, someone spreading
>foreign plants or the RSPB?

I don't think it really matters what is planted and where. Bird
seeds from America are not going to destroy the planet as we know it.

>
>Could you expand on the problem you seem to have with the RSPB?


The problem I have with the RSPB is that they kill, and support the
killing of, wildlife to suit their varying agendas. They also allow
the shooting of wild and game birds on their reserves.


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

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 07:48:08 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm [at] indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>
>In article <sr2992t2dc6do0bq1bjp8dh0f6t09mien6 [at] 4ax.com>,
>amacmil304 [at] aol.com writes
>>
>>The problem I have with the RSPB is that they kill, and support the
>>killing of, wildlife to suit their varying agendas. They also allow
>>the shooting of wild and game birds on their reserves.
>>
>Let's have a little honesty, please, Angus.
>
>The RSPB has over 140 reserves. Are you claiming that they allow "the
>shooting of wild and game birds" on all of them? If not, perhaps you
>would like to tell us, firstly, on how many of them does shooting
>actually take place and, secondly, on how many of those the RSPB
>"allows" shooting, as opposed to them not being in a position to stop
>it, bearing in mind that they may not own the shooting rights.


In the minds of most people, the RSPB is an organisation that protects
birds but in reality there is another side to it.

Some time ago, I came across a British Association for Shooting and
Conservation web-page, where it was revealed that shooters were
"managing" a wildfowl reserve for the RSPB. Within a day of me
bringing this to the attention of an Internet Newsgroup, the page was
removed from the Internet. Following a telephone call to the RSPB
headquarters in Edinburgh, I wrote to them asking if they would
identify the location of this reserve. They didn't reply.

Consequently, I started to do some research and found that shooting
tenants on their Abernethy Reserve kill about 200 brace of red grouse
each year. The RSPB's explanation was, "it is good for public
relations as the reserve is then not seen as divorced from normal
country pursuits".

Within a few days I came across the following message from a
contributor to an Internet wildfowling forum. "I shoot over marches
owned by the RSPB. They lease the Humber wildfowlers the shooting on
there and I suppose we sort of police them for the RSPB. Ironic how
they publicly attack us but still let us shoot on there."

Apart from the RSPB's continued advocacy for the slaughter of Ruddy
Ducks, Uist Hedgehogs, Lundy Rats and various species of deer, they
are also involved with those who shoot birds for fun and recreation.
Some way of "protecting" birds!

In my opinion, to solicit money from the general public for the
"protection of birds", then to allow them to be shot on "reserves",
which should be safe havens, is dishonest and disgraceful.


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

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 09:28:50 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm [at] indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>
>In article <0j1a92hbij8u27cd5f5ln79k9ofde7rgc2 [at] 4ax.com>,
>amacmil304 [at] aol.com writes
>>On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 07:48:08 +0100, Malcolm
>><Malcolm [at] indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>In article <sr2992t2dc6do0bq1bjp8dh0f6t09mien6 [at] 4ax.com>,
>>>amacmil304 [at] aol.com writes
>>>>
>>>>The problem I have with the RSPB is that they kill, and support the
>>>>killing of, wildlife to suit their varying agendas. They also allow
>>>>the shooting of wild and game birds on their reserves.
>>>>
>>>Let's have a little honesty, please, Angus.
>>>
>>>The RSPB has over 140 reserves. Are you claiming that they allow "the
>>>shooting of wild and game birds" on all of them? If not, perhaps you
>>>would like to tell us, firstly, on how many of them does shooting
>>>actually take place and, secondly, on how many of those the RSPB
>>>"allows" shooting, as opposed to them not being in a position to stop
>>>it, bearing in mind that they may not own the shooting rights.
>>
>>
>>In the minds of most people, the RSPB is an organisation that protects
>>birds but in reality there is another side to it.
>>
>>Some time ago, I came across a British Association for Shooting and
>>Conservation web-page, where it was revealed that shooters were
>>"managing" a wildfowl reserve for the RSPB. Within a day of me
>>bringing this to the attention of an Internet Newsgroup, the page was
>>removed from the Internet. Following a telephone call to the RSPB
>>headquarters in Edinburgh, I wrote to them asking if they would
>>identify the location of this reserve. They didn't reply.
>>
>>Consequently, I started to do some research and found that shooting
>>tenants on their Abernethy Reserve kill about 200 brace of red grouse
>>each year. The RSPB's explanation was, "it is good for public
>>relations as the reserve is then not seen as divorced from normal
>>country pursuits".
>>
>>Within a few days I came across the following message from a
>>contributor to an Internet wildfowling forum. "I shoot over marches
>>owned by the RSPB. They lease the Humber wildfowlers the shooting on
>>there and I suppose we sort of police them for the RSPB. Ironic how
>>they publicly attack us but still let us shoot on there."
>>
>>Apart from the RSPB's continued advocacy for the slaughter of Ruddy
>>Ducks, Uist Hedgehogs, Lundy Rats and various species of deer, they
>>are also involved with those who shoot birds for fun and recreation.
>>Some way of "protecting" birds!
>>
>>In my opinion, to solicit money from the general public for the
>>"protection of birds", then to allow them to be shot on "reserves",
>>which should be safe havens, is dishonest and disgraceful.
>>
>Or in other words, you were being dishonest when you claimed that
>"They also allow the shooting of wild and game birds on their reserves."
>as you have only been able to produce just two examples.

I'm not being dishonest at all. Read what I wrote.

So are you saying that the RSPB only allow shooting on two of their
reserves? As an RSPB adviser you should be able to provide
information as to how many reserves there are where birds are shot -
not only by shooting for sport but by the RSPB themselves. So come on
Malcolm, let the people in this ng know the truth.


> Perhaps you
>would like to tell us whether the RSPB own the shooting rights over the
>whole of their Abernethy Reserve.

Are you saying the RSPB have no control over the shooting at
Abernethy? They admit they have a shooting tenant. I don't have
access to the title documents; you should know. Tell us now.

>
>And, as you have been told before, the reserve involving BASC is one
>where the RSPB interest is in summer breeding birds so that foreshore
>shooting, which the RSPB doesn't own, does not have an effect on the
>summer breeding birds and the arrangement with BASC prevents
>uncontrolled shooting.

So what reserve is this you are referring to? This looks like another
one where RSPB have an "arrangement" with people who shoot birds
rather than protecting them.

>
>The RSPB are quite right to advocate the removal of the introduced
>hedgehogs from the Uists where they have done huge damage to the
>ground-nesting waders.

So what increase has there been in ground nesting birds since the
hedgehogs were removed? And don't forget the RSPB is presiding over
the biggest fall in wild bird populations ever recorded. If they
spent more on protecting birds and less on fat cat executives who send
out environmentally damaging junk mail, such as I received a couple of
days ago, they might do better.

>The culling of the Ruddy Duck is government
>policy, but I notice you don't criticise the government over it, only
>the RSPB.

Advocated and advised by the RSPB.

So is this where Malcolm aka Dr Thick tells me I'm a joyless c**t and
to f*** off - as he have done so in the past?

Just shows the quality of those the RSPB have as advisers :-((


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

"Martin" <me [at] privacy.net> wrote in message
news:mh0992d8b7160cp260vd7k84g36tjpkur2 [at] 4ax.com...
> On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 22:26:24 +0100, Jupiter <Jupiter [at] shotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> As an RAC member of 40 years standing,
>>if I receive such an approach I shall cancel my membership.
>
> and what will you do when your car breaks down?

Join the AA!

Alan

RAC is a commercial
> organisation owned by Lex Service PLC since 1999. I doubt if they will
> give a toss.
> --
>
> Martin
>

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

In article <rcda92lf0juodgnqomsb8iffm1g8bpjo5c [at] 4ax.com>,
Martin <me [at] privacy.net> writes:
|> >
|> >You tell me. You're the one that claimed that "They also allow the
|> >shooting of wild and game birds on their reserves". You attempted to
|> >convey the impression that it was on all their reserves. You have only
|> >been able to come up with two.
|>
|> I don't see anywhere where he attempted to convey that impression.
|> Two is two too many.

No, it's far too few. What the conservation camp followers in this
country need is a damn sight more knowledge of ecology and preparedness
to live with nature, and a damn sight less bunny-cuddling and birdie-
cooing.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

I agree with you 100%.
Reg
amacmil304 [at] aol.com wrote:
> It seems the RSPB think if you feed birds in your garden you're
> helping them.
>
> They say:
>
> "Did you know you're already helping us? Just by feeding the birds in
> your garden you're encouraging many threatened species to thrive"
>
> Well, I've got news for the RSPB.
>
> We've fed birds in our garden for decades and it's not to help the
> RSPB; it's to help the birds.
>
> And we buy our birdseed at Costco for under a fiver for 10 kilos.and
> I'd rather spend the money on seed than support a multi-million pound
> business that discriminates against wildlife including birds.
>
> For the price of an annual family membership you could buy
> approximately 85 kilos of seed which could be better spent on keeping
> wild birds fat and happy than contributing to executives salaries of
> up to =A3100k per annum
>
>
> Angus Macmillan
> www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
> www.killhunting.org
> www.con-servation.org.uk

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 12:07:07 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm [at] indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>
>In article <8l4a92p7mer8ojeu5i6pndpr45ci9hir0r [at] 4ax.com>,
>amacmil304 [at] aol.com writes
>>>>
>>>>In my opinion, to solicit money from the general public for the
>>>>"protection of birds", then to allow them to be shot on "reserves",
>>>>which should be safe havens, is dishonest and disgraceful.
>>>>
>>>Or in other words, you were being dishonest when you claimed that
>>>"They also allow the shooting of wild and game birds on their reserves."
>>>as you have only been able to produce just two examples.
>>
>>I'm not being dishonest at all. Read what I wrote.
>>
>>So are you saying that the RSPB only allow shooting on two of their
>>reserves?
>
>You tell me. You're the one that claimed that "They also allow the
>shooting of wild and game birds on their reserves". You attempted to
>convey the impression that it was on all their reserves. You have only
>been able to come up with two.

Not at all. That's your one-eyed interpretation.

>
>>As an RSPB adviser
>
>I am not an RSPB adviser, although you keep claiming I am. More lies :-(

You were until recently. Did they eventually sack you?

>
>>you should be able to provide
>>information as to how many reserves there are where birds are shot -
>>not only by shooting for sport but by the RSPB themselves. So come on
>>Malcolm, let the people in this ng know the truth.
>>
>Are, I see you are admitting that you haven't been telling them the
>truth. Good.

No Malcolm. The intelligent people on this ng will see you're
squirming and twisting.


>>
>>> Perhaps you
>>>would like to tell us whether the RSPB own the shooting rights over the
>>>whole of their Abernethy Reserve.
>>

Well?

>>So is this where Malcolm aka Dr Thick tells me I'm a joyless c**t and
>>to f*** off - as he have done so in the past?
>>
>I repeated someone else's comment about you being "a joyless c**t" as it
>seemed particularly apt.

You "endorsed" it which is just as well as saying it.

> It's just a pity you haven't taken my other
>advice.

Which was to f*** off.

Here's the transcript of what you said:

____________________

"When you started this thread, someone immediately responded with:

"Angus. you are a humourless, joyless c**t of the highest order. Do
the
cyberworld a favour and plug yourself into the mains. "

I endorse that view. Now f*** off."

____________________

If you gave the same "advice" to the RSPB, no wonder you're no longer
an adviser. Did you get the boot from SNH for the same advice?

No chance of you getting back there. They're abolishing the worthless
Area Boards. No freebies left for the likes of you :-))

>>Just shows the quality of those the RSPB have as advisers :-((
>>
>See above.

Indeed, see above.

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

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

In article <oqpa92d87l0qf3f26kr1oecqrpn69lq3jr [at] 4ax.com>,
Martin <me [at] privacy.net> writes:
|>
|> >|> >You tell me. You're the one that claimed that "They also allow the
|> >|> >shooting of wild and game birds on their reserves". You attempted to
|> >|> >convey the impression that it was on all their reserves. You have only
|> >|> >been able to come up with two.
|> >|>
|> >|> I don't see anywhere where he attempted to convey that impression.
|> >|> Two is two too many.
|> >
|> >No, it's far too few. What the conservation camp followers in this
|> >country need is a damn sight more knowledge of ecology and preparedness
|> >to live with nature, and a damn sight less bunny-cuddling and birdie-
|> >cooing.
|>
|> Outraged in Tunbridge Wells? :-)

Precisely. As a basis for planning, let alone legislation, ignorant
emotion is catastrophic - and that is what we have had for the past
half-century :-(


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 17:15:48 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm [at] indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>
>In article <7mia92ln1d31f3rjf0u6eaqvbj4a4u42bg [at] 4ax.com>,
>amacmil304 [at] aol.com writes
>>On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 12:07:07 +0100, Malcolm
>><Malcolm [at] indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>In article <8l4a92p7mer8ojeu5i6pndpr45ci9hir0r [at] 4ax.com>,
>>>amacmil304 [at] aol.com writes
>>>>>>
>>>>>>In my opinion, to solicit money from the general public for the
>>>>>>"protection of birds", then to allow them to be shot on "reserves",
>>>>>>which should be safe havens, is dishonest and disgraceful.
>>>>>>
>>>>>Or in other words, you were being dishonest when you claimed that
>>>>>"They also allow the shooting of wild and game birds on their reserves."
>>>>>as you have only been able to produce just two examples.
>>>>
>>>>I'm not being dishonest at all. Read what I wrote.
>>>>
>>>>So are you saying that the RSPB only allow shooting on two of their
>>>>reserves?
>>>
>>>You tell me. You're the one that claimed that "They also allow the
>>>shooting of wild and game birds on their reserves". You attempted to
>>>convey the impression that it was on all their reserves. You have only
>>>been able to come up with two.
>>
>>Not at all. That's your one-eyed interpretation.
>>
>>>
>>>>As an RSPB adviser
>>>
>>>I am not an RSPB adviser, although you keep claiming I am. More lies :-(
>>
>>You were until recently. Did they eventually sack you?
>>
>No, Angus. I was on their Scottish Advisory Committee for six years, or
>two years longer than the normal term of service. I retired in early
>2005. But you're always behind with the news, aren't you?
>

I'd hardly call that "news" :-))


>>
>>If you gave the same "advice" to the RSPB, no wonder you're no longer
>>an adviser.
>
>Like I said, I served a longer term than normal.
>
>> Did you get the boot from SNH for the same advice?
>>
>I retired from SNH's West Areas Board after 10 years, or six years
>longer than the normal period of service.
>

Was that what was wrong with it.


>>No chance of you getting back there. They're abolishing the worthless
>>Area Boards. No freebies left for the likes of you :-))
>>
>Once again, you've got it wrong - a major habit of yours.

>I've been a member of their Scientific Advisory Committee since April last year :-)

Gosh! How important you must feel :-))

So you're still on the freebie trail. Might have known. Do they pay
you as well? If they do I'd stick in. It must be more profitable than
writing books which sell below half price.

Is it scientific to tell people to f*** off when you don't agree with
them?

Seems you might be in the right niche with SNH.


Do they know you've got unlimited intelligence? What an asset that
must be for them.


Remember this?

__________________

Malcolm Ogilvie aka Dr Thick is confused about his measure of
intelligence.

A Macmillan said; "Do you think you don't have limited intelligence?"

Dr Thick said: "What a contorted question. The answer is yes. What
about yourself?"

__________________

What a confused dummy you are, Malcolm. You don't improve with age.




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

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 18:15:09 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm [at] indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>
>In article <e40b9254iu0mcfcu2o5rkj0pnhrui9ivaj [at] 4ax.com>, Martin
><me [at] privacy.net> writes
>>On 18 Jun 2006 16:05:49 GMT, nmm1 [at] cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren) wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>In article <oqpa92d87l0qf3f26kr1oecqrpn69lq3jr [at] 4ax.com>,
>>>Martin <me [at] privacy.net> writes:
>>>|>
>>>|> >|> >You tell me. You're the one that claimed that "They also allow the
>>>|> >|> >shooting of wild and game birds on their reserves". You attempted to
>>>|> >|> >convey the impression that it was on all their reserves. You
>>>|> >|> >have only
>>>|> >|> >been able to come up with two.
>>>|> >|>
>>>|> >|> I don't see anywhere where he attempted to convey that impression.
>>>|> >|> Two is two too many.
>>>|> >
>>>|> >No, it's far too few. What the conservation camp followers in this
>>>|> >country need is a damn sight more knowledge of ecology and preparedness
>>>|> >to live with nature, and a damn sight less bunny-cuddling and birdie-
>>>|> >cooing.
>>>|>
>>>|> Outraged in Tunbridge Wells? :-)
>>>
>>>Precisely. As a basis for planning, let alone legislation, ignorant
>>>emotion is catastrophic - and that is what we have had for the past
>>>half-century :-(
>>
>>I agree with you.
>>
>>There's a difference between control and shooting things for pleasure
>>for no good reason.
>>
>>Providing shooting for rich gents in the name of control is not what
>>RSPB contributors have in mind when they make their donations.
>
>The RSPB do not provide any shooting for rich gents, or anyone else,
>whether in the name of control or for any other reason.
>

"In addition to this NGO conservation bodies such as the Wildlife
Trusts and RSPB have wildfowling tenants
on their reserves. Examples include Montrose Basin (Scottish Wildlife
Trust, Angus), Frampton Marsh
(RSPB, Lincolnshire), Ouse Washes (RSPB, Cambridgeshire), Tetney
Marshes (RSPB, Lincolnshire).
Locally, RSPB let sporting rights to Langstone & District Wildfowling
& Conservation Association
(L&DW&CA) at the Langstone Harbour RSPB reserve. Wardening at
Langstone Harbour is a co-operative
and joint venture between RSPB, Local Authority and L&DW&CA. In many
cases wildfowling clubs lease
sporting rights jointly with conservation bodies to allow for
cooperative and integrated management. Nearby
examples include Langstone & District Wildfowling & Conservation
Association’s joint Crown Estate leases
with the Hampshire Wildlife Trust and RSPB. In some cases wildfowling
clubs jointly own freehold with
conservation bodies – e.g. Fenla nd Wildfowlers Association jointly
own c. 250 acres of the Welney Reserve
(Ouse Washes) with the Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust (WWT)."



Some way to protect birds :-((


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

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Malcolm wrote:
> [snip]

Malcom, and others. You have ruined uk.environment.conservation. You
have not, apparently, responded to requests there to desist. Please
will you therefore take your "arguments" back there, and don't give
"Amgus" his kicks here. Thank you.

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 19:46:04 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm [at] indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>
>In article <b86b9291s4vdlmvqempen7d6oqvg32cdso [at] 4ax.com>,
>amacmil304 [at] aol.com writes
>>On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 18:15:09 +0100, Malcolm
>><Malcolm [at] indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>In article <e40b9254iu0mcfcu2o5rkj0pnhrui9ivaj [at] 4ax.com>, Martin
>>><me [at] privacy.net> writes
>>>>On 18 Jun 2006 16:05:49 GMT, nmm1 [at] cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>In article <oqpa92d87l0qf3f26kr1oecqrpn69lq3jr [at] 4ax.com>,
>>>>>Martin <me [at] privacy.net> writes:
>>>>>|>
>>>>>|> >|> >You tell me. You're the one that claimed that "They also allow the
>>>>>|> >|> >shooting of wild and game birds on their reserves". You attempted to
>>>>>|> >|> >convey the impression that it was on all their reserves. You
>>>>>|> >|> >have only
>>>>>|> >|> >been able to come up with two.
>>>>>|> >|>
>>>>>|> >|> I don't see anywhere where he attempted to convey that impression.
>>>>>|> >|> Two is two too many.
>>>>>|> >
>>>>>|> >No, it's far too few. What the conservation camp followers in this
>>>>>|> >country need is a damn sight more knowledge of ecology and preparedness
>>>>>|> >to live with nature, and a damn sight less bunny-cuddling and birdie-
>>>>>|> >cooing.
>>>>>|>
>>>>>|> Outraged in Tunbridge Wells? :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>Precisely. As a basis for planning, let alone legislation, ignorant
>>>>>emotion is catastrophic - and that is what we have had for the past
>>>>>half-century :-(
>>>>
>>>>I agree with you.
>>>>
>>>>There's a difference between control and shooting things for pleasure
>>>>for no good reason.
>>>>
>>>>Providing shooting for rich gents in the name of control is not what
>>>>RSPB contributors have in mind when they make their donations.
>>>
>>>The RSPB do not provide any shooting for rich gents, or anyone else,
>>>whether in the name of control or for any other reason.
>>>
>>
>>"In addition to this NGO conservation bodies such as the Wildlife
>>Trusts and RSPB have wildfowling tenants
>>on their reserves. Examples include Montrose Basin (Scottish Wildlife
>>Trust, Angus), Frampton Marsh
>>(RSPB, Lincolnshire), Ouse Washes (RSPB, Cambridgeshire), Tetney
>>Marshes (RSPB, Lincolnshire).
>>Locally, RSPB let sporting rights to Langstone & District Wildfowling
>>& Conservation Association
>>(L&DW&CA) at the Langstone Harbour RSPB reserve. Wardening at
>>Langstone Harbour is a co-operative
>>and joint venture between RSPB, Local Authority and L&DW&CA. In many
>>cases wildfowling clubs lease
>>sporting rights jointly with conservation bodies to allow for
>>cooperative and integrated management. Nearby
>>examples include Langstone & District Wildfowling & Conservation
>>Association’s joint Crown Estate leases
>>with the Hampshire Wildlife Trust and RSPB. In some cases wildfowling
>>clubs jointly own freehold with
>>conservation bodies – e.g. Fenla nd Wildfowlers Association jointly
>>own c. 250 acres of the Welney Reserve
>>(Ouse Washes) with the Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust (WWT)."
>>
>>
>So what?

So the RSPB has shooting tenants on it reserves. "Locally, RSPB let
sporting rights to Langstone & District Wildfowling & Conservation
Association"

So you're a liar, Malcolm.

>Winter foreshore shooting doesn't necessarily interfere with a
>reserve that is important for summer breeding birds. And if a
>wildfowling club will look after the winter shooting that prevents a
>free-for-all and carry out wardening. An excellent arrangement.

Doesn't "protect" the birds that are shot.

The RSPB also shoot birds themselves.

And one only needs to look at the power stbehing the RSPB to see
they're into shooting up to their necks.


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

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 19:04:50 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm [at] indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>
>In article <fq1b92ho8a7ap5qep95u6h0moitvkn8g54 [at] 4ax.com>,
>amacmil304 [at] aol.com writes
>>
>>Remember this?
>>
>>__________________
>>
>>Malcolm Ogilvie aka Dr Thick is confused about his measure of
>>intelligence.
>>
>>A Macmillan said; "Do you think you don't have limited intelligence?"
>>
>>Dr Thick said: "What a contorted question. The answer is yes. What
>>about yourself?"
>>
>>__________________
>
>Of course. Compared with you, everyone has unlimited intelligence.


From your afterthought department :-))

Do you still think that men on the moon will be "native" because they
reached there by their own devices?

I can see your duff scientific advice to SNH will be fun :-))

Do they know that you tell people that don't share your opinions to
f*** off ?


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

On 18 Jun 2006 21:14:34 +0200, Chris Bacon <chrispbacon [at] thai.com>
wrote:

>Malcolm wrote:
>> [snip]
>
>Malcom, and others. You have ruined uk.environment.conservation.

Malcolm and his supporters indulge in fake conservation and it is
something that needs to be exposed. You will notice that I posted the
same message on uk.e.c but that Malcolm preferred to respond here.

I don't ask for any responses; I only seek to inform people of the
facts. But I shall respond if attacked with silly rhetoric.


>You
>have not, apparently, responded to requests there to desist. Please
>will you therefore take your "arguments" back there, and don't give
>"Amgus" his kicks here. Thank you.

Although I wouldn't call it "kicks", I am quite happy to address the
arguments on uk.e.c but the problem is "they" don't have any arguments
and can only attack me as the messenger.

I think this thread was entirely on topic as most people feed birds in
their gardens and, in my view, should continue to do so.



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

amacmil304 [at] aol.com wrote:
> Chris Bacon wrote:
>>
>>Malcom, and others. You have ruined uk.environment.conservation.
>
>
> Malcolm and his supporters indulge in fake conservation and it is
> something that needs to be exposed. You will notice that I posted the
> same message on uk.e.c but that Malcolm preferred to respond here.
>
> I don't ask for any responses; I only seek to inform people of the
> facts.

No you don't, this plainly shown by your replies.

What fools do, I can't help.

On 18 Jun 2006 22:56:23 +0200, Chris Bacon <chrispbacon [at] thai.com>
wrote:

>amacmil304 [at] aol.com wrote:
>> Chris Bacon wrote:
>>>
>>>Malcom, and others. You have ruined uk.environment.conservation.
>>
>>
>> Malcolm and his supporters indulge in fake conservation and it is
>> something that needs to be exposed. You will notice that I posted the
>> same message on uk.e.c but that Malcolm preferred to respond here.
>>
>> I don't ask for any responses; I only seek to inform people of the
>> facts.
>
>No you don't, this plainly shown by your replies.

If you look at my original post it did not ask to be responded to; but
I respond in kind to those that seek to abuse me.

>
>What fools do, I can't help.

Seems you're at it as well :-(

Seems you can't help yourself. If you get my meaning :-))


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