Most people would be forgiven for thinking that hunting is already banned. But the hunting season is underway right now and foxes are dying. 191 fox hunts will ride out nearly 10,700 times this year.
That can’t be right. That can’t be the type of country we are trying to be in the twenty-first century.
And that is why the Hunting Act needs to be strengthened.
Bill Oddie video
This election is a real opportunity to show unity where there has been division; to commit to a vision of Britain that is a kinder place for all of us to live. A country where there is an understanding of the importance of protecting the environment around us and all the wildlife that shares our land.
Please contact your election candidates today and help get more anti-hunt MPs into parliament.
Take Action
It is time political parties went further, not only to secure the Hunting Act but to strengthen it; to ensure there can be no excuses for harming wild animals for ‘sport’.
I am calling on all parties to include this pledge in their manifestos, to allow themselves to be judged on their compassion and their commitment to our land and our wildlife, as well as their willingness to ensure all those who seek to circumvent these rules are appropriately punished.
We know from polling commissioned by the League Against Cruel Sports that 85 per cent of the public think fox hunting should remain illegal. We ask that all political parties commit to strengthening this law and reduce those 10,700 hunting days to zero.
Please contact your election candidates today and help end fox hunting for good.
Take Action
Yours sincerely,
Bill Oddie
Bill Oddie OBE
Patron of the League Against Cruel Sports
PS: Together we have a stronger voice to make changes for our wildlife. Could you make a donation that will enable us to deliver a campaign that puts wildlife at the heart of this General Election? Thank you for standing on the side of animals.
Sunday, 1 December 2019
POLITICS WITH ANDREW MARR
PREJUDICE PREJUDICE PREJUDICE
This morning on BBC TV I thought that Andrew Marr lost it! I always try and watch his Sunday morning political show and I admire the way he deals with his interviewees. Even the bloody-minded ones who will never say yes or no, but let party rhetoric fall from their mouths like vomit.
That was my view until this morning and I watched him let the smooth talking Baroness Chakrabarti get away with saying about ‘that is too early to discuss what happened on London Bridge’. Okay she showed respect and regret. And he let her carry on with this calm and “wordless-meaning” approach to a too early discussion. She was correct in many ways and I listened intently to what it takes to supervise and maintain surveillance. It is costly, financially and with human time, to do the job well, but it will never be perfect.
Now the Prime Minister. The chat started smoothly enough. The guts of the conversation was about the release of the killer after only eight years in prison. The public will always have mixed views on sentencing and why prisoners are released before their full term. It is always political and party politics seems to blur or even conceal the factual extent of what legislation can allow or not.
Apparently the legislation under which are killer was sentenced was in the period of a Labour Goverment. That was convenient for our wild haired prime minister. You can either love him or hate his image or everything about him. He is the ‘marmite man’ to many.
According to Marr the Conservative governments have had ten years to change the law regarding release for convicted terrorists. There was more ‘toing and froing’ than usual with both talking at the same time. That's probably very easy to do when Boris Johnston is in full flow. At least eight times Marr asked the same question and there was hostility written across his face.
The first fact we should know is whether the killer could have been kept in prison or not. We did not know from this programme and I hold Marr accountable for this. Facts should be there for us. Maybe we will see.
I have been a fan of Marr for years, but today, I saw him let himself down. He may not like our current Prime Minister, but that was not his job on this Sunday morning. I even walked away from the screen. Why give one interviewee an easy ride and then become, even belligerent, to another one. I know that there is a huge political divide and on this Sunday morning is he showing his own politics? Maybe he is trying to influence the polls!
Come on Andrew Marr - you can be more even handed because you have done better than this.
This morning on BBC TV I thought that Andrew Marr lost it! I always try and watch his Sunday morning political show and I admire the way he deals with his interviewees. Even the bloody-minded ones who will never say yes or no, but let party rhetoric fall from their mouths like vomit.
That was my view until this morning and I watched him let the smooth talking Baroness Chakrabarti get away with saying about ‘that is too early to discuss what happened on London Bridge’. Okay she showed respect and regret. And he let her carry on with this calm and “wordless-meaning” approach to a too early discussion. She was correct in many ways and I listened intently to what it takes to supervise and maintain surveillance. It is costly, financially and with human time, to do the job well, but it will never be perfect.
Now the Prime Minister. The chat started smoothly enough. The guts of the conversation was about the release of the killer after only eight years in prison. The public will always have mixed views on sentencing and why prisoners are released before their full term. It is always political and party politics seems to blur or even conceal the factual extent of what legislation can allow or not.
Apparently the legislation under which are killer was sentenced was in the period of a Labour Goverment. That was convenient for our wild haired prime minister. You can either love him or hate his image or everything about him. He is the ‘marmite man’ to many.
According to Marr the Conservative governments have had ten years to change the law regarding release for convicted terrorists. There was more ‘toing and froing’ than usual with both talking at the same time. That's probably very easy to do when Boris Johnston is in full flow. At least eight times Marr asked the same question and there was hostility written across his face.
The first fact we should know is whether the killer could have been kept in prison or not. We did not know from this programme and I hold Marr accountable for this. Facts should be there for us. Maybe we will see.
I have been a fan of Marr for years, but today, I saw him let himself down. He may not like our current Prime Minister, but that was not his job on this Sunday morning. I even walked away from the screen. Why give one interviewee an easy ride and then become, even belligerent, to another one. I know that there is a huge political divide and on this Sunday morning is he showing his own politics? Maybe he is trying to influence the polls!
Come on Andrew Marr - you can be more even handed because you have done better than this.
Sunday, 24 November 2019
WE NEED TREES SAY FRIENDS OF THE EARTH
I re-post this request from FRIENDS OF THE EARTH TO PLANT MORE TREES
Dear John
Scientists say we need billions more trees in the UK to protect our climate and wildlife. And trees can help offer a natural defence against extreme weather like flooding
But here in the UK spending on trees fell by £20 million a year between 2015 and 2018. That’s no way to respond to the climate emergency.
Our petition calling on the UK government to double tree cover already has over 90,000 signatures. As it's National Tree Week, can you add yours today to help us reach 100,000? Let’s make sure the next government has committed to double the UK’s tree cover.
I’LL SIGN THE PETITION
Only 13% of the UK is covered in woodlands – less than half the European average.
Our remaining woodland absorbs greenhouse gas emissions and provides homes for all kinds of wildlife. If the next government is serious about tackling the climate and ecological emergency, it needs to commit to doubling tree cover.
And right now we have a chance to change things. Under huge public pressure to act, political parties are making competing tree planting pledges in the run-up to the election.
Let’s take this opportunity to increase the pressure and secure a commitment.
Can you sign our petition to help double tree cover?
Dear John
Scientists say we need billions more trees in the UK to protect our climate and wildlife. And trees can help offer a natural defence against extreme weather like flooding
But here in the UK spending on trees fell by £20 million a year between 2015 and 2018. That’s no way to respond to the climate emergency.
Our petition calling on the UK government to double tree cover already has over 90,000 signatures. As it's National Tree Week, can you add yours today to help us reach 100,000? Let’s make sure the next government has committed to double the UK’s tree cover.
I’LL SIGN THE PETITION
Only 13% of the UK is covered in woodlands – less than half the European average.
Our remaining woodland absorbs greenhouse gas emissions and provides homes for all kinds of wildlife. If the next government is serious about tackling the climate and ecological emergency, it needs to commit to doubling tree cover.
And right now we have a chance to change things. Under huge public pressure to act, political parties are making competing tree planting pledges in the run-up to the election.
Let’s take this opportunity to increase the pressure and secure a commitment.
Can you sign our petition to help double tree cover?
Thursday, 21 November 2019
SHOOTING TIMES & WOODCOCK KILLERS
Latest issue of Shooting Times seen in Sainsbury's - Woodcock, red listed bird of conservation concern, Common Snipe and Teal, amber listed. Unbelievable - what is wrong with these people! @MarkAvery @ChrisGPackham @_robsheldon @ASPaton
REQUEST FROM MARINE CONSERVATION SOCIETY
THE ELECTION IS COMING SOON
Our oceans are vital to all life on Earth and protecting them for future generations should be a key aim for the next government.
We’re in the midst of an environmental and climate emergency and our marine biodiversity is under constant threat. This comes from overfishing, plastic and other pollution, deep-sea mining and the effects of climate change. There is a pressing need for further action.
With a general election on 12 December all of the UK’s political parties and MP candidates will be setting out the legislation and policies that they would like to introduce. At MCS we’ve prepared our own Ocean Manifesto and we’ve identified key policy changes which would help protect our marine environment. We'll be examining each political party’s plans to see how they measure up against our priorities for the marine environment.
Our nine point policy plan sets out an ambitious agenda and MCS believes that any future government should implement the following:
Marine Plastics
Ban the loss of microplastics into the environment during the manufacturing and recycling processes
Introduce an all-inclusive deposit return scheme for drinks containers
Introduce extended producer responsibility so that manufacturers are responsible for the total disposal and recycling costs of their products
UK and Overseas Territories
Designate new Highly Protected Marine Areas to cover at least 10% of UK waters by 2023
Commit to a substantial increase in UK Overseas Territories funding to ensure we protect these vital ecosystems
Ban damaging activities from all UK Marine Protected Areas
Fishing
Implement measures to help vessels account for what they catch
Legislation to ensure no fishing above scientifically recommended sustainable levels
Support the roll out of CCTV cameras on vessels to record catches
Our full Ocean Manifesto highlights our complete policy plan which would set a bold agenda for our oceans and show ambitious leadership globally. Click below to read more.
Our oceans are vital to all life on Earth and protecting them for future generations should be a key aim for the next government.
We’re in the midst of an environmental and climate emergency and our marine biodiversity is under constant threat. This comes from overfishing, plastic and other pollution, deep-sea mining and the effects of climate change. There is a pressing need for further action.
With a general election on 12 December all of the UK’s political parties and MP candidates will be setting out the legislation and policies that they would like to introduce. At MCS we’ve prepared our own Ocean Manifesto and we’ve identified key policy changes which would help protect our marine environment. We'll be examining each political party’s plans to see how they measure up against our priorities for the marine environment.
Our nine point policy plan sets out an ambitious agenda and MCS believes that any future government should implement the following:
Marine Plastics
Ban the loss of microplastics into the environment during the manufacturing and recycling processes
Introduce an all-inclusive deposit return scheme for drinks containers
Introduce extended producer responsibility so that manufacturers are responsible for the total disposal and recycling costs of their products
UK and Overseas Territories
Designate new Highly Protected Marine Areas to cover at least 10% of UK waters by 2023
Commit to a substantial increase in UK Overseas Territories funding to ensure we protect these vital ecosystems
Ban damaging activities from all UK Marine Protected Areas
Fishing
Implement measures to help vessels account for what they catch
Legislation to ensure no fishing above scientifically recommended sustainable levels
Support the roll out of CCTV cameras on vessels to record catches
Our full Ocean Manifesto highlights our complete policy plan which would set a bold agenda for our oceans and show ambitious leadership globally. Click below to read more.
Wednesday, 20 November 2019
KILLING ON MIGRATION ROUTES FOR THE SAKE OF IT
Thanks to Bryan Thomas at http://birdingcostablanca.blogspot.com
Birding Costa Blanca
A video everybody has to watch
Posted: 19 Nov 2019 07:16 AM PST
Hi there everybody
If you visit my blog for bird sighting and information could you
Please take the time to watch these 2 videos, you won't believe it and the scale of night poaching and slaughter. This happens every day and night through the Autumn migration
Click this link below
Large scale night poaching of migratory birds
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=55lZ23JOeu0
For the first time, our latest CABS video shows the large-scale indiscriminate night poaching of protected migratory birds occurring each autumn in northern Lebanon. During the recent CABS bird protection camp
I just don't get it? how can this be allowed to go on?
Click this link below
Blood on the Motorway of Migration: Raptor killing in Lebanon
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hORiFG4f-Js
Comment anybody
Birding Costa Blanca
A video everybody has to watch
Posted: 19 Nov 2019 07:16 AM PST
Hi there everybody
If you visit my blog for bird sighting and information could you
Please take the time to watch these 2 videos, you won't believe it and the scale of night poaching and slaughter. This happens every day and night through the Autumn migration
Click this link below
Large scale night poaching of migratory birds
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=55lZ23JOeu0
For the first time, our latest CABS video shows the large-scale indiscriminate night poaching of protected migratory birds occurring each autumn in northern Lebanon. During the recent CABS bird protection camp
I just don't get it? how can this be allowed to go on?
Click this link below
Blood on the Motorway of Migration: Raptor killing in Lebanon
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hORiFG4f-Js
Comment anybody
Monday, 18 November 2019
PRINCE ANDREW ON THE MORNING AFTER
THE INTERVIEW OF HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS, PRINCE ANDREW DUKE OF YORK WITH EMILY MAITLIS
I hate prejudice. I prefer to go along the route of examining the evidence and then making a judgement. Sounds simple doesn't it? But where prejudice, subliminal or otherwise, is involved then listening can become a lost art and the tongue starts flapping and anything can come out. That's my stance? Why now and why this morning?
Yesterday evening BBC Two screened the interview with Emily Maitlis and his Royal Highness Prince Andrew, Duke of York. I know that it would not be everyone's idea of a good Saturday viewing and after Strickly it could be viewed as very bland.
We've had headlines to suck us into a segment of the truth or just to draw us in or even drag us away from a comment. Indeed reading the headlines this morning those ‘journos’ dug in and hammered in their comments. Well they have to make a living.
I watched the interview as dispassionately as I possibly could. Andrew Marr on his Sunday morning programme said that he squirmed. I did not. I wanted evidence if we were to get any or something that I could believe one way or the other. Yes, evidence works for both sides and that alas, will depend upon what we want to hear.
The Sunday papers are loaded with comment and it is essential that the nation gets to know as much as possible. Camilla Long in a lengthy article gets ‘stuck in’. Her headline includes ‘Poor St Andrew’. That's a cheap shot isn't it? In a side comment she says “Why do we speak of ‘standards’ when he appeared to have none”. Okay, he may not but neither may she! Her words are emotive and pathetic when she mentions ‘Brashest unrepentant carpet in the world’ when referring to the room where the interview took place. I think that she is showing her own prejudice here and I will watch out for her on TV.
Was there any evidence to absorb and take away for examination? Well, not much. There was the photo in Central Park. It looked like a long shot to me and it would not have been a close up as there would have been security to shoo them away. Was it intended for someone’s benefit? Then there is the photo with a smiling Prince and a young girl. Fake or real, but we will have to wait for that too. Then something unusual in that it was said that Prince Andrew was soaked in sweat in Tramps. Not possible, he says, since his experiences in the Falklands. The adrenaline stopped him sweating. Medical fact or not and that is something that can be proved or otherwise. Again we will have to wait.
The interview was good. Emily Maitlis examined and persisted. He answered and I thought he did well. I don't think we are nearer the truth than we were. It was a gamble for him and such an interview has not been done before.
One thing sticks out ‘like a sore thumb’ which is why did he need to visit Epstein just to tell him that their friendship was over. I find that strange and a poor decision. I met friends for lunch and they were not on the Prince’s side. The truth could come out and I am considering the point that Maitlis did not ask is what can his security people tells. Again we wait.
I hate prejudice. I prefer to go along the route of examining the evidence and then making a judgement. Sounds simple doesn't it? But where prejudice, subliminal or otherwise, is involved then listening can become a lost art and the tongue starts flapping and anything can come out. That's my stance? Why now and why this morning?
Yesterday evening BBC Two screened the interview with Emily Maitlis and his Royal Highness Prince Andrew, Duke of York. I know that it would not be everyone's idea of a good Saturday viewing and after Strickly it could be viewed as very bland.
We've had headlines to suck us into a segment of the truth or just to draw us in or even drag us away from a comment. Indeed reading the headlines this morning those ‘journos’ dug in and hammered in their comments. Well they have to make a living.
I watched the interview as dispassionately as I possibly could. Andrew Marr on his Sunday morning programme said that he squirmed. I did not. I wanted evidence if we were to get any or something that I could believe one way or the other. Yes, evidence works for both sides and that alas, will depend upon what we want to hear.
The Sunday papers are loaded with comment and it is essential that the nation gets to know as much as possible. Camilla Long in a lengthy article gets ‘stuck in’. Her headline includes ‘Poor St Andrew’. That's a cheap shot isn't it? In a side comment she says “Why do we speak of ‘standards’ when he appeared to have none”. Okay, he may not but neither may she! Her words are emotive and pathetic when she mentions ‘Brashest unrepentant carpet in the world’ when referring to the room where the interview took place. I think that she is showing her own prejudice here and I will watch out for her on TV.
Was there any evidence to absorb and take away for examination? Well, not much. There was the photo in Central Park. It looked like a long shot to me and it would not have been a close up as there would have been security to shoo them away. Was it intended for someone’s benefit? Then there is the photo with a smiling Prince and a young girl. Fake or real, but we will have to wait for that too. Then something unusual in that it was said that Prince Andrew was soaked in sweat in Tramps. Not possible, he says, since his experiences in the Falklands. The adrenaline stopped him sweating. Medical fact or not and that is something that can be proved or otherwise. Again we will have to wait.
The interview was good. Emily Maitlis examined and persisted. He answered and I thought he did well. I don't think we are nearer the truth than we were. It was a gamble for him and such an interview has not been done before.
One thing sticks out ‘like a sore thumb’ which is why did he need to visit Epstein just to tell him that their friendship was over. I find that strange and a poor decision. I met friends for lunch and they were not on the Prince’s side. The truth could come out and I am considering the point that Maitlis did not ask is what can his security people tells. Again we wait.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)