Jump to content

Recommended Posts

As you posted the O.P. why not further educate us. Seeing as I'm not actually that concerned about looking for the sites, on-line communities etc. Why not post the links? Come on show us your pictures of your meat harvest in the E.U. with all your European hunting pals while you're at it.

I for one would love to see them. Oh, if you actually read my post you'd see I wasn't wholly against the hunting with bows/crossbows issue however, you do come across as a aggressive and a little shouty, frothy round the mouth even. I'm sure someone as bright, if not slightly socially awkward in company like you, already knows that.


Nette.(tu)

Annette Curtain Wrote:

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

> As you posted the O.P. why not further educate us.

> Seeing as I'm not actually that concerned about

> looking for the sites, on-line communities etc.

> Why not post the links? Come on show us your

> pictures of your meat harvest in the E.U. with all

> your European hunting pals while you're at it.

> I for one would love to see them. Oh, if you

> actually read my post you'd see I wasn't wholly

> against the hunting with bows/crossbows issue

> however, you do come across as a aggressive and a

> little shouty, frothy round the mouth even. I'm

> sure someone as bright, if not slightly socially

> awkward in company like you, already knows that.

>

> Nette.(tu)

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


+1



Was that supposed to be funny? Because it wasn't. But more to the point, who said/wrote anything about a "primitive crossbow", whatever that is? Or is it just a creation you grasped at to bolster what can only be described as a weak attempt at humour?



Annette, I could attach or link you to a plethora of images that feature men posing over a dead animal, and further images confirming that the meat had been harvested for human consumption i.e - hanging and jointing. But that would be futile, because the likes of you would then come along and (understandably) refute the authenticity of the attached images, claiming they could be anyone. Forgive me for note posing over my last kill with a piece of paper that has "Scribe - East Dulwich Forum". But you already knew that would be the case, so, for now, your requests have no bearing on this thread. But you seem to be the one struggling to believe what many people know to be common place all over the world, so when you think about it, the owness is on you to investigate, not I.




The reason I may have come across as "aggressive and a little shouty, frothy round the mouth" is because you, among others, keep insinuating that what I'm writing isn't true, but you keep evading my requests to substantiate those claims, but you don't/can't. Why is that?

Whatever... :D


You're also clearly deranged, i'm finding your posts quite laughable.


I'm surprised someone as smart as you allows themselves to get so worked up

by some unknown internet posters?? why do they wind you up so much?

You really do need to relax.


Or perhaps you are seeking some sort of approval from us??


Anyhows, i'm enjoying finding silly pictures of other people who also like playing with crossbows.

But more especially your little outburst crack me up :)-D

Pearson, rest assured, I'm not getting worked-up, no matter how intelligent you think I am. I'm simply challenging those, yourself included, to provide me with a shred of evidence that what I claim is untrue. But so far, all any of you have done is evade my requests to substantiate your claims, which says a lot, quite frankly.


But please, allow me to let you in on the real joke. The images you're posting betray a weak mind, unable to connect what the image conveys to what you're attempting to deride. In short, they're fairly weak and only achieve a generic relation at best.


So, back to the drawing board, Pearson.

"I'm simply challenging those, yourself included, to provide me with a shread of evidence that what I claim is untrue. But so far, all any of you have done is evade my requests to substantiate your claims"


Why? I'm not THAT BOTHERED by the whole issue quite frankly.

But, if it amuses you, do remind me exactly what I said that implied your claim was untrue?


"The images you're posting betray a weak mind, unable to connect what the image conveys to what you're attempting to deride. In short, they're fairly weak and only achieve a generic relation at best."


Lolz, keep em coming.

Dont you think ,Scribe? the killhead is a bit like using a tank, to shoot ducks at a fairground.

Year old bucks/does are hardly old enough to run fast anyway,the way those arrows kill is inhumane,ordainary shot

would have done .like they always have.

You using those, just confirms you have bloodlust,admiring how the thing can destroy is deranged thinking.

Or maybe your playing too many computer games.

Are you Peckham boy,with the shed load of cats fur?

Scribe, I lived on the German border for many years, I've seen most forms of hunting first hand, mainly wild boar hunted with dogs, guns and the like. Ever been charged by a sow protecting her young? I have. So I don't need to authenticate your post, I've seen, smelt it first hand. My question is have you yet ? My friends father was a serious game dealer based in Northampton & hunted in Germany extensively, he actually died of a heart attack whilst doing so, god rest his soul. Tell me where do you go to ? I'm sure Charlie will know it, he may even know some of your hunting pals.


Go on post your pictures, I'll believe you, honest.


Nette.:)

All the regular hunters I know are farmers and they are very 'matter of fact' about the death of an animal.


To watch someone gut and skin a rabbit in a couple or three minutes is a fascinating although pungent scene.


All our ancestors hunted, they had to to survive, but these days because of the sake of efficiency it comes vacuum packed and we are removed from it.


When hunting deer on the large estates they developed the ghillie suit made from fronds of burlap which enabled the stalker to lie unseen until the animal came within range of his 'scope. The ghillie suit was then adopted by snipers in the various wars.



Seeing as you yourself have proven on countless occasions throughout this thread that you're not exactly on speaking terms with reality, I find what I've quoted you on very difficult to believe. In fact, I'd even go as far as openly suspecting you of being no older than 14, seeing as you seem incapable of stringing a sentence together within in a coherent structure. And you stiil haven't validated your claims that what I've written with regards to hunting large game with a bow is untrue.


As ever, in your own time, young lady.

Ho hum.....


It is Tuesday the 8th of Feb today isn't it?


( i'm just taking a reality check )


And does everyone understand this post ok ?


( good, thought so. )


I duly throw in the towel with scribe/wolf/the eye. He's truly lost the plot this time.


Nette.:)


* dons chain mail suit *

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...