Contry mans weekly?

[shepp 2,285]

Well i'll carry on buying Countrymans Weekly then in that case

[Graham Nicholson 0]

Well i'll carry on buying Countrymans Weekly then in that case

 

 

 

 

in what case??????????? What page you on

[shepp 2,285]

Well i'll carry on buying Countrymans Weekly then in that case

 

 

 

 

in what case??????????? What page you on

 

 

Well there are articles about lurchers, terriers and ferrets, pretty tame I know but they don't have much choice with the ban and shit.

So as far as i'm concerned they are on our side.

Must start paying direct debit, i see you get a free knife sharpener if you sign up right now.

Go on, you know it makes sense

[shinyspade 2]

its a magazine that is weekly what others are there it was asking for input and letters for the letters page. go on write a topical letter. win a good hunting knife plenty of terrier and ferret articles. but ive gotta say the letters page used to be good years ago. along with deargie and pesters pen . it gets my support . 100% as its the only weekly we have.

[Graham Nicholson 0]

its a magazine that is weekly what others are there it was asking for input and letters for the letters page. go on write a topical letter. win a good hunting knife plenty of terrier and ferret articles. but ive gotta say the letters page used to be good years ago. along with deargie and pesters pen . it gets my support . 100% as its the only weekly we have.

 

 

 

Its weekly drooled saliva by the countryside alliance who drivel for snobs, and has been since Dave Venner became editor.

[skycat 6,173]

This is not a subject I would normally comment on but I have to say that whilst it is tame, the fact that it is on the high street shelves (in some places) means that everything written in it must comply with the ban, annoying though that is for those who send in articles.

 

Would you, who slag it off, rather there was no publication at all that printed articles about working lurchers, terriers and ferrets? As someone already said, the fact that hunting is still a legitimate occupation, even despite the ban, means that whilst we can keep it in the public eye then the man or woman in the street can more readily accept that fact, whether they agree with it or not.

 

Yes, it is infuriating not to be able to write real, as it happens, accounts of digging to terriers, or other things which were once completely legal and are no longer so. but I still think it is better to write sanitized, watered down accounts of what we do rather than write nothing at all. If we wrote nothing, then, as has already been said, hunting would be driven completely underground.

 

And no, I am not a member of the Countryside Alliance, and whilst I might not speak with a strong regional accent that does't make me a snob! And as far as working dogs is concerned, I am out there working my lurchers and terriers virtually EVERY day of the year, and have done for the last twenty odd years, before which I hunted with my dad out shooting, and even before that followed hounds on a scraggy little pony as a little kid in Cornwall. How many of you can really say that you live and breathe hunting, working dogs etc?

 

Another thing: has no one noticed that even Dave Harcombe has been forced to be a little less graphic in his descriptions of terrier work than he was before the ban?

 

No one is exempt from the law, unfortunately, and whoever dares to write about hunting of any sort in this day and age must comply with that law, however ridiculous it might be.

 

At least the CMW are willing to put in 'memory lane' articles about dog work before the ban, but seeing as they had their offices burnt down by antis a few years ago, and daily receive threatening letters from antis I think they do the best they can given the problems they face.

 

Its all too easy to slag something or someone off, but it might be an idea to sometimes put yourselves in someone else's shoes. If we all just sat around and thought we were better than everyone else because we THINK we are the only ones out there doing it, I'm damn sure not a lot of game would really get caught at all!

 

And by the by, the CMW will always publish well written stories/articles sent in by readers providing it is in reasonable English and within in the law. If you can't write well, then tell your story to a friend or someone who can write! Its not that difficult really. A lot of the hunting accounts on the net would easily be edited to make a good article: its no good moaning about how crap the paper is if you don't do something about it yourselves! Which is exactly what I did: moaned, then wrote!

 

Postcript to this little rant: Britain: a nation of moaners, not doers!

[shinyspade 2]

[Graham Nicholson 0]

This is not a subject I would normally comment on but I have to say that whilst it is tame, the fact that it is on the high street shelves (in some places) means that everything written in it must comply with the ban, annoying though that is for those who send in articles.

 

Would you, who slag it off, rather there was no publication at all that printed articles about working lurchers, terriers and ferrets? As someone already said, the fact that hunting is still a legitimate occupation, even despite the ban, means that whilst we can keep it in the public eye then the man or woman in the street can more readily accept that fact, whether they agree with it or not.

 

Yes, it is infuriating not to be able to write real, as it happens, accounts of digging to terriers, or other things which were once completely legal and are no longer so. but I still think it is better to write sanitized, watered down accounts of what we do rather than write nothing at all. If we wrote nothing, then, as has already been said, hunting would be driven completely underground.

 

And no, I am not a member of the Countryside Alliance, and whilst I might not speak with a strong regional accent that does't make me a snob! And as far as working dogs is concerned, I am out there working my lurchers and terriers virtually EVERY day of the year, and have done for the last twenty odd years, before which I hunted with my dad out shooting, and even before that followed hounds on a scraggy little pony as a little kid in Cornwall. How many of you can really say that you live and breathe hunting, working dogs etc?

 

Another thing: has no one noticed that even Dave Harcombe has been forced to be a little less graphic in his descriptions of terrier work than he was before the ban?

 

No one is exempt from the law, unfortunately, and whoever dares to write about hunting of any sort in this day and age must comply with that law, however ridiculous it might be.

 

At least the CMW are willing to put in 'memory lane' articles about dog work before the ban, but seeing as they had their offices burnt down by antis a few years ago, and daily receive threatening letters from antis I think they do the best they can given the problems they face.

 

Its all too easy to slag something or someone off, but it might be an idea to sometimes put yourselves in someone else's shoes. If we all just sat around and thought we were better than everyone else because we THINK we are the only ones out there doing it, I'm damn sure not a lot of game would really get caught at all!

 

And by the by, the CMW will always publish well written stories/articles sent in by readers providing it is in reasonable English and within in the law. If you can't write well, then tell your story to a friend or someone who can write! Its not that difficult really. A lot of the hunting accounts on the net would easily be edited to make a good article: its no good moaning about how crap the paper is if you don't do something about it yourselves! Which is exactly what I did: moaned, then wrote!

 

Postcript to this little rant: Britain: a nation of moaners, not doers!

 

 

 

You should send that in! You will definitely win a pen-knife

[trader 0]

This kind of inverted snobbery is no help to hunting as a whole.

Whether you think the mag is shit or not, the most important thing is it's on the shelf, in the village or high street.

It's presence alone helps to make hunting normal in the eyes of the average man in the street.

The more hunting goes underground the less likely things can survive, let alone the ban being turned around.

 

Try looking at the big picture.

couldnt agree more, good post,

[shepp 2,285]

This is not a subject I would normally comment on but I have to say that whilst it is tame, the fact that it is on the high street shelves (in some places) means that everything written in it must comply with the ban, annoying though that is for those who send in articles.

 

Would you, who slag it off, rather there was no publication at all that printed articles about working lurchers, terriers and ferrets? As someone already said, the fact that hunting is still a legitimate occupation, even despite the ban, means that whilst we can keep it in the public eye then the man or woman in the street can more readily accept that fact, whether they agree with it or not.

 

Yes, it is infuriating not to be able to write real, as it happens, accounts of digging to terriers, or other things which were once completely legal and are no longer so. but I still think it is better to write sanitized, watered down accounts of what we do rather than write nothing at all. If we wrote nothing, then, as has already been said, hunting would be driven completely underground.

 

And no, I am not a member of the Countryside Alliance, and whilst I might not speak with a strong regional accent that does't make me a snob! And as far as working dogs is concerned, I am out there working my lurchers and terriers virtually EVERY day of the year, and have done for the last twenty odd years, before which I hunted with my dad out shooting, and even before that followed hounds on a scraggy little pony as a little kid in Cornwall. How many of you can really say that you live and breathe hunting, working dogs etc?

 

Another thing: has no one noticed that even Dave Harcombe has been forced to be a little less graphic in his descriptions of terrier work than he was before the ban?

 

No one is exempt from the law, unfortunately, and whoever dares to write about hunting of any sort in this day and age must comply with that law, however ridiculous it might be.

 

At least the CMW are willing to put in 'memory lane' articles about dog work before the ban, but seeing as they had their offices burnt down by antis a few years ago, and daily receive threatening letters from antis I think they do the best they can given the problems they face.

 

Its all too easy to slag something or someone off, but it might be an idea to sometimes put yourselves in someone else's shoes. If we all just sat around and thought we were better than everyone else because we THINK we are the only ones out there doing it, I'm damn sure not a lot of game would really get caught at all!

 

And by the by, the CMW will always publish well written stories/articles sent in by readers providing it is in reasonable English and within in the law. If you can't write well, then tell your story to a friend or someone who can write! Its not that difficult really. A lot of the hunting accounts on the net would easily be edited to make a good article: its no good moaning about how crap the paper is if you don't do something about it yourselves! Which is exactly what I did: moaned, then wrote!

 

Postcript to this little rant: Britain: a nation of moaners, not doers!

 

 

Good post Skycat