Why would someone do this? Is it a warning to the mole population?

[-]

Putrid_Screen1078@reddit

They are hung on the fence by the trapper to show the landowner how many they have caught. Could be done in a less obvious way nowadays but it’s the tradition. Birds will feed on the maggots too.

[-]

StabbyMcStabbedface@reddit

This is the correct answer, also if you’re a tenant farmer it shows the landowner that you’re looking after the land.

I agree that this could be done in a less obvious way.

[-]

Gloomy-Sink-7019@reddit

Why though? To protect the sensibilities of city people?

Country people have their way. It's like when rich people move to the countryside and then complain about the tractors and noises from farms

[-]

Particular-Set5396@reddit

I am a country people and this shit is all kinds of messed up. Moles are part of the ecosystem and there is no need to exterminate them. This is backwards and cruel.

[-]

timeforknowledge@reddit

There's living in the country, which is you

And there's working in the country which is not you...

There are serious pests and obstacles from things in the country, only when you've had to put down your own animals or has serious financial impact from it would you change your mind on killing animals.

Here's another one; deer, they have no predators and they kill young trees.

Birds like black bird can carry diseases to animals like pigs so need to be shot to thin them out / keep them away.

Badgers, carry TB and can transmit it to cattle.

And there's lots more

[-]

EmojiRepliesToRats@reddit

Fuck animal agriculture, and anyone involved in it. They're destroying nature just to make a buck by abusing and killing animals. Rotten from top to bottom.

[-]

EnormousD@reddit

You know animals are also killed during the production of grains, vegetables, legumes etc? Both intentionally and unintentionally. Ever seen the pigeons shot on a stubble field after harvest? Seen foxes mangled by a combine or a baler? Rodents driven out from rice paddies?

I'd argue that not only does animal agriculture feed more people with fewer animal deaths per meal but also it actually destroys far more of the natural world and strays further from a naturally balanced ecosystem. Monocrop agriculture is damaging as fuck for the land. Animal agriculture done right and in combination with arable farming is the only way to farm sustainably.

[-]

EmojiRepliesToRats@reddit

You know animals are also killed during the production of grains, vegetables, legumes etc?

Yes, I know. It does not change anything that I said.

I'd argue that not only does animal agriculture feed more people with fewer animal deaths per meal

You would argue wrong.

What do you think they feed farmed animals? It takes far more crops to feed an animal to provide food for a human than to just feed the human directly.

5x more land is used for animal agriculture than for plant-based agriculture. Despite that, we still get a large majority of calories and protein from plant-based agriculture. Animal agriculture is horribly inefficient, and the only way to make it more efficient is to ramp up the cruelty.

https://ourworldindata.org/global-land-for-agriculture

Monocrop agriculture is damaging as fuck for the land.

Much less land will be needed for agriculture if we all went vegan. Do you think that mono-animal grazing isn't damaging for the land?

Animal agriculture done right and in combination with arable farming is the only way to farm sustainably.

Why on earth would animal agriculture ever be part of the picture of ideally sustainable farming practices?

[-]

EnormousD@reddit

Yes, I know. It does not change anything that I said.

So you're OK with animal death as long as we don't eat them. Got ya.

What do you think they feed farmed animals?

In my country, where we do things right, they eat grass. Occasionally they eat a little silage made from maize but mostly grass (be that fresh, hay or silage). The pigs I deal with eat organic soy feed which doesn't bother me, I'd rather run my soy through a pig first, they're much better at digesting it than I am and the end product is much more nutritionally dense. Plus they don't eat the decent grain, they eat the shit stuff that isn't particularly suitable for the human grade market. Besides, the land the animals live on is mostly unsuitable for arable farming anyway, hilly stony areas that can't be used for anything else. Think about all those Welsh lambs roaming the mountainsides.

Much less land would be needed for agriculture if we all went vegan.

Again, since we tend to put our ruminants on the land not suitable for arable, this is wrong. Even if you were correct, there are so so many reasons why a vegan diet is not a good choice for a human. We need B12, iron, certain essential amino acids, there are so many things a vegan diet cannot provide that meat can.

Why on earth would animal agriculture ever be part of the picture of ideally sustainable farming practices?

Ever heard of soil depletion? Animals provide natural fertilizer directly back into the land keeping it balanced just as it is in nature. Harvesting crops from a field over and over again without reintroducing nutrients depletes the soil and will eventually make the world unfarmable. Chemical fertilizers have negative side effects and do not do the same job. Mob grazing livestock actually helps fields to grow better and restores their ability to sequester carbon from the atmosphere. Tilling and ploughing releases carbon.

Research regenerative agriculture for a better understanding. To suggest everyone going vegan is going to save the planet is shortsighted to say the least.

[-]

EmojiRepliesToRats@reddit

So you're OK with animal death as long as we don't eat them.

I make a distinction between intentionally imprisoning and killing intelligent animals in order to eat them, and the necessary minimal deaths of wild animals associated with crop farming.

As a human, there is no way for me to live without some animals losing out. I try to minimise the harm my existence causes as much as is practicable.

Much less land would be needed for agriculture if we all went vegan.

Again, since we tend to put our ruminants on the land not suitable for arable, this is wrong.

To all go vegan, we would not need to increase arable land by the same amount that pastoral land would reduce. The land that isn't suitable for arable wouldn't need to become arable - it would not be needed for agriculture anymore.

Even if you were correct, there are so so many reasons why a vegan diet is not a good choice for a human. We need B12, iron, certain essential amino acids, there are so many things a vegan diet cannot provide that meat can.

I get plenty of those things on a vegan diet. I'd wager I'm a lot healthier than you are.

Ever heard of soil depletion?

Ever heard of crop rotation?

Mob grazing livestock actually helps fields to grow better and restores their ability to sequester carbon from the atmosphere.

I thought that ruminants weren't kept on land suitable for arable?? Confusing.

Research regenerative agriculture for a better understanding. To suggest everyone going vegan is going to save the planet is shortsighted to say the least.

I understand the topic plenty. Animal agriculture is not necessary for regenerative agriculture at all.

[-]

EnormousD@reddit

I make a distinction between intentionally imprisoning and killing intelligent animals in order to eat them, and the necessary minimal deaths of wild animals associated with crop farming.

Plenty of animals are intentionally killed to produce vegan food. Birds need to be shot to protect grain fields, rodents need to be poisoned or trapped IE killed. If this isnt done, farming is completely unprofitable and more to the point its unfeasible. We aren't just talking about a couple we are talking thousands upon thousands of sentient beings. Again I state my claim that many many more lives are lost per meal for vegan food than the 1 single cow that is killed to feed many hundreds of people. Just as an aside, do you have a problem with people eating the birds that have been shot to protect grain fields? I personally like woodpigeon and I do my best to ensure those lives don't go to waste, do you? If you ate those birds you could then eat less grain and maybe save some further bird and rodent lives from being lost in the pursuit of yet more grain?

To all go vegan, we would not need to increase arable land by the same amount that pastoral land would reduce. The land that isn't suitable for arable wouldn't need to become arable - it would not be needed for agriculture anymore.

I just disagree with you here. You've missed the point entirely. If you have animals on land that isn't suitable for arable farming anyway then there is no land to trade off for vegan food, you could do away with the animals and gain no land on which to grow vegan food. As I said previous, in this country we feed our cows and sheep little to no grain because our grass is so abundant due to the amount of rain we get - which is why those animals are not displacing any other source of human food, they are mostly an addition grown within the margins as it were. Your whole argument depends on this idea of meat displacing plant foods. In some parts of the world that is absolutely true, but not here, and not everywhere. You can't base your whole theory around the practices of a few places like America or Brazil. I don't eat meat from these places for this very reason. The issue is so much more complex than just "meat bad".

I get plenty of those things on a vegan diet. I'd wager I'm a lot healthier than you are.

We've no way of verifying that and I'm not getting into a pissing match about whose healthier. I know that my diet is better and more complete because I eat everything, I eat every different meat, fish and dairy product going, I eat a massive variety of properly grown fruit, vegetables, nuts and seeds and virtually no UPF. We all know that a varied diet is the key to proper nutrition and the benefits of meat fish and dairy have been proven for centuries. Argue against that at your own detriment.

Ever heard of crop rotation?

Yeah and crop rotation includes phases of animal grazing and being left fallow lol you can't just rotate crops and hope nutrients will find their way back into the soil. Clover does do that but you know what's good for encouraging clover to grow? Grazing the land with cows!

I thought that ruminants weren't kept on land suitable for arable?? Confusing.

A good chunk of animal grazing land isn't suitable for arable no but some of it is yeah. Having diverse sources of food is the name of the game though, animals give us greater resilience and that's why humanity started domesticating animals in the first place. Plus they eat our scraps and provide food from things we'd struggle to eat ourselves.

I could go back and forth with you all day honestly, I enjoy a good conversation however I've got other stuff to do today.

I'd just like to recommend a book called "The great plant based con" by Jayne Buxton. It talks in great detail about nearly everything we've spoken about today and its probably the most comprehensive coverage of the pros and cons of plant based diets vs omnivore diet that I've seen.

It's free with Spotify and also available on audible if you want to listen to it.

https://open.spotify.com/show/1p9hd5KlhkxqDlQ8AZfcAO?si=mPrvm-QrQMW90Krq3-ZeSQ https://www.audible.co.uk/pd/1405548576?source_code=ASSORAP0511160007

You care enough to have an opinion and do your own research so I'm sure you'd appreciate more information even if you don't agree with eating animals. I'd love to hear your thoughts about it if you've got the time or inclination to read it, feel free to take note of my username.

[-]

EmojiRepliesToRats@reddit

Again I state my claim that many many more lives are lost per meal for vegan food than the 1 single cow that is killed to feed many hundreds of people.

You seem to be under the illusion that rearing a cow involves zero external animal deaths. You are mistaken.

Huge swathes of land are taken from nature to farm cows. The natural animals inhabiting that area are driven out. Other animals trying to inhabit the land are killed. Nearby water sources are polluted.

Just as an aside, do you have a problem with people eating the birds that have been shot to protect grain fields?

I wouldn't raise issue with that meat consumption. But I would expect farmers to do everything they can to minimise the requirement of it, e.g. by scaring away pigeons (and other crop pests).

If you have animals on land that isn't suitable for arable farming anyway then there is no land to trade off for vegan food, you could do away with the animals and gain no land on which to grow vegan food.

You continue to miss my point, so I will try to spell it out with a simple example. Read carefully this time because I won't bother explaining it again.

Imagine you have 1000 acres of land used for animal agriculture. Imagine that land is producing 100,000 calories worth of food every year (this number doesn't need to be accurate to reality, it is just for example).

Now suppose that you want to replace those animal-based calories with plant-based calories. You could do so with less than 200 acres of crops.

You do not need to convert the full 1000 acres of pastoral land into 1000 acres of arable land. You can pick the 200 acres of most-suitable land to grow crops on, and return 800 acres to nature.

The goal is not to replace all animal land with crop land. The goal is to replace all animal calories with plant calories, and far less land is needed to do that.

animals give us greater resilience and that's why humanity started domesticating animals in the first place.

Yes, before we had methods of producing huge excesses of plant-based foods, and the technology to preserve those foods.

What exactly are animals making us "resilient" against now? We can comfortably preserve enough plant-based foods to survive off for several years.

I'd just like to recommend a book called "The great plant based con" by Jayne Buxton.

I'd rather read the opinions of experts than a business graduate who receives funding from Big Ag lobbying groups. For example:

https://www.who.int/europe/publications/i/item/WHO-EURO-2021-4007-43766-61591

A vegan diet isn't perfect, as that link makes clear. But people like Jayne Buxton will magnify the flaws with veganism and downplay or ignore the flaws with non-veganism. This is because she is being paid to push a certain agenda.

[-]

EnormousD@reddit

Wow you're really good at finding reasons to ignore information!

Sorry who is Jayne Buxton being paid by and what's the benefit to "big ag"? She does nothing but advocate for small farms in that book 😂 but of course you'll never know because you're going to ignore the big ag propaganda machine to preserve your precious echo chamber.

The WHO article you've linked really doesn't shed much light on anything other than people who eat alot of meat are unhealthy. Yeah that's not news, people who eat alot of anything are generally unhealthy. Says nothing about people who eat meat in moderate amounts alongside plants because they're the healthiest of all.

[-]

EmojiRepliesToRats@reddit

Wow you're really good at finding reasons to ignore information!

I, a vegan, don't want to read a book written by an MBA on why I should be eating meat. I really don't think that should shock you.

Sorry who is Jayne Buxton being paid by and what's the benefit to "big ag"? She does nothing but advocate for small farms in that book

You came away from it with the idea that meat eating is sustainable, repeating the usual "small farms are good" rhetoric that ignores that 85% of farm animals in the UK are kept in ultra high density farms. Of course Big Ag benefits from people believing that.

As for who she's being paid by, I read that in a reddit comment after a quick google but wasn't able to substantiate it (that comment's source is down), so I may well be wrong about that.

you're going to ignore the big ag propaganda machine to preserve your precious echo chamber.

Did you read the WHO article in full? It is very much not an echo-chamber.

[-]

EnormousD@reddit

I, a vegan, don't want to read a book written by an MBA

Ah yes the same line of thinking the Soviets had when they got rid of all the farmers and intellectuals and banned any books that didn't align with their ideology.

You came away from it with the idea that meat eating is sustainable, repeating the usual "small farms are good" rhetoric that ignores that 85% of farm animals in the UK are kept in ultra high density farms.

Mate I'm a high street butcher from a small town, I deal personally with the farmers I buy from, I see their farms whenever I go out for a walk. I neither work with nor eat any of the meat you're talking about. I never once advocated for intensive farming, I actively advocate against it because it's immoral and more to the point it creates a bad end product! Eating the right meat from the right places in the right amount is not only sustainable its the best way to keep a balanced ecosystem. Old school farmers know this and that's why they practice it.

I'll also add that the 85% you're talking about, the vast majority of that is chicken which not only inflates the numbers (IE number of animals vs actual biomass) but chickens have a significantly lower carbon footprint than other livestock. I remind you that beef, lamb and even pigs raised under the right circumstances can be carbon negative or at least neutral and that these methods of farming are pretty much standard in this country.

I did read the WHO article in full yes, twice. It cites it's sources for some of the few claims it makes but it doesn't actually make a very convincing case for veganism or that omnivore diets are bad. It's whole argument of 14 pages can be boiled down to "fat people and people who don't eat alot of vegetables have the most diseases and people who are fat and don't eat alot of vegetables generally eat meat. Vegans and vegetarians are usually skinnier and therefore have less diseases (except strokes and nutrient deficiencies)"

I really wish you'd read that book... you could be doing yourself a favour.

[-]

EmojiRepliesToRats@reddit

Ah yes the same line of thinking the Soviets had when they got rid of all the farmers and intellectuals and banned any books that didn't align with their ideology.

Now you're just being ridiculous. I'm not interested in hearing her opinion on it because she has zero expertise in the subject. I have probably read more about it than she has.

Eating the right meat from the right places in the right amount is not only sustainable its the best way to keep a balanced ecosystem.

Source?

I remind you that beef, lamb and even pigs raised under the right circumstances can be carbon negative or at least neutral and that these methods of farming are pretty much standard in this country.

Source? (Specifically, cows and sheep). I'm pretty confident that the study you're referencing does not consider that if it weren't grazed then the land wouldn't just be grassland. Plus, that being carbon neutral doesn't mean that it is good for local ecosystems, nor for the climate (since the primary problematic GHG emission of ruminants is methane).

[-]

EnormousD@reddit

The article you've linked is such a massive crock of shit! Such a cursory glossing over of the entire topic! Basically just boils down to "yeah so if we just come up with a way to make plant agriculture more efficient we wouldn't need to use all this land for animals"

No mention of how that's going to be possible or anything. Just an absurd notion that to preserve biodiversity we have to get rid of all the farm animals??? Yes agriculture does drive down biodiversity but there's nothing worse for biodiversity than cutting everything back and replacing it with a bunch of soy, rice and wheat.

I haven't got time to interrogate all the cited sources of information within that article as I'd like to but when the entire article hinges on the idea that we can make plant agriculture more efficient somehow then why would I trust it?

[-]

EmojiRepliesToRats@reddit

The article you've linked is such a massive crock of shit!

I just linked it for the stats, not the conclusions.

Yes agriculture does drive down biodiversity but there's nothing worse for biodiversity than cutting everything back and replacing it with a bunch of soy, rice and wheat.

Again, look at the stats on that page. If we stop using land for animal agriculture we would not have to increase the land used for plant-based agriculture by the same amount. Animal agriculture is incredibly inefficient at turning land outputs into human-consumable energy.

the entire article hinges on the idea that we can make plant agriculture more efficient somehow

Plant-based agriculture is already far more efficient than animal agriculture. For example, a cow has to consume 25 calories to produce 1 calorie of beef.

[-]

Eyewiggle@reddit

Killing the natural inhabitants/animals of the land that have balanced themselves for millions of years and evolved just fine without our interference, to introduce and protect none native genetically controlled animals, for your own benefit, is the definition of selfish.

One persons pest, is not another persons pest. Pests are a perception.

It’s humans saying hey, we as a species, cause more destruction and problems than anything but to feel better about killing things for my own benefit, I need to really lay it on thick about the cow killing moles.

Poor little bastards did nothing but exist underground. Everything is just trying to survive.

[-]

Chidoribraindev@reddit

That's such a bad "definition" lol

[-]

Eyewiggle@reddit

How so?

[-]

Chidoribraindev@reddit

initially it was tongue in cheek because it was so long and unapplicable to other situations.

But.... It has nothing to do with selfish. Farmers provide food not just for themselves, they sell it to you and I for survival. We owe our existence to this practice. Also, moles are not eating "invasive species." They eat plants and mess up the soil.

So the purpose and reason are both wrong in what you said.

I find it more selfish to impose values that will degrade someone's livelihood just so you, who have nothing to do with this farm, feel better.

[-]

Eyewiggle@reddit

I never said moles eat invasive species?

They (moles, native species) are being killed to make way for cattle etc (none native species).

Regardless of who farming benefits, humans are very destructive and selfish. It doesn’t mean it isn’t useful. It just means that humans do X to benefit themselves and nothing else but that.

[-]

timeforknowledge@reddit

for your own benefit, is the definition of selfish.

Try speaking to a fox, they'll kill every chicken in a coop and just take one.

Now that's the definition of selfish

[-]

Apple-Pigeon@reddit

That's instinct, not selfishness. If we didn't raise animals for slaughter or products it wouldn't be an issue.

[-]

timeforknowledge@reddit

What would we eat? I think meat/ varied diet is important for humans

[-]

ArrivalAlternative14@reddit

Varied diet, yes. Meat, no.

[-]

slade364@reddit

So, stop killing those moles who have evolved over millions of years to be here.

But stop eating what we've evolved to eat over millions of years?

[-]

jesussays51@reddit

Not sure why you are being downvoted. I’m vegan and am not dead.

[-]

ArgumentativeNutter@reddit

but we do so your argument makes no sense

[-]

Eyewiggle@reddit

Foxes can’t speak human, so I doubt the conversation would be fruitful but calling a fox selfish, did make me laugh.

They don’t have the capacity to get why all that stuff they can eat, is in box, in its habitat. Instinct takes over. Its like having a pantry of food in the middle of a population of starving humans and telling them not to touch

People who have chickens and other poultry in the country or places where foxes are known to be, should make sure they’re adequately secured and have a working dog to protect them

[-]

timeforknowledge@reddit

should make sure they’re adequately secured and have a working dog to protect them

And a shotgun / rifle

Foxes will kill lambs too

[-]

Routine_Ad1823@reddit

You're so close to getting it.

The reasons these pests are a problem is because farmers and gamekeepers have wiped out their predators to protect their own stock.

[-]

futurenotgiven@reddit

so we should bring wolves back?

[-]

BppnfvbanyOnxre@reddit

And bears, spice up a picnic no end knowing there are proper predators roaming free

[-]

weesteve123@reddit

Right so we should just stop farming then. I suppose civilisation isn't all that great anyway.

[-]

TheLastTsumami@reddit

Farmers: I want to harness the power of nature to earn a living. Also I want to destroy any nature that affects my profit.

[-]

Interesting_Try8375@reddit

Farming isn't nature though

[-]

Routine_Ad1823@reddit

Totally. Civilisation would collapse with grouse shooting

[-]

PolskiHussar548@reddit

That’s not farmers though, Grouse shooting and other hunting is almost entirely from the upper class landed gentry, your average farmer isn’t hunting grouse.

[-]

veggiejord@reddit

So can we get rid of that shite at least? Reforest large tracts of moorland.

[-]

Routine_Ad1823@reddit

That's why I said and gamekeepers.

[-]

ConstantineGSB@reddit

You cant just take things that have a vague connection and put them in the same bracket ffs.

"boy racers are a real problem in the city so, lets ban bus drivers"

[-]

Smithstar89@reddit

Magpies are the fucking worst. They're everywhere (at least in Lancashire) and go for sheep's eyes 👹

[-]

Jay-Seekay@reddit

Don’t the animals get put down anyway in the end

[-]

shagssheep@reddit

Yea but at least if it’s eaten it’s served a purpose (if that purpose is justified is a whole other argument) if you put something down because it had tb or broke its leg in a rabbits burrow it’s died for literally no reason

[-]

Jay-Seekay@reddit

I just find it a bit odd that it’s sad to put animals down up until they decide it’s the right time to put them down and then it’s not as sad?

I think the only difference here is that one makes a profit and one doesn’t.

[-]

EnormousD@reddit

Nobody said it wasn't sad to slaughter an animal though, its just a justifiable trade off. The benefits to humanity of animal agriculture outweigh the psychological cost of killing animals.

I'm a butcher and I also shoot game and I've always tried to honour every animals life by not wasting a scrap. A wasted life is a much greater tragedy than a well lived useful life with purpose and meaning.

[-]

bellwaa8@reddit

I'm not sure it's always a justifiable trade-off. The amount of land and resources it takes to raise cattle for meat, for example, by large industrial farming, is not a good economic trade-off.

If people were to eat less meat but if they did have meat, it was high quality and as sustainably raised as possible, then they would be better off.

[-]

jjramrod@reddit

Well yeah, it's economic, sure, but if you've raised a cow to kill and eat, at least it had use and purpose... if you've killed it and it serves no purpose, then it's more of a shame, and yeah, money is wasted too...

[-]

Jay-Seekay@reddit

In the majority of cases it’s not for the farmer to eat. All I’m saying is to stop all the fake sadness around putting animals down at the wrong time, when it’s ultimately about money lost. Just want some honesty is all.

[-]

OldManChino@reddit

No, you want a create a caricature in your mind that sits with your beliefs.

[-]

Jay-Seekay@reddit

Maybe? I’m just saying either way they die. One gives profit, one doesn’t. One makes them sad, one doesn’t.

[-]

OldManChino@reddit

My dad was a farmer and he was definitely sad about all his animals when something happened to them. You just prefer it if they are sociopaths in your mind, it makes reality easier for you to habdle

[-]

Jay-Seekay@reddit

No mate I’m sorry, but I got this idea from Clarksons Farm believe it or not, I know it’s not representative of all. I can’t remember the details, but there was an episode where he was getting upset because piglets were dying, but then the next episode he was waying up the cost of keeping a cow alive that couldn’t get pregnant. He was like “I love her, but it’ll cost me an extra 30 quid to keep her alive” and in my head that £30 is nothing to him. They did keep her alive in the end, but it does show that to run a farm you have to consider costs and you don’t want to waste food on an unproductive animal do you.

It was in that moment I was like “hmm this feels odd” but I seem to be alone in that mentality. Like it’s sad for one, but about profit for the other. I know baby-anythings dying is going to always be sad, but the inconsistency there is what makes me see it this way. Blame clarkson for that one

[-]

Deano_Martin@reddit

Do you know any farmers? Farmers love their animals and they are sad either way when they have to go but that’s life

[-]

shagssheep@reddit

Well I’ve put cattle down and lost calves and I always care so does my dad and I know it upsets my neighbours to loose animals. Just because you don’t have any experience of something doesn’t make you an expert on other people’s lives and emotions.

If you had any farming experience you’d know exactly what I mean

[-]

Jay-Seekay@reddit

That’s fair and I don’t have any experience you’re right. And I can understand it’s upsetting to lose an animal you’ve raised and cared for, and put time into. If you feel sad when they go to the abbetoir as well then there’s no issue here for me. My point is that both are sad right now

[-]

Deano_Martin@reddit

If the animal has to be put down because of TB for example then the carcass had to be destroyed and so it’s a waste. That’s the difference.

[-]

Particular-Set5396@reddit

I grew up on a farm, held a cow’s intestines in my arms while the vet was performing a c section on the right side, held a horse’s head while the vet was putting it down because it had its back legs sliced by wire it got tangled in, I fed countless cows, milked a bunch more, led them to pasture, weaned a bunch of yearlings, assisted the vet to castrate horses, drove a tractor, killed a bunch of chickens for lunch, helped cows to calf, drove cattle to the slaughterhouse, packed their meat to sell it, etc, etc.

But PLEASE, tell me how “I just lived there”.

[-]

sc0ttydo0@reddit

Population control is sometimes necessary, I agree.

The macabre display in OP'S pics is not necessary. There are better, less seemingly-psychotic, ways of disposing of the bodies, without flaunting the corpses of some vermin you heroically slaughtered.

[-]

CatchaRainbow@reddit

Get rid of animal agriculture and nothing dies needlessly. Simple.

[-]

Ok-Potato-8278@reddit

Right, except for all the pests of arable agriculture

[-]

A_posh_idiot@reddit

I mean, everyone who would starve might classify as needles, but hey I’m sure your food wills still magically appear on your plate then

[-]

Zippyfrood@reddit

Deer are an absolute menace in Scotland and additional cull proposals are too slow to effectively reduce their numbers.

Culls need to be 200,000+ a year.

Tree damage, crop damage, tick infestation, all due to excess deer levels.

Venison is super tasty, healthy and sustainable.

Reintroduce a pack of wolves to the Cairngorms, a pack in Caithness and a pack in the Glencoe area and that should even things out a bit

[-]

ArrivalAlternative14@reddit

Wahhh farmers being inconvenienced by actual wildlife. Gotta protect their unethical artificially bred source of income

[-]

rumblemania@reddit

0 comments outside this post in the last 100 days lol

[-]

alecmuffett@reddit

I am also a country person - grew up amongst three farms in Worcestershire - and although I now enjoy Countryfile and love watching moles as part of wildlife, they are considered a pest and economic risk to cattle:

https://www.pestcontrolberkshire.com/blog/moles-and-cattle-dont-mix

…Which is the usual reason they are caught and killed in certain fields.

[-]

PM_ME_UR_SUMMERDRESS@reddit

I think rich people are a pest. Can I kill them?

[-]

alecmuffett@reddit

The question is more: how willing are you to accept the generally accepted social consequences of doing so?

[-]

PM_ME_UR_SUMMERDRESS@reddit

The point is, whilst they’re a pest, they should be killed and disposed of humanely.

[-]

alecmuffett@reddit

"…disposed of talpidly." - fixed that for you.

Actually, moles are vicious little buggers. You should go read up about what they do to each other.

[-]

PM_ME_UR_SUMMERDRESS@reddit

Talpidly

When I google this, nothing comes up. I say “humanely” because we are humans and we are supposed to have empathy.

It doesn’t matter.

[-]

Awellknownstick@reddit

Ok there's village country people and actual country people who use the land other than a garden. You have no idea the damage they can cause

[-]

Particular-Set5396@reddit

I grew up on a farm, but go on.

[-]

winobeaver@reddit

you can tell human selective breeding on livestock animals must've gone too far if the poor cows are injuring their legs on molehills like they're some kind of mountain

[-]

Routine_Ad1823@reddit

I totally agree. They can absolutely trash the land - leaving old machinery in rivers to shore up the banks, overuse of pesticides and fertilisers fucking the local water, plastic wrap and twine strewn everywhere.

[-]

Deano_Martin@reddit

Where’s this comically bad farm? I have never in my life (living in countryside, working for multiple farmers and studying a bsc in agriculture) seen old machinery in rivers. Farming laws in the UK are some of the strictest in the world. Farms are struggling financially so they all want in for the sustainable farming incentive (SFI). Pesticide and fertiliser prices are through the roof, there’s definitely no overuse happening. The laws about spraying are very strict, farmers don’t risk it. They keep away from water courses as the law states which is why you’ll notice that the crop at the edge of the field isn’t great compared to the rest. And plastic and twine everywhere? Everywhere where? If they leave it all over the fields then it’ll get caught in their machinery and fuck it up. Plastic wrap is for silage bales and twine for hay or straw so when they’re unwrapped they don’t leave the plastic in case the animals eat or get caught in it.

So how do you want to eat?

[-]

Routine_Ad1823@reddit

I've seen the cars shoring up banks in the Yorkshire Dales and seen farm trash everywhere I've visited in the UK.

As for the run off - I'm very surprised that you don't know about how much of an issue it if you've done a degree in farming.

This is paywalled but I'm sure you can easily find many similar articles - https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg25834440-900-farming-destroyed-uk-rivers-to-meet-food-demand-heres-how-we-fix-it/

[-]

Deano_Martin@reddit

Cars. Not machinery like you said.

Farm trash in the farm yards themselves or farm trash in the fields, woodlands etc? And what is “farm trash”? You said “strewn everywhere”, in my opinion this is highly exaggerated. Like I said, if it’s everywhere then it’d be causing problems in their machinery. Farmers look after their land.

I do know about these things going into rivers. But again, the laws in the UK about spraying and what can be sprayed are incredibly strict. Farmers mostly adhere to these rules as they don’t want to risk the fines and prison while also wanting the subsidies from SFI which include spraying away from water and having a grass buffer at the edge of fields. Of course, like in everything ever, there are some people who do things wrong and don’t care, but that’s far from everyone.

The UK does pesticides much better than other countries which is the worry of importing. I believe there are/were talks of importing cereals from India where they use methods and chemicals that are banned here.

Farming isn’t perfect, there’s a lot to balance. Organic is basically impossible for this population size. What do you, and from how you’re talking I assume you’re an agriculture expert, suggest farmers do?

Could you not find a more credible, not pay walled argument from a more agriculture orientated source? New scientist seems very new age and bias according to some.

[-]

Routine_Ad1823@reddit

I genuinely had no idea that New Scientist isn't considered credible. How about -

https://post.parliament.uk/research-briefings/post-pn-0661/

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/apr/19/most-uk-dairy-farms-ignoring-pollution-rules-as-manure-spews-into-rivers

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-63961659

To be honest, the fact that you're not aware it's probably makes me wonder if you're arguing in bad faith.

[-]

Deano_Martin@reddit

I am aware. I have literally told you that I am aware and that I hold 3 qualifications in relation to this which explicitly teach about pesticides and rivers. You specifically said in your initial comment “pesticides and fertilisers” whereas these sources are talking about manure. I’ve been arguing about pesticides and fertilisers for use in arable agriculture not manure from livestock agriculture. So that’s two things you’ve changed: machinery becomes cars and pesticides become manure. The livestock issue is real and I know about it.

[-]

Routine_Ad1823@reddit

You've honestly never walked through woods and had old peasant feed equipment everywhere, or rolls of ancient, rusty barbed wire, or walked through the moors and had come across bundles of twine and plastic strewn around?

Cars and machinery are essentially the same thing (cars are machines) - they shouldn't be in rivers! I can't believe I'm having to argue about this! It seems like a bit of no brainer to me.

Pesticides and fertiliser - okay, my bad - I misspoke. Maybe 'farming runoff' - covers it better? I meant the liquid waste from intensive farming that damages rivers. Whether it is diesel, or manure, or pesticides - it's all the same difference. We would rightly be up in arms if a factory was trashing our rivers, wouldn't we?

I'm sure many farmers do take care over these things - but the bad ones shouldn't get a free pass, just because people are like, "Well, without food you'd die!"

[-]

Eyewiggle@reddit

And why is the plastic wrap and twine there in the first place? It didn’t grow from the ground.

The only ones doing unnatural things, are humans. Which is why I think more respect is needed when dealing with animals who are just leading their natural lives. The easiest thing is to inhumanely trap and kill stuff because it’s inconveniencing you

[-]

Routine_Ad1823@reddit

I agree with you! I was making light of OP's phrasing.

[-]

Quadroon3443@reddit

I work on a golf course and moles are a nightmare, I absolutely despise the things.

[-]

Particular-Set5396@reddit

Golf courses are an aberration. They are environmental disasters.

[-]

wowsomuchempty@reddit

Thank you.

[-]

disasterly213@reddit

I are country human too, 4 legs good, 2 legs bad. Baaah

[-]

dannydrama@reddit

I'm in the country too and the farmer is fucking useless, spends more time shooting and dog hunting than actually farming.

Someone seems to be waging war because I've driven past his cars a couple of times and they've been fucked, sometimes lots of shouting as someone follows them on the hunt, a couple of dogs ended up being poisoned, taking shifts to film them for long stretches, damaging hay bales.

[-]

Deano_Martin@reddit

You live in the country but you don’t work in the country. Different things. You have the perspective of a moaning villager. Are you actually sure the farmers are shooting or do they just have a field banger? Perhaps the farmer has a terrible pest problem.

[-]

arkhane89@reddit

Whilst I agree with the sentiment, there is a specific reason that the moles are killed. The soils from the mole hills can ruin the hay/haylage/silage made from the field as the soil gets into the bales and can introduce bacteria and cause spoil

[-]

theroch_@reddit

I take it you don’t try and maintain a hay meadow then?

[-]

Awellknownstick@reddit

By 'They' I mean Moles.

Having grown up in Farming lands in Norfolk and Suffolk.

[-]

OlParky@reddit

Sadly it is important to keep on top of the mole populations, espically in fields that have live stock (Cows, Sheep) these animals will step onto mole hills, leg goes through, they trip and break their leg.

See it all the time.

[-]

andyb12@reddit

Try baling or mowing mole hills. It's not too bad until a stone flys through your window and soil is bad for animals...

[-]

random_invisible@reddit

People move to my neighborhood and complain about the noise from the planes. From the international airport that's been here longer than most of the houses. Our local bar is literally called the Flight Path. But every week on nextdoor there's some dipshit asking what can be done about the noise.

Idk Karen, maybe DON'T BUY A HOUSE NEXT TO THE AIRPORT

[-]

thegreyman1986@reddit

Probably not to “protect the sensibilities of city people” … that’s one of the most idiotic things I’ve read today, and this is Reddit!

It’s because they will damage crops and/or livestock. Those are a farmers fields. You know how everyone keeps complaining about how expensive food is? Well, it would be more expensive if this kind of thing didn’t happen.

[-]

original12345678910@reddit

let 👏 people 👏 kill 👏 moles

not that complicated is it, city slickers? we don't trample on your rights so don't trample on ours

[-]

Blind_Warthog@reddit

Lmao “it’s our right to kill moles!”. Get fucked.

[-]

n_that@reddit

This thread is a massive endorsement of my belief that farmers are largely nobheads

[-]

Gloomy-Sink-7019@reddit

Or they just don't live in a very comfy and cushioned padded life.

Not everyone can be a coke sniffing city dweller who's never seen a field in their life

[-]

Blind_Warthog@reddit

Nuance

[-]

EnormousD@reddit

Is this day 1 of the hunger strike then?

[-]

n_that@reddit

Farmers: if you try and touch my inheritance I will institute a famine

Also Farmers: why does everybody think we're dickheads

[-]

Blind_Warthog@reddit

Shocked Pikachu face

[-]

EnormousD@reddit

I'm no farmer, just tired of people taking their food for granted. Pay what it's actually worth and not just rock bottom supermarket prices. Also why tax the farms out of existence and then act surprised when people are upset??

[-]

evthrowawayverysad@reddit

Country people's 'way of life' is devastating Britain's natural spaces and pushing our species to the brink of extinction. So yes strapping dead wildlife to fences is fucked up. It's also not the norm; I've lived in a rural area all of my adult life and never seen this.

[-]

Matthewrotherham@reddit

> Why though? To protect the sensibilities of city people?

Because extermination of pests is fine. Displaying corspes is not.

''sensibilites of city folk'' how about common decency, you contrarian...

[-]

spursjb395@reddit

And those who move next door to pubs...

[-]

RugbyEdd@reddit

Because we know better and have better ways to communicate. I think some people need to understand that tradition isn't an excuse to dismiss morality.

[-]

ShaftManlike@reddit

They do that in cities too. Move next to or above well known but small music venues and then complain about the noise. This happened to Night and Day in Manchester but at least they won.

Night & Day Cafe: Venue owner blames council for noise row - BBC News https://share.google/MqxrfbA76QvKXt2kg

[-]

SensitivePotato44@reddit

Sure, let’s let them go badger baiting and cock fighting as well, but we mustn’t let those brown people hang on to their barbaric traditions must we?

[-]

Mediocre_earthlings@reddit

Fuck up

[-]

rufio259@reddit

Just because someone's chosen profession is to deal in death, why should that be subjected onto anyone else?

Not all traditions are correct and not everything should be done in the name of tradition and it's got bugger all to do with Londoners. It's just grim.

And before you say something like 'keep to your city and I'll stick the countryside', the world isn't reduced to two sorts of people.

It's closer to catching an unwarranted lung full of ripe road kill when you drive along with the window open. You didn't ask for it, it's gross and you're glad to move along and get away from the stench... Except for rural types who love that smell, because it's the way of the countryside, right?

[-]

StabbyMcStabbedface@reddit

Indeed country people do have their way, that doesn’t mean to say that they should stop the land management, purely a suggestion that some archaic traditions be slightly changed, after all tourism is a big uncle for rural communities too.

[-]

Gloomy-Sink-7019@reddit

And if tourists want to travel to rural communities they have to accept what happens.

We shouldn't sanitise the countryside for the sake of some Londoners

[-]

StabbyMcStabbedface@reddit

That’s quite possibly one of the worst responses to justify on why it’s still done and also why there’s backlash to conservation of our countryside.

[-]

Gloomy-Sink-7019@reddit

Because city dwellers don't like the reality of life?

What are you on about. If I told you where your food came from I'd probably need 999 on speed dial.

Dopey bastard

[-]

Proof_Drag_2801@reddit

if you’re a tenant farmer it shows the landowner that you’re looking after the land.

Who told you that nonsense? It's easier to spot the mole hills or lack thereof. Mole hills are obvious from a long way away. Moles are only visible from close up.

It's just the mole man making sure he gets paid.

[-]

JackDrawsStuff@reddit

Couldn’t unscrupulous tenants just buy dead moles on Amazon and use those?

[-]

Runaroundheadless@reddit

I think it’s decent. As decent as putting out bird seed. I doubt that the remaining moles give shit. Too busy probably. Living and making moles. As we all are. ‘cept pandas maybe.

[-]

Weird-Statistician@reddit

Yeah just WhatsApp a photo to the landowner. I bet they stink after a couple of days

[-]

Space_Cowby@reddit

i saw simialr with rabbits 20 odd years ago. They where using ferrets to chase the rabbits I assume, they where then hung on a fence. Not the view you expected from a meetign room but there was a LOT of burrows under buildings and walls etc.

[-]

LegendryLuke@reddit

Usually farmers hang anything from moles to rats etc to attract Birds of prey.

[-]

Albertjweasel@reddit

No they don’t, where have you got this from?

[-]

bhawker87@reddit

Don't be ridiculous. The mole catcher has hung then up so the farmer knows how many he caught and how much to pay. The farmers like birds is prey on their land. I even used to wild hack 40+ at a time gyr and gyr/peregrines on a bloody dukes grouse estate, the head keeper would sit watching them in absolute wonder.

[-]

elnegroik@reddit

To the uninitiated, both of these claims seem equally plausible.

[-]

bhawker87@reddit

And yet I'm a country lad, who got into falconry at a young age, ended up moving from falconry centres into a large breeding facility hybridising falcons for the middle Eastern market. The falcons are wild hacked which produces better falcons. The market used to be for hunting but has switched primarily to falcon races in the UAE. the change came mainly after the Iraq war as dwarves of land that were hunted became unavailable. Traditionally the birds were hybridised to hunt houbara. We now need hybrids to create a hunting bird that is superior to the native sakers, thereby removing the need for wild taken birds. Every keeper I've worked with or lived with has loved watching birds of prey and know their vital role in the ecosystem. They are beneficial, even for keepers. Fun fact, I was once dating the head keeper of a large estate... The same keeper who has chased me for years for poaching on his land, he was not impressed.

[-]

Teleopsis@reddit

Even the keepers on Grouse moors who shoot hen harriers?

[-]

bhawker87@reddit

Very much a anachronistic myth. You do still get the odd twat that will shoot birds of prey but by that token If the exception is the rule, the rspb and RSPCA should be demonised just as much. I have known them both disturb nests, kill birds (both captive and wild) even destroy whole populations of species (think of the corncrake.) The majority of keepers know more about ecology than the average Reddit user. It's their livelihood. The keepers daughter I dated actually set up a falconry service on the same estate her father keepers. Offering various things such as hawk walks, wedding services (owls, hawks etc being ring bearers) Those in the situation are far more aware of the reality than those that read about the situation from media that rarely delves into reality

[-]

Teleopsis@reddit

Not an anachronistic myth at all: plenty reports of, for example, GPS tagged hen harriers mysteriously vanishing over grouse moors in recent years. Here’s a recent RSPB report for you. https://www.rspb.org.uk/media-centre/hen-harriers-missing-killed-reaches-new-high

No argument that the average keeper might know more ecology than the average Reddit user but maybe don’t make that assumption about individual Reddit users.

[-]

bhawker87@reddit

The rspb will deem any bird they can't find as persecuted. This is the same rspb that was caught trying to set up falconers by paying people to plant illegal birds in their aviaries. The same ones who used falsified evidence to start operation seahare. The ones who couldn't tell the difference between a black gyr and a peregrine, who smashed up the keels of dozens of falcons after refusing to listen to me when I stated the nets weren't safe, the ones who stressed and killed my sparrowhawk, the ones who claimed a peregrine is worth £300,000. The ones. The ones there guy shorrock would walk into DEFRA offices (bearing in mind he's a civilian) and take sensitive data of members of the public without oversight. The same rspb who will find a peregrine in a trap, take it out, lower it down the rock face then put it back IN the trap for a photoshoot. They have actively stated they want falconry eliminated despite falconry having been one of the most beneficial factors in bird of prey conservation? That rspb?

[-]

Teleopsis@reddit

Ok so you don’t like the RSPB. Doesn’t make their data wrong though. What about the police? Why have they set up a harrier task force if, as you claim, this is not a problem? Why can I find so many news stories about keepers being prosecuted for… shooting hen harriers?

I’m quite happy to believe that most keepers nowadays are on the side of the angels and I can simultaneously think that there seems to be a problem with this specific species. Your whataboutism is not convincing I’m afraid.

[-]

bhawker87@reddit

The police had to be investigated by the IPCC as did DEFRA. DEFRA were previously found to have used falsified evidence back in the day when it was the DOE. the issue is data is easily used and misrepresented. A birds GPS stops and without evidence they claim it was persecuted, this isn't relying on any data other than the GPS stopped. They do not rely on evidence, but simply making spurious statements and allowing the ambiguous wording to mislead people. The reason you done so many stories is because they push the misrepresented data in order to have a campaign and generate more income and to push their ideologies on the public through deceit. They claim peregrines are worth £300,000 yet when we relied on that figure for claiming damages they denied it. They never announce for natural circumstance or the damage they themselves cause. It's not whataboutism, it's having spent a decade fighting and winning against them and DEFRA, changing the law after they were utilising ultra-vires laws and illuminating how their persecution led to innocent people being imprisoned

[-]

Teleopsis@reddit

Alright mate. Calm down. Maybe you could let me have a source for the IPCC investigation of the police and the investigation of DEFRA? What did they conclude?

[-]

bhawker87@reddit

First for historic reference you can look into how DEFRA and the rspb (then the DOE) were trying to hire Mark Robb to plant illegal birds in people's aviaries. If I remember correctly it was even televised on the cook report and it's even on YouTube. The investigation from 2008 was in response to operation seahare. There was multiple raids, I myself was the only person on site when 26 coppers and the rspb arrived and started making the birds. There was even an incident down south where the rspbb needed the blood sample from a merlin and suggested to the vets that they kill the bird and drain the blood (burdens premises) You say to calm down, I am. However having watched these people kill my birds and inflict massive suffering on them, that shit sticks with you for life. I was even told on the day that if I resisted at all I would be locked up immediately and have no oversight in any way. I have the IPCC report in my paperwork I don't know if it was published publicly however. The law that was found to be ultra-vires was regarding hybrids, it was found that the law was imposed without consultation hence beyond the remit of the department, the same law was then used to penalise many many people. You asked...I answered. The rspb are not in any way good for birds of prey

[-]

Teleopsis@reddit

Help me out here.

[-]

bhawker87@reddit

Just to clarify, I was a member of the rspb growing up, I even worked with them on projects. It was when I saw them kill and maim dozens of my birds that I realised the truth and through the legal defence and offence discovered a multitude of unsavoury truths about them. The goal is admirable however it has been destroyed by greed and ignorance

[-]

testing-attention-pl@reddit

This guy falconry’s. A very good insight.

[-]

Benificial-Cucumber@reddit

Why is their comment ridiculous? They suggested it's to attract birds of prey, you said farmers like birds of prey on their land.

If farmers want birds of prey around, attracting them is a good thing, no?

[-]

bhawker87@reddit

Because it's common practice of mole catchers. I know several myself. Not only that attracting birds of prey through feeding them isn't beneficial. It's unsustainable. You need to attract them through good ecological management. Otherwise the species being attracted may well rise to unsustainable levels and then become an issue

[-]

Eyuplove_@reddit

Ok I understood the first three sentences

[-]

allthemodsarenonces@reddit

I think I had a stroke

[-]

Eyuplove_@reddit

Just read it in Gerard's voice from Clarksons farm

[-]

UnderstandingFit8324@reddit

What's the going rate for a dead mole?

[-]

Proof_Drag_2801@reddit

The actual truth - because there's all sorts of bollocks on here about "tenant farmers" and wealthy landowners and politicking and suchlike. People will chat about things they know nothing of and other, similar types will nod their heads sagely and agree with them.

Anyhow...

Mole trapping is quite an art. It takes time, equipment, skill and patience. If you haven't tried it, I wish you the best of luck.

Moles are a nightmare if you're trying to make silage or hay, or just keep a grazing field productive - they aren't controlled because they make things look messy.

In the same way that it's easier to get a locksmith to sort your door out, it's also much easier to get a mole-man in to catch the moles.

Now, there's something of a challenge around work done and payment.

The mole-man, working alone, needs to be able to evidence that he's caught moles so you can pay him for however many he's rid you of.

You need a way to know that the wiley old mole man isn't showing everyone the same twenty moles and making a fortune ripping everyone else off.

This circle is squared by him hanging the moles on your fence.

You pay him for the ones he leaves on your wire.

Everyone else can see the moles you've had left for you and you therefore can't squirm out of paying him. Similarly, everyone will see that the twenty that used to be on your neighbour's wire are now on yours and the mole man is asking for payment.

[-]

Candid-Bike-9165@reddit

I am a mole and I live in a hole

[-]

-b_i_n_g_u_s-@reddit

Not anymore 😢

[-]

disasterly213@reddit

This is the only correct answer

[-]

SomeWomanFromEngland@reddit

There’s only one way to get rid of a mole…

[-]

Runaroundheadless@reddit

Mind how you go.

[-]

LargePlums@reddit

I am a mole, now I’m strung up here whole.

[-]

SaltShakerXL@reddit

diggy, diggy hole

[-]

StandardBanger@reddit

Sorry for your loss 🙏🏼

[-]

SuperSparSpartan@reddit

Holy moly, it’s a mole using Reddit

[-]

allaboutevelouise@reddit

Why not just put them in a sack/bin bag?

[-]

PsychologicalClue6@reddit

That is sad and appalling.

[-]

rinomartino@reddit

Mole jerky!

[-]

bhawker87@reddit

This was the case involving Mark Robb for historical context and he was the same breeder they then tried to set up with falsified evidence in 2008

https://youtu.be/LWi7sHRWKzQ?si=_9cq_GONrOWqvJUe

[-]

Normal-Ad2587@reddit

It's just traditional.

Mole catcher's used to be a legitimate profession as they can spread diseases throughout livestock. If a particular farmer was your customer and he was out when you were doing your rounds, you just hung them on his fence so he knows how much to pay you. Bit like your window cleaner leaving you a note in your letterbox to say they've been.

It's either a traditional mole catcher doing as above or the farmer himself but just carrying on the tradition of displaying them.

[-]

Eyewiggle@reddit

It’s not diseases that are the issue. Moles don’t come into contact with anything as they live underground. It’s the holes they leave

[-]

ChickenTikkaMasalla_@reddit

Do you often talk on subjects you have no idea about?

[-]

BigDaddySpez@reddit

Look like it 😂☺️

[-]

Normal-Ad2587@reddit

They absolutely do.

Similar to badgers, they don't go around kissing cattle 😂. There's other ways of spreading diseases such as urine and droppings.

[-]

ArgumentativeNutter@reddit

moles spread tb, your argument that they live entirely underground is absurd

[-]

Beithyr@reddit

I love that they keep this tradition going!

[-]

murd3rsaurus@reddit

So given that moles are insect eaters and won't eat plants, why do people have them killed? That question has rattled around the back of my brain for a while

I always assumed the tunneling was basically free tilling for the soil

[-]

FighterJock412@reddit

Their tunneling fucks with the root systems of crops and grass, which can screw up silage. And silage is very important to farmers as it's essential for cows.

They also create uneven ground which can cause problems with machinery and injure animals.

[-]

murd3rsaurus@reddit

Thanks, I'm in Canada (mum's from the UK) and most of my experiences with moles are shoreline area with starnose moles, so not really dealing with a garden situation so I appreciate the insight. Most of my gardening is on an apartment building balcony so I'm pretty insulated from things like that

[-]

rev-fr-john@reddit

It's how you get paid, the person paying for the pest control sees you're doing your job and pays you. Farmers don't actually have the time to interact with most contractors, most contractors don't have the time to locate the farmer to interact with them, so another system was arranged, it's a reliable system that requires no maintenance or modification so it stays.

[-]

WhatsGoingOnThen@reddit

It’s been happening years and years, but now people I’m sure will be offended by it.

[-]

Bobjob_The3rd@reddit

They've been leaking farm secrets to the Russians!

[-]

Snout_Fever@reddit

This gave me flashbacks to a book series I read when I was younger where moles had their own underground society and this was called 'snouting' and was used as a rather savage public form of punishment and execution by religious mole extremists.

Apparently I was not ruined enough by Farthing Wood as a child and needed more animal related trauma.

[-]

VerankeAllAlong@reddit

judging by your username, you were quite affected by this??

[-]

Snout_Fever@reddit

Hahaha, I didn't even think of that - my username has nothing to do with that, it's a weird reference to Wes Anderson's Isle of Dogs.

Maybe I'm just missing my calling as a homicidal mole cultist.

[-]

VerankeAllAlong@reddit

best description of the books going, to be honest. you could describe the whole thing as two trilogies about internecine religious feudalism, involving pseudo-Christ, really weird family abuse, cannibalism, spiritual questlines, crusades and a plague, before even thinking to mention oh and they’re all moles

[-]

Snout_Fever@reddit

That fits my memory of those books precisely, I don't know what I was expecting when I started reading them, but it was not that! Thoroughly enjoyed them though.

I'd start re-reading them now, but having checked my bookcase in the meantime I remembered I let an ex borrow the first book years ago and never saw it again. Bugger!

[-]

4oclockinthemorning@reddit

Duncton Wood

[-]

Snout_Fever@reddit

Yup, that's the one! I still have all the books, I may read them again some day when I decide my life doesn't have enough disturbing animal related things in it.

[-]

MrDannySantos@reddit

I know, why? Why would someone share a profile screenshot of a landscape picture?

[-]

Orangesteel@reddit

In William Horwood novels (think Watership down with Moles) this was called snouting.

[-]

LadderMadeOfSticks@reddit

Shrikes (sometimes known as Butcherbirds) are known to do this with prey. But these look far too neat and there are far too many so it's almost certainly a trapper

[-]

Norman_debris@reddit

These mole hangings: far too accurate for Sandpeople.

[-]

space_coyote_86@reddit

I learned about these far too young thanks to Farthing Wood

[-]

LadderMadeOfSticks@reddit

Ah Farthing Wood. 30% animal facts, 30% animal misinformation, 30% trauma, 10% vaguely Christian allegory

[-]

MungoLloydy@reddit

I see this next door to where I live and it saddens me . I've just bought a 12 acre field and we love to see the moles increasing in numbers as they are natures drainage engineers . I'm making a sign for the gate saying mole sanctuary .

[-]

Stuspawton@reddit

I genuinely couldn't see what you were on about till I read the comments. I grew up in a large village that bordered farming lands, I now live a lot more rural setting (the kind of place where point to point horse racing takes place annually and there's a tractor showroom at the top of my street). Killing moles is a bit weird to me from my upbringing because we didn't kill anything but living through here, working in my job, etc. I understand why it's done. They can be lethal to cattle, especially if I cow inadvertently steps on a mole hill, it'll break their legs.

[-]

RookieDuckMan@reddit

There’s a mole and a vole

[-]

Character_Athlete877@reddit

Farmers tend to be nasty bastards

[-]

campionmusic51@reddit

it’s for jerky. mole strips. yum. very nutritious.

[-]

Kaz00ey@reddit

Sends a message

[-]

NuclearCleanUp1@reddit

fuck you nature

[-]

YSOSEXI@reddit

It's known as a farmers dream catcher, If you look closely you can see him and his sons asleep in the grass...

[-]

PraterViolet@reddit

Mole catchers have done this for hundreds of years. It shows how many they've caught. Growing up in the country it was a common sight.

[-]

Pure_Thanks_6195@reddit

Country folks be weird

[-]

SoggyWotsits@reddit

Not really, they’re just managing the land.

[-]

Outrageous-Ad5612@reddit

Is this just outside Buxton by chance

[-]

DafneOrlow@reddit

I mean.....it worked for Disney......

[-]

Long-Garlic@reddit

It’s a warning to other moles. Mole mafia. Don’t be coming round here moleing it up on our turf, capich?

[-]

Nebulousdbc@reddit

Nice crop job

[-]

indigo263@reddit

I saw the same thing when I was on holiday earlier this year up in the black isle area of Scotland. Was a bit of a grim sight, not gonna lie. It was just along from where we were staying so we asked the woman who had our holiday let and she said she thinks it's to attract birds of prey to the area to help manage pests. Apparently it used to be something that mole catchers did because they were paid for every mole they caught, so by hanging them the farmer knew how much to pay them and could see they actually did the job.

[-]

mizcello@reddit

They’re still paid by the mole so although a whatsapp is fine, it’s a good way for mole catchers to come, pin the moles and get payment at a later date so they don’t have to go across fields and land to find the farm. Then things eat them.

[-]

AnxiousCinephile40@reddit

Serial killer behaviour.

[-]

Runaroundheadless@reddit

That’d be fine by me if they just stuck to moles.

[-]

FighterJock412@reddit

It's pretty normal, actually.

[-]

Pinkmonkeypants@reddit

How awful

[-]

hullk78@reddit

Reminds of the dolls head woman from the amazing Skiningrove video. Dj, bless him, wonder what the Rebel Without an Innertube is up to these days?

skiningrove

[-]

When repling to submission/post please make genuine efforts to answer the question given. Please no jokes, judgements, etc.
Don't be a dick to each other. If getting heated, just block and move on.
This is a strictly no-politics subreddit!

Please help us by reporting comments that break these rules.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.