[escapedtothecountry]

And of course the previous owner surrounded two sides of the plot with conifers which are now huge - so we have plenty of pigeons too! If suddenly the shops ran out of food I think we could survive for a long time on the pigeons and rabbits if we had too! 

[JFDI]

Welcome to the rural idyll 

[bangbang]

Ahh BangBang, you're just a big old softy aren't you. 

Hard as nails me..

It's not the killing I object to it's the snaring method. and snares dont just get what you want rid of,
they entrap anything that gets tangled in them. Cats, birds ...etc.

[SteveHants]

I must have set thousands in my time and never caught anything else but rabbits. I can see how you might end up catching a cat, but the only bird I can see being large/daft enough is a pheasant.

[JFDI]

That is interesting.

[deepinthewoods]

 a well placed snare shouldnt catch a cat because cats dont hop. i was taught the idea with a snare was to catch the babbit mid-hop. so placed between spots.  i havent snared much and i havent heard a 'true' story about a cat being caught either. but good placement is the key.

[SteveHants]

a well placed snare shouldnt catch a cat because cats dont hop. i was taught the idea with a snare was to catch the babbit mid-hop. so placed between spots.  i havent snared much and i havent heard a 'true' story about a cat being caught either. but good placement is the key.

There was always the apocrophal 'boy who snared a cat' when I was growing up, but I never saw evidence for this. The reason I suppose you could catch one is that I often used to snare where rabbits pushed under a fence as well as tamps, but if I know cats, they would probably go over it...

[bangbang]

Check out the RSPCA's statistics on snares and the animals they inadvertantly trap!

[the great composto]

Clever trappers include a breakaway in the snare which allows animals you are not supposed to catch ( cats badgers etc) to get free.  It just releases the trap.

[Castle Farm]

Between now and winter try to find out where they are in the burrows and get a ferreter in.

[Brucklay]

I do realise rabbits are a problem and as I can't shoot (just not good enough) we rely on the cat to kill lots of the youngsters.


Having seen (given to me for rehabilitation by Tayside Police) a Buzzard with it's lower leg hanging by a tread of skin and stinking of gangrene, I wouldn't like to use a snare.


I am sure it's like anything else, if you experienced on where to locate them, set them etc they can do the job swiftly but not for the inexperience I would have thought.

[nicandem]

Check out the RSPCA's statistics on snares and the animals they inadvertantly trap!

and then take a pinch of salt and find something believable to read

[jonkil]

Snares, very effective but need placing and setting properly.
Always set them on the rabbits "run" or its "pad"... rabbits use those as their "motorways" so to speak.
Snares need frequent checking, at least 3 times daily so for me setting snares is a weekend activity.
.177 rimfire rifle wont destroy a carcase and it is quite usable if its shot with one of those, I regularly use a .22 rimfire rifle to hunt rabbits, a clean head shot is possible up to 50 metres away... and up to 100 metres with a .177 as the round is much flatter and of a higher velocity.
The trouble I have is that the rabbit population has been destroyed by foxes, although there is more now that we have been proactive with fox control over the last couple years.

[JFDI]

I used to be a supporter of the RSPCA until they got taken over by the extremists.  It's a shame that the abuse of their quasi official status gets in the way of the value they could add.  Our local vet sighs heavily when talking about the calls he gets about the odd lame sheep in a flock. 

Rabbit population around here dipped for the first time last year but is the biggest I've seen it this year.  An early evening walk round my ten acres and I'll see perhaps 30.  I can't get an FAC for my land because of I'm next to a main road, but my local gamekeeper, is very down on the .17HMR beloved of the firearms officer (is that the same as a .177?) because its very expensive and very noisy because of its velocity.  He reckons its great at long distance but very destructive at 100/150m.  The firearms officer says it doesn't ricochet like the .22 but fragments on impact: perhaps they specify a particular round

[jonkil]

No, we're talking the same round. Usually referred here as the .177 rimfire (not strictly true .177 is the actual air rifle round). The .17HMR (Hornady Magnum Rimfire) is basically a .22 body with a .17 projectile tip added. It has twice the velocity of a standard .22 magnum (about 2500 feet per second) and much more accurate. The .22 is better for "less destruction" use at close range due to its heavier lead end and "drop". The .17 is available in soft tip and is less destructive.
The .17 is actually the round that "snipers" prefer..... and not the big long case round we see in the action films.