Wills hard at work

[Princess MS]

But he still hunts a lot (I have no real issue with hunting especially when it's for a species that's overrunning the land, it's sometimes necessary), and just whinges about how George and Charlotte need to see rhinos and elephants which equals his 'conservation work'.

In-season, legal deer stalking in Scotland  and then shooting birds at Sandringham once a year for the purpose of culling --- neither of those things is comparable to hunting rhinos for the horn to sell on the black market!!!!

The birds that are shot at Sandringham are bred specifically for that purpose.  They only need to be "culled" because someone - in the past it was Prince Philip's job to manage their production - ensured there were so many birds there that the needed to be "culled".   Those birds only exist because the royals and their friends enjoy killing them.     

Incidentally, sometimes even elephants need to be culled because their population is too large to be supported on the land where they live because there is not enough food for all of them and if they are all allowed to live there won't be enough food for any of them.  It's a complicated subject. 

The point was that you trying to make the two things comparable is daft. But whatever, carry on with your false equivalencies which make you feel intellectually superior. I'm glad you have your methods of achieving a healthy self-esteem. Peace and blessings.

OK - well I find hunting for pleasure something that does not accord with my values but accept that others will feel differently. The landed gentry have a history of going down this path .... breeding animals, birds etc for food is IMO different to setting up opportunities for Duke, Lord and Sir Many Acres to host weekends for friends and paying guests to "shoot".

Wildlife management is a different space - IMO more complicated but non unrelated to hunting in as much as many "big game" hunters use it as a validation to be out there. Bottom line - shooters just want the thrill and in environments that don't support this then they look to dress it up as something more acceptable

[Jonathan]

But he still hunts a lot (I have no real issue with hunting especially when it's for a species that's overrunning the land, it's sometimes necessary), and just whinges about how George and Charlotte need to see rhinos and elephants which equals his 'conservation work'.

In-season, legal deer stalking in Scotland  and then shooting birds at Sandringham once a year for the purpose of culling --- neither of those things is comparable to hunting rhinos for the horn to sell on the black market!!!!

The birds that are shot at Sandringham are bred specifically for that purpose.  They only need to be "culled" because someone - in the past it was Prince Philip's job to manage their production - ensured there were so many birds there that the needed to be "culled".   Those birds only exist because the royals and their friends enjoy killing them.     

Incidentally, sometimes even elephants need to be culled because their population is too large to be supported on the land where they live because there is not enough food for all of them and if they are all allowed to live there won't be enough food for any of them.  It's a complicated subject. 

I find the whole deer stalking and shooting as a sport disgusting.  The breed to kill makes my stomach turn.


No offence Margaret but I haven't heard of elephant culling since the 1970's. I grew up in Africa and visit often. The policy is to move elephants as they are rapidly becoming an endangered species.  However you are right that there was at one point in the past when it was considered necessary. Even in the Kruger National Park.

[Margaret]

But he still hunts a lot (I have no real issue with hunting especially when it's for a species that's overrunning the land, it's sometimes necessary), and just whinges about how George and Charlotte need to see rhinos and elephants which equals his 'conservation work'.

In-season, legal deer stalking in Scotland  and then shooting birds at Sandringham once a year for the purpose of culling --- neither of those things is comparable to hunting rhinos for the horn to sell on the black market!!!!

The birds that are shot at Sandringham are bred specifically for that purpose.  They only need to be "culled" because someone - in the past it was Prince Philip's job to manage their production - ensured there were so many birds there that the needed to be "culled".   Those birds only exist because the royals and their friends enjoy killing them.    

Incidentally, sometimes even elephants need to be culled because their population is too large to be supported on the land where they live because there is not enough food for all of them and if they are all allowed to live there won't be enough food for any of them.  It's a complicated subject.  

I find the whole deer stalking and shooting as a sport disgusting.  The breed to kill makes my stomach turn.


No offence Margaret but I haven't heard of elephant culling since the 1970's. I grew up in Africa and visit often. The policy is to move elephants as they are rapidly becoming an endangered species.  However you are right that there was at one point in the past when it was considered necessary. Even in the Kruger National Park.

Culling in Kruger NP didn't stop until the moratorium in 1994.  Before that, since 1967, culling took place to maintain the population at 7,000.  In the 1990s the carrying capacity was estimated at 7,500.   In 2006 the population was about 13,500.  Even the current Kruger NP Elephant Management Plan provides for culling in certain circumstances, though other options are preferred. https://www.southafrica.t...ationalPark_elephants.htm  
https://www.sanparks.org/...phant-management-plan.pdf

[QueenEM]

Doesn't he usually go to rugby things when Wales are playing in Cardiff? It's fun for him so therefore he'll show up!

But has he ever worn a red tie? I only associate literal dressing with Kate.
I think that 30 year from now we will find that Wills is a competent/working king and we will wonder when on earth did that happen.

Baby steps, Wills, baby steps.

[ralf103]

I didn't want to put this in the news and pictures thread. But there is some interesting points about William in the new Robert Hardman book. I can't quite work out if they have come from William's side thinking it makes him look "just like a regular bloke" or from others trying to make him seem a bit unintelligent, uninterested and a bit of a philistine.

https://www.dailymail.co....aining-Prince-George.html

Within the offices of both the King and the new Prince of Wales, it is accepted that both will make changes according to their own tastes and personalities. Whereas the King likes to assemble panels of experts around him, for instance, his son does not.

'William will say: 'Don't get me a meeting with an academic.' He might want to meet a brilliant scientist who is doing something amazing but he doesn't seek intellectual company,' says one of those who has worked closely with him.

Prince Charles may have been happy to wade into big social issues of the day with a provocative speech or foreword to a book, or by bending the ears of ministers.

Now in his 40s, Prince William has steered a more conventional and cautious path. Within the Palace, some see traces of an earnest, dutiful George VI.

As one of his senior advisers puts it: 'He is one of the least ideological people I have met.'

Prince William gets most of his news from online sources such as the BBC website and briefings from staff. He prefers cogent, bullet-point memos to the big bundles of documents the King likes to wade through.

When it comes to leisure, the King has inherited his late father's love of reading. Prince William, by contrast, will dip into books for information, less so for pleasure.

Asked to name the Prince's favourite author, one official replies diplomatically: 'He's a box-set guy.' Superhero movies are, apparently, a particular favourite, especially Deadpool and all things Batman-related. 'He just likes action flicks,' says one friend.

What may mark out the future King William V as a 'change-maker' is not what he does, so much as what he may not do.

According to a close adviser, he is 'very nervous' of being seen to presume he is the future head of the Commonwealth. 'It's something he thinks about a lot.'

However, one idea which he certainly does not favour, says a source, is the idea of being a 'co-head' (with a politician).

The prospect of there being a future monarch who is not head of the Commonwealth is not nearly as big a leap of the royal imagination, however, as having a monarch who is not Supreme Governor of the Church of England.

In royal circles, it is no secret that he does not share the King's sense of the spiritual, let alone the late Queen's unshakeable devotion to the Anglican church.

'His father is very spiritual and happy to talk about faith, but the Prince is not,' says a senior Palace figure. 'He doesn't go to church every Sunday, but then nor do the large majority of the country. He might go at Christmas and Easter, but that's it.

'He very much respects the institutions, but he is not instinctively comfortable in a faith environment.'

Prince William, however, is said to be closer to the late Prince Philip than to his father on farming issues.

According to one adviser, this is especially true when it comes to the merits of organic farming.

Whereas the King is a purist on the matter, his son is more agnostic, given the difficulties facing many farmers in seeking to attain organic status.

Both, however, have a strong admiration for what each other has achieved in terms of keeping the environment to the fore.

[anneboleyn]

Oof. None of those statements are particularly flattering.

[SvenskaSarah]

And the contest of who works the least is between Frodo and Wills; one is now King, one is one step away. Who will win? 

[Paulina]

What an obnoxious DM article on William and Charles. Charles will do it differently than his mother did. He has been king-in-waiting so long, his views and passions well known, the transition is relatively seamless. Charles is a well-known quantity and so far there are not really any surprises.

For the article to do a compare and contrast at this juncture of Charles's reign is obnoxious. Puts William in an awkward position. He may have an entirely different agenda and get the entire country into sports and physical fitness. Or safety training, or anything.

Of course they have different interests. 

[thecrownjewelthief]

What an obnoxious DM article on William and Charles. Charles will do it differently than his mother did. He has been king-in-waiting so long, his views and passions well known, the transition is relatively seamless. Charles is a well-known quantity and so far there are not really any surprises.

For the article to do a compare and contrast at this juncture of Charles's reign is obnoxious. Puts William in an awkward position. He may have an entirely different agenda and get the entire country into sports and physical fitness. Or safety training, or anything.

Of course they have different interests. 

ITA! Just click bait from the DM. They're also from different generations, of course they won't do things the same way.

[Lady Liebe]

What an obnoxious DM article on William and Charles. Charles will do it differently than his mother did. He has been king-in-waiting so long, his views and passions well known, the transition is relatively seamless. Charles is a well-known quantity and so far there are not really any surprises.

For the article to do a compare and contrast at this juncture of Charles's reign is obnoxious. Puts William in an awkward position. He may have an entirely different agenda and get the entire country into sports and physical fitness. Or safety training, or anything.

Of course they have different interests. 

ITA! Just click bait from the DM. They're also from different generations, of course they won't do things the same way.

ITA with you both. Will add that no two Monarchs are just alike, just as no two reigns are the same.

[TLLK]

What an obnoxious DM article on William and Charles. Charles will do it differently than his mother did. He has been king-in-waiting so long, his views and passions well known, the transition is relatively seamless. Charles is a well-known quantity and so far there are not really any surprises.

For the article to do a compare and contrast at this juncture of Charles's reign is obnoxious. Puts William in an awkward position. He may have an entirely different agenda and get the entire country into sports and physical fitness. Or safety training, or anything.

Of course they have different interests. 

ITA! Just click bait from the DM. They're also from different generations, of course they won't do things the same way.

ITA with you both. Will add that no two Monarchs are just alike, just as no two reigns are the same.

Adding myself as the third person to agree.

[Lord G¡n]

Prince William's return
https://www.reuters.com/w...%2C%20his%20office%20said.