The stupid hunt ....

[Palomino Mare]

I just really think that we are going down a dangerous road, you want to ban all blood sports because you disagree with it. Even though there are many people that enjoy them and it generates money for the economy and the countryside and is good for countryside management. What about the Animal Rights people who believe that it is wrong and degrading to keep animals as pets? I know it sounds far fetched but whos to say in 50 years that people won't be campaigning to ban horseriding because it is not fair on the horse? Will you be in the same boat then as people who want to keep hunting and shooting now?

very good point - i was also going to ask (going slightly OT here) but i remember one of the things said when the lobbying was going on was "what's next - are they going to want to ban fishing?" IMO i am far more uncomfortable watching fishing than fox hunting - not that i'm against either.

i recommend watching Channel 4's "dangerous jobs for girls" on one of them they are on a fishing trawler. In short hundreds of fish are captured in the nets which are emptied onto the deck - fish piled ontop of each other and left there while the crew struggle to get them in their containers or to kill them with mallots. the fish at the bottom will suffocate to death with the weight of the other fish and lack of air.

So my question to anti-fox hunters is do you place the same amount of concern in how all animals are killed? Do you go to a restaurant and order a fish dish (or watch one get ordered if your vege/vegan) and feel the same amount of remorse for the fish (or any animal consumed) that you do for the fox when you see hunting propaganda? Is there a limit to this

empathy

that is displayed?

 

[Yann]

So my question to anti-fox hunters is do you place the same amount of concern in how all animals are killed?

I'm a meat eater and when animals are killed for meat I see it as an unpleasant necessity, which we have to accept and face up to and which should be carried out in as humane a way as possible. Likewise I accept that pest control is a necessity, and again should be carried out in as humane and efficient a way as possible. It's not a perfect world, and you're not going to get it right all the time and avoid suffering, but at least you should try.

Traditional fox hunting is nothing to do with either of the above, it's the causing of suffering to and destruction of an animal purely for human entertainment, which I find distastful.

 

[country_bumpkin]

i think what we[people who dont approve of hunting] are trying to get to the bottom of is why people who go hunting do it?

http://www.fitzwilliamhunt.com/FAQ/enjohunt.htm

I enjoy watching hounds work, I enjoy riding my mountain bike over land I don't usually have permission to enter, I enjoy the social events and I believe that this was the best method of fox control and that meddling politicians should have bothered to find out more and actually listened to the reports they commissioned.

 

[Cerys]

There may not be whole groups yet I am not sure but there are certainly individuals and groups can soon form. As part of my Animal Management ND we had to study ethics and a lady from an animal rights organisation came to talk to us and she held these beliefs. Another well knowbn activist John Bryant said " I have not the slightest hesitation is in saying that pet animals should be phased out of existance" .

For those who find this notion hard to belive I imagine that if I went back 50 years and told a hunt that in 50 years it would be banned I imagine they would have felt the same.

 

[country_bumpkin]

I think mother nature knows best

So what you are advocating is that the weaker foxes will starve to death due to the natural availability of food?? Before natural mechanisms of food supply kick in, the fitter foxes have to literally eat themselves out of house and home. For example a change in the fox control policy in Holland led to several species of ground nesting birds being extinguished from some Dutch Nature Reserves before the situation resolved itself.

Hunting in it's traditional pre-ban format, replaced the fox's original top predator, it was selective culling, not complete eradication or hit and miss control through trapping, snaring and lamping.

 

[colettybetty]

Traditional fox hunting is nothing to do with either of the above, it's the causing of suffering to and destruction of an animal purely for human entertainment, which I find distastful.

Quite so.That in essence is a definition of a blood sport. Hunters chase the fox for entertainment - a good day out. If the selfless motive of service to the farmers or the environment was a reason, then I'd expect to see large numbers of eager folk out clearing ditches, cleaning up canals or ragwort picking comman land.

 

[Morganna]

So my question to anti-fox hunters is do you place the same amount of concern in how all animals are killed? Do you go to a restaurant and order a fish dish (or watch one get ordered if your vege/vegan) and feel the same amount of remorse for the fish (or any animal consumed) that you do for the fox when you see hunting propaganda? Is there a limit to this that is displayed?

I think that most people don't compare the two simply because we don't use foxes as a major food source. We chase them down and kill them for our own amusement, and throughout this thread, my opinion on that has not changed and that's what makes me uncomfortable with it - the fact that anyone can get amusement or pleasure out of it - nobody would go fox hunting if they didn't enjoy it - nobody gets up in the morning and has the opinion "oh christ, I have to go chase a fox today, what a drag (no pun intended). And it does not erradicate enough foxxes to make a difference to the number of foxes in the UK as was stated earlier in the thread so what is the point other than to amuse the minority of UK citizens who actually participate in the sport?

Having said that, I don't class myself as totally anti fox hunting or totally pro fox hunting, just uncomfortable that my fellow human being can get gratification from the killing of an animal and that's what it comes down to with me. Whether that be fox hunting, bear fighting, horse fighting - there is no point to any of these other than the amusement of people. Does that make sense?

 

[Yann]

Hunting in it's traditional pre-ban format, replaced the fox's original top predator, it was selective culling, not complete eradication or hit and miss control through trapping, snaring and lamping.

Sorry, that's just excuses to make sure there's a fox to chase on hunting day. The fact remains that vast areas of the countryside never see a hunt and don't have a fox problem.

 

[Mary Poppins]

I'm a meat eater and when animals are killed for meat I see it as an unpleasant necessity, which we have to accept and face up to and which should be carried out in as humane a way as possible. Likewise I accept that pest control is a necessity, and again should be carried out in as humane and efficient a way as possible. It's not a perfect world, and you're not going to get it right all the time and avoid suffering, but at least you should try.

Traditional fox hunting is nothing to do with either of the above, it's the causing of suffering to and destruction of an animal purely for human entertainment, which I find distastful.

I totally agree with this. The death of an animal is never pleasant but if the end purpose is to feed humans then I do accept this needs to be done. Work is being done to improve the conditions of animal slaughtered for meat and recent years have seen tightened legislation in the way that this is done. For example, the live transportion of animals is now limited to minimise the suffering of the animals.

In the case of fishing - I don't know how they could make the killing of a fish more humane. They are caught in nets (which I know creates other problems) but are not drugged or physically hurt in any other way. The death of a fish through suffocation is not something that I like to watch, but it is the quickest, painless way for them to die.

So yes I do place the same amount of concern to other animals. As someone who is anti-hunting I do put the welfare of animals first. I am not out to simply 'spoil the fun' of the pro-hunters. It is nothing to do with class, tradition etc. it has everything to do with animal welfare.

 

[country_bumpkin]

I would agree if at the end it was a good piece of law

A law passed in spite to get one back for the miners, don't believe me? Just look at some of the comments written by Peter Bradley MP..

A law that was ultra vires, it used the Parliament Act to pass the law, but the Parliament Act itself was passed using an earlier Parliament Act, designed only for passing finance legislation. The constitutional ramifications were so great, the law lords could not find against the Hunting Act.

A law that protects the rights of foxes, but says it is okay to hunt rats and rabbits, if that isn't species-ism then I don't know what is..as one commentator wrote 'foxes are rats with a good PR spokesman'

A law that offered so many loopholes that hardly anything has changed, bar the numbers of hounds allowed out at any one time, the use of a bird of prey. Anyway what about socks, why should they have to endure being dipped in **** and chased around the countryside...
It must have been a huge disappointment for the anti-hunt brigade who had fought so hard, they wake up on the 19th Feb and everyone is dressed as they would pre-ban, the hounds are still out, the horses are still there and with clever use of exemptions and a cunning trail layer, an uninformed observer would be hard pressed to tell the difference!

 

[country_bumpkin]

Quite so.That in essence is a definition of a blood sport. Hunters chase the fox for entertainment - a good day out. If the selfless motive of service to the farmers or the environment was a reason, then I'd expect to see large numbers of eager folk out clearing ditches, cleaning up canals or ragwort picking comman land.

So who do you think planted the spinneys and the small woodlands, who do you think builds the pretty jumps, who do you think maintains the woodland, who runs the knacker service?? Who do you think pays the bills for these activities??

 

[Mary Poppins]

Quite so.That in essence is a definition of a blood sport. Hunters chase the fox for entertainment - a good day out. If the selfless motive of service to the farmers or the environment was a reason, then I'd expect to see large numbers of eager folk out clearing ditches, cleaning up canals or ragwort picking comman land.

What an excellent point!

 

[country_bumpkin]

Sorry, that's just excuses to make sure there's a fox to chase on hunting day. The fact remains that vast areas of the countryside never see a hunt and don't have a fox problem.

It is a fact that a small, but healthy population of foxes is good for the countryside, too many become a problem, selective culling is needed. There is no point taking a rifle and killing the first four foxes you see, because that does not create a good ecosystem.

 

[Yann]

CB, I think you've just agreed with my point there

 

[Twigletz7]

The Hunting Act has many flaws in it that need to be addressed. In my opinion, it should have been a complete ban on all bloodsports with no loop holes or compromises. I voted for labour purely and simply because they promised to ban hunting - and although I feel let down by them, I will continue to vote for them in the hope they will eventually iron out the flaws in the present hunting law.

So that takes all game off the menu then....

So when do we stop culling pigs, cows, chickens, ducks, geese and christmas turkeys and turn the whole country vegan

 

[Mary Poppins]

So that takes all game off the menu then....

So when do we stop culling pigs, cows, chickens, ducks, geese and christmas turkeys and turn the whole country vegan

The previous poster was talking about banning BLOODSPORTS. This is totally different from killing animals for food as has been discussed above.

 

[Francis Burton]

It is a fact that a small, but healthy population of foxes is good for the countryside, too many become a problem, selective culling is needed. There is no point taking a rifle and killing the first four foxes you see, because that does not create a good ecosystem.

Yes, but there never is or was a "small, but healthy population of foxes"! A "small" population implies a tenth, a quarter or even a half of the natural size, but that's not what you mean, is it? The numbers have stayed at around 250,000 adults (of which about 35,000 live in urban areas) year after year after year. How many foxes were killed by registered packs of hounds? About 20,000 to 25,000. Put that against 425,000 cubs that are born each year and you see that hunting with hounds made hardly any difference; it just tweaked the numbers slightly. Far more foxes were and are killed on the roads. And what happened to the fox population when there was no hunting for 10 months in 2001 due to foot-and-mouth?

I agree there is no point in going out and shooting the first 4 foxes you see. Surely it would be much better to target the ones that actually causing a problem?

 

[Francis Burton]

So who do you think planted the spinneys and the small woodlands, who do you think builds the pretty jumps, who do you think maintains the woodland, who runs the knacker service?? Who do you think pays the bills for these activities??

Yes, if it weren't for country sports great chunks of the English countryside would look completely different. Banning them would almost certainly have knock-on effects. People have to decide for themselves if that is a price worth paying.

(Just so you don't get the impression I disagree with everything you say. )

 

[india]

....I believe that this was the best method of fox control....

I'm getting confused here!!!! even the pro hunt folk can't agree on whether foxhunting was (is) the best method of fox control. As far as I can remember most of the pro posts on this thread have agreed in one way or another that foxhunting is NOT an effective means of controlling the fox population.

 

[Yann]

So that takes all game off the menu then....

No. Much as I dislike sport shooting at least what is getting shot is usually going to end up on someone's plate, in which case it's fair enough in my book.