The stupid hunt ....

[country_bumpkin]

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

I argue in favour of a balanced ecosystem.

Think about this scenario :

If I plant a new wood, I am a conservationist.

The majority of small birds and mammals in woodland live on the edges. So, if I put rides and glades in the wood, thus increasing the amount of "edge" available, I am a conservationist.

If I plant fruiting shrubs and trees to feed the birds – I am a conservationist.

If I put up artificial nesting boxes for the Birds - I am a conservationist.

If I were to put in an artificial badger set - I am a conservationist.

If I were to do any of these things, all of which increase the wildlife and diversity of the wood, people would say that I had done a good thing.

The Government would even, in many instances, pay me Grants for it.

But :

If I put in an artificial Fox Earth to encourage the foxes into my new wood, then suddenly the only reason that I would do that is because I am a Sadist.

No. I don't think so. Just a little bit of inconsistency there.

Why?

Because everyone knows that we used to kill foxes.

What they forget is that we kill many other species too and for exactly the same reasons. Conservation means killing.

 

[country_bumpkin]

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?

And that is exactly what hunting with hounds did. It was never about the eradication of every fox, but it was about managing the population. I suppose I should have used stable rather than small population.

A person out lamping can't tell which is the problem fox, or pick out the weaker ones, a trap or a snare doesn't discriminate between the old, weak fox looking for an easy meal or a young, fit fox trotting off to hunt some rabbits. Hounds selectively and discriminately culled the population by mirroring a top predator's behaviour.

 

[india]

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!

It was never anything to do with the 'dressing up', hounds or horses, infact I think all that looks rather spectacular. I agree though, it was a dissapointment there where so many loopholes in the law. Untill these flaws can be ironed out though, the animal welfare hunt monitors will continue to record evidence of illegal hunting for future evidence.

 

[Haphazard]

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

so wreck a large part of the rural economy in one go?

the majority of "bloodsports" are killing animals for food so where do you draw the line?

 

[Yann]

If I put in an artificial Fox Earth to encourage the foxes into my new wood, then suddenly the only reason that I would do that is because I am a Sadist.

Or a hypocrite, if you also espouse the view that foxes are a problem and need controlling? Breeding something just so you can terrorise and destroy it isn't clever in my book

A person out lamping can't tell which is the problem fox, or pick out the weaker ones, a trap or a snare doesn't discriminate between the old, weak fox looking for an easy meal or a young, fit fox trotting off to hunt some rabbits. Hounds selectively and discriminately culled the population by mirroring a top predator's behaviour.

I'm afraid it's just the same old excuses, especially if you're artificially encouraging a fox population for sporting purposes.

 

[Morganna]

Hounds selectively and discriminately culled the population by mirroring a top predator's behaviour.

Ok I can see what you are saying here But, this still does not explain why we have to dress a bunch of people up, shove them on a horse and make the chase and the subsequent killing of the fox a fun day out with all the pomp and ceremony that goes with it.

Killing an animal, for any reason, should not be about fun and a good day out. I understand on many levels the need for culling, whether that be deer, hedgehogs (as was the case in Uist a while back) and Kangaroos in Australia and so on although this thread has neither confirmed or denied if foxes do indeed require culling - none of these are carried out in a method which makes it a sport - why are foxes any different?

 

[india]

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

Since when have pigs, chickens, ducks, geese and turkeys been hunted by hounds as a sport?

At any rate, all the above animals are at least in the food chain.....when was the last time you had fox on your dinner plate?

 

[Haphazard]

Untill these flaws can be ironed out though, the animal welfare hunt monitors will continue to record evidence of illegal hunting for future evidence.

you never know they may grow to enjoy it

 

[Liz1949]

whether that be deer, hedgehogs (as was the case in Uist a while back) and Kangaroos in Australia and so on ... none of these are carried out in a method which makes it a sport - why are foxes any different?

it is perfectly clear, then, that you have never heard about (a) deer-stalking in Scotland and (b) what constitutes 'fun' to many Australians with powerful headlights or torch and with (or without) a firearms licence...

 

[country_bumpkin]

, then I'd expect to see large numbers of eager folk out clearing ditches, cleaning up canals or ragwort picking comman land.

I don't see many riders out clearing up either! I don't know about other bridleway groups, but round here it is the hunt that make sure the bridle paths are kept nice, the estate that houses the hunt uses their staff to keep all the tracks mown and clear of fly tipped rubbish, the gates they bought mean no 4 x 4s are allowed through. The local horse riders get the benefit of this, for no cost.

 

[Haphazard]

Since when have pigs, chickens, ducks, geese and turkeys been hunted by hounds as a sport?

At any rate, all the above animals are at least in the food chain.....when was the last time you had fox on your dinner plate?

But chickens, ducks etc will have been hunted by foxes, probably last night. Foxes are indescriminate not just killing for what they need to eat. I have seen almost a hundred chickens ripped apart by a single fox

PS I believe they eat dogs in thailand. OK not a fox but same family

 

[country_bumpkin]

Or a hypocrite, if you also espouse the view that foxes are a problem and need controlling? Breeding something just so you can terrorise and destroy it isn't clever in my book

Foxes don't need help to breed, they are clever like that and have managed to master the art of having sex...

Now go back and read my post about conservation again...

 

[Yann]

Killing an animal, for any reason, should not be about fun and a good day out

The fact is, humans being as we are, that many people do enjoy doing something that still fulfills a strong instinctive need in us. I wouldn't do it myself but I can live with it if the result is going to be eaten or is environmentally necessary. Traditional fox hunting doesn't tick either of those boxes.

 

[country_bumpkin]

I'm afraid it's just the same old excuses, especially if you're artificially encouraging a fox population for sporting purposes.

But yet you think game shooting is okay, because it is for food. Poults are bought in, reared at shoots, released and then shot when fully grown.
Hunts manage the fox population, for the benefit of the countryside.

 

[Yann]

Foxes don't need help to breed, they are clever like that and have managed to master the art of having sex...

So why would you put an earth in your theoretical wood? Or discourage local vermin shooters from taking any foxes so they're there for the taking by the hunt?

 

[Yann]

But yet you think game shooting is okay, because it is for food

Yes, I think that's a very important distinction personally.

 

[country_bumpkin]

Ok I can see what you are saying here But, this still does not explain why we have to dress a bunch of people up, shove them on a horse and make the chase and the subsequent killing of the fox a fun day out with all the pomp and ceremony that goes with it.

Running a pack of hounds is an expensive business - the feed, running the knacker wagon, fuel for the vehicles, staff, horses, uniform, wages...the money has to come from somewhere. Hunt subscriptions provide major income, which means we are a free pest control service and a low cost knacker facility for fallen stock.

The kit worn on the hunting field, generally has a reason behind it. Scarlet coats are easy to see, that is why staff and masters wear them (so the field know who to follow, although this may also be extended to subscribers who have proved themselves useful. We show respect to the landowner by wearing smart breeches and a riding coat - yes we could wear jeans, tatty fleeces and pink jockey skull caps, but we probably wouldn't get invited back!
Would you suggest that the Grenadier guards swapped their red tunics and bear skins for something a bit less traditional??

 

[country_bumpkin]

Yes, I think that's a very important distinction personally.

Even though poults are specifically bought in to be fattened up for shooting...I am pro-shooting and I love eating game, but your ethical stance is hardly consistent..

 

[Morganna]

it is perfectly clear, then, that you have never heard about (a) deer-stalking in Scotland and (b) what constitutes 'fun' to many Australians with powerful headlights or torch and with (or without) a firearms licence...

Of course I have heard of deer stalking, I do live in Scotland. Deer can cause substantial damage to the countryside, and I see a reason for culling them. Also the Deer Culling Code of Practice have very stict guidelines on the shot and how it should be executed to make it as humane as possible. I do not agree with it being a recreational activity any more than I agree with fox hunting being a recreational activity but I understand why deer are culled.

Also, we eat deer, so that comes under supplying a food stuff for people, same as fishing which obviously some people enjoy as a sport. We don't eat foxes - we have already established during this thread that people see both these things in a different light. And I am not referring to illegal activities such as you mention regarding Australia. People will always do things illegally.

My point is in relation to cullling, which pro hunters frequently use as a reason for fox hunting. I would just like someone to explain to my why this has to be done by a bunch of people on horseback, dressed up to the nines charging over the countyside, tooting their little hunting horns and have a great time.

 

[wanabe]

No - great evil is done by people who want control and power. They have a complete lack of empathy otherwise they won't be able to do the things that they do.

Having empathy and channeling it in the correct manner will result in legislation change to make our country a better place - hence the reason that fox hunting was banned in the first place.

She said "feeling strongly" not "empathy". It's only a better place if foxes are actually suffering less -- not if the suffering is hidden out of sight where those with empathy no longer suffer because they no longer see it. I'm not saying this is the case. But it COULD be the case in similar circumstances. There's usually some law of unintended circumstances that reminds us why we had thing the way we did in the first place.