80 Years of Campaigning - What a waste of time

[duffgirl]

i also think not a lot of anti's actually know that hunts can still go out and cull foxes with dogs, (scotland being different with more dogs allowed) so i do think lots of them dont understand the Bill and think its been stopped all together. That woudl be why some are happy with the Bill.

if they only read it and were realisitc they woudl understand it was a waste of everyones time and money. Their anger should be at the government for making a fool of them.

 

[Nigel]

Hi Karl,

If you are that worried about millions of pheasants being blown out of the sky purely for sport, why were you more worried about 15,000 foxes killed with a pest control element attached?

Cheers

Nigel

PS, Richard Course in his Submission to the Burn Inquiry,

The second of these motives is better described as moral fundamentalism which is rarely a sound basis for legislation. In this particular case, "killing for fun" or "killing for sport" would inevitably put fishing and shooting at the top of such an agenda.

 

[Doreys_Mum]

The act is flawed because antis and pros are happy with it...

That in itself argues the antis points that it works - hunters aren't upset about it...

Hunting has not changed. I hate to say it, but someone has to, the flaw in the hunting act is that there are enough exemptions for huntsmen to carry on as normally and then tip their caps at policemen whilst saying "trail huntin', officer" - the only policemen to know any different being the pro hunting ones anyway!!!!

And that is the major loophole. Only the foxhounds and the huntsman know if they're hunting a real fox or a trail. Even the best film footage might not prove if they're hunting the fox, or if the fox has moved away from the area the hounds are in, having learnt in the past to run - after all, I've seen foxes run from hounds since the ban myself - I have a photo of one!!! No one is hunting them, they're just vacating the area!

The hunting act will only work if the excemptions, trail hunting, drag hunting and alternative species hunting are removed.

You can shout it till you're blue in the face. We all blooming well know that hunts are still hunting foxes properly in between trails - they're just for show - and THAT means the ban has failed!

 

[wurzel]

"You can shout it till you're blue in the face. We all blooming well know that hunts are still hunting foxes properly in between trails - they're just for show - and THAT means the ban has failed! "

Oh dear !!

The hideous truth!!!

 

[Ereiam_jh]

It's interesting what you say about the exemptions allowing people to carry on hunting.

I look at it from the other way round.

I'm convinced that what I do isn't cruel at all. I don't kill any animals and yet it's still against the law. I'm more interested in what the law stops me doing than what it lets other people do.

Or at least would stop me doing if I could be bothered to obey it.

Can you suggest a way I can legally walk my dogs round my farm given that I know they will flush out deer? I doubt it.

I'm happy to stop them chasing deer but even flushing out is banned. The judge in the Tony Wright case has ruled that this is seperate from chasing.

Can I just let them flush the deer out and to hell with it? What is the point of my obeying the law?

After all what I do isn't cruel. I'm sure you agree with that.

There were red deer over the valley this evening. Tomoroow morning I am going to go out and flush them with my dogs. I'll make sure the dogs don't chase them and I won't kill them but I will deliberatly flush them out. Why is that illegal?

The law means I can't go out with my dogs because I know doing so is going to flush out deer. That bans me from 90% of my property. I live in harmony with the wildlife on my farm why should I let some stupid, ill thouight out law get in the way of my hard earned lifestyle.

Worst of all the morons who wrote this law say I CAN flush out the deer with two of my four dogs to protect my woodland but I have to shoot them as soon as possible. The government say that this is somehow in the deer's interest. Eh? You can forget that, there is NO WAY I am shooting some deer just because of some stupid law that LACS lack the honesty to admit is ridiculous and won't get enforced any way. I just can't be bothered and LACS are insisting that I have to employ at least one LINE of gun men to slaugher the deer. If I break the law then all of those deer will survive. Which would you prefer I do?

Wouldn't it have made more sense to have a law against cruelty? That would have resolved all these issues.

Sorry, but I'm off hunting deer tomoorow in direct and deliberate breech of the hunting act. I coulldn't give a damn whjether you like it or not. There's nothing you can do to stop me.

 

[Nigel]

Hi Sheeps

Thanks for our posting. I Hunted the drag all last year the Exmoor. Chuckle chuckle,Nudge Nudge wink wink say no more.

Do you think Karl will ever respond?

Nigel

 

[Ereiam_jh]

Karl get's a little upset now and again. He goes away and thinls about things, which is a good sign, but he still comes back with the same old drivel.

 

[Paul T]

I'm not upset at all, just amused, and I go away every now and again because I have a life (unlike some).

You seem to have missed my previous message so I've reproduced it again for you:

"I'm glad to see you're concerned about animal welfare and think shooting is cruel. Perhaps you'd join with me in criticising the millions of pheasants that are bred as living targets and released into the countryside each year?

Also I'm pleased to see you're opposed to the current practice of hunts that take pot shots at foxes. There's hope yet!"

 

[endymion]

Support for hunting greater now than before the ban - FACT.

erm, its not actually. As most pros point out recent poles suggest that support had remained the same, opposition has reduced slightly leaving a larger number of 'dont give a toss'. Although antis are still the majority.


No hunts closed down since the ban - FACT
Point? I'm more than happy for hunts to carry on - drag hunting.

Foxes killed by hounds whilst trail hunting in same numbers as pre-ban - FACT.
I never thought the ban would reduce numbers of foxes killed just the way in which they were killed. More humanely.

Farmers and landowners now permitting snaring and shooting of foxes when they did not pre-ban - FACT.
I'd like to see your figures for this......

No prosecutions (or court appearances)for hunt staff participating in trail hunting - FACT.
Ok so whos not the brightest now...why would i want to see people arrested for legal hunting :crazy:



Proving intent to hunt against all reasonable doubt will be incredibly difficult - FACT.
True, but as just seen its not impossible and we'll all be keeping a very close eye....

Hunting is a very low priority for police forces - FACT.
True again, but as long as antis are there we'll do the job for them and then its up to the CPS to decide...

I have lost nothing (other than respect for those people who spy on their fellow citizens). Polish your camera lens. I look forward to watching you prove nothing again next season.

hahaha, I love it when pros get defensive, its hilarious. Sometimes I wonder if I sab for moral reasons or to see the little angry red faces of you lot when we spoil yer fun! :grin:

 

[LACS]

"80 Years of Campaigning - What a waste of time"

How did the Waterloo Cup go this year?

 

[combat_claire]

Interestingly Endy the most recent poll that Kieran and myself could locate hails from 2005 and shows that support for the hunting ban had dropped from 2/3 to under half. Ban Supporters accounted for just 47% of the total. Full details from the Mori website.

http://www.ipsos-mori.com/polls/2005/bbc-countryfile.shtml

Quite true no packs of hounds have shut down, indeed 1 and a half have been formed. The Private pack in Heythrop country and Giles' hounds accounting for the half

Research from the Middle way Group has surveyed 600 farmers and found a worsening in welfare: Full details here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/07/28/nhunt28.xml

I truly believe that what we did pre-ban was for the best. We'll carry on working within the law that we have been given, you guys will keep slaving away trying to prove our intent, the legal bills spiralling from both sides. Whilst the life of no fox will be improved and many more will in fact be suffering more.

We'll continue ignoring the sabs and the opportunists who come out to yell abuse at us..and one day history will judge which side was right.

 

[combat_claire]

Bah just lost this long post once...

The latest poll is by Mori in 2005, they found that support for the ban had dropped from 2/3 to 47% in 6 years or so. http://www.ipsos-mori.com/polls/2005/bbc-countryfile.shtml

No hunts have closed, but 1 and a half have been opened. The private pack in Heythrop country and Giles' motley crew. Hunting appears to be thriving!

Whilst the Middle Way Groups survey of 600 sheep farmers suggests that welfare has been lowered by a ban on hunting - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/07/28/nhunt28.xml

We'll keep working with the law we've been given, you guys will keep on monitoring and bringing cases, the legal bills will mount on both sides, we'll keep ignoring the mouthfuls of abuse we get from anti-hunting people who join the Fitzwilliam. But at the end of the day only history will be able to tell which side was right!

 

[combat_claire]

Spooky apparently my post was lurking in the database afterall....

 

[wurzel]

"Farmers and landowners now permitting snaring and shooting of foxes when they did not pre-ban - FACT.
I'd like to see your figures for this......
"


Why do you think I would keep records of this?

I use snares. Fox gets snared. Shoot fox or if dead just remove it. Throw dead fox on bonfire. Reset snare or move it. End of the matter.

 

[Paul T]

"I use snares. Fox gets snared. Shoot fox or if dead just remove it. Throw dead fox on bonfire. Reset snare or move it. End of the matter. "

A good example of old Faggot's concern for animal welfare.

 

[wurzel]

All instructed by DEFRA my townie friend !!

(Apart from the fire of course)


Don't tell me you disagree with ZANU labour !!!!

 

[Paul T]

DEFRA forces you to catch foxes with snares, does it?

 

[allijudd]

Karl,
it may not FORCE people to snare, but DEFRA (by using the hunting law) is restricting the way in which foxes can be controlled. As hunting cant be used as effectively as before landowners must find other means to control the fox population, shooting is one and snaring is another.
Would you prefer carte-blanche killing by gassing foxes in their lair. All the ban has done is to increase the suffering of the fox, which if I remember rightly, was the opposite to what the antis claimed to want. Implementing the ban has hardly had the effect on fox welfare that antis claimed, has it?

 

[wurzel]

In effect, Yes !!

But I am open to better methods.

 

[Paul T]

On the one hand we're being told hunting is carrying on much as before the ban, now you're saying hunting isn't as effective as it was. Which is it to be?

Thank God the law is finally taking into account the fact that foxes are capable of suffering, and restricting the worst excesses of those hellbent on killing foxes. Like all pros on this site, you take it as read that foxes absolutely have to be killed. Don't assume the rest of us share your blind prejudice.

 

[Paul T]

What do you mean 'in effect'? Either it does or it doesn't.

 

[wurzel]

OK, It does

 

[allijudd]

"Like all pros on this site, you take it as read that foxes absolutely have to be killed."

I dont remember ever saying anthing like that. I am a pro because i believe that people should have the freedom to choose.
Foxes are not the cutey cutey fury cuddly animals you seem to think they are. I sugges you watch Jimmys farm (was on late last night but will be on again this week, im sure. 1 fox killed all his poultry...... did the fox take them all err NO took only a couple for itself and killed the rest BECAUSE THATS WHAT THEY DO. Foxes kill everything inside a confined space because ( i can only assume) they enjoy it. A chicken is hardly a threat to a fox so its sure as hell got nothing to do with the fox being concerned about his survival.

 

[Hercules]

Karl,

You state that foxes are capable of suffering. Jackie Ballard (one of your 'leaders') stated that there was no evidence to show that a wounded fox suffered after being shot. What is it to be?

 

[Paul T]

Thought so, you've no sense of personal responsibility but instead prefer to blame everyone else for your own actions.

My son used to be like that but thankfully grew out of it whilst in primary school.

 

[Paul T]

Why is Jackie Ballard one of my leaders?

You'll have to ask her about her comments but there's no doubt foxes are capable of suffering, I hope you'll agree.

 

[wurzel]

Oh no, I take full responsibility for Foxes I cause to be killed.

The only practical, legal way left to me is snaring.

And I take full and complete responsibility for the whole process.

And I follow DEFRA guidelines.

Like a good boy.

 

[Paul T]

So DEFRA doesn't force you to catch foxes with snares. Thought not.

 

[wurzel]

This is challenging you isn't it?

I follow DEFRA guidelines to snare foxes.

I am happy to consider a viable alternative.

 

[Paul T]

Nothing challenging about it. You claimed DEFRA forced you to snare foxes and all I've done is demonstrated they do nothing of the sort.