A1fie
Well-Known Member
No problem Smurf's gran. I can respect your point of view, even if mine is not the same. I agree that it is good to ask questions and try and understand an opposing point of view. 
Ban all hunts
- Thread starter Thriller
- Start date
Exploding Chestnuts
Well-Known Member
See my previous post regarding regarding your approach, which was neither honest nor open.
You don't want a debate, you want an argument.
Last edited:
Smurf's Gran
Well-Known Member
Doormouse
Well-Known Member
When hunting was legal it had several aims, for the welfare of the fox population and for the rural population.
Foxes are prey animals and as such they will prey on lambs and chickens etc which means that their numbers need to be controlled or farmers would have alot of trouble allowing their lambs and chickens the free range lifestyle that is nowadays considered the best. Also any population of wild animals require a certain amount of regulation of numbers due to illness and disease, in foxes this is mainly mange which is a nasty problem that most domestic dog owners are not happy with their pets contracting.
Hunting is without doubt the fairest and most natural way of controlling the fox population. Whilst it was legal foxes were found and chased, healthy and young foxes got away, old or ill foxes were caught and quickly despatched. Because hunting is regulated by seasons, vixens with cubs are in far less danger of being killed than with shooting that can be done at any time of the year. Also, most huntsman are experienced and knowledgable and if by any chance they found a vixen who looked in cub or recently had them they would remove hounds from there immediately. I personally cannot think of anything crueller than someone going out in May and shooting a vixen at night who has cubs in her earth who will then die of starvation. That sport is however, legal.
Hunting also provides a community for the rural population, one where many people find employment, where the older generation meet several times a week, enjoy their day out and are noticed and monitored by others, where local pubs often benefit from an increase in trade on day when hounds meet nearby, where social events are organised regularly for hunt supporters and locals alike.
Hunting also manages local habitat for wildlife, for example laying covers, hedges, putting in bridges and gates, all of which are necessary to keep the countryside the way it is.
There is a great deal more to hunting from the inside than it is possible to explain to someone who has not experienced several years of it first hand, but to all who are against it or perhaps feel they don't understand it, then I would ask, before you pass judgement, that you spend at least a year as part of a hunting community learning about hounds, kennels, hunt horses and indeed foxes.
Foxes are prey animals and as such they will prey on lambs and chickens etc which means that their numbers need to be controlled or farmers would have alot of trouble allowing their lambs and chickens the free range lifestyle that is nowadays considered the best. Also any population of wild animals require a certain amount of regulation of numbers due to illness and disease, in foxes this is mainly mange which is a nasty problem that most domestic dog owners are not happy with their pets contracting.
Hunting is without doubt the fairest and most natural way of controlling the fox population. Whilst it was legal foxes were found and chased, healthy and young foxes got away, old or ill foxes were caught and quickly despatched. Because hunting is regulated by seasons, vixens with cubs are in far less danger of being killed than with shooting that can be done at any time of the year. Also, most huntsman are experienced and knowledgable and if by any chance they found a vixen who looked in cub or recently had them they would remove hounds from there immediately. I personally cannot think of anything crueller than someone going out in May and shooting a vixen at night who has cubs in her earth who will then die of starvation. That sport is however, legal.
Hunting also provides a community for the rural population, one where many people find employment, where the older generation meet several times a week, enjoy their day out and are noticed and monitored by others, where local pubs often benefit from an increase in trade on day when hounds meet nearby, where social events are organised regularly for hunt supporters and locals alike.
Hunting also manages local habitat for wildlife, for example laying covers, hedges, putting in bridges and gates, all of which are necessary to keep the countryside the way it is.
There is a great deal more to hunting from the inside than it is possible to explain to someone who has not experienced several years of it first hand, but to all who are against it or perhaps feel they don't understand it, then I would ask, before you pass judgement, that you spend at least a year as part of a hunting community learning about hounds, kennels, hunt horses and indeed foxes.
Last edited:
Maesfen
Extremely Old Nag!
Very well put Doormouse, thank you. People just don't understand (and most don't want to try) how integral to the countryside it all is.
Smurf's Gran
Well-Known Member
Bur the last Mori poll showed that 80% of the population want to retain a ban,. and that opinions are the same for town and countryside. So 80% of the Countryside want to retain the ban.
Could the benefits you refer to for the countryside be achieved as well by hunting within the law?
nianya
Well-Known Member
I don't really understand it to be honest. I come from a place where hunting of most kinds of wildlife is legal, in season and within certain regulations. You can even use horses to do so, typically to get into the back country and carry the prey home. And of course, certain hunting practices are controversial, mostly those which are considered inhumane like using hounds in bear hunting. There is even fox "hunting" in some parts, but it's actually just chasing as the hounds don't kill, and are trained to leave it when it goes to ground (the fox is typically left alive).
So I fully understand needing to control wildlife populations, but I sincerely doubt that fox hunting with hounds is either an effective method of controlling populations or a humane one. Unless you want to tell me that the fox is typically shot above ground and the hounds never touch him?
As to the point of enjoying being out in the countryside with a group of like-minded people enjoying an activity together and providing something to the local rural community. None of that requires the fox. We also worked together to develop and maintain trails and habitats that were then used by many other people and spent time and money in the local community. I've ridden that way for going on 30 years without killing, or even chasing a single fox. In the process I've seen a great deal of wildlife including foxes, bears, cougar, deer, coyote, eagles, and hawks.
I think this is why people really don't understand. It looks inhumane no matter how you cut it. There are other hunting methods that are more humane and likely more effective, and it is entirely possible to enjoy riding in the country, including galloping and jumping hedges, without the fox.
So I fully understand needing to control wildlife populations, but I sincerely doubt that fox hunting with hounds is either an effective method of controlling populations or a humane one. Unless you want to tell me that the fox is typically shot above ground and the hounds never touch him?
As to the point of enjoying being out in the countryside with a group of like-minded people enjoying an activity together and providing something to the local rural community. None of that requires the fox. We also worked together to develop and maintain trails and habitats that were then used by many other people and spent time and money in the local community. I've ridden that way for going on 30 years without killing, or even chasing a single fox. In the process I've seen a great deal of wildlife including foxes, bears, cougar, deer, coyote, eagles, and hawks.
I think this is why people really don't understand. It looks inhumane no matter how you cut it. There are other hunting methods that are more humane and likely more effective, and it is entirely possible to enjoy riding in the country, including galloping and jumping hedges, without the fox.
Exploding Chestnuts
Well-Known Member
It would be possible to go across country with like minded people if all the farmers and landowners permitted it, but they wouldn't.
In most country the hunt build and maintain fences to allow subscribers and huntsmen to cross country, they also negotiate to gain access, there is no way any group of individuals could manage that starting from scratch. There are alternatives where riders can pay to jump and use cross country courses, but they are few and far between. Some are hunt related, but they lack the element of adventure, the skill of the huntsmen and the whole countryside ethos.
The general consensus pre-ban was that the fox owed its continued existence to the hunt, as the coverts are planted and managed to provide a place for foxes to lay up and breed.
Gassing with cyanide is one alternative which was also considered inhumane and ineffective,
In most country the hunt build and maintain fences to allow subscribers and huntsmen to cross country, they also negotiate to gain access, there is no way any group of individuals could manage that starting from scratch. There are alternatives where riders can pay to jump and use cross country courses, but they are few and far between. Some are hunt related, but they lack the element of adventure, the skill of the huntsmen and the whole countryside ethos.
The general consensus pre-ban was that the fox owed its continued existence to the hunt, as the coverts are planted and managed to provide a place for foxes to lay up and breed.
Gassing with cyanide is one alternative which was also considered inhumane and ineffective,
Last edited:
Smurf's Gran
Well-Known Member
I don't understand - one of the main pro hunting (with hounds) arguments is that hunting is pest control and that is why it is justified.
Its a shame I think the arguments have become so confused and tangled it seems very hard to extricate pro's and cons anymore for either side.
Its a shame I think the arguments have become so confused and tangled it seems very hard to extricate pro's and cons anymore for either side.
Doormouse
Well-Known Member
Humane, no, it isn't but then lions bringing down their prey isn't humane but it is natural. When they give chase they generally bring down the weakest and therefore they follow natures rule 'survival of the fittest'. Hunting mimics the most natural selection of the weak and sick. Shooting is completle indiscriminate, and unless you are an excellent shot often wounds as opposed to kills.
Yes, the fox is afraid as it is chased, but that fox, 30 minutes before was probably chasing a rabbit or destroying a hen run, was that humane? Was the rabbit unafraid, or the chickens? Probably not but the fox was doing what it does naturally as hounds are doing what they do naturally. Do you allow you your dogs to go ratting? Do you encourage them to chase mice? Many of you do, why is it different?
If we all decided to follow a lion bringing down a gazelle on horses for the sport, would you then say it was cruel? I can confidently assure you that once a fox is caught by a hound it is dead a great deal quicker than that poor gazelle.
I know that many of you prefer lethal injection for your horse so why do you champion shooting foxes? Why is being shot so much better? None of you have answered my point about vixens with Cubs, do you not think that is cruel?
Yes, the fox is afraid as it is chased, but that fox, 30 minutes before was probably chasing a rabbit or destroying a hen run, was that humane? Was the rabbit unafraid, or the chickens? Probably not but the fox was doing what it does naturally as hounds are doing what they do naturally. Do you allow you your dogs to go ratting? Do you encourage them to chase mice? Many of you do, why is it different?
If we all decided to follow a lion bringing down a gazelle on horses for the sport, would you then say it was cruel? I can confidently assure you that once a fox is caught by a hound it is dead a great deal quicker than that poor gazelle.
I know that many of you prefer lethal injection for your horse so why do you champion shooting foxes? Why is being shot so much better? None of you have answered my point about vixens with Cubs, do you not think that is cruel?
Exploding Chestnuts
Well-Known Member
So you are now telling us that hunts are not operating within the law and yet you have already demonstrated that your information comes from an extremist site?
I think the RSCPA were told to stop trying to bring prosecutions, is that not enough?
Last edited:
millikins
Well-Known Member
Now a question about sports where animals are set on other animals to fight or kill them. These activities are currently illegal in Great Britain. For each one I read out, please tell me whether you think it should or should not be made legal again. Just read out the letter that applies in each case." SHOWCARD
Fox Hunting; Deer Hunting; Hare Hunting and Coursing; Dog fighting; Badger baiting.
- Yes, should be made legal again
- No, should not be made legal again
- Don’t Know
This was the question that Ipsos Mori put to gain its "80%" "support" for continuing the ban, couldn't really be described as not leading the respondent could it?
Fox Hunting; Deer Hunting; Hare Hunting and Coursing; Dog fighting; Badger baiting.
- Yes, should be made legal again
- No, should not be made legal again
- Don’t Know
This was the question that Ipsos Mori put to gain its "80%" "support" for continuing the ban, couldn't really be described as not leading the respondent could it?
Exploding Chestnuts
Well-Known Member
That's almost unbelievable!
millikins
Well-Known Member
I copied and pasted from IM's website!
Smurf's Gran
Well-Known Member
You are right, much of the natural world is cruel. I suppose that animals doing what they naturally do ( and a lot of the time for food) is one thing, but humans doing it for sport for me is the crucial difference. I accept that dogs (when hunting) are doing what comes naturally, but they are not doing this in a natural arena, Its a group of people who have organised them for the purposes of sport , and they are not hunting for their food - for me that is where the difference lies.
Last edited:
Tiddlypom
Carries on creakily
My OH is a born and bred townie. He was always pretty anti hunting, though not actually a practising 'anti'. After living out here in the sticks for a number of years, he came to realise just how much the countryside benefits from hunting.
He still doesn't much like the hunting set, but he now realises how much better the fox is managed in a hunting country, in order to provide sport for the field.
(I used to hunt regularly in the West Country, long before the ban).
He still doesn't much like the hunting set, but he now realises how much better the fox is managed in a hunting country, in order to provide sport for the field.
(I used to hunt regularly in the West Country, long before the ban).
Smurf's Gran
Well-Known Member
Bonkers I really wish you would stop assuming things ( quite wrongly) about what I read and what I don't. I read a lot of things, so that I have an informed view. I would like to know your views also, but every time I ask you a question about something you have posted on this thread you just get stroppy if you don't like what I have put and then you get personal - why is this - I am asking a question about if the suggested benefits to the countryside could be achieved with legal hunting? What is wrong with that ?
Please can you just stick to what I am actually writing, rather than what you think I might mean.
As a PS if the RSPCA has been asked to stop bringing prosecutions that may be of interest to posters on here who say there is little or no illegal hunting,
Last edited:
Smurf's Gran
Well-Known Member
Doormouse
Well-Known Member
Because if I filled out that form I would not wish dog fighting or badger baiting to made legal!
Actually in many ways they are hunting for their food because many hunts run a 'flesh round' where they collect for a very small fee all the local farmers dead stock of calves, cows and lambs. Once skinned and gutted these dead animals provide food for the hounds. Farmers appreciate this because it cost considerably less than other dead stock collections and the hounds use the flesh as food instead of it simply being incinerated.
Actually in many ways they are hunting for their food because many hunts run a 'flesh round' where they collect for a very small fee all the local farmers dead stock of calves, cows and lambs. Once skinned and gutted these dead animals provide food for the hounds. Farmers appreciate this because it cost considerably less than other dead stock collections and the hounds use the flesh as food instead of it simply being incinerated.
millikins
Well-Known Member
I might say the same to you SG, I offered no opinion or information on hunting, merely pointed out that LACS have yet to produce credible evidence that illegal hunting is taking place, didn't stop you making assumptions about me.
Moomin1
Well-Known Member
The RSPCA were not told to stop bringing prosecutions about with regard hunting because the hunts act within the law. They were advised to leave it to other organisations to bring about the prosecutions instead.
Clodagh
Well-Known Member
Smurfs Gran - I really like you, an anti who can debate! Although I am not anti (I am on the fence so securely I have splinters). All pros think if you are anti hunting you are ignorant, which is patently not true. I am not anti enough to state my case online but you have a lot of valid points.
I don't know about the deer sanctuary situation and I do think LACS are hopeless but hunting is not the be all and end all of the rural scene.
Hope that makes sense!
I don't know about the deer sanctuary situation and I do think LACS are hopeless but hunting is not the be all and end all of the rural scene.
Hope that makes sense!
Exploding Chestnuts
Well-Known Member
Your earlier quote "- information is always good, and if you have an opposing view its always good to know what the other camp are saying?? you never know they may have a point some of the time"
Sorry, but you haven't demonstrated any understanding, you had certain fixed ideas when you came on here and you still have them. I am not assuming anything, you told us where you got your information.
As I said before, you are assuming that "illegal" hunting is widespread, and some sort of "legal" hunting could take place within the current "countryside structure" , therefore you are telling us that current hunting is illegal.
Last edited:
LittleRooketRider
Well-Known Member
Actually Bonkers I do agree with a lot of what you say, ( though not the left wing thing that's just an argument put forward by the Countryside Alliance which I think has no basis in fact) but unfortunately due to the partisan views on here, its impossible to get past petty bickering as to who is right - if there could be an adult debate that would be great.
As for Lacs asking for all hunting to be banned. I doubt this would happen, but it is worth bearing in mind that this is being requested because of hunts who do hunt illegally - in my view they are spoiling this for others who want to hunt legally.
As for my comments being weird, you are of course entitled to your views but there is nothing weirder ( grammar
As for looking at activists websites - information is always good, and if you have an opposing view its always good to know what the other camp are saying?? you never know they may have a point some of the time.
Evidence of it being a class war...easy..I just have to list the class related insults used online and hurled at me most saturdays.
"Inbred toff/scum/upper-class ****"
"Blood-thirsty/murdering toff"
"Bl00dy/effing Posh whore/ see-you-next-tuesday"
Inbred is a popular one with sabs.In fact I believe I am yet to recieve an insult that is neither class related nor about my parents being related...can't really blame their lack of originality when their insults are based on misinformation and a lack of fact.
For clarity I am a farmer's daughter, not the landed gentry kind, my grandparents and Dad bought our farm about 40 years ago and have built it up with copious amounts of blood, sweat and tears.
I hunt because I ove horses and I will confess to being an adrenaline junkie. Why do I want the ban repealed? a) hunting with hounds mimcs nature..so is nature cruel? b) I have witnessed first hand the damage the vermin caused..ripping to shreds all ten chickens and takin half of one, killing lambs, we have had attacks on calves...yet there si an abundance of rabbits ruining our crops.
Smurf's Gran
Well-Known Member
Why don't you go back and re read my posts to you...I have asked you some questions based on what you posted, nothing more or less and no assumptions made ?
I believe that your view about LACS and other organisations in regards to collecting evidence of illegal hunting is that there is no evidence to collect ...yet we have Bonkers who says that the RSPCA was asked to stop bringing convictions. I would really like to know which one it is ??
Smurf's Gran
Well-Known Member
And you know this how ???
Last edited:
Smurf's Gran
Well-Known Member
LRP - you are entitled to your views, and I appreciate you explaining them - what I would say re whether this is a class war is that while it may appear to be so in the Hunting field, and I do accept your points re insults etc, which I am sure occurs on both sides and does no argument any good. In the real world outside the hunting field 80% of the population really are against hunting - I don't think 80% of our nation is Working class . and the poll has shown to be equally split between town / country.
Smurf's Gran
Well-Known Member
Thanks for you comments Clodagh. TBH I've about had enough of this now, not the topic ...as I find this very interesting. What I am getting fed up of is those on here who are pro hunting being unable to discuss in a rational way, without being insulting, calling people weird, using partial quotes so things are taken out of context, and then refusing to answer questions or provide info on that which they have posted. There is only A1fie who actually provided anything helpful.
This behaviour does those who are pro hunting no good at all, and it appears that the debate has become so polarised that this is no longer possible.
Moomin1
Well-Known Member
I think you misunderstood me. The RSPCA were not told to stop bringing prosecutions about as an insinuation that the hunts purportedly act within the law - it has nothing to do with that. They were told to leave any prosecutions to other agencies to prevent any further criticism that they are politically motivated. Which the report also stated there was absolutely no evidence of.
Last edited:
Smurf's Gran
Well-Known Member
The questionnaire actually gives different options for each animal, so you can choose to support a ban on one and not another. If you look up the results of the poll you will see that different "animals" have differing percentage based results.
Re the hounds hunting for their food. I'm sure its helpful for the hounds to dispose of fallen stock etc, but I don't think its the same as a pack of wild dogs bringing down a bison etc which will be their food for the week etc.
The hounds don't need to eat the fox to survive - the chase and kill is set up for humans for their sport and pleasure. I know there are some arguments about hunting having a conservation role in terms of foxes, but equally pro hunting arguments have also used the opposite argument
.