Desperate measures - 'UK foxhunters should be protected ethnic minority'

If hunting with hounds is the most humane method of fox control why aren't better dogs used? Mine could catch and despatch a fox in very short order. It would be a very quick clean death where the neck was broken, so instant death. Once it was spotted he would catch it in under a minute. So why are we using hounds that can take an hour chasing them?
 
I'm Dun said:
If hunting with hounds is the most humane method of fox control why aren't better dogs used? Mine could catch and despatch a fox in very short order. It would be a very quick clean death where the neck was broken, so instant death. Once it was spotted he would catch it in under a minute. So why are we using hounds that can take an hour chasing them?
Click to expand...
I think you are talking about pre-ban hunting. There is no law to stop you taking 2 dogs out, of your choice, for fox control but sighthounds will not likely scent and trail a fox they cannot see.

Foxes use many different methods to evade predators so the most reliable method is to use a scent trail and foxhound/fell hounds and harriers are experts in that department. There is nothing to stop anyone taking 2 hounds out to do that either. A foxhound kill is as instant as a sighthound kill, as a terrier killing a rat is instant and still considered the most humane way of killing rats. The pursuit of an animal may be more stressful for them, depending on how they have evolved to cope with that type of predation. Foxes generally are hunted by longer pursuit or opportunist attack (not in the UK) by their predators. A pack of hounds is not only a species appropriate form of predation for foxes, but pre-ban, foxes in the UK were well adapted to this.
 
skinnydipper said:
Who decided it was the most humane method? I'm sure it wasn't a fox.

ETA. if you were a fox, how would you choose to die?
Click to expand...
No wild creature dies easily. Wild/non domestic animals starve to death, get injured and are predated or die of their injury or starvation, or disease. Whether we see that or not, wild animals do not have easy deaths. I have no idea why the lives of wild animals are so idealized that this basic fact isn't recognized. In terms of humane despatch of wild animals, finding the weak, sick and ailing is not actually very easy. A gun is an excellent tool but humane despatch by a number of means is much, much simpler than the finding.
 
palo1 said:
A pack of hounds is not only a species appropriate form of predation for foxes, but pre-ban, foxes in the UK were well adapted to this.
Click to expand...

How many foxes would be required to appropriately feed a pack of hounds each day? Surely in the wild a pack of hounds would focus on bigger prey or die of malnourishment quite quickly - hard to see how this situation would occur naturally, be sustainable, or be 'species- appropriate' for either species?

Natural predators of foxes in other countries are coyotes, eagles, cougars, lynx - all generally solitary hunters to the best of my knowledge.

As for foxes being 'well adapted' to being hunted... Before given the right to vote, women were 'well adapted' to not having the right to vote. Or was it just that they had to cope with their lives as best they could given the time they lived in?
 
Don't young foxhounds have to be taught to hunt fox? What is that horrible cubbing/autumn hunting business?

And just to ensure it will never be a level playing field for the fox, anywhere they are likely to hide is filled in or if they are lucky enough to find somewhere to seek refuge they will get dug out or terriers sent in.
 
Last edited:
PurpleSpots said:
How many foxes would be required to appropriately feed a pack of hounds each day? Surely in the wild a pack of hounds would focus on bigger prey or die of malnourishment quite quickly - hard to see how this situation would occur naturally, be sustainable, or be 'species- appropriate' for either species?

Natural predators of foxes in other countries are coyotes, eagles, cougars, lynx - all generally solitary hunters to the best of my knowledge.

As for foxes being 'well adapted' to being hunted... Before given the right to vote, women were 'well adapted' to not having the right to vote. Or was it just that they had to cope with their lives as best they could given the time they lived in?
Click to expand...
I've no idea how many foxes would be needed...! I suppose it depends on the size of the pack of hounds. Foxes are adapted to being hunted by both solitary hunters as you say, and packs of wolves, wild and feral hunting dogs. They are remarkable, beautiful, adaptable creatures which is why they have been so successful, including being able to adapt to human cities.

A 'wild' pack of hounds would ecologically mimic a pack of wolves or wild hunting dogs (though African hunting dogs have some pretty unique ways of working). Within a pack of hounds there are a range of skills/talents, with some hounds having speed or aggression, others greater stamina, others have very high scenting ability or good or particularly reliable voice which brings the pack together. It would be interesting but unfeasible to see how a pack of hounds would function without humans. Probably not a suitable experiment any time soon though!

I think the point about women's suffrage is non-sensical tbh because that is a specific cultural-political issue that is not universal to all human cultures and is not an ecological phenomenon either.
 
skinnydipper said:
Don't young foxhounds have to be taught to hunt fox? What is that horrible cubbing/autumn hunting business?
Click to expand...
Hounds are pretty sensitive - they need to learn to work together, more than learn to kill - which they will do as easily or not as many other individual dogs. Not all hounds are killers in the same way that not all dogs have a killing instinct. One of our sheepdogs is way more aggressive/prey driven than some hounds would be... Back in the day, cubbing allowed hounds to start working together without the domination of the whole, older pack. Young foxes were dispersed or easily killed by those hounds. The pack working together to find and kill young foxes was important in developing a true hunting pack and encouraging hounds to develop their specific talents.
 
Tiddlypom said:
Trail hunting’s days are done. It served a purpose for pro hunt enabling much full fat illegal hunting to go on under the smokescreen, but there’s no point carrying on with that pretence any more since Labour got in. Trail hunting is a busted flush.

All pro hunt have got to lose now is the rather large sum of money required to try to get this protected characteristic wheeze through the courts in the hope of hunting eventually becoming legal again. It’s boom or bust.

It’s a mockery of what the Equalities Act was set up for, but pro hunt don’t care about that, or how they will be perceived for trying this legal wangle to enable them to continue to get their kicks.

I used to hunt long before the ban, and the writing was on the wall for hunting many, many years ago. It’s not as if the ban was a shock, sensitivities have changed and hunting has had its time. Pro hunt need to suck that up and get on with their lives.
Click to expand...
This. Me too, I used to hunt but realise now it had it's day. The hunts have shot themselves in the foot by arrogantly carrying on as before. If they'd obeyed the law or become drag hunts things might have been different. Drag hunting is great fun btw. They've caused their own demise and cannot lay blame elsewhere.
 
I'm Dun said:
If hunting with hounds is the most humane method of fox control why aren't better dogs used? Mine could catch and despatch a fox in very short order. It would be a very quick clean death where the neck was broken, so instant death. Once it was spotted he would catch it in under a minute. So why are we using hounds that can take an hour chasing them?
Click to expand...
Because that's what the followers and hunt staff want presumably. When our local huntsman was doing a work to rule type thing after a dispute with the masters he found and killed in quick succession and there was no galloping across fields it was straight to the covert hounds in fox dead everyone standing around.
 
Hunting is done because of the entitled attitude of hunts not because of perceived animal cruelty. I can only think of 2 land owners near us that let them on the land and that is the real nail in the coffin. If you don’t have the landowners on side you don’t have a hunt.

I have had people try to talk me in to letting them hunt across my land but the answer will always be no… generally I find the hounds are out of control now and their attitude sucks
 
skinnydipper said:
Who decided it was the most humane method? I'm sure it wasn't a fox.

ETA. if you were a fox, how would you choose to die?
Click to expand...

Honestly, I'd rather the sight hound got me than I starved to death or died of some horrible old age related illness. Or by a clean good shot which would be my preferred choice if they could be guaranteed to be accurate. I wouldn't want chasing beforehand though.
 
blitznbobs said:
Hunting is done because of the entitled attitude of hunts not because of perceived animal cruelty. I can only think of 2 land owners near us that let them on the land and that is the real nail in the coffin. If you don’t have the landowners on side you don’t have a hunt.

I have had people try to talk me in to letting them hunt across my land but the answer will always be no… generally I find the hounds are out of control now and their attitude sucks
Click to expand...
Agree
 
palo1 said:
I think you are talking about pre-ban hunting. There is no law to stop you taking 2 dogs out, of your choice, for fox control but sighthounds will not likely scent and trail a fox they cannot see.

Foxes use many different methods to evade predators so the most reliable method is to use a scent trail and foxhound/fell hounds and harriers are experts in that department. There is nothing to stop anyone taking 2 hounds out to do that either. A foxhound kill is as instant as a sighthound kill, as a terrier killing a rat is instant and still considered the most humane way of killing rats. The pursuit of an animal may be more stressful for them, depending on how they have evolved to cope with that type of predation. Foxes generally are hunted by longer pursuit or opportunist attack (not in the UK) by their predators. A pack of hounds is not only a species appropriate form of predation for foxes, but pre-ban, foxes in the UK were well adapted to this.
Click to expand...

Its not really a serious argument from me, but sight hounds absolutely do scent and trail. I have prevented the death of many deer because Ive noticed mine picking up the scent and got him back on his lead before he engages the murder turbo button. The do use sight as well obviously, but if there's nothing to be seen, anything with strong drive will put their nose down and find out where its gone.

I watched him quarter a crop field that had been cut yesterday, nose to the ground, scenting. I let him as I love watching him work and anything there was going to be small vermin, rabbits and the like. He covered the whole field looking, worked out whatever it was had gone into the woods, and was then put on his lead because it looked like it was probably deer he was looking for and he was about to head off into the woods to find them, and I don't want him doing that!

You could absolutely breed in faster more athletic dogs to make the chase much shorter, but I don't think thats really what people wanted.

And yes I guess I am talking pre ban hunting, but as we all know, its still going on now.
 
palo1 said:
No wild creature dies easily. Wild/non domestic animals starve to death, get injured and are predated or die of their injury or starvation, or disease. Whether we see that or not, wild animals do not have easy deaths. I have no idea why the lives of wild animals are so idealized that this basic fact isn't recognized. In terms of humane despatch of wild animals, finding the weak, sick and ailing is not actually very easy. A gun is an excellent tool but humane despatch by a number of means is much, much simpler than the finding.
Click to expand...
I think because our TV viewing is sanitised people think wild animal kills are immediate. Lions will start eating once the prey is down and wild dogs often start at the belly - neither wait for the animal to be dead.

Shooting always sounds much cleaner but you'd have to be an excellent shot to kill outright and not let an injured animal go off to die in pain.
 
SEL said:
Shooting always sounds much cleaner but you'd have to be an excellent shot to kill outright and not let an injured animal go off to die in pain.
Click to expand...
And for every clean shot, how many bad shots have there been to enable the shooter to learn to make consistently clean shots?
 
Last edited:
I'm Dun said:
If hunting with hounds is the most humane method of fox control why aren't better dogs used? Mine could catch and despatch a fox in very short order. It would be a very quick clean death where the neck was broken, so instant death. Once it was spotted he would catch it in under a minute. So why are we using hounds that can take an hour chasing them?
Click to expand...
A foxhound can kill instantly.

Pre ban I saw a Welsh hunt (no horses) clearing foxes during lambing season. The huntsman were sending hounds into the thickets to disperse foxes and any that weren't sharp enough to scarper were dispatched quickly.

But foxes are fast! Watching two come across my land last year with hounds in pursuit I was impressed at the speed.
 
Thats what I mean, foxes are faster than hounds so it was never about a quick catch and despatch job. If it was they would have bred lighter framed faster dogs. It shouldn't be relevant now, but given the proper hunting lots are doing, it kind of is.
 

​

The Granemore Hare

One fine winter's morning, my horn I did blow
To the green fields of Keady, for a hunt we did go
We gathered our dogs and we circled around
For none loves the sport better than the boys of Maydown

And when we arrived, they were all standing there
We set off through the fields boys, in search of a hare
We didn't go far 'til someone gave a cheer
Over high hill and valley, this wee puss did steer

As she flew o'er thon hills, 'twas a beautiful sight
There were dogs black and yellow, there were dogs black and white
As she skipped the Black Bank and went driving once more
Oh, that was her last look on the hills of Granemore

In a field of wheat stubble, this wee puss did lie
And Rory and Charmer, they did pass her by
But, there where we stood at the top of the brae
We heard the very last words that this wee puss did say

No more o'er the green fields of Keady I'll run
Or trip through the fields boys, to have a day's fun
Or hear the long horn that Joe Toner did play
Or go home to my den by the clear break of day

You may blame Owen McMahon for bringing Coyle here
He's been at his ould capers this many a year
Saturday or Sunday, he'll never give o'er
Only bringing strange dogs 'round the hills of Granemore
 
And "The Hare's Lament," also from Ulster.


On the 20th of January and in the 70th year,
The morning being beautiful, charming, bright and clear,
I being disturbed by dreams as I lay in my den,
I dreamed of heathery mountain, high rock and low glen.


Chorus (repeated after each verse):
To my hark, tallyho! Hark over yon brow.
“She’s over,” cries the huntsman, “See, yonder she’ll go.”


As I sat in my form for to view the plains round
I being trembling and shaking for fear of the hounds
And seeing no danger appearing to me
I quickly walked out to the top of Sliabh Cruach.


They hunted me up and they hunted me down;
At the loop of the burn they did me surround.
Then came the huntsman to end all the strife,
He says, “Leave the hare down and give her play for her life.”


Bad luck to all sportsmen, to Bowman and Ringwood,
They sprinkled the plain with my innocent blood.
They let Reynard go free, that cunning old fox,
That ate up all the chickens, fat hens and game cocks.


It’s now I’m for dying, but I know not the crime;
To the value of sixpence I ne’er robbed mankind.
I never was given to rob or to steal,
All the harm that ever I done was crop the heads of green kale.
 
Last edited:
Clodagh said:
For once I actually think the chocolate teapot that is the CA is right.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree on this occasion.

The CA desperately want to promote the narrative that hunting self regulates and that hunting’s own governing body oversees and enforces legal Hunting Act compliant trail hunting. No need for Labour to ban trail hunting as all is hunky dory and law abiding within hunting. That’s balls, of course, but that’s the path they’re taking.

The BHSA, endorsed by the CA, are busy organising Smokescreen Saturday (as the antis refer to it) next month to promote trail hunting as a ‘legal well-regulated activity’ 🙈. Smokescreen Saturday was originally arranged to take place before the anticipated date of an autumn general election to impress parliamentary candidates, but got wrong footed by the short notice July GE. It’s going ahead anyway ahead of the autumn political party conference season.

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=pfbid0zbpVfh76o9pcC9KeRiqKNQK5yhKGE1Sg11CQNJokJhfJ4J2fba33chDPDvfhDrhpl&id=100087380293538

Then Ed Wales and cronies, fed up with the perceived uselessness of the CA, bob up to bring to very public notice that what the hunting fraternity really want is proper hunting back.

I don’t know what sort of reception that EW thought that his attempt to get pro hunting beliefs Equality Act protection would get. I doubt that he anticipated the widespread derision and anger that he has encountered. And it’s put the spotlight right back on hunting.

IMG_1272.jpeg

Whilst this is just a quick and not very rigorous public vote conducted during his recent car crash appearance on ITV, it’s probably not that far off. 15% for hunting beliefs getting Equality Act protection, 85% against.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top