Dogs or guns

[CARREG]

When it comes to the hare, the figures are grotesque, a slaughter on an unparalleled scale. In the last year of hare coursing - and coursers keep precise statistics because greyhounds are matched in knock-out competition - 180 hares were killed in 1,462 courses on 71 days on 10 purely coursing estates. The next year, on the same estates, 8,000 hares were shot.

On one estate, according to National Coursing Club figures, 330 hares were shot in one day. A fortnight before, when coursing was still legal, just nine hares were killed there. 'Everyone knew what the consequences of the ban would be,' I was told by Charles Blanning, the secretary of the National Coursing Club. 'We told MPs and ministers so at meetings we had prior to the bill being published. But they didn't care. They had a single-issue agenda which was to get rid of hunting and hare coursing and damn the consequences. They're really not interested in animals.'


Most civilised urban and suburban people probably supported the ban on hunting because in some way they felt it would benefit wild mammals. It is a very difficult concept for them to grasp that the very opposite is true. Perhaps to understand fully the conundrum, we need to anthropomorphise more, not less. For if I were a fox or a deer, I'd be begging for a return to 2004. And if I were a hare, I'd be down on my knees praying for the good old days of coursing where, for 20 seconds of supposed terror, everything was a free lunch.

Now we know - bullets are far crueller than dogs

From The Observer...............Carreg

 

[severnmiles]

We all said it would happen....they wouldn't listen, unfortunately this is what happens when townies and city folk interfere in something they just don't have a clue about.

Personally I'm very fond of hares...but then again I'm not an arable farmer.

 

[flying_change]

"The next year, on the same estates, 8,000 hares were shot"

Why ?

 

[Ereiam_jh]

If an animal is providing sport then people will tolerate it more. Also hares tend to be shot in large numbers to discourage illegal coursing which causes all sorts of problems to estate owners.

 

[flying_change]

Shot by whom ?

 

[k9h]

The land owner organises shoots (shoot like a pheasant shoot) Also if you can lamp them at night you can get £6 a hare from a butcher!
I'd go for hounds all the way as it is either a straight kill or getaway. No lingering deather by shot gun.

 

[flying_change]

So it's again the custodian of the countryside who is doing the excess killing.

 

[runaway]

Because like rabbits and foxes they need controlling and because the "normal" method has been banned, the only other way is to shoot the hare. But as it's already been mentioned shooting is not "selective" (in most cases). So anything that gets up will be shot at. Unlike coursing where the fittest healthiest animals out run the hounds and breed for the future.

Going off at a tangent a little (apologises CARREG) I watched a video of the 6 fell packs the other night. What an eye opener. It goes to show how a healthy fox can "literally" walk over a pack of hounds. One particular clip showed the pack in full cry hard on Charlies heels. Charlie "ran" into hounds on a couple of occasions and pulled the wool over their eyes. He eventually went through some deer fencing that held hounds up and sauntered off.

Another clip showed a "dumped" fox who'd been killing lambs. It was heart breaking to see the state of this fox, mange, lame and thin. Thank goodness the hunt could be called to end his misery.

Those clips just showed the real side of what the idiots in parliament have banned. Lets kick on and get the ban repealed

 

[Fantasy_World]

Runaway I totally agree with what you say about healthy foxes and the difference between foxes which are mange ridden, or ill. I also agree with the repealing of the ban too.
I for one did not want the ban even though I don't hunt myself.
I saw it as an effective way of controlling pest animals or dispatching those which otherwise could die a long and lingering death. Especially in the case of deers anyway, although a release of wolves into Scotland would be a terrific idea because if we can bring back the natural predator of these beautiful animals it will help prevent the species for the forseeable future. Unfortunately 'townies' or those which don't understand the aspect of wildlife management cannot grasp the idea of killing to maintain healthy stock. To them, particularly in the case of foxes, the thought of control did not even come into their heads, as most townies regard foxes as the night time visitors they see in their gardens at night.
They do not understand the damage they can do to livestock of farmers and small holders particularly those whose very aim is to provide less cruelly gained meat and eggs by the way of free range poultry.
We won't get into the class issue but I no doubt imagine that class rivalry was also partly to blame for the ban. Again media hype and poor representation of hunters and their followers. Stereotyping to the extreme. If the average person actually took a copy of the horse and hound off the shelf and read it before the ban or else read articles or watched programmes about it they would have seen that hunters come from all walks of life.
Also many believed that foxes lives would be saved. How stupid. I don't know exact figures off hand but hunting although a good way to control foxes was not fool proof and more could be killed by shooting that is true. In effect by banning hunting it is likely that more foxes would be killed. Trapping, poisoning and snaring are far more cruel in my own opinion and I would actively have a go at anyone I saw doing it.
Also shooting can leave animals maimed if not shot cleanly leaving animals to either starve to death ( cannot hunt, dig or graze) or else eventually die of gangrene.
I will say one thing though I did not agree with the digging out of foxes. If a fox beat the hounds then it won imo and should have been left alone!
Carreg a brilliant post btw and very informative. Full of facts no bulls**t or media hype. Never a truer word said in my opinion of the posting. Coursing versus shooting in relation to the welfare of the hare, no contest imo, coursing wins everytime.
Cazx

 

[peakpark]

That's an interesting piece, particularly from the Observer, which usually takes an anti line. There's also an article in the Sunday Telegraph today about how the ban isn't working.

 

[severnmiles]

So it's again the custodian of the countryside who is doing the excess killing.

If you'd left us to it then it wouldn't have happened. An interesting TV programme a few on this forum should have watched was 'Fat Men Can't Hunt'. If it aint broke don't fix it....

 

[k9h]

Cazee34 I totally agree on your non digging thing. Like you say if it has gone to ground then it has won. Though they only time I have know of digging to take place is when the farmer has requested it. I know one farmer requested a hole be dug a long time ago (over 10yrs) 5 came out but they would only shoot 1 to say & proove they had done as requested.
The unfortunate fact is that these Hare shoot took place before the ban & will continue except with a higher mortality rate.

 

[smilincow21]

"So it's again the custodian of the countryside who is doing the excess killing"
Actually it isn't just the countryside doing the killing! We get alot of foxes dumped on our fields by the townies and RSPCA. The foxes cannot fend for themselves as they have never had to kill their own food and live of plentifull leftovers in town. It is awfull when you find them in a heap, starving to death with no energy left to try and run away from you! And this comes from the people in town, who love and look after wildlife! When in actual fact it is the people of the countryside who are mainly involved in conservation of wildlife! Yes we may hunt, fish, shoot etc.etc. but in actual fact in most cases it maintains a healthy population!

 

[CARREG]

F.S
I answered this months ago, the owners of the estates are shooting the hares to stop illegal coursers running rampant over their estates, when coursing was legal the revenue it brought in was used to keeper the estates, that money has now gone theres no-one to pay for the keepers...............Carreg

 

[CARREG]

F.S
See me post higher up for the reasons the hares are shot.............Carreg

 

[Clodagh]

I did not agree with the digging out of foxes. If a fox beat the hounds then it won imo and should have been left alone!Cazx

IMO if the bugger won't run he should be shot and if he gives us a good run he can live for another day!!
OK, very politically incorrect answer, and tongue in cheek, peeps!
Totally agree with digging out, its what persuades the farmers to allow us to cross his land.
This winter, particulary we are so in their debt as it is so wet. Also, with digging now being the most legal way to kill the foxes its pretty well the only option left open for pest control.

 

[Breezesbenefactor]

I've found your debates on hunting very interesting as of late. Though isolation of the "townies" only assists in nailing down your coffin. I myself do not hunt but choose to be a watcher from the sideline, I don't agree with the ban as I feel that there are many other issues regarding animal welfare that need to be addressed first. However, the vote was done in Parliament and not as a referendum so by blighting yourselves to the masses is but a step away from putting a rope around your necks, still it does concern me that the shooting of foxes is not an effective way of culling their population but then again neither is coursing if there is no way out that's just plain wrong, unless you're not the sporting type in which case this won't matter.