Got a bit unsettled today...League Against Cruel Sports

[cptrayes]

"A foot pack would do the same job"

exactly my point , why waste a good day with horses around interfereing with the job

Perhaps because they are the ones who pay for it?

 

[GreenMill]

Firstly let me apologise for this being my first post, i'm not a troll, simply someone who's anti parents are far to techy.

Firstly i have to say i believe firmly that in a debate over such an emotive subject we can never expect everyone to play nice. You will constantly have the extremists on both sides.

Sometimes i compare both pro parties and anti parties to football hooligans. You get some people who are so wrapped up in the emotion of the sport and are truly willing to fight for what they believe, and you also get those who are purely there for the fight. And that IMHO is where the problems mainly lie. I think plenty of regular hunters and hunt staff constantly prove how civilised and willing to accept other peoples opinions they are, same with anti's. Although a few of you pro's on here are doing a good job of proving how they can also not take in anything anyone else says! CC i admire how politically you word your posts, and how obviously well informed they are.

In reply to the original post, to be quite honest with you anyone that calls themself and animal lover that isn't at lease partly distressed by some of the images on there doesn't have the right to call themselves an animal lover. So at least you have that. However i would say that some of those images may either be fake or something taken extremely out of context, and that doesn't only happen on the anti side.

I shan't state which hunt but i took my horse cubbing early this season, and actually left because of how awful i thought the amount of foxes being slaughtered was. And that was from one covert. However i was then talkied into going out again once cubbing had stopped and did not see anything but a hare killed, a hare they didn't even intend to kill. And yet it says on their website "hunting within the law", clearly though they aren't. SO how is a mounted field, of which a lot only go because they think it's banned supposed to know any different?

I am starting to sound very anti now, and in truth i'm not. I am pro controlling a fox population, i feel hunting with hounds is a far more humane method than shooting or indeed poison!! However i have been witness far to many times to people from the hunting community hunting and killing animals for their own pleasure. I speak from experience after a few seasons hunting, relationships with hunt staff and many of my friends being within the hunting community.

To be honest with you i fail to see how i could of ever justified paying for this barbaric act, however after experience with another hunt i am starting to see why i am pro in a purely anti family. Some hunts tarnish all the others with a bad brush, as do some people.

And in reply to the comment about a mounted field, how do you think a hunt would have the up-keep of however many couple of hounds, lorry's, staff, buildings etc WITHOUT a mounted and PAYING field? Your naieve if you think hunting would be better off without paying 'customers'.

I don't see anything wrong with drag hunting, it's upto the farmer whether or not they allow them onto his/her land. And IMO what's wrong with a group of people having a nice enjoyable day whilst crossing country and following hounds just because they don't want to see a fox killed?

Sorry for the novel, when your in an anti family with pro friends it's hard to have a decent discussion about it!

 

[cptrayes]

So it's a foot pack. Your point?

If that's your game just play it. Why do some people, not necessarily you, try to tell other people that they shouldn't be playing the game they want to play? Beats me, it really does.

 

[Starbucks]

i want to know where snobby Rosiie came from? Last time I saw her she was a really nice girls. apparently things change!

 

[Starbucks]

really Rosiie, as someome who knows you, you aren;t doing yourself any favours.

 

[RunToEarth]

I'd really love you to pick apart my posts on this thread and point out where I am so snobby, sarah?
What is it to you anyway, I'm happy, I haven't said anything to upset you, let me be.

 

[RunToEarth]

really Rosiie, as someome who knows you, you aren;t doing yourself any favours.

Yikes didn't see this one either, two posts in a row, I am on the front of your mind...
Honestly S? I haven't seen you or spoken to you in person for 3years + now, thats quite a substantial amount of time, I hardly think you can play the "thats not the Rosie I used to know" card. Anyway, not particularly bothered about a public argument on here. PM me is you have a problem with...me.

 

[Starbucks]

You are right no need to argue.. sorry for being a bitch.

 

[combat_claire]

What are you talking about? My last post was agreeing with you in the light of the new information you supplied that people in your hunt didn't understand the concept of trail hunting.

 

[combat_claire]

You are not reading my posts. I am looking at a scenario where quarry packs have gone altogether. The drag packs that make no contribution to farming are unlikely to be tolerated unless some arrangement is made to compensate the farmer for the damage caused to his land. Penalties for landowners being in breach of cross compliance regulations are becoming far too stringent for many to risk damage to their land without return.

I admitted earlier that I hadn't realised that your drag pack collected fallen stock, but I still believe they are in the minority among drag packs. Our local pack certainly feed biscuit as they kennel with the beagles.

 

[combat_claire]

It would be easier to debate with you if you actually understood the the Hunting Act 2004. The High Court Judgement upheld the acquittal of Tony Wright

In legal terms the judgment limits the definition of 'hunting' to the pursuit of a mammal with dogs; it upholds the presumption of innocence for people involved in legal hunting by putting the burden of proof on the prosecution to prove that any hunting is illegal; and it confirms that 'hunting' can only be intentional - you cannot hunt by accident.

So having cleared that one up, do you now concede that the majority of UK hunts are working within this confusing law to the best of their ability. Or do you have some staggering evidence of widespread law breaking??

Don't worry we will be fighting for repeal, in the mean time we work within the law as written. We are not picking and choosing which laws we obey.

Once again you fail to read or understand any of my post before responding. Hunting pre-ban was always about population management not extermination. I have seen some of the ridiculous bags where people go out lamping and kill every fox within sight, regardless of health and age. Some foxes are good for farms, they eat rabbits and slugs, too many foxes become a problem and that is when targeted population management based on natural selection against the weak or sick fox, which is most likely to predate livestock comes into play. If you go out with a rifle, how can you guarantee that the fox that killed lambs the night before is the same one you shot. Skiddaw Lad will be able to tell you about the lambing call outs that the fell packs were engaged with. Now the Act only allows terriers to be used to protect gamebirds, not livestock. Makes no sense at all does it??

I would also like to reiterate that shooting does not have a 100% record in clean kills, that would be impossible, especially shooting at night. Horrendous wounding injuries which condemn a fox to starvation or a lingering death to gangrene will never be acceptable in my view.

 

[combat_claire]

One of our subscribers stated that hunting with a drag pack was like kissing your sister, fun but not as good as the real thing!

 

[combat_claire]

Good post Greenmill. Can't be easy for you in your situation. Hope you stick around with your contributions. Has anyone seen Scratchline about recently??

I guess it all depends on what exemption the pack was attempting, not all hunts trail hunt as their main activity, a lot flush to guns or a bird of prey or use other exemptions within the Act, but we are using hounds who are not robots, and if they pick up an interesting smell that isn't the laid trail then the whips must be well on the ball to prevent any unfortunate incidents.

 

[Simsar]

And we can't pick and choose what laws we intend to stick by and which we don't. There are plenty of people in this country who think paedophilia is harmless and should be legal. Whilst I accept this is an extreme example, if people are allowed to pick and choose which laws to ignore and which to stick by, the whole of society would break down.

I wasn't going to join in with this argument but I fail to see how ANY decent person could compare the hunting argument with the above on PAEDOPHILIA.

Since this government came to power there has been no society left to break down IMHO!!

I understand what the OP was trying to get at but shame on you for such a comparison.

 

[abb123]

I think RosiiePimms has a point. People should be aware of what type of hunt they are going which can be difficult for newcomers. I consider myself definately as a newcomer and was considering going on a drag hunt or a pre-ban fox hunt. I decided against the fox hunt as, after reading around I became aware that fox hunting still occurs but within the law (example using hawks). I dont know much about that and to be honest I dont want to. I am far more comfortable knowing that I can go out and enjoy the riding AND the hounds without worrying about being involved in fox hunting.

 

[combat_claire]

I applaud you for researching and making your own mind up. The majority of packs will make an announcement as to which exemptions they will be employing on a hunting day.

For example our minkhound masters will stand up at the meet and announce that we will be hunting rats, hound exercising or following a pre-laid trail. This way there is no confusion about what is supposed to be happening.

 

[skewby]

I think it would do for fields to know what type of hunt they are on, so when some little oik in the office tries to make you feel like a criminal, you have a dignified response.

Gosh, did I say I found myself in a field of horses and hounds, and didn't know what the aim of the day was? I do apologise for not making myself clear.

I also don't see how my OP was about the legality of it - though that's an interesting turn the thread has taken, and I have learned a lot, so thank you to those who have taken the time to share their considerable knowledge, it has helped clarify things for me.

I consider asking questions on here, of you knowledgable hunting folk, to be part of my research. I find out as much as I can, and inevitably I find conflicting information or am not sure about something. So shoot me for not being born with the knowledge, I don't care and clearly neither do the others who give me their advice and help freely on here, and via PM.

As far as I am concerned, my hunt has been fabulously welcoming and encouraging to me, and they are the ones who matter, really. If they took the view I should know it all before I went out with them, they'd have to make me sit an entrance exam. Luckily this does not seem to be their stance, and they don't penalise me for being new to the sport - they field my many questions quite happily and I have actually been commended for being unafraid to ask "dumb" questions when I'm out. I'm new, I don't really know what's going on, I really don't see why I should need to pretend that I do!

It's a shame that others on the field have pointed out they are impressed with my forthrightness, as they clearly didn't feel comfortable enough to ask what they wanted to know when they were in my position.

Perhaps my OP was ridiculous, but I still don't truly see why. The mounted field is kept pretty much away from the "action" the times I have been out. I wanted to find out more of the detail, I have two sources - MFHA and LACS, I thought that here would be the best place to ask those who will know more, and will tell me the truth. It was just a question

If I have to apologise for not being born on the back of a horse, to a hunting family, then so be it, if it makes you feel happy or superior to me, knock yourself out

 

[cptrayes]

It would be easier to debate with you if you actually understood the the Hunting Act 2004. The High Court Judgement upheld the acquittal of Tony Wright etc etc etc etc etc.

Thankyou for your lecture but I am actually a Justice of the Peace and I do know how the law works

I know from the horse's mouth that the fox hunt nearest me is hunting fox. They asked me to go out with them. As a JP I cannot break the law so I asked them if they were hunting fox and they said yes.

My drag do not feed the hounds with the meat run, they are not allowed by current H&S or DEFRA or some other rules. If you read the article in H&H last week you would have known that we have a meat run, how much it costs, and how it cannot be fed to our hounds.

 

[Starbucks]

Was gonna say earlier, hunts have to pay to get rid of fallen stock, not so easy as just feeding to hounds nowadays.

 

[cptrayes]

And we can't pick and choose what laws we intend to stick by and which we don't. There are plenty of people in this country who think paedophilia is harmless and should be legal. Whilst I accept this is an extreme example, if people are allowed to pick and choose which laws to ignore and which to stick by, the whole of society would break down.

I wasn't going to join in with this argument but I fail to see how ANY decent person could compare the hunting argument with the above on PAEDOPHILIA.

Since this government came to power there has been no society left to break down IMHO!!

I understand what the OP was trying to get at but shame on you for such a comparison.

I am not comparing the hunting argument with paedophilia. I am comparing a decision to break the law in one area with a decision to break the law in another, both on the basis that you consider what you do is acceptable. While one is clearly much less unacceptable to society than the other, the point was valid.

I could not give a fig about the hunting argument, you hunt what you like. My conscience is my conscience and yours is yours. But there is undoubtedly a growing trend among hunts, (fuelled by the Association of Chief Police Officers statement that prosecuting hunting is to be considered very low priority) of ignoring what is admittedly a deeply flawed law, and my point is that in a civilised, democratic society we cannot pick and choose what laws we stick by and which we don't .

I am sure that a lot of hunting people are simply hoping that the law will "fade away" and not be enforced. It won't, the LACS will see to that and bring private prosecutions if the Police and CPS won't act. You need to continue your fight to get the law repealed.

 

[fitzaud2]

i know what you mean, my mother gave me a note for school once apon a time that said i was missing school the previous day because i was hunting, i could have killed her. it started world war 3 with the teacher. i've been hunting since i was 13, i'm now 30. I met my ex out hunting, and have 2 children because of it. Digging out is against the law now, even though it does still hapen. I dont agree with it. I think that if the fox goes to ground, and gets away from the hounds, then it should be left aslone. Hunting is much better then being snared, shot or poisioned. Those anti fox hunting people wreck my head, do they even know what they are campaining against? Someone shot a fox that ended up on our land at one point, and i followed the trail of blood for a mile, so tell me, is it more humane to have them suffer or die in a split second.

 

[fitzaud2]

Give them time and they will ban rat hunting.

 

[Clodagh]

Digging out is not illegal, its a bizarre part of the HUnting Act that they didn't want to upset the shoots so allowed digging out to continue.
I'm a long time hunter who is getting old and soft and slowly turning anti. We lamp the foxes now with a rifle and its a damn sight more efficient and humane than fox hunting, although we kill a lot more than the hunt would.

 

[cptrayes]

That's the first time I have heard from a lamper, and it's a very interesting report, particularly as there is nothing else but lamping in my area. It's good to know that you believe it's humane. I dont' think you need to apologise for killing numbers. If my friends lose many more hens in the daytime they'llpay your train fare to come up and sort them out! Thankyou for risking some negative feedback by posting.

 

[Clodagh]

Lol! We only go lamping when we start losing daytime hens so I sympathise with your friends.

 

[combat_claire]

In that case you will know that there are plenty of legal ways to hunt a fox, just because your pack are hunting fox, does not mean they are necessarily breaking the law.

I don't read Horse & Hound regularly and I have already apologised for not realising that your pack organise a flesh round so you really don't have to keep banging on about it.

Current rules have made the practices relating to feeding flesh more stringent, but has by no means banned it. So long as the meat is stored separately from where skinning takes place, filtering of waste water, bunding areas of hard standing, after burners on the incinerator etc etc. This has cost hunts thousands of pounds to comply with so many decided it just wasn't worth the expense.

 

[combat_claire]

Having had first hand experience of going knackering and more recently feeding flesh to our minkhounds I can assure you that the flesh round is still an integral part of many packs. The costs have increased in complying with the Animal By-Products regs but thankfully packs have managed to raise the funds to upgrade facilities or find other ways of complying with the rules.

 

[rosie fronfelen]

our hounds are fed dried feed(hence no meat) they are very fit and going well. we then dont have the dreaded inspections regarding the flesh facilities!! by the way, off topic altogether, did you see the Fitzwilliam on telly, " A Ride Through Middle England." they are near you i believe?

 

[Starbucks]

Oh right I see.

That's good then.

 

[combat_claire]

Our minkhounds love the bakery waste that they get served with the flesh after a hard day on the river. Quite cute seeing them with whipped cream round their chops, but not so nice when they want a hug before bedtime!

Dammit, I was watching that programme and then switched over to watch Harry Potter DVD! Will try and catch the re-run on H & C TV. :grin: