Hunting Ban - ten years on

[ester]

Ah, I misunderstood you meant shooting v. hunting as opposed to hunting v. not hunting at all and letting them carry on their merry way.

 

[JenHunt]

Funnily enough we were discussing this on Saturday (whilst mounted, obviously!), and saying that actually, to the majority of us, what the hounds are following is irrelevant to our day - they could be following fox, socks or squirrel for all the difference it makes to us. We were treated to a lovely display of the hounds flushing a bunny from covert (quickly stopped by the Whip though) and you could have thrown a blanket over them they were so tight. Just beautiful to watch. What is important to us though was to see hounds working, and working well, on top of that the riding, the social side, the horses and the country we cross is why we go.

That said, I'm a firm believer that there is no more efficient and humane way to control pest species, and for that reason, and the unworkability (is that even a word?) of the ban, I think we should still be working for repeal.

And I agree, the prospect of it all under a Labour government is indeed terrifying.

 

[Alec Swan]

……..

And I agree, the prospect of it all under a Labour government is indeed terrifying.

The problem is that we entrust our lives, our futures and our well beings, to idiots, and that's all of them, regardless of party.

Alec.

 

[JenHunt]

there is that Alec! but then i guess that's the price we pay for living in a democracy? or even society in general?

 

[Alec Swan]

So what happens when a football club manager is found to be failing? He's out! He's then replaced. If there was a vote of confidence for the average MP, then we'd start to have a system where the wishes of the public were taken in to account. That Guy Fawkes should be martyred!!

Alec.

 

[Smurf's Gran]

So what happens when a football club manager is found to be failing? He's out! He's then replaced. If there was a vote of confidence for the average MP, then we'd start to have a system where the wishes of the public were taken in to account. That Guy Fawkes should be martyred!!

Alec.

Yes but one mans failure is another man's hero. Its all a matter of opinion.

 

[shannonandtay]

So what happens when a football club manager is found to be failing? He's out! He's then replaced. If there was a vote of confidence for the average MP, then we'd start to have a system where the wishes of the public were taken in to account. That Guy Fawkes should be martyred!!

Alec.

Just on a lighter note, guy Fawkes is martyred around here, we are still celebrating him even now

 

[Smurf's Gran]

I think hunting is certainly more popular now, because people have realised that the countryside is under threat and want to support it. People who before didn't think hunting was for them have wanted to stick two fingers up to the ban, and so have tried out hunting-and found that they loved it.

I think that whether or not we see a repeal-in fact whether or not any sort of hunting survives for us to enjoy in 10 years time or so-depends entirely on whether we have a Conservative or Labour government in 2015.

With a Conservative majority, we will get repeal and hopefully some sort of animal welfare legislation which puts hunting off the political agenda so it won't be tampered with by future politicians. Additionally we can hope for "English (and Welsh) Votes for English (and Welsh) Laws" -which would make introducing a ban again much harder for our enemies.

The prospect of a Labour government-with regards to our sport-is absolutely terrifying.

Or hunting maybe more popular now because there are more drag hunts, and people who previously would not dream of going fox hunting will now go.

 

[Smurf's Gran]

The very thinnest end of the wedge arrived when The National Trust decided to ban hunting upon the land under its control. A strange stance, but is it? The NT haven't banned shooting, and I wonder why? Do you suppose that it could be because those who shoot pay hefty rents? Do you suppose that had the Hunting fraternity paid for the right to cross land owned by the NT and pay for the right to do so, that they would have been stopped? I very much doubt it!!

I wonder what the thoughts would be of those who set up the NT, as a previously principled body which was focused upon the protection of our rural environs, and if they now saw the appalling state of our decimated rural lives, controlled by those who only have interest in 'Control'. When we eat a sandwich, we eat it crusts and all, and if Hunting is unpalatable to some, then it should be borne in mind that the sport of Hunting was an important part of the rural package.

Those who we vote in to Parliament, and to represent us? Should they reflect their supporters views, or should they go along with their own principles? Principles? There's a question in itself, when we consider that lot!!

Alec.

I am aware that feelings are strong on this site regarding hunting and this is a "Horse and Hound" Forum after all, but those in favour of bringing back hunting really are a minority. This is what living in a democracy is like, Hunting (legally!) will not come back, and the National Trust are merely considering its members wishes. Hunting legally has gone, so give it up. If you are so worried about the rural economy diversify !

Also I do think there is a difference between shooting and hunting. Shooting involves a quick kill (with a dog to retrieve a shot bird quickly that may not have died from the first shot) and Hunting involves a chase that can be prolonged and is considered cruel by the majority. Now I am aware that those who are pro hunting will now be apoplectic with rage, That's just tough, its called living in a democracy, and if any one else mentions any more hunts who are hunting illegally I will happily report them to the police, write to my MP etc etc. breaking the law is nothing to be proud of.

Here is a little excerpt for from "Conservatives against Foxhunting"
Welcome to Conservatives Against Fox Hunting (The Blue Fox Group) established by a Conservative Association Chairman ,( now the Association Vice President and his family in January 2010. This web site is here to represent the two thirds of Conservative supporters and the 75% of the general population who think hunting should remain illegal as demonstrated in an Ipsos MORI poll carried out in 2009 for The League Against Cruel Sports.

I think whoever gets elected fox hunting is never coming back, no matter how much a vocal minority complain and stick stickers on road signs. Why not support drag hunting instead, its legal, and will support the countryside, and rural economy also.

 

[Alec Swan]

I am aware that feelings are strong on this site regarding hunting and this is a "Horse and Hound" Forum after all, but those in favour of bringing back hunting really are a minority. This is what living in a democracy is like, Hunting (legally!) will not come back, and the National Trust are merely considering its members wishes. Hunting legally has gone, so give it up. If you are so worried about the rural economy diversify !

Also I do think there is a difference between shooting and hunting. Shooting involves a quick kill (with a dog to retrieve a shot bird quickly that may not have died from the first shot) and Hunting involves a chase that can be prolonged and is considered cruel by the majority. Now I am aware that those who are pro hunting will now be apoplectic with rage, That's just tough, its called living in a democracy, and if any one else mentions any more hunts who are hunting illegally I will happily report them to the police, write to my MP etc etc. breaking the law is nothing to be proud of.

Here is a little excerpt for from "Conservatives against Foxhunting"
Welcome to Conservatives Against Fox Hunting (The Blue Fox Group) established by a Conservative Association Chairman ,( now the Association Vice President and his family in January 2010. This web site is here to represent the two thirds of Conservative supporters and the 75% of the general population who think hunting should remain illegal as demonstrated in an Ipsos MORI poll carried out in 2009 for The League Against Cruel Sports.

I think whoever gets elected fox hunting is never coming back, no matter how much a vocal minority complain and stick stickers on road signs. Why not support drag hunting instead, its legal, and will support the countryside, and rural economy also.

Para 1. So with your approval and support of the Majority, are we to take it that the Minority have no rights and through the bore of democracy, are to be swept aside and have their wishes ignored? I have never claimed that Hunting is vital to the rural economy. What i have said is that Hunting was and is a vital part of our rural structure and framework.

Para 2. Your knowledge of shooting is woefully lacking. When a fox is hunted, it lives to run another day, or it doesn't. When driven game birds are shot at, especially considering that it is now a serious business and attracts clients who have yet to gain an acceptable standard of marksmanship, i assure you that there is a proportion of wounded game which takes many days to die, assuming that the fox doesn't bring their suffering to a respectable close. I Hunt (on foot) and I shoot. Yet again, democracy is always the card offered by those who are opposed to those who hunt, whilst offering their own assumed, inexperienced and generally distorted points. I Course and I Hunt, so do feel free to report me to the Police. I view my activities as 'testing' an unjust Law.

Para 3. Nothing like a Conservative viewpoint, is there?!

Para 4. I agree with you but only in that we have such a spineless, support seeking and soporific bunch of self supporting and promoting politicians, and that they, none of them, will ever have the courage to support a Minority. Sad really, but hey-ho, it's the way that it is.

Alec.

 

[cptrayes]

.

Para 1. So with your approval and support of the Majority, are we to take it that the Minority have no rights and through the bore of democracy, are to be swept aside and have their wishes ignored?

Yes, that's how a democracy works. There are lots of perfectly harmless things that lots of people want to do but can't, because the Majority don't want them to be able to. Live with it or go live in a dictatorship.

I have never claimed that Hunting is vital to the rural economy. What i have said is that Hunting was and is a vital part of our rural structure and framework.

But you consistently fail to explain how that can be the case when there are very large parts of the UK which control fox by shooting and not hunting, and yet they seem to survive very well without this vital part of their rural structure and framework.

 

[Alec Swan]

.

…….. there are very large parts of the UK which control fox by shooting and not hunting, and yet they seem to survive very well without this vital part of their rural structure and framework.

Were that true, then I'd agree with you. The reality is that the fox population is greater now than it's ever been, and the shooting of foxes, which is mostly carried out at night and under spot lights, is neither selective nor humane. 'Night shooting' is also considered by those who are so involved, to be for the purpose of 'Sport', not control.

Alec.

 

[cptrayes]

Were that true, then I'd agree with you. The reality is that the fox population is greater now than it's ever been, and the shooting of foxes, which is mostly carried out at night anAleer spot lights, is neither selective nor humane. 'Night shooting' is also considered by those who are so involved, to be for the purpose of 'Sport', not control.

Alec.

Which is it, Alec? There are more foxes than ever and they need culling, or shooters shoot purely for fun? We do know, at least, that hunting riders ride purely for the entertainment. You also know that I would not condone any animal being killed purely for sport.

You know as well as I do that the study done at the time of the law change concluded that shooting was at least as humane as hunting with hounds.

Hunting discriminates? I can accept that it sometimes kills the weak and injured, but it chases any scent it finds and is completely indiscriminate about what fox is being chased.

And as for these mange ridden, injured, half shot foxes I'm supposed to be seeing around here because we don't have fox hunting in this area, I've never seen one. Seen a few good healthy ones though.

 

[Alec Swan]

Which is it, Alec? There are more foxes than ever and they need culling, or shooters shoot purely for fun? ……..

You know as well as I do that the study done at the time of the law change concluded that shooting was at least as humane as hunting with hounds.

Hunting discriminates? I can accept that it sometimes kills the weak and injured, but it chases any scent it finds and is completely indiscriminate about what fox is being chased.

And as for these mange ridden, injured, half shot foxes I'm supposed to be seeing around here because we don't have fox hunting in this area, I've never seen one. Seen a few good healthy ones though.

Line 1. Both.

Line 2. The 'study' done was flawed, science based, and inaccurate.

Line 3. Being chased, and being caught and killed by Hounds are two totally different points, and one rarely follows the other. The strong and the healthy will be the more likely to escape and so the more likely to reproduce and to rear those which are better able to represent their species.

line 4. If you are seeing foxes during daylight hours, then it would be more likely that they are not actually those which are the healthiest. Your ability to discern the youthful and healthy from those which are neither, would impress your local Huntsman!

Alec.

 

[cptrayes]

Alec, I do not consider it acceptable to chase an animal with a pack of hounds whether it is caught or not. The fact that the strong escape is not relevant.

How convenient, too, that those which survive to reproduce are able to produce animals which are more likely to give a more enjoyable days sport, and so it goes on ....... Fox conservation is actually synonymous with breeding foxes that can run further and faster before being caught. Lovely.

 

[Alec Swan]

cptrayes,

You've just made the case for Hunting! You've also just explained, neatly, the rationale or perhaps the ethos behind the time served system which supported both Hunting and our Vulpine population.

Alec.

 

[cptrayes]

cptrayes,

You've just made the case for Hunting! You've also just explained, neatly, the rationale or perhaps the ethos behind the time served system which supported both Hunting and our Vulpine population.

Alec.

I knew the case for hunting.

In the past, kind posters have gone to great lengths to give me every detail I asked for in my quest to understand their sport. I came to the conclusion long ago that the conservation of foxes practised by hunts served only to increase the strength of the individual fox in order to provide a better day's sport for the riders who follow the chase.

What puzzles me is why you think that's a good idea.

 

[ExmoorHunter]

I knew the case for hunting.

In the past, kind posters have gone to great lengths to give me every detail I asked for in my quest to understand their sport. I came to the conclusion long ago that the conservation of foxes practised by hunts served only to increase the strength of the individual fox in order to provide a better day's sport for the riders who follow the chase.

What puzzles me is why you think that's a good idea.

It's good for any quarry species and ensures the survival of the best. A win win!!

 

[Alec Swan]

It's good for any quarry species and ensures the survival of the best. A win win!!

You're waisting your efforts!

Alec.

 

[cptrayes]

It's good for any quarry species and ensures the survival of the best. A win win!!

Evolution ensures the survival of the best, it does not, in the case of the fox population, need any help from man. Do you think the fox population think that bigger, faster foxes is in some way 'good'?

That's an entirely artificial construct dreamed up by man.

 

[ExmoorHunter]

You're waisting your efforts!

Alec.

Yes, I know. What I don't comprehend is why bother if you don't want to understand. Either make an effort or go and do (and comment on) something else. Each to their own and all that.

 

[cptrayes]

Yes, I know. What I don't comprehend is why bother if you don't want to understand. Either make an effort or go and do (and comment on) something else. Each to their own and all that.

Oh that old one again! If you don't agree with me it's only because you don't understand.

I understand perfectly. I just don't agree with you.

 

[Isbister]

II hunt with a proper hunt, hunting within the law, and very much enjoy it. Foxes are killed with some regularity, but that is not the expressed purpose of the hunt and frankly I doubt whether it ever was - there is so much more to enjoy about the day out than a bit of vermin-control.

If foxes are killed with regularity I very much doubt that you are hunting within the law. Drag packs do not kill foxes with regularity, Why should a trail hunting fox pack? You have, after all, had ten years to teach your fox hounds to be as obedient to being called off the wrong scent as a drag pack of fox hounds.

And if it was never the expressed purpose of the hunt to kill foxes, doesn't that destroy almost every argument that has been put forward against the ban?

I assure you you are wrong - it's just that like many parts of the country, it's teeming with foxes and they will keep popping up suddenly in front of the hounds, and it's no use calling them off then.

Of course the purpose of the hunt before the ban - at least part of the purpose - was to kill foxes, but the point I was making was that there are other reasons to enjoy the hunt.

One point that I don't think has been made, and which the National trust appear to have overlooked, is that the very reason so much of the English countryside survives at all in its present form - with hedges, copses, ditches etc, rather than as an arable desert, is because of hunting. Of course not all farmers support hunting, but to their credit a great many do.

 

[ExmoorHunter]

Oh that old one again! If you don't agree with me it's only because you don't understand.

I understand perfectly. I just don't agree with you.

Really happy to agree to disagree, just don't understand why so many posts on the hunting forum. Why not go and do what you enjoy with like minded people?

 

[cptrayes]

Really happy to agree to disagree, just don't understand why so many posts on the hunting forum. Why not go and do what you enjoy with like minded people?

I like to correct the incorrect statements made in support of the people who are breaking the law week in week out.

If Alec stops insisting that the country can't exist without hunting, for example, I will stop replying to him. Simples

This is an open forum. If you want to talk about hunting without anyone putting a counter view, you need to do it on a hunting forum.

 

[cptrayes]

I assure you you are wrong - it's just that like many parts of the country, it's teeming with foxes and they will keep popping up suddenly in front of the hounds, and it's no use calling them off then.

Of course the purpose of the hunt before the ban - at least part of the purpose - was to kill foxes, but the point I was making was that there are other reasons to enjoy the hunt.

One point that I don't think has been made, and which the National trust appear to have overlooked, is that the very reason so much of the English countryside survives at all in its present form - with hedges, copses, ditches etc, rather than as an arable desert, is because of hunting. Of course not all farmers support hunting, but to their credit a great many do.

Oh yes, I forgot, fox hounds are uncontrollable when they scent a fox, unless they are fox hounds belonging to a drag pack, when they are routinely called off because drag packs won't get permission to hunt again if they deviate from the agreed trail.

Do you know what, in areas where there is no hunting, farmers grow hedges because they offer good shelter for livestock and because they like birds, and because they are given grants to do so. It is also clear that there is significant demand for drag hunting, so if there are more hedges because of hunting, they're still going to be there, aren't they?

And I think you'll find that all the other reasons people hunt can be achieved without chasing or killing any foxes by trail and drag hunting.

You guys are creative in dreaming up reasons why those of us who fundamentally disagree with chasing an animal before you kill it should change our minds, I'll give you that

 

[ExmoorHunter]

I like to correct the incorrect statements made in support of the people who are breaking the law week in week out.

If Alec stops insisting that the country can't exist without hunting, for example, I will stop replying to him. Simples

This is an open forum. If you want to talk about hunting without anyone putting a counter view, you need to do it on a hunting forum.

I bet we could all "exist" without hunting but would it be any fun? Perhaps we are all healthier as a result. I hope so!

 

[Alec Swan]

cptrayes,

you really haven't the first idea of what you're talking about, have you?

Alec.

 

[cptrayes]

I bet we could all "exist" without hunting but wwould it be any fun? Perhaps we are all healthier as a result. I hope so!

If you are seriously suggesting that your life is no fun if you are only allowed to trail hunt, not hunt fox, then your problems are far deeper than me disagreeing with you on a forum !

 

[cptrayes]

cptrayes,

you really haven't the first idea of what you're talking about, have you?

Alec.

Which bit have I got wrong Alec, please correct me.