Hunting is in a spot of bother

[ycbm]

You say that you live somewhere that has only been hunted once in 30 years yet at the same time profess to understand hunting, hunting people and all the complexities that surround it.

"All the complexities that surround it"? I have never claimed that. I have also lived slap bang in Beaufort and Berkeley country and hunted with both those and the Curre.

How can you live somewhere that has not been hunted for 29 years and still say you understand how it works for people in places where hunting still functions?

It is possible to live close to and have many friends in and often visit places which are hunted and to go hunting, while living somewhere which is not hunted.
.

 

[paddy555]

I get hear what you are saying though it doesn't work like that for me.

can you explain why not?

 

[paddi22]

if you changed the context and it was a hundred cows (for some bizarre reason!) that decided to run across land and jump ditches and fencing, we wouldn't be on claiming it has some magical benefit for the countryside.

 

[paddy555]

But as someone who hunts I can't justify it doing the countryside any good? do you have tangible evidence of that. I often block from my mind the damage done to ground birds and animal habitats, fencing, hedging, nesting habitats, damage to ditching, polluting water and the faeces in fields. I nearly had a panic attack watching one of my pregant mares run herself into a frenzy when hounds ran through her field unexpectedly. I had
one of my own horses jump out of it's box due to stress listening to them going past. I can only assume others have their things happen too? I have read back your posts and I am not understanding where it benefits the countryside?

I am afraid we probably all have to accept that as horse riders we are not doing the countryside a great deal of good at all, hunting or not.

I have done the horses' stress thing. One evening by 5.30 I thought they had gone home, it was nearly dark, I was tired and had left the horses out until they had gone. Brought them all in, fed them, everyone calm and happy. Then the hunt arrived and the huntsman sat on the road outside my stables blowing the horn. I flew out and asked him to move. Total chaos with my nags, only a stone wall separated them from the huntsman. I thought that was so unreasonable. They could not have failed to have noticed that we had horses

I remember an entire pack of hounds flying through the field past my dear old Jersey cow, same with an older horse with leg problems who did not have long for this world. Very depressing.

 

[stormox]

If people want a horse put down they can contact the hunt and they pick up fallen stock. So thats one point pro hunt anyway.

 

[paddi22]

If people want a horse put down they can contact the hunt and they pick up fallen stock. So thats one point pro hunt anyway.

very very good point.

 

[rabatsa]

Just what ground nesting birds need, a pack of hounds followed by thundering hooves running through them!

I was not aware that hunting of any sort happened during the birds nesting season. However I may be wrong and you know of ground nesting birds that breed over winter.

 

[ycbm]

If people want a horse put down they can contact the hunt and they pick up fallen stock. So thats one point pro hunt anyway.

It's only a benefit if there is no alternative. I have a choice of knacker men to shoot and remove horses here, none from a hunt.

 

[Rowreach]

I was not aware that hunting of any sort happened during the birds nesting season. However I may be wrong and you know of ground nesting birds that breed over winter.

Ground nesting birds can be disturbed at any time of year, not just when they are sitting. Dogs being walked off lead in conservation areas cause huge damage, for example (this is something I dealt with on a daily basis in my old job).

 

[Stressymummy]

Thank you, Stressymummy, for bring the Kimblewick court case post back up .

As a reminder, the Countryside Alliance‘s Head of Hunting follows that pack. So you’d have thought that it would be a model of good practice, wouldn’t you?

 

[Stressymummy]

I didn't bring up any court case !

 

[Stressymummy]

Thank you, Stressymummy, for bring the Kimblewick court case post back up .

As a reminder, the Countryside Alliance‘s Head of Hunting follows that pack. So you’d have thought that it would be a model of good practice, wouldn’t you?

I didn't bring any court case up ???

 

[Tiddlypom]

I didn't bring any court case up ???

See post # 231 .

You quoted my post about the Kimblewick court case, but didn’t go on to comment on it. So my post about the court case got bumped back up the thread by you.

I don’t think that you’ve quite got the hang of how the quote and reply functions work on here.

 

[OldNag]

I wonder what proportion of hunts do still flout the law. I know my local pack are up to various tricks but there seem to be plenty that are legal.

 

[Errin Paddywack]

If people want a horse put down they can contact the hunt and they pick up fallen stock. So thats one point pro hunt anyway.

We have used the hunt several times to put down horses and to remove horses the vet has put down. Now we usually use a very good knacker but we still use the hunt for the sheep and totally depend on them. They provide a fantastic service especially at lambing time. Horrifying how many sheep they have to pick up then.

 

[meleeka]

We have used the hunt several times to put down horses and to remove horses the vet has put down. Now we usually use a very good knacker but we still use the hunt for the sheep and totally depend on them. They provide a fantastic service especially at lambing time. Horrifying how many sheep they have to pick up then.

Our local knacker man/fallen stockman also does farm animals (different lorry to horses) I recently had to use them and the when he arrived the lorry had probably 20 fsrm animals on board, by 10am, so I think it’s a well used service. There isn’t a local hunt to me, although one about 20 miles away, but it wouldn’t occur to me to use them as we get such a good service from the professional.

 

[Leah3horses]

It's quite refreshing to see how most posters on here have evolved and moved with the times, and have a balanced view of hunting related topics, and a desire for the law to be upheld. There was a time on here when to express anti hunting views was considered heresy! Thank goodness things have changed for the better on here and in the wider equestrian community. No, we are far from completely ethical treatment of other species , but things have progressed rapidly from the time the ban was brought in, people are looking objectively at the whole picture in the most part. "Tradition" had it's day for hundreds of years , unfortunately, in both human and animal welfare/ rights.
A few die hard ,stubborn traditionalists who still refuse to evolve and hunt within the law are solely responsible for any visits from the more reactionary sabs.. Cause and effect. Any other type of citizen still visibly and routinely making a mockery of a law for 16 years now, would have been prosecuted and banned from that illegal activity 15 years ago.
When you think about it, all extremists have more in common with each other than they do rational, moderate thinkers. Isis/ Fundamental 'Christian' / White supremist terrorists , and blood thirsty , unethical law breakers who continue killing foxes illegally, and the more extreme hunt sabs all have more in common with each other than they realise.
I feel much safer on here now more rational, law abiding views regarding hunting are welcome. Progress in action. The 2004 law needs a much needed progressive update, because they've had 16 years to breed and train less fox focussed hounds , improve their standards of behaviour etc etc...one hunt on live quarry is one too many, has been for years but now enough is enough. Outright ban on any hunts flouting the law now...legal packs have nothing to worry about, after all.

 

[mariew]

Regardless of argument pro or anti, if you start talking emissions then surely travelling to all equestrian competition and fun rides should be considered a bad thing and not something that should be part of a pro/anti hunt argument surely?

In fact on an environmental argument level horses are not great, mounds of plastic, fabric, feeds to be grown tractors to harvest etc etc. How good is it for the environment to have 20 rugs and 20 saddlepads for one horse for example...

As far as the actual argument goes I am staying well out!

 

[paddy555]

Regardless of argument pro or anti, if you start talking emissions then surely travelling to all equestrian competition and fun rides should be considered a bad thing and not something that should be part of a pro/anti hunt argument surely?

yes all equestrian activities are bad from an emissions POV. It was only brought up about hunting as the argument was that hunting benefited the countryside. It doesn't, neither do most horse activities.

 

[palo1]

yes all equestrian activities are bad from an emissions POV. It was only brought up about hunting as the argument was that hunting benefited the countryside. It doesn't, neither do most horse activities.

I think this is part of what you were referring to paddy555: The point I was making @ycbm was that where there fox hunting existed there was an added factor in creating a better environment and more biodiversity. Fox hunting was just part of the glue that made it more desirable to have woodland. Supporting an apex predator (which fox hunting did) is well documented for it's beneficial effect on the whole ecosystem. I cannot speak for your area though you have slightly contradicted yourself here as previously you have referenced a local hunt. No matter I get your drift I think.

 

[ycbm]

The point I was making @ycbm was that where there fox hunting existed there was an added factor in creating a better environment and more biodiversity. Fox hunting was just part of the glue that made it more desirable to have woodland. Supporting an apex predator (which fox hunting did) is well documented for it's beneficial effect on the whole ecosystem. I cannot speak for your area though you have slightly contradicted yourself here as previously you have referenced a local hunt. No matter I get your drift I think.

I have not contradicted myself and I have already explained that to you, but you have ignored it. Local doesn't mean hunting the direct area in which my house sits. My local town is five miles away. My local hunt hunts up to that town, in fact on one occasion a couple of years back, well into the town, with a dead fox in a suburban garden, video here.

https://www.google.com/url?q=https:...FjAAegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw23pl5MfzpwOKvmU1Ml_C5D


I don't know if you've noticed, Palo, but even the other hunters on this thread are saying they don't agree with you that hunting benefits the countryside?
.

 

[ycbm]

Dupe

 

[paddy555]

I think, Palo, that we are just going to have to agree to differ. Hunting gives or takes nothing more or less to the countryside than any other activity, say an endurance ride, sponsored ride, fun ride, pony club rally. Hunting is simply a group of people, horses and dogs out for a country ride/run. It has the same impact as other events and if it was completely banned the countryside would suffer no loss.
One could say there was a benefit of proper hunting before the ban in that it acted as pest control and I thought that was an argument always put forward for fox hunting. Now I think many can see absolutely no benefit for trail riding.

If people want to legally hunt then great. Please get out and enjoy the countryside. Just don't think your activities are bestowing any great benefit on it.

 

[Tiddlypom]

I wonder what proportion of hunts do still flout the law. I know my local pack are up to various tricks but there seem to be plenty that are legal.

But how will anyone know which is which?

All hunts insist that they hunt legally.

Before the leak of the webinars, I had presumed that whilst there were undoubtedly some illegal hunts, the majority were probably hunting legally.

After the webinar leak, with the 155 attendees, that is no longer a credible view. I was naïve.

 

[paddy555]

All hunts insist that they hunt legally.

.

well they are hardly going to tell you otherwise!!!

 

[palo1]

I have not contradicted myself and I have already explained that to you, but you have ignored it. Local doesn't mean hunting the direct area in which my house sits. My local town is five miles away. My local hunt hunts up to that town, in fact on one occasion a couple of years back, well into the town, with a dead fox in a suburban garden, video here.

https://www.google.com/url?q=https:...FjAAegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw23pl5MfzpwOKvmU1Ml_C5D


I don't know if you've noticed, Palo, but even the other hunters on this thread are saying they don't agree with you that hunting benefits the countryside?
.

Apologies @ycbm - I did not intend this post to be directed at you; I was responding to paddy555's comment. I had read your earlier comment about where you live. I am aware of all the different viewpoints from people who enjoy hunting for the fun of it to those that wish it were entirely banned. There are also people, who may not have posted here, that certainly agree with me that hunting benefits the countryside; I am very well aware of the variety of opinions on the subject. To be honest I wish I hadn't responded to this thread at all - it is a complete waste of energy and words. Debate on social media makes no difference at all but divides people who may otherwise have things in common. That is a great shame. Whatever the outcome of the police investigation I hope that next year is easier for all and less divisive than 2020 appears to have been.

 

[paddy555]

I cannot speak for your area though you have slightly contradicted yourself here as previously you have referenced a local hunt. No matter I get your drift I think.

I thought this was aimed at ycbm but if at me I have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[OldNag]

But how will anyone know which is which?

All hunts insist that they hunt legally.

Before the leak of the webinars, I had presumed that whilst there were undoubtedly some illegal hunts, the majority were probably hunting legally.

After the webinar leak, with the 155 attendees, that is no longer a credible view. I was naïve.

Me too. I knew my local was not following the law but hadn't realised it was so widespread..

 

[luluphoto63]

I have had the privilege to go out as a guest a couple of times pre-ban, a few times since, and more recently with a bloodhound pack. Not being a 'regular', I know there's much I don't see or understand, but from a rider's perspective:

There is something wonderful about the unpredictability of the chase - mostly you're lost, trying to keep up, and occasionally terrified. A fox doesn't stick to headlands; it takes a direct line sometimes, and gives you the gallop of your life. Every day is totally different, and the foxes for the most part seem to get away. Lest ways the only dead one I ever saw was caught in a snare.
Drag hunting as done by the fox hound packs (and the ones I have been out with were following the law) is as close as they can mimic a real scent to make the hounds work, and I'm not sure if they even tell the huntsman the exact route. It has the advantage of being planned to the extent that hazards can be avoided (e.g. road and rail), and you still see the hounds working, but loses a little of the adrenaline rush from being more predictable. In both cases there is some standing around, but you are watching and listening to the hounds (and the countryside around), and it's very pleasant.
The bloodhounds follow a runner, and the route is known. Whilst it's a lovely ride, you follow the headlands and it's more like a fun ride with no gaps between groups of riders. I found we were often holding back the horses to keep off the hounds, since runners, and bloodhounds are much slower than foxes. There seems to be more standing around, if anything, waiting for quarry to get a head start etc.

SO sadly untrue that most Foxes get away. So many are killed, they run in terror and then hounds attack their stomachs and they die in terror and agony. In areas where e=Fox numbers are low they often use a bagged fox.

 

[paddi22]

SO sadly untrue that most Foxes get away. So many are killed, they run in terror and then hounds attack their stomachs and they die in terror and agony. In areas where e=Fox numbers are low they often use a bagged fox.

I would have to disagree with you on that. it is once in a blue moon that foxes are caught here and bagged foxes are never used. Not catching them is mainly due to the fact that there isn't a straight trail across land here. hunts have to go out, in and around fields as they don't have permission or it's grazing land with stock on it. We are also surrounded by forestry that they only have access to part of. so there is realistically no way of catching the fox at least in this area.