Hunting is in a spot of bother

[rabatsa]

Even just marshalls would be of benefit! Although as you say, that suggests someone can provide the route to be taken in order for them to be far enough ahead to do said marshaling.

When I hunted in pre ban days we had marshals who saw us crossing roads and opened field gates for the non jumpers. the drove 4x4 vehicles. The knew where hounds would be drawing and so stationed themselves around that area.

It could be done then so I am sure that it could be done now.

 

[Tiddlypom]

There should be marshals for hunts at main road crossing points or dangerous stretches of road. Like most hunts round here, my local pack has much lovely open grassland with big inviting hedges, but it is all criss crossed with very busy A roads, which are often crossed multiple times in a day. It's only common sense to provide marshalling to aid such a large unwieldily group to cross main roads.

I only know from what was posted on the anti pages about what happened yesterday on the Cheshire/Staffs border, but a smart car collided with a horse and rider who *allegedly* emerged unexpectedly along with other members of the hunt onto what looks like a main road.

Horse rolled over the car . Car driver shocked but unhurt, rider hurt, horse did survive the initial impact and was seen by a vet but don't know how it is today. Don't know how the rider is. You can be driving along as carefully as you like, but if horses and dogs burst unexpectedly out onto the road in front of you only have so much time to react.

 

[paddy555]

It is about traditional dress and the historic notion that hunters are likely to be off road. Some still are. There is hi vis that is well supported by hunting people but is generally used on the way home in poor light. Hi vis is entirely possible but when given the option to have hi-vis built into my own hunt coat I opted not for that because unlike decent cavalry twill (the material my coat is made from) hi vis degrades quickly; the two materials are not really compatible. I carry hi vis in my pocket as do several of my friends. One of the best known companies designing hunt-inspired rainwear do a hi vis coat but again I would not choose that because of the short life of hi vis (relatively speaking).

Umm, also...why do not all cyclists or walkers wear hi vis, nor all horse riders actually? Presumably it is because they too 'own the road and everyone should get out of the way' (@meleeka)...

Further ETA - is that why all manner of people go walking on the hills poorly prepared (or looking for Pokemon), let their dogs chase sheep, ponies or cattle, wander through people's private yards, have picnics and barbeques on private land etc etc? Is it entitlement or that they feel they own the countryside and that everyone else should be prepared to rescue them, put up with fires, helium balloons, chinese lanterns, upset stock, trespass etc etc I genuinely don't believe anyone actually intends to cause problems - either in urban or rural areas but I suppose other people have less tolerant interpretations when things don't please them or suit their agenda...

always when someone makes a point about hunting in this case hi vis it gets twisted as to why don't other people. Hunters are not off the road BTW, they are all over it.

can hunters NEVER take any responsibility
most riders, the vast majority round here wear high vis as do many bikers.
I reported some riders to the police for not wearing and a couple of weeks later they appeared in their new hi vis.

I want the hunt to wear hi vis so that I don't hit one of them. I really really do not care if I hit a member of the hunt. It is up to them to take responsibility. I care about the horse I hit as he has no choice. I care I might get injured, I care I might damage my car yet the hunt cannot show any consideration towards me by making sure I can see them when they are blocking road, forcing past cars etc etc In fact much of the time in general the hunt show little consideration to anyone else in all things. Perhaps start to get your house in order with that point.

Wearing hi vis is your responsibility to other people not worrying about some ancient tradition of hunting dress.

I am afraid hunting dress etiquette is one thing that really gets to me.

A few years ago we drove over the common on a Sat. late pm. It was snowing and sleeting. It had been forecast. Very very miserable and cold and wet.

We met the hunt, right out on the open moor, no shelter. It was Oct. All the horses were newly fully clipped out. Hunting had ended and horses and riders were all over the riders trying to shelter behind rocks. The horses just had to stand out in it. Mostly thin skinned TB types. Presumably they were awaiting transport and they were there a while (not just a few minutes) Not a single horse had an exercise sheet on nor any protection from the sleet/snow on it's back when it had obviously come in hot from working all day.
I asked why on one group and was told it was not on for them to wear sheets. Just let them stand and OK for t hem to get cold because of dress etiquette.

I'm sorry Palo but everytime someone posts anything about hunting, not about fox killing but even general points such as hi vis,, roads, cars etc etc you twist it back to other groups don't do it. Perhaps look at what it is that hunters do (other than illegal hunting) that causes so much upset and try to rectify it.

 

[Indy]

I think when it comes to hi Viz, people don't wear it due to snobbery, some horse riders don't wear it because it spoils the look, the same goes for cyclists I think, they don't wear it because they don't want to spoil the look of the brand they are wearing. I don't tend to wear hi Viz when I'm out with the dog in daylight because he's on a lead and we're on a pavement and if we cross a road I've got the intellect not to step out into an oncoming car. I always wear a fluorescent jacket in evenings and he always wears a lot up collar and I always wear hi Viz and camera when on the horse.

I think when people say they've got hi viz in their pocket is worse than non at all.

Also when we have to bring sheep in up the road we always have people either end of the road to stop traffic and we're all in hi Viz even the dog and people don't mind having to wait a few minutes. I think if we all just swung round a corner unexpectedly with 200 hogs into traffic people would be a bit cheesed off with us.

 

[Abacus]

always when someone makes a point about hunting in this case hi vis it gets twisted as to why don't other people. Hunters are not off the road BTW, they are all over it.

can hunters NEVER take any responsibility
most riders, the vast majority round here wear high vis as do many bikers.
I reported some riders to the police for not wearing and a couple of weeks later they appeared in their new hi vis.

I want the hunt to wear hi vis so that I don't hit one of them. I really really do not care if I hit a member of the hunt. It is up to them to take responsibility. I care about the horse I hit as he has no choice. I care I might get injured, I care I might damage my car yet the hunt cannot show any consideration towards me by making sure I can see them when they are blocking road, forcing past cars etc etc In fact much of the time in general the hunt show little consideration to anyone else in all things. Perhaps start to get your house in order with that point.

Wearing hi vis is your responsibility to other people not worrying about some ancient tradition of hunting dress.

I am afraid hunting dress etiquette is one thing that really gets to me.

A few years ago we drove over the common on a Sat. late pm. It was snowing and sleeting. It had been forecast. Very very miserable and cold and wet.

We met the hunt, right out on the open moor, no shelter. It was Oct. All the horses were newly fully clipped out. Hunting had ended and horses and riders were all over the riders trying to shelter behind rocks. The horses just had to stand out in it. Mostly thin skinned TB types. Presumably they were awaiting transport and they were there a while (not just a few minutes) Not a single horse had an exercise sheet on nor any protection from the sleet/snow on it's back when it had obviously come in hot from working all day.
I asked why on one group and was told it was not on for them to wear sheets. Just let them stand and OK for t hem to get cold because of dress etiquette.

I'm sorry Palo but everytime someone posts anything about hunting, not about fox killing but even general points such as hi vis,, roads, cars etc etc you twist it back to other groups don't do it. Perhaps look at what it is that hunters do (other than illegal hunting) that causes so much upset and try to rectify it.

I’m preparing myself for a pile of abuse here but reporting someone to the police for something that is neither a crime nor a legal requirement? They don’t always manage to attend or follow up genuine crime so this seems a bit excessive. Perhaps a quiet word to let them know you didn’t easily see them would have been more in keeping.

 

[limestonelil]

Well said paddy, your last paragraph in 5433 managed to articulate what I've been trying to get clear in my head about some recent posts.
Also in post 5424 palo1 says 'I genuinely don't believe anyone wants to cause problems', well believe it as the local hunt did want to cause us problems.The field was led onto our farm into our lambing ewes areas 6 days before lambing started for a jolly, despite knowing there was no access from solicitors letter and personal communications. Indefensible, whatever pro-hunters may come back with, and say they agree it shouldn't happen.

 

[ester]

I think when people say they've got hi viz in their pocket is worse than non at all.

I found it pretty easy to take out of my pocket when I needed it.

 

[Miss_Millie]

It is about traditional dress and the historic notion that hunters are likely to be off road. Some still are. There is hi vis that is well supported by hunting people but is generally used on the way home in poor light. Hi vis is entirely possible but when given the option to have hi-vis built into my own hunt coat I opted not for that because unlike decent cavalry twill (the material my coat is made from) hi vis degrades quickly; the two materials are not really compatible. I carry hi vis in my pocket as do several of my friends. One of the best known companies designing hunt-inspired rainwear do a hi vis coat but again I would not choose that because of the short life of hi vis (relatively speaking).

Umm, also...why do not all cyclists or walkers wear hi vis, nor all horse riders actually? Presumably it is because they too 'own the road and everyone should get out of the way' (@meleeka)...

Further ETA - is that why all manner of people go walking on the hills poorly prepared (or looking for Pokemon), let their dogs chase sheep, ponies or cattle, wander through people's private yards, have picnics and barbeques on private land etc etc? Is it entitlement or that they feel they own the countryside and that everyone else should be prepared to rescue them, put up with fires, helium balloons, chinese lanterns, upset stock, trespass etc etc I genuinely don't believe anyone actually intends to cause problems - either in urban or rural areas but I suppose other people have less tolerant interpretations when things don't please them or suit their agenda...

Yes, any road user who is not driving a car should be wearing hi-viz. I think we can all agree about that. The number of cyclists I see on 40mph roads in dark clothing is shocking.

However, we are talking about riding, and specifically hunting here. In general, there seems to be a good awareness amongst recreational horse riders in the UK to wear fluorescents and hi viz if hacking out on the roads. In my local area everyone is very good - the riders have tabards with flashing lights, the horses have quarter sheets and legs wraps.

I can only assume that it would ruin the 'look' of the tweed and clipped out horses, if they were wearing fluorescent yellow, orange and pink. And that this is the reason why we never seen hunters in hi-viz. But it would make them a hell of a lot more visible to anyone driving a car, and less likely for an accident to happen.

The roads are busier than ever now, we need to do the responsible thing and keep everyone safe. The driver yesterday was very lucky not to be killed when the horse rolled over the windscreen. I just hope that everyone, especially the horse, is going to be okay.

 

[Koweyka]

I was speaking to a farmer yesterday, he had the farm hands out on his boundaries he had sheep and lambs. He told us they hunt was banned off his land because they come on and do in his words “very bad things” he said they also cut his sheep fences and he has lost sheep. He said they keep saying it won’t happen again but it always does. He was very despondent, why should he be continually treated this way he said they are so arrogant when they ride by him on his own land.

 

[Millionwords]

I want the hunt to wear hi vis so that I don't hit one of them. I really really do not care if I hit a member of the hunt. It is up to them to take responsibility. I care about the horse I hit as he has no choice. I care I might get injured, I care I might damage my car yet the hunt cannot show any consideration towards me by making sure I can see them when they are blocking road, forcing past cars etc etc In fact much of the time in general the hunt show little consideration to anyone else in all things. Perhaps start to get your house in order with that point.

Wearing hi vis is your responsibility to other people not worrying about some ancient tradition of hunting dress.

I'm sorry Palo but everytime someone posts anything about hunting, not about fox killing but even general points such as hi vis,, roads, cars etc etc you twist it back to other groups don't do it. Perhaps look at what it is that hunters do (other than illegal hunting) that causes so much upset and try to rectify it.

THIS 1000 times this. Every single time. Even when pointed out it always comes back to "but what about...."

Have a hunt done this thing they shouldn't? - yes
Should they have done it? - No.
Did they do it anyway? - Yes

Have the hunt done something they shouldn't under provocation? - Yes
Should they have done it? - No.
Did they do it anyway? - Yes.

Did the man murder someone? - Yes
Should he have murdered them? - No
Did he do it anyway? - Yes....but other people murder people, and people get into fights all of the time, so we should look at them too
Should he have done it? - No ...but other people murder people and get into fights all the time, why dont they take responsibility for that and we should legislate to stop them doing it so that ....

 

[Millionwords]

Yes, any road user who is not driving a car should be wearing hi-viz. I think we can all agree about that. The number of cyclists I see on 40mph roads in dark clothing is shocking.

However, we are talking about riding, and specifically hunting here. In general, there seems to be a good awareness amongst recreational horse riders in the UK to wear fluorescents and hi viz if hacking out on the roads. In my local area everyone is very good - the riders have tabards with flashing lights, the horses have quarter sheets and legs wraps.

I can only assume that it would ruin the 'look' of the tweed and clipped out horses, if they were wearing fluorescent yellow, orange and pink. And that this is the reason why we never seen hunters in hi-viz. But it would make them a hell of a lot more visible to anyone driving a car, and less likely for an accident to happen.

The roads are busier than ever now, we need to do the responsible thing and keep everyone safe. The driver yesterday was very lucky not to be killed when the horse rolled over the windscreen. I just hope that everyone, especially the horse, is going to be okay.

Half the reason I'm sure is because they'd be easier to spot by people on roads, or sabs, when potentially doing things they shouldn't when away from roads.

 

[SilverLinings]

With regards to hi viz and hunting, IME a lot of them don't wear any hi viz when exercising either. I live in a rural area at the moment and of the 8 nearby properties (near where I keep my horses) who have horses only myself and one other have them to compete/hack/as pets. The others are all people who solely hunt, and one family keeps polo ponies; these horses are only ridden on the roads to get/keep them fit for their 'job'; they are on the roads regularly, moving at a decent pace and cover quite a large area, but NONE of them are ridden in hi viz, and that includes the children of said families. With one exception, they are reasonably courteous to others, but they see nothing wrong with riding out in the dusk wearing dark colours, despite the very narrow lanes and high speeds of some of the drivers.

I expect that the lack of hi viz is partly due to 'tradition', but they must have an unusual belief that they are invincible - and total lack of care for their horses lives- to persist in doing this on the increasingly dangerous roads. If they aren't going to be sensible at home then there is no way they would wear hi viz when hunting unless the hunts enforce it.

I pointed out to one of them that they weren't that visible to other road users and was told that it isn't their responsibility to avoid getting hit, it is the drivers' responsibility to avoid hitting them. He also thought that not wearing hi viz would force the drivers to drive more slowly all the time 'just in case they come across a horse', and could not see the flaws in his logic. It came across as very arrogant that he believed he bore no responsibility for his own safety, and that the responsibility was all on others.

 

[rabatsa]

I’m preparing myself for a pile of abuse here but reporting someone to the police for something that is neither a crime nor a legal requirement? They don’t always manage to attend or follow up genuine crime so this seems a bit excessive. Perhaps a quiet word to let them know you didn’t easily see them would have been more in keeping.

I told a couple of local riders that they were not visible on a sunny day when riding in the shade of the trees. I got a mouthful of abuse for my trouble.

Nothing to do with hunting people.

 

[paddy555]

I’m preparing myself for a pile of abuse here but reporting someone to the police for something that is neither a crime nor a legal requirement? They don’t always manage to attend or follow up genuine crime so this seems a bit excessive. Perhaps a quiet word to let them know you didn’t easily see them would have been more in keeping.

this was a regular occurrence on a very narrow, winding road and there were several occasions when, even though I realised they were there, I nearly hit them. I was going very slowly in anticipation. Many others used that road and were going twice as fast as I was.
It was entirely appropriate to prevent an accident in which I or another motorist got hurt or far worse than that a horse got hit.
I didn't think it appropriate or effective to have a quiet word.
Yes it wasted some police time but when the inevitable accident happened it would have wasted police, ambulance, fire brigade (if they had had to cut the horse or driver free) and vet time.
I decided wasting a small amount of police time was more cost effective.

 

[Nancykitt]

I do think that the main reason for the lack of hi-viz amongst hunters is down to tradition and the regard for appearance - which some hunts are incredibly strict about. I once went out with a very trad trail hunt and it was pouring down when we were getting the horses off the wagon so I put on a long navy raincoat, only to be blasted by one of the hunt staff because I hadn't asked the master for permission to put a waterproof coat on over my black hunting coat. We hadn't even set off!

When I went out with the bloodhounds there were numerous marshals en route to make sure that we crossed roads safely. If the hunt knows the line to be taken, this can easily be organised.

 

[Sandstone1]

This thread goes round and round in circles. When ever a hunt is caught out in wrong doing some pro hunter pops up and says yes but sabs do this or that or the other so there...
Its boring, pointless and predictable.
Hunting foxes is illegal we all know that. We also know that in a lot of cases its still going on under the guise of trail hunting. No point in anyone arguing the toss about that.
There is more than enough proof with videos etc. I think most people know this has been a open secret since the ban.

The time has come now with lot of proof of hunts wrong doings that something will be done to stop this.
The hunts that have broken the law have only themselves to blame. How much more proof do people want? Bagged foxes, stopping badger sets, deliberate and open hunting of foxes, trespassing, road accidents and hunt supporters driving at and hitting sabs with cars, jumping horses over sabs, running them down with horses. Plus other charming incidents of hunt supporters punching ponies and stabbing foxes with pitchforks the list goes on and on.
Yes sabs are not always perfect but that does not excuse the blatant disregard for the law that hunters have been getting away with.
without sabs and monitors hunts would simply get away with hunting as they did pre ban.
The fact is, as much as pro hunters do not like it and would like to continue to try and pull the wool over the general populations eyes fox hunting is illegal and trail hunting has simply been used to try and con people.
Blaming sabs wont cut it. Its time to face the truth.

 

[Tiddlypom]

I was speaking to a farmer yesterday, he had the farm hands out on his boundaries he had sheep and lambs. He told us they hunt was banned off his land because they come on and do in his words “very bad things” he said they also cut his sheep fences and he has lost sheep. He said they keep saying it won’t happen again but it always does. He was very despondent, why should he be continually treated this way he said they are so arrogant when they ride by him on his own land.

I can't comment on that particular instance, but I have heard of similar time and again from farmers in these parts. Hunts deliberately trespassing on farmland which they have no permission to be on, cutting fences, mixing up dry and milking cattle (injured cattle and milk yield down for weeks afterwards)...

 

[palo1]

Hmm, to be honest I am at the end with this thread. It's obvious that the idea of context can be applied to one set of things - ie there is a context for sabs trespassing, holding up traffic, swaggering down the roads, spraying citronella at hounds, assaulting people and abusing them - ''cos of hunting'' but it is not ok for any other context to be applied. Hunting is one activity that can cause issues in our countryside and is very much part of the context of how we move forward in managing and living in the countryside but that fact of a wider context or of hunting being a part of something bigger, more complex is clearly beyond the scope of some posters on here. There is no will to engage in discussion or actually listening to any other viewpoint. It is simply pointless to type any more...Enjoy the echo chamber folks!

 

[Miss_Millie]

Hmm, to be honest I am at the end with this thread. It's obvious that the idea of context can be applied to one set of things - ie there is a context for sabs trespassing, holding up traffic, swaggering down the roads, spraying citronella at hounds, assaulting people and abusing them - ''cos of hunting'' but it is not ok for any other context to be applied. Hunting is one activity that can cause issues in our countryside and is very much part of the context of how we move forward in managing and living in the countryside but that fact of a wider context or of hunting being a part of something bigger, more complex is clearly beyond the scope of some posters on here. There is no will to engage in discussion or actually listening to any other viewpoint. It is simply pointless to type any more...Enjoy the echo chamber folks!

Admittedly I don't always keep up with every post on this thread, but I have seen little to no-one on here condone violence from sabs

I'm sorry Palo but I do think this is a little pot kettle black, as you seem hellbent on defending hunters no matter what; even the ones filling in the badger sett who were blatantly caught red handed, you tried to make about the person filming them.

I think that the discussion on here has been interesting, it has been eye opening to hear different people's experiences from around different parts of the UK.

I don't think that this thread is an echo chamber, rather that it is an accumulation of people's experiences, often real life experiences of hunts trespassing on their land or upsetting their animals, and also thoughts and feelings upon reading various news reports.

I understand that you love trail hunting and that your hunt are law abiding, so it must be frustrating to feel tarred with the same brush. But can't you put yourself in other people's shoes and see why they feel so negatively about hunting?

All it takes is one person with no opinion on hunting watching the Avon Vale Hunt video of the fox abuse, for you to have another member of the public who is firmly anti-hunt. Hunting must clean up its imagine if it wants to survive, its as simple as that.

I am not ignorant or prejudiced, I have a mental tally in my head of all of the law breaking and abuse that has happened this year under the banner of trail hunting, adding to many years before and nothing ever changes.

'Beyond the scope of some posters on here' comes across as incredibly arrogant and dismissive. Just because some people don't share your opinion, it doesn't make them stupid.

 

[Gallop_Away]

FWIW palo, I personally admire the way you have contributed to this thread. You explain your points so well, and despite the rudeness some posters show you in their replies, I've not once seen you rise to it.

I think this thread is going to simply continue to go around in circles over the same points over and over again. Neither "side" will see each other's points of views when it comes to this subject, and I feel we've danced around and around the same discussions over and over with little more to be gained from continuing.

There have been some pretty vile comments made by some posters during this thread but for the most part, it has been civil, however having just read one poster blatantly say that they don't care if they were to hit a hunt rider with their car, and see that post "liked" by many posters I've previously held a lot of respect for, despite not always agreeing with their views, I'm afraid this thread is now finished for me also. To show such disregard or care towards the life of another person, hunter or otherwise, that leaves a rather vile taste in my mouth. I don't think there is anything further to be gained from myself contributing to this thread further.

 

[Sandstone1]

FWIW palo, I personally admire the way you have contributed to this thread. You explain your points so well, and despite the rudeness some posters show you in their replies, I've not once seen you rise to it.

I think this thread is going to simply continue to go around in circles over the same points over and over again. Neither "side" will see each other's points of views when it comes to this subject, and I feel we've danced around and around the same discussions over and over with little more to be gained from continuing.

There have been some pretty vile comments made by some posters during this thread but for the most part, it has been civil, however having just read one poster blatantly say that they don't care if they were to hit a hunt rider with their car, and see that post "liked" by many posters I've previously held a lot of respect for, despite not always agreeing with their views, I'm afraid this thread is now finished for me also. To show such disregard or care towards the life of another person, hunter or otherwise, that leaves a rather vile taste in my mouth. I don't think there is anything further to be gained from myself contributing to this thread further.

I agree that most things have already been said on this subject. I do feel sorry for the few hunts that do legally fully trail hunt but they are sadly in the minority. The sad fact is that in the most part trail hunting is just used to try and con the general public. If you happen to live near a hunt that does not hunt legally and see the disruption they cause its painfully clear what they are up to and sadly it not uncommon.
The " Vile comments" have been in my opinion mainly supporting hunters for instance recently supporting the huntsman jumping a gate right next to a sab. Some of those comments were just ridiculous. It was ok apparently because the sab should not have been there and even the sab was " too old" at 60 to be out and about. Its all just so pathetic. Fox hunting with hounds is illegal and people are no longer prepared to put up with it going on under the guise of trail hunting.

 

[Millionwords]

Noone who disagrees with youu has ever suggested violence or dangerous or illegal acts by sabs (or anyone else) as being okay.

"Context" quite often was more akin to whataboutery. When talking about group A it doesn't matter what unrelated group B do.

People even asked for statistics on a statement which was made as fact, but that was ignored.

Focusing on the issue at hand, does not make people stupid, it means they're talking about the issue at hand, not conflating it with other things.

Ive read all of your replies throughout this thread @palo1, you are not stupid, you are very knowledgeable, but you come across as assuming other posters are stupid quite reguarly.

The lengths folk go to in this thread to justify illegal, dangerous or violent actions by hunts that simply should not have occurred at all, in any context is what is most frustrating.

 

[Fred66]

Noone who disagrees with youu has ever suggested violence or dangerous or illegal acts by sabs (or anyone else) as being okay.

"Context" quite often was more akin to whataboutery. When talking about group A it doesn't matter what unrelated group B do.

People even asked for statistics on a statement which was made as fact, but that was ignored.

Focusing on the issue at hand, does not make people stupid, it means they're talking about the issue at hand, not conflating it with other things.

Ive read all of your replies throughout this thread @palo1, you are not stupid, you are very knowledgeable, but you come across as assuming other posters are stupid quite reguarly.

The lengths folk go to in this thread to justify illegal, dangerous or violent actions by hunts that simply should not have occurred at all, in any context is what is most frustrating.

I don’t think anyone has tried to justify illegal or violent acts by those who hunt.

However many have condemned all who hunt and have refused to condemn actions by saboteurs. They have justified the sabs actions in various ways of whataboutery largely based upon the “well if hunts weren’t committing illegal acts the the sabs wouldn’t be there” refrain.

There are some hunts that do seem to be hunting illegally and if monitors can legally gather the evidence to prosecute then I applaud them.

However no one has the right to set themselves up as a vigilante and to go dressed as a paramilitary and equipped with unknown chemicals, whips etc with the intent of deliberately disrupting and intimidating others in an illegal manner, including verbal and physical abuse of minors. If this happened in a town the police would clamp down on them immediately.

For those who think this abuse is anyway justified then in one way I do hope that at some point an activity of yours attracts something similar so that you can understand how frustrating and scary it can be, however largely I would not wish this on anyone.

 

[lizziebell]

Something I have been pondering whilst thinking about this awful crash today...why do hunters not wear hi-viz? The BHS found that wearing hi-viz means motorists will spot you 3 seconds sooner. I am assuming they do not wear it for aesthetic reasons/tradition? I would never dream of riding on the roads without hi-viz, regardless of how busy the road is. It isn't worth the risk imo.

I found myself sat next to the local hunts whipper in a few years ago and he said only people who can’t ride wear hi viz The most arrogant person I’ve ever met !

 

[Tiddlypom]

Who are the 'many' on this thread who condemn all who hunt and who refuse to condemn actions by sabs? I am one of many on here who outright disapprove of most sab (as opposed to monitor) active interferences in the conduct of a hunting day, violent or not.

I just wish that all on both sides would respect both the spirit and the letter of the law. The law might be an ass, but it is the law.

Pics below from the FB page of the local Police Rural Crime Team who accompanied local pack recently. I am especially impressed with the police scrambler bikes and the police drone . No one on either side need have anything to fear if they are not misbehaving.

 

[webble]

I didn't have a strong view either way until reading this thread. I knew there were a few hunts doing the odd naughty thing but I genuinely thought they were isolated incidents, reading this has made me realise they quite clearly aren't.

Even if you take the fox factor out of it the lack of hi vis, control over hounds and general distress caused to anyone in their path is enough to raise an eyebrow and make my mind up

 

[Red-1]

Anyone know how the horse and rider who skittled over a car are doing? I understand the driver was OK.

 

[Clodagh]

Who are the 'many' on this thread who condemn all who hunt and who refuse to condemn actions by sabs? I am one of many on here who outright disapprove of most sab (as opposed to monitor) active interferences in the conduct of a hunting day, violent or not.

I just wish that all on both sides would respect both the spirit and the letter of the law. The law might be an ass, but it is the law.

Pics below from the FB page of the local Police Rural Crime Team who accompanied local pack recently. I am especially impressed with the police scrambler bikes and the police drone . No one on either side need have anything to fear if they are not misbehaving.

View attachment 108057

View attachment 108058

View attachment 108059

im actually appalled the resources the police put into this. Any other rural crime goes completely unnoticed.

 

[meleeka]

im actually appalled the resources the police put into this. Any other rural crime goes completely unnoticed.

Do you mean you are appalled that all rural crime doesn’t have the same resources put into it rather than you are appalled that they investigated this one?

 

[Clodagh]

Do you mean you are appalled that all rural crime doesn’t have the same resources put into it rather than you are appalled that they investigated this one?

Well, both? Rural crime has no resources whatsoever so spending the budget on a hunt when (eg) my brother in law had all his tack and trailers and his car stolen two weeks ago and no one even came out is a bit skewed, to my mind. And I don’t mind whether the police were there on an anti or pro role.