Hunting is in a spot of bother

[littleshetland]

I have huge issues with these methods, too. But is the fox population plummeting? Do you have references for this?

In a survey of Welsh farmers in 2013, 96% said that predation on lambs had an impact on their income. Seventy-five per cent said that they had lost more lambs to foxes since the hunting ban in 2005. Going back further, in 1999, according to one estimate, foxes cost sheep producers approx. £9.4 million. This is obviously counter-balanced by the benefits of having a healthy fox population, rabbit control for example. But, if farmers perceive a problem with foxes attacking livestock, they will take matters into their own hands. I can see farmers absolutely up in arms if they are restricted in this matter, and I can't see any government who would pass such a law in the near future. If they did, then fox control, and the methods used, would simply slide out of sight, in the privacy of farms and fields and woodland. Much like it is now, really.

Round here in very rural somerset, the biggest threat to lambs is people 'walking' their out of control dogs...

 

[Koweyka]

The Burns report didn’t state it wasn’t cruel though did it.

 

[Koweyka]

Round here in very rural somerset, the biggest threat to lambs is people 'walking' their out of control dogs...

Did you know hunting hounds could chase a whole flock of sheep, or cows and even llamas have been chased and they are totally exempt from whatever damage they cause. It’s madness.

 

[Sandstone1]

Clearly you haven't read what I have written. I have made it perfectly clear on numerous occasions that I am totally aware of the Hunting Act and that hunting foxes with a pack of hounds is illegal.

I have read what you have written and you seem very confused between trail hunting and fox hunting. For someone who supposedly is aware that fox hunting is and will remain against the law you seem to be very much in favor of it. We continue to go round in circles here, the fact remains, it is against the law and in my opinion trail hunting soon will be too. That is completely due to people constantly and blatantly breaking the law. Im not wasting anymore of my time on this as you clearly cant see it.

 

[Dizzy socks]

I have read what you have written and you seem very confused between trail hunting and fox hunting. For someone who supposedly is aware that fox hunting is and will remain against the law you seem to be very much in favor of it. We continue to go round in circles here, the fact remains, it is against the law and in my opinion trail hunting soon will be too. That is completely due to people constantly and blatantly breaking the law. Im not wasting anymore of my time on this as you clearly cant see it.

I think you can be in favor of something which is illegal though, whilst also recognising that it is illegal and not doing it as a result.

Personally I'm against fox hunting, but I do think Palo can logically argue that it should be legal whilst also being aware that it isn't.

I'm not commenting currently on the wider issue of hunts flouting the ban - I *think* everyone agrees that it's disgraceful, the disagreement lies in how prevalent illegal hunting is. Palo thinks its rare, others think it's far too common. Personally I agree with Sandstone that unless the hunts which are acting within the law make it very obvious that they distance themselves from those which have acted illegally, trail hunting will have had its day soon too. A good start would probably be not training hounds on fox scent.

 

[blitznbobs]

I think you can be in favor of something which is illegal though, whilst also recognising that it is illegal and not doing it as a result.

.

This is a very true statement - if it wasn’t there would be no people campaigning to change the law - civil rights in the states and gay rights/ marriage laws everywhere spring to mind. There are many laws that I think should be changed but I will observe them til they are

 

[Sandstone1]

This is a very true statement - if it wasn’t there would be no people campaigning to change the law - civil rights in the states and gay rights/ marriage laws everywhere spring to mind. There are many laws that I think should be changed but I will observe them til they are

I agree but Palo constantly goes back and forth between trail hunting and fox hunting and confusing the two. This thread is about fox hunting.

 

[The Fuzzy Furry]

This thread is about fox hunting.

In that case, it ought to be locked now as fox hunting is historical.

Or, perhaps the pointed postings from some uneducated posters who seem to perpetually keep posting that hunts are all hunting fox and not trail, clean boot or drag, need to accept that the highlighted ones ARE legal and ARE permitted to go ahead.

 

[Sandstone1]

In that case, it ought to be locked now as fox hunting is historical.

Or, perhaps the pointed postings from some uneducated posters who seem to perpetually keep posting that hunts are all hunting fox and not trail, clean boot or drag, need to accept that the highlighted ones ARE legal and ARE permitted to go ahead.[/QUOTE
As far as I am aware this thread is about hunts that break the law. As in using trail hunting as a smokescreen. Genuine trail or drag hunting is of course legal. If only fox hunting was really historical there would be no problem would there?

 

[palo1]

And this is the same group that feel they are informed enough about wildlife matters....I would like to say though that I don't particularly see the need to bring vegans/veganism into the discussion so apologies for that from the original poster. At the same time it is kind of relevant that these hunt sabs who want to dictate what goes on in the countryside in all manner of ways clearly have no clue about some quite important things about conservation.

From fb - of course.

Mink: where animal liberation and wildlife conservation collide head-on. Sabs really are as thick as (vegan) mince if they think a wildlife trust is just trapping mink for fun.

 

[Koweyka]

In that case, it ought to be locked now as fox hunting is historical.

Or, perhaps the pointed postings from some uneducated posters who seem to perpetually keep posting that hunts are all hunting fox and not trail, clean boot or drag, need to accept that the highlighted ones ARE legal and ARE permitted to go ahead.

You won’t find monitors or sabs at clean boot or drag, unless we have been invited which we often are, they are open and transparent, advertise their meets and their routes.....no terrier boys. Perhaps some of the posters on this thread need to get their heads out of their nether regions and concede that not all trail hunts are operating legally and that’s why all trail hunts get tarred with the same brush.

All hunts know that some hunts openly hunt fox but have they tried to get their house in order ? No they haven’t, as long as they weren’t getting monitored or sabbed they ignored it, now the whole thing has blown up in the trail hunts faces it’s panic stations.

 

[Kipper's Dick]

And this is the same group that feel they are informed enough about wildlife matters....I would like to say though that I don't particularly see the need to bring vegans/veganism into the discussion so apologies for that from the original poster. At the same time it is kind of relevant that these hunt sabs who want to dictate what goes on in the countryside in all manner of ways clearly have no clue about some quite important things about conservation.

From fb - of course.

Mink: where animal liberation and wildlife conservation collide head-on. Sabs really are as thick as (vegan) mince if they think a wildlife trust is just trapping mink for fun.

Oh good grief, you couldn't make it up. What an appalling and unforgivable level of ignorance.
The "SES pixies" could start educating themselves by googling predation by mink in the UK.

 

[Upthecreek]

Snares should be banned immediately, not only do targeted species suffer horribly, none targeted species suffer immeasurably as well, in the last few months alone several cats, a dog, an owl and birds of prey have been found in snares, how many other animals have died that haven’t been discovered by members of the public.

Culled at cubbing earths WTAF everything you stated there is revolting.

Far too many gun happy (insert your own expletive) get a kick out of lamping etc it’s utterly repugnant and as you say has no closed season, I know some MP’s are actively looking into this very issue.

I know many many farmers who don’t want to kill foxes, they understand the value foxes have to the ecosystem, the way the fox population is plummeting especially in the countryside it will come that foxes have protected status and that can’t come soon enough, that will really throw a spanner in the works for hunting/shooting and snaring then.

Slightly off topic, but are you saying that numbers of all animals which have no natural predators (e.g. foxes, badgers, deer) should be uncontrolled by man? If so what do they eat when their numbers get so high that their natural food source cannot sustain them?

Badgers were protected for years, but mass culling has had to be introduced over the last few years to control numbers due to increased cases of TB in cattle. Deer in large numbers can decimate huge areas of crops within a couple of days. Foxes kill lambs, chickens, ducks etc. They don’t just eat wild rabbits. How would you manage all of this if you think we shouldn’t kill any animals at all? (I am not saying they should be hunted by hounds by the way).

 

[Koweyka]

Slightly off topic, but are you saying that numbers of all animals which have no natural predators (e.g. foxes, badgers, deer) should be uncontrolled by man? If so what do they eat when their numbers get so high that their natural food source cannot sustain them?

Badgers were protected for years, but mass culling has had to be introduced over the last few years to control numbers due to increased cases of TB in cattle. Deer in large numbers can decimate huge areas of crops within a couple of days. Foxes kill lambs, chickens, ducks etc. They don’t just eat wild rabbits. How would you manage all of this if you think we shouldn’t kill any animals at all? (I am not saying they should be hunted by hounds by the way).

They have no natural predators because they have all been hunted to extinction....

The badger population is overestimated, there has just been a study saying the population is between 250k-400k that’s a huge variation, in the cull they use a formula based on guesswork of how many badgers live in a square kilometre, if You take the higher number then it will lead to local extinctions, just because a sett has 10 entrances it doesn’t follow there are at least ten badgers. This is why every year they have had to extend the cull duration and revise minimum numbers down. Badgers are now extinct in many areas of the UK, I know of a sett on a horse stud farm, there are references to this sett going back 400 years regarding it, no cattle nearby all the badgers are dead all culled. I don’t want to get into the ins and outs of the cull, clearly I don’t agree with it, the infections are in the herd and until that’s eradicated badgers will be the innocent scapegoats, every badger could be killed in the UK and you will still have TB. More badgers were killed in the last cull than cattle. The farmers have been let down as much as the badgers have by a testing regime that misses infections.

I believe in this country there is a kill first think of alternatives later, killing is the easy alternative, this is why the UK is one of the most wildlife depleted countries in the world. I feel sorry for future generations, who won’t get to see some of the wildlife we have now.

As I have mentioned before, the gangs of people going out lamping need to be regulated and licensed, they don’t do it for control they do it for fun, if there needs to be control then it has to be carried out in a humane, sympathetic and controlled way only after all other alternatives have been considered.

The cruelty inflicted on our wildlife is on a scale you probably can’t imagine.

 

[Upthecreek]

They have no natural predators because they have all been hunted to extinction....

The badger population is overestimated, there has just been a study saying the population is between 250k-400k that’s a huge variation, in the cull they use a formula based on guesswork of how many badgers live in a square kilometre, if You take the higher number then it will lead to local extinctions, just because a sett has 10 entrances it doesn’t follow there are at least ten badgers. This is why every year they have had to extend the cull duration and revise minimum numbers down. Badgers are now extinct in many areas of the UK, I know of a sett on a horse stud farm, there are references to this sett going back 400 years regarding it, no cattle nearby all the badgers are dead all culled. I don’t want to get into the ins and outs of the cull, clearly I don’t agree with it, the infections are in the herd and until that’s eradicated badgers will be the innocent scapegoats, every badger could be killed in the UK and you will still have TB. More badgers were killed in the last cull than cattle. The farmers have been let down as much as the badgers have by a testing regime that misses infections.

I believe in this country there is a kill first think of alternatives later, killing is the easy alternative, this is why the UK is one of the most wildlife depleted countries in the world. I feel sorry for future generations, who won’t get to see some of the wildlife we have now.

As I have mentioned before, the gangs of people going out lamping need to be regulated and licensed, they don’t do it for control they do it for fun, if there needs to be control then it has to be carried out in a humane, sympathetic and controlled way only after all other alternatives have been considered.

The cruelty inflicted on our wildlife is on a scale you probably can’t imagine.

You haven’t answered my questions though. I did not ask whether the badger cull was right or wrong. I used it as an example in my post of a species that has been protected and the consequence of not controlling numbers at all over the years is the implementation of a mass culling programme.

So I say again if you are saying that numbers of animals with no natural predators should not been controlled by man how do you think they will survive when there are too many to be sustained in their environment? They will starve. Hardly humane.

The “gangs of people going out lamping” you refer to are poachers. Poaching is illegal. Anyone going out lamping to control foxes must have the permission of the landowner and a firearms license. Why do you assume anyone that kills animals does so for fun?

 

[Koweyka]

You are wrong in your assumption that lampers always have the permission of the landowner, they don’t poach foxes or badgers or hares and you are being rather naive if you think the vast majority don’t do it for fun.

Explain fox hunting to me, why go out with the intention to hunt and kill foxes ? Do you think that’s humane ? Stag hunting, how do you feel about that, do you think that’s an acceptable exercise in population control ? Hare coursing ? A kind way of stopping hares eating grass and crops ? What are your thoughts on that ?

If some claims are to be believed foxes are killing thousands of lambs chickens and ducks and have stockpiles to last 30 years.

I answered your question “if there needs to be control then it has to be carried out in a humane, sympathetic and controlled way only after all other alternatives have been considered” you chose to ignore it for your own narrative.

 

[Clodagh]

I answered your question “if there needs to be control then it has to be carried out in a humane, sympathetic and controlled way only after all other alternatives have been considered” you chose to ignore it for your own narrative.

So what way would you recommend? Shooting foxes with rifles is undoubtedly the quickest and most humane method. Whether or not the individual enjoys it is irrelevant to the fox.

And trespassers with guns tend to be frowned upon by both landowners and the police.

 

[Koweyka]

Am I in the Twilight Zone here, because it feels like it.....or is it ground hog day.

The police and landowners have to catch them first.

 

[Upthecreek]

You are wrong in your assumption that lampers always have the permission of the landowner, they don’t poach foxes or badgers or hares and you are being rather naive if you think the vast majority don’t do it for fun.

Explain fox hunting to me, why go out with the intention to hunt and kill foxes ? Do you think that’s humane ? Stag hunting, how do you feel about that, do you think that’s an acceptable exercise in population control ? Hare coursing ? A kind way of stopping hares eating grass and crops ? What are your thoughts on that ?

If some claims are to be believed foxes are killing thousands of lambs chickens and ducks and have stockpiles to last 30 years.

I answered your question “if there needs to be control then it has to be carried out in a humane, sympathetic and controlled way only after all other alternatives have been considered” you chose to ignore it for your own narrative.

If lampers don’t have permission of landowners they are trespassing. And they most definitely do poach hare and deer. I was not talking about people doing it illegally for sport/fun. I was talking about people lamping with permission of the landowner with a licensed firearm for the purpose of population control.

Why are you asking me about fox hunting? My post had nothing to do with that. Actually I don’t think hunting is an effective method of controlling numbers of any species. Neither do I think that numbers should be uncontrolled.

I’m not sure what you think my narrative is. I just find it ridiculous when people say animals shouldn’t be killed full stop but have no answer about how you manage species that don’t have natural predators and the consequences of their numbers getting out of control. There are far worse things than dying and killing doesn’t have to be cruel.

 

[Koweyka]

I think you have a narrative because you are deliberately ignoring what I stated and you have done it again.

Honestly it’s like banging your head against a brick wall, I don’t actually believe that some of you know what happens to wildlife in the countryside, a farmer giving permission is totally different to the gangs going out, I certainly didn’t give permission when lampers came on my land. Oh wait....we according to some drivel on here we are all unwashed, uneducated, jobless layabouts engaged in a class war aren’t we, its utter rubbish and there will never be any class in anyone who hunts for fun or sport.

This thread was about Hunting, but as frequently happens any discussion around fox hunting turns into .... well what about this and what about that and deviates from the discussion at hand.

 

[palo1]

Did you know hunting hounds could chase a whole flock of sheep, or cows and even llamas have been chased and they are totally exempt from whatever damage they cause. It’s madness.

Hunts are not exempt from any damage they cause at all; that is one of the reasons that they have insurance; a hunt cannot function without that in place. Your statement simply isn't true.

 

[Koweyka]

You are wrong, hounds are exempt from incidents involving livestock, if they chase sheep they cannot be shot a pet dog can be. Another shocking loophole in the hunting act.

The hunts I deal with don’t involve insurance in most occasions they try pay people off, a pony was killed at a hunt I monitor, chased by the hounds and broke a leg, the owner was an employee they threatened her with the sack if she complained. We are the agents for many landowners who suffer from trespass, one of them is still waiting for repairs to her fencing months after the ginger trail went through her property.

But you don’t want to hear that do you.

 

[Koweyka]

I take my hat off to some of the regular posters on here, that have called out trail hunting for what it is, you have the patience of saints you really do.

 

[palo1]

I think you have a narrative because you are deliberately ignoring what I stated and you have done it again.

Honestly it’s like banging your head against a brick wall, I don’t actually believe that some of you know what happens to wildlife in the countryside, a farmer giving permission is totally different to the gangs going out, I certainly didn’t give permission when lampers came on my land. Oh wait....we according to some drivel on here we are all unwashed, uneducated, jobless layabouts engaged in a class war aren’t we, its utter rubbish and there will never be any class in anyone who hunts for fun or sport.

This thread was about Hunting, but as frequently happens any discussion around fox hunting turns into .... well what about this and what about that and deviates from the discussion at hand.

But...you also completely ignore what other people say and refuse to accept or engage with any of the ideas or challenges to your opinion. For you, contributions to the thread appear to be about repeatedly stating a single view - not entering into a discussion at all! That is often what happens with highly polarised issues I know. That is why, often, it helps to have facts rather than opinions. Why do you feel that your knowledge of wildlife and the countryside is perhaps more informed or more 'correct' than other people? I don't mean that rudely, but do you have particular qualifications or knowledge that justifies that position? I have the experience of living in the countryside, keeping sheep, chickens and cattle as well as having a long standing relationship with my particular community and with hunting activities. I also have a very long standing interest and committment to wildlife and to the protection of nature and feel that is hugely important in my life. I have academic skills and experience so feel able to identify resources and information that are impartial and produced by people who have a serious level of knowledge about and approach to particular aspects of their subject. I try to keep contributions within the context of knowledge and values that I am confident about.

I do understand that some values are based strongly on feelings and we all have different interpretations of things - thankfully we live in a free society where expressions of those differences are tolerated.

ETA - it is very easy these days to live in an echo chamber - where both good and bad resonate repeatedly. I think that happens a lot with any debate around hunting (trail, drag and bloodhounding).

 

[palo1]

You are wrong, hounds are exempt from incidents involving livestock, if they chase sheep they cannot be shot a pet dog can be. Another shocking loophole in the hunting act.

The hunts I deal with don’t involve insurance in most occasions they try pay people off, a pony was killed at a hunt I monitor, chased by the hounds and broke a leg, the owner was an employee they threatened her with the sack if she complained. We are the agents for many landowners who suffer from trespass, one of them is still waiting for repairs to her fencing months after the ginger trail went through her property.

But you don’t want to hear that do you.

Well unless you are involved in the running of a hunt you probably wouldn't know the details of their insurance. What you are saying is just completely alien to my experience to be honest.

 

[Upthecreek]

I think you have a narrative because you are deliberately ignoring what I stated and you have done it again.

Honestly it’s like banging your head against a brick wall, I don’t actually believe that some of you know what happens to wildlife in the countryside, a farmer giving permission is totally different to the gangs going out, I certainly didn’t give permission when lampers came on my land. Oh wait....we according to some drivel on here we are all unwashed, uneducated, jobless layabouts engaged in a class war aren’t we, its utter rubbish and there will never be any class in anyone who hunts for fun or sport.

This thread was about Hunting, but as frequently happens any discussion around fox hunting turns into .... well what about this and what about that and deviates from the discussion at hand.

I haven’t ignored anything you stated. You are making lots of assumptions about people and your tone is rude.

 

[palo1]

You won’t find monitors or sabs at clean boot or drag, unless we have been invited which we often are, they are open and transparent, advertise their meets and their routes.....no terrier boys. Perhaps some of the posters on this thread need to get their heads out of their nether regions and concede that not all trail hunts are operating legally and that’s why all trail hunts get tarred with the same brush.

All hunts know that some hunts openly hunt fox but have they tried to get their house in order ? No they haven’t, as long as they weren’t getting monitored or sabbed they ignored it, now the whole thing has blown up in the trail hunts faces it’s panic stations.[/QUOTE

But only very recently sabs advised their supporters to get after a bloodhound hunt; they produced a poster for one of the National Parks, artfully splashed with fake blood demanding that the National Park ban all hunting; yet bloodhounds are recognised as absolutely 'safe' ; even Brian May tells everyone to go bloodhounding!! Here you go:-

 

[Koweyka]

An unfortunate choice of photograph using bloodhounds, no sab or monitor I know would sab a bloodhound pack, perhaps they should have featured this fox killed by the Holderness Hunt, more fitting wouldn’t you say.

 

[palo1]

You are wrong, hounds are exempt from incidents involving livestock, if they chase sheep they cannot be shot a pet dog can be. Another shocking loophole in the hunting act.

The hunts I deal with don’t involve insurance in most occasions they try pay people off, a pony was killed at a hunt I monitor, chased by the hounds and broke a leg, the owner was an employee they threatened her with the sack if she complained. We are the agents for many landowners who suffer from trespass, one of them is still waiting for repairs to her fencing months after the ginger trail went through her property.

But you don’t want to hear that do you.

I have just looked at both Forestry England and the MOD and both of those organisations clearly require sight of current insurance before annual agreements for trail hunting are confirmed. I know that insurance is in place too as I attend the hunt AGMs and listen to the cost of it every year.

 

[palo1]

An unfortunate choice of photograph using bloodhounds, no sab or monitor I know would sab a bloodhound pack, perhaps they should have featured this fox killed by the Holderness Hunt, more fitting wouldn’t you say.View attachment 67691

I just can't be drawn into agreeing that a picture of a dead fox is evidence of any particular death tbh and I don't think that just using a picture of a dead fox would be particularly 'convincing' but the picture I posted is perfectly clear and yes, unfortunate, particularly because it reflects a level of ignorance that makes a nonsense of the 'message' and the claim of anti-hunters and sabs that they 'know and understand' about hunting.