Hunting is in a spot of bother

[Michen]

A reminder of what some of the delightful, country based, animal welfare at heart hunting lot get up to.

Kimblewick Hunt, New Years Day 2019.

Kimblewick Hunt: Men sentenced for releasing fox 'into hunt path' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-50562260

Covert cctv filming, no antis present. Fox prodded out of a drain then pulled out by its tail just as hounds approach. The stooges who did the prodding got suspended prison sentences, but the brains who pulled their strings did not.

https://forums.horseandhound.co.uk/threads/kimblewick-hunt-pair-found-guilty.781967/

This is NOT what all hunts get up to. Stop trying to tar everyone with the same brush. Like in all walks of life, there are good and bad practices.

 

[Tiddlypom]

Did I say all hunts? No, I didn’t. I said SOME.

I have also said that my own local pack are now hunting legally.

 

[Indy]

Can I just say that not all sabs are brainless idiots. My nephew has been out monitoring and he swears to me that he is nothing but polite and professional and he takes it very seriously. He doesn't disrupt but he videos for evidence of illegal hunting. He's also shut Gates, has caught a loose, wandering horse on one occasion and has kept left behind Hounds company while waiting for the hunt to realise they haven't taken them all home - apparently that was a long night and he missed out on a DJ'ing set he was supposed to do.

What changed him was seeing a report on the news of a hunt man throwing a live fox cub into hounds, before he saw that he was a people are entitled to their hobbies kind of lad.

 

[Michen]

Did I say all hunts? No, I didn’t. I said SOME.

I have also said that my own local pack are now hunting legally.

You are fully aware of the intentions behind your posting.

 

[Tiddlypom]

Which are?

 

[paddy555]

Paddy555 - you have given up on the document because of the bias you perceive yet if you look at the references, those are unbiased and largely produced by organisations that have no direct interest in hunting. I agree that the issue is not around hunting and foxes at this point BUT I am all too aware of some entirely prejudiced and ignorant statements and attitudes about the entire premise of hunting.

I can't comment on the quality of your vets -I have met and used good and bad vets myself but for a veterinary body to research and produce this document suggests that there was and continues to be a group of professionals involved in wildlife welfare and management that challenge the attitudes that you and others have. It's great to debate and discuss but it really helps to be in possession of facts, information and as the current woke-spoke would have it 'the science'. If you don't like the science, research and data and you are unable to challenge it with an alternative set of facts then you are probably not winning the argument!!

I am not sure why I have to win the argument. Isn't fox hunting illegal? if so full stop end of.

 

[hollyandivy123]

high levels of cortisol (stress hormone) and depleted glycogen (energy) levels in the muscles in fox and deer hunted with hounds, compared to the levels found in shot controlled fox/deer..................if this was really about pest control surely targeting the breeding female foxes and reducing the cub numbers is more cost effective way (i am not suggesting this by the way).

 

[paddy555]

This is NOT what all hunts get up to. Stop trying to tar everyone with the same brush. Like in all walks of life, there are good and bad practices.

but is it bad practice? surely it is illegal practice.

 

[suebou]

high levels of cortisol (stress hormone) and depleted glycogen (energy) levels in the muscles in fox and deer hunted with hounds, compared to the levels found in shot controlled fox/deer..................if this was really about pest control surely targeting the breeding female foxes and reducing the cub numbers is more cost effective way (i am not suggesting this by the way).

This is exactly what people who are pest controlling for foxes do.

 

[palo1]

high levels of cortisol (stress hormone) and depleted glycogen (energy) levels in the muscles in fox and deer hunted with hounds, compared to the levels found in shot controlled fox/deer..................if this was really about pest control surely targeting the breeding female foxes and reducing the cub numbers is more cost effective way (i am not suggesting this by the way).

I understand and have seen this also but these are also entirely normal, natural physical responses to stress which the VAWM report identifies thus: ''physiological stress involved in the terminal stages of a hunt is no more than the reversible physiological stress endured by the human athlete or racehorse. This compares more favourably with the protracted stress associated with snaring and trapping or the pain and suffering associated with wounding by shooting.''

Further ''There are not and never were any scientific grounds for banning hunting with hounds on the grounds of cruelty. Lord Burns, Chairman of the Committee of Inquiry into Hunting with Dogs in England and Wales said, “Naturally, people ask whether we were implying that hunting is cruel but in true Sir Humphrey style we were not prepared to say so clearly. The short answer to that question is no. There was not sufficient verifiable evidence or data safely to reach views about cruelty” (ref 13). A view echoed by inquiry committee member and veterinary surgeon Lord Soulsby, “At no point did the committee conclude, or even attempt to conclude, an assessment of cruelty. Yet many bodies have erroneously - I repeat the word “erroneously” - quoted the Burns report, stating that it clearly demonstrated that the practice of hunting wild animals with dogs caused cruelty. The report did not state that” (ref. 14). 4.5 A Veterinary Opinion on Hunting with Hounds, supported by over 560 members of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons states, “Hunting with hounds is the natural and most humane method of managing and controlling foxes, hares, deer and mink in the countryside” (ref. 15). This opinion is reached after careful consideration of all the various methods of control and their implications for the wild animal.''

I understand that the point is not whether fox hunting is legal or not - it isn't. I am not addressing that here rather trying to demonstrate some of the research around hunting which is rarely if ever acknowledged by the anti-hunt lobby whose entire premise and raison d'etre is that hunting is cruel. To me, the anti-hunt lobby are wrong, ill-informed and ignorant and many of them use dangerous bully boy tactics to intimidate those that believe and/or know they are engaged in a legal activity. This will become a matter of civil liberty.

 

[shortstuff99]

Most of the animal rights campaigners who campaign against hunting think ALL killing of animals is wrong, be it farm animals or wild animal hunting. They think it is all murder and seeing the (apparent) enjoyment of the said murder by a group of (to them) privileged people just adds insult to injury. Telling them that it is not cruel won't work as they don't think it is our place to decide to kill animals full stop.

Seeing an animal being chased down and ripped apart alive is not going to sit well with members of the public no matter the science.

Hunting really needs to improve its image with the general public, not just country folk, if they want to survive that's the crux of it really.

 

[palo1]

Most of the animal rights campaigners who campaign against hunting think ALL killing of animals is wrong, be it farm animals or wild animal hunting. They think it is all murder and seeing the (apparent) enjoyment of the said murder by a group of (to them) privileged people just adds insult to injury. Telling them that it is not cruel won't work as they don't think it is our place to decide to kill animals full stop.

Seeing an animal being chased down and ripped apart alive is not going to sit well with members of the public no matter the science.

Hunting really needs to improve its image with the general public, not just country folk, if they want to survive that's the crux of it really.

I agree that hunting needs to improve it's image. As for animal rights campaigners - they will also assert and move on to try to prevent all horse sports and keeping of animals in any form of controlled setting.

 

[hollyandivy123]

I understand and have seen this also but these are also entirely normal, natural physical responses to stress which the VAWM report identifies thus: ''physiological stress involved in the terminal stages of a hunt is no more than the reversible physiological stress endured by the human athlete or racehorse. This compares more favourably with the protracted stress associated with snaring and trapping or the pain and suffering associated with wounding by shooting.''

Further ''There are not and never were any scientific grounds for banning hunting with hounds on the grounds of cruelty. Lord Burns, Chairman of the Committee of Inquiry into Hunting with Dogs in England and Wales said, “Naturally, people ask whether we were implying that hunting is cruel but in true Sir Humphrey style we were not prepared to say so clearly. The short answer to that question is no. There was not sufficient verifiable evidence or data safely to reach views about cruelty” (ref 13). A view echoed by inquiry committee member and veterinary surgeon Lord Soulsby, “At no point did the committee conclude, or even attempt to conclude, an assessment of cruelty. Yet many bodies have erroneously - I repeat the word “erroneously” - quoted the Burns report, stating that it clearly demonstrated that the practice of hunting wild animals with dogs caused cruelty. The report did not state that” (ref. 14). 4.5 A Veterinary Opinion on Hunting with Hounds, supported by over 560 members of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons states, “Hunting with hounds is the natural and most humane method of managing and controlling foxes, hares, deer and mink in the countryside” (ref. 15). This opinion is reached after careful consideration of all the various methods of control and their implications for the wild animal.''

I understand that the point is not whether fox hunting is legal or not - it isn't. I am not addressing that here rather trying to demonstrate some of the research around hunting which is rarely if ever acknowledged by the anti-hunt lobby whose entire premise and raison d'etre is that hunting is cruel. To me, the anti-hunt lobby are wrong, ill-informed and ignorant and many of them use dangerous bully boy tactics to intimidate those that believe and/or know they are engaged in a legal activity. This will become a matter of civil liberty.

then to make it more natural...........there should be no followers on foot or on horse back..............i can't remember ever seeing a pack of hyenas in Africa being followed by men on horse back.


and if you really want to think about natural control in an environment maybe what was observed at yellow stone is something you might want to consider..................

 

[Cob Life]

This. It's the huge number of injured birds which are just left to die a slow lingering death, which is so upsetting. When I was a child, there was always concerted efforts made to do as you, say, mop up the injured, but these days it seems more a case of just get off to the next drive and no thought given to any that aren't in the bag. A previous poster said they were worried if hunting was banned, "the antis" would move on to shooting, fishing etc. leading to basically the downfall of country estates. This need not be a bad thing, I think as with all things, change has happen, and the way estates and the countryside is used has to change with the times. (And it need not be used for housing, how about bike tracks and dog exercise fields and country trails... And surely hunts aren't the only people capable of organising a fun ride? Particularly as the land they are welcomed on seems to be ever shrinking...

The shoots I go on we pick up every bird, I’ve spent ages looking and climbed trees to retrieve them before!

 

[shortstuff99]

I agree that hunting needs to improve it's image. As for animal rights campaigners - they will also assert and move on to try to prevent all horse sports and keeping of animals in any form of controlled setting.

Yes they will, (the hardcore ones anyway) as their goal is the end of the 'commodity' of animals. Most pragmatic campaigners know that, that wouldn't go down well and instead campaign for more ethical treatment of animals and the reduction of meat consumption (and away from intensive farming).

 

[palo1]

then to make it more natural...........there should be no followers on foot or on horse back..............i can't remember ever seeing a pack of hyenas in Africa being followed by men on horse back.


and if you really want to think about natural control in an environment maybe what was observed at yellow stone is something you might want to consider..................

I quite agree with you on this. I would be sad to say goodbye to following hounds of course, though when David Attenborough and others present a hunt on TV to demonstrate the lives of wild animals there are many, many 'followers' (on TV). A hunt is clearly something that is compelling for many people. I think the chance of re-introducing wolves to the UK is non-existent. A pack of hounds could provide the same impacts however...that is contentious but not non-sensical and conservation charities have experimented with the impact of 'mimic' top predators here in the UK already.

 

[palo1]

Yes they will, (the hardcore ones anyway) as their goal is the end of the 'commodity' of animals. Most pragmatic campaigners know that, that wouldn't go down well and instead campaign for more ethical treatment of animals and the reduction of meat consumption (and away from intensive farming).

Yes, and the ethical treatment of animals should absolutely be a goal for a mature society. I would support fox hunting on that ground though I know that will provoke howls of rage amongst some. Where evidence, facts etc are suitably contested the law should make that a matter of personal conscience and on-going debate and research.

 

[Clodagh]

then to make it more natural...........there should be no followers on foot or on horse back..............i can't remember ever seeing a pack of hyenas in Africa being followed by men on horse back.


and if you really want to think about natural control in an environment maybe what was observed at yellow stone is something you might want to consider..................

What difference to the fox do the followers make? Unless they’ve are in the wrong place and then they would get a rollicking.

 

[Clodagh]

Yes, and the ethical treatment of animals should absolutely be a goal for a mature society. I would support fox hunting on that ground though I know that will provoke howls of rage amongst some. Where evidence, facts etc are suitably contested the law should make that a matter of personal conscience and on-going debate and research.

Certainly the ban has done the fox population no good overall.

 

[hollyandivy123]

Some people who have horses are cruel.


What difference to the fox do the followers make? Unless they’ve are in the wrong place and then they would get a rollicking.

it goes against the argument that it is natural.........hound vs fox you could say is a natural response, add the humans then you start to loose that argument as they will influence the outcome...........

 

[rextherobber]

The shoots I go on we pick up every bird, I’ve spent ages looking and climbed trees to retrieve them before!

Yes, that's great in the shoots it does happen on, and is obviously the way it should be, but it doesn't happen on the one near me.

 

[Tiddlypom]

Certainly the ban has done the fox population no good overall.

Now I fully agree with you on that.

Whilst I am clearly on the side that the law must be obeyed, when hunting was legal the general fox population was better managed and cared for than it is now, in order to provide sport.

 

[Tiddlypom]

Btw the antis are no longer hassling my local pack now they have gone legit. They do keep an eye on them, but do not interfere.

We’d had a nightmare time before that, with pros, antis and the police having standoffs all the time. I think the record was 8 or 9 police cars plus a helicopter one day.

It is so much nicer for us residents now that peace is restored, and as far as I can tell it is much more enjoyable for the hunt followers, too.

 

[palo1]

Certainly the ban has done the fox population no good overall.

I think it is particularly saddening that an animal that is iconic to our culture and emblematic of our biodiversity has lost's it's rightful place and thus the welfare of the fox as a species has suffered Those that campaigned for this should at least accept what damage the Hunting Act has caused in that respect.

And this too: “The area of woodlands managed for foxhunng in England and Wales is 23,300 hectares. This is based on informaon submied by 93 hunts and is validated by on-site visits to a random selecon of 235 woodlands. This figure is roughly double the area of woodland within the boundaries of Naonal Nature Reserves in England and Wales” (VAWM) I guess that data was correct at the time of the first report - we have undoubtedly lost acres of this incredibly valuable woodland over the last 15 years.

 

[ycbm]

I think it is particularly saddening that an animal that is iconic to our culture and emblematic of our biodiversity has lost's it's rightful place and thus the welfare of the fox as a species has suffered Those that campaigned for this should at least accept what damage the Hunting Act has caused in that respect.

Palo, you write as if you don't know that vast areas of the country have never had fox hunting. My area has never had fox hunting.

The only real problem we have with fox here is that a couple of times a year the RSPCA think it's a good idea to release a load of absolutely huge and totally fearless urban foxes in hill country. They are usually

And this too: “The area of woodlands managed for foxhunng in England and Wales is 23,300 hectares. This is based on informaon submied by 93 hunts and is validated by on-site visits to a random selecon of 235 woodlands. This figure is roughly double the area of woodland within the boundaries of Naonal Nature Reserves in England and Wales” (VAWM) I guess that data was correct at the time of the first report - we have undoubtedly lost acres of this incredibly valuable woodland over the last 15 years.

Why are you assuming that not managing woodland for fox hunting means that woodland disappears? Or even that it is detrimental to woodland to allow foxes to regulate themselves?

To speak of my area again, there is more woodland here now than there was when we moved here 30 years ago.


I do respect your views, Palo, but you do seem to have a dream of managing both nature and humankind that appears to me to be incompatible with managing 7 billion people on the planet, before we even look at mass migration due to climate change. The glory days of living at one with nature, if they ever existed in the last few hundred years, are gone.

 

[Clodagh]

The only real problem we have with fox here is that a couple of times a year the RSPCA think it's a good idea to release a load of absolutely huge and totally fearless urban foxes in hill country.

Do you not have shooting, either?

 

[blitznbobs]

The birds aren't all eaten on the big commercial shoots, BB. It used to be fairly easy for antis to find heaps of dumped birds but they are removed these days. Not many restaurants will serve a bird that might land it with compensation for remedial dentistry and most modern diners wouldn't order it with a disclaimer for pellets being in it.

And none of the commercial chicken farms would be allowed to breed for the meat market if the method of death was to pepper them with shot, fetch the ones still alive with a dog and wring their necks.

I respect the activity is legal and makes a big contribution to the rural economy. I'm not calling for a ban any time soon, but it must eventually go, it's completely unethical judged by modern animal welfare law.

FWIW fishing for sport is no better. I think the two will go at the same time. I
This isn't a class thing.

Well on every shoot (and I don’t shoot cos I’m the worlds worst shot) I’ve been on we eat the birds ... i don’t know any shoot that doesn’t use the pheasant tbh

 

[palo1]

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]

I haven't contradicted myself Palo. Local hunt doesn't mean around my house it meant hunts within an hour's travel with a lorry.
.

 

[HashRouge]

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'm so confused. I thought fox hunting was designed to control fox numbers, but this makes it sound like its aim was to increase them?! Have I just lost the ability to read?!