Sandstone1
Well-Known Member
So what would the pro hunters here say about the Warwickshire killing two foxes in two weeks? Can anyone answer this please?
So hunts do not do this then?
Hunting is in a spot of bother
- Thread starter Tiddlypom
- Start date
AmyMay
Situation normal
The two are in no way comparable and completely detracts from the discussion.
palo1
Well-Known Member
You are so blind... Ok one more time. If trail hunting why oh why do they frequently end up along side or on main roads??? If trail hunting why are the so often hunting foxes??? why do they end up on land they have been asked not to go on??? Why do they upset livestock and other horses??? why have they killed pets???? why do they end up on railway lines???? Can you please answer this without quoting reports at me? If legal trail hunting why are they not laying and following a trail? I can tell you why. BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT TRAIL HUNTING. If you think they are you must be incredibly lucky that your hunt does it legally or you have not actually been hunting recently or you are deluded. I t has to be one of them.
@Sandstone: the answers you have pressed me for!!
(I know you won't like them).
I do not experience hounds frequently ending up alongside or on main roads but that could happen because of stupidity or accident; the scent trail (any scent) can change in the breeze and some hunting country is benighted by roads all over so where a trail is laid in one place that may inevitably be near a road. Our hounds cross one main road annually, accompanied by members of the hunt. If trail hunting hounds will naturally be in the same area as foxes so the sab assertions that a fox 2 fields away from hounds is definitively being hunted is just speculation. Some hunts and hounds end up on land they are not welcome on; that is poor management, miscommunication or accident. Killing pets is very, very rare and totally unacceptable on every level. I have not witnessed upset livestock so I can't answer why or how livestock is upset - I guess it is a different situation every time. Trail hunts do lay a trail - that is demonstrated by many hunts.
You hear of all of these things as incidents and they are very damaging but in fact the vast majority of trail hunting days do not involve these things. You are focussing on those because that is your viewpoint and those things are important to your viewpoint. The statistics tell a different story.
@Sandstone: the answers you have pressed me for!!
(I know you won't like them).I do not experience hounds frequently ending up alongside or on main roads but that could happen because of stupidity or accident; the scent trail (any scent) can change in the breeze and some hunting country is benighted by roads all over so where a trail is laid in one place that may inevitably be near a road. Our hounds cross one main road annually, accompanied by members of the hunt. If trail hunting hounds will naturally be in the same area as foxes so the sab assertions that a fox 2 fields away from hounds is definitively being hunted is just speculation. Some hunts and hounds end up on land they are not welcome on; that is poor management, miscommunication or accident. Killing pets is very, very rare and totally unacceptable on every level. I have not witnessed upset livestock so I can't answer why or how livestock is upset - I guess it is a different situation every time. Trail hunts do lay a trail - that is demonstrated by many hunts.
You hear of all of these things as incidents and they are very damaging but in fact the vast majority of trail hunting days do not involve these things. You are focussing on those because that is your viewpoint and those things are important to your viewpoint. The statistics tell a different story.
Fred66
Well-Known Member
Please don’t join the group of people so blinkered that they are unwilling to even try and discuss. I, Palo and others have indicated that we do not advocate breaking the law. We acknowledge that some hunts have, however this does not make it our responsibility to police it, we have a police force for that purpose.
I don’t take it upon myself to follow speeding drivers, to sit in pubs watching for potential drunk drivers or stalk other potential law breakers. Do you ? If not does this mean that you don’t call it out ? That you passively support it ? If not then don’t accuse me in a similar vein.
Sandstone1
Well-Known Member
I am focussing on them because they happen pretty much every week with my local hunt. They dont even pretend to lay a trail and often kill foxes.You are so blind... Ok one more time. If trail hunting why oh why do they frequently end up along side or on main roads??? If trail hunting why are the so often hunting foxes??? why do they end up on land they have been asked not to go on??? Why do they upset livestock and other horses??? why have they killed pets???? why do they end up on railway lines???? Can you please answer this without quoting reports at me? If legal trail hunting why are they not laying and following a trail? I can tell you why. BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT TRAIL HUNTING. If you think they are you must be incredibly lucky that your hunt does it legally or you have not actually been hunting recently or you are deluded. I t has to be one of them.
@Sandstone: the answers you have pressed me for!!
I do not experience hounds frequently ending up alongside or on main roads but that could happen because of stupidity or accident; the scent trail (any scent) can change in the breeze and some hunting country is benighted by roads all over so where a trail is laid in one place that may inevitably be near a road. Our hounds cross one main road annually, accompanied by members of the hunt. If trail hunting hounds will naturally be in the same area as foxes so the sab assertions that a fox 2 fields away from hounds is definitively being hunted is just speculation. Some hunts and hounds end up on land they are not welcome on; that is poor management, miscommunication or accident. Killing pets is very, very rare and totally unacceptable on every level. I have not witnessed upset livestock so I can't answer why or how livestock is upset - I guess it is a different situation every time. Trail hunts do lay a trail - that is demonstrated by many hunts.
You hear of all of these things as incidents and they are very damaging but in fact the vast majority of trail hunting days do not involve these things. You are focussing on those because that is your viewpoint and those things are important to your viewpoint. The statistics tell a different story.
Just out of interest how do you feel when your hunt "kills" by accident?
CrunchieBoi
Well-Known Member
Indeed, always handy for the purposes of creating a smokescreen and trying to portray to the people that you're going about your legitimate business. *wink
skinnydipper
Well-Known Member
Did anyone come up with a reasonable explanation why fox scent, artifical or natural, has continued to be used when fox is not the quarry?
AmyMay
Situation normal
I think for the balance of fairness we should recognise that not all hunts are breaking the law.
ycbm
Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
Does the Master of your hunt belong to the organisation which continues to insist the the webinars were taken out of context and that the conviction is unsafe?
I would like to hunt Joe in future years if it's still around then. But I won't hunt with a Master who takes that view, because I know that would mean I was tacitly supporting illegal hunting.
It frustrates the hell out of me that the failure of trail hunting to split from the illegal fox hunts is sowing the seeds of its own demise.
.
CrunchieBoi
Well-Known Member
Not all, but the leaked webinars strongly suggest widespread criminality within the sport from the top down. From what I can see there's been no attempt to address that.
Sossigpoker
Well-Known Member
There is no explanation other than the fact that they still hunt foxes.
palo1
Well-Known Member
It is a legacy issue; the Hunting Act was so difficult and so contested that many 'accomodations' had to be made - the Act would not even have made it as far as the deployment of the Parliament Act (where an Act can be passed without going to both the House of Commons and the House of Lords as our legislature usually demands - sorry if you know this but I think you are in the US so you may not be familiar with our parliamentary process!) without significant compromise. The unique qualities of traditional fox hounds were recognised in the agreement that an animal based scent could continue to be used; though any idiot could see the problems with that. Both sides were (and remain) completely entrenched and the pro-hunting lobby were determined not to lose the ability of fox hounds to hunt foxes as they felt that the act, utterly dire and nonsensical as it is, was bound to be repealed. In fact several governments considered that and everybody associated with the Act has publicly expressed great regret over it.
But now, several years down the line hunters are determined not to give any more ground up and the use of animal based scent is a problem in itself. It is one of those unintended consequences of an Act that was never fit for purpose. Drag hunts have always used a non-animal based scent and fox hunters never wanted to become drag hunters (on the whole anyway) so the traditionally minded packs who want to hunt legally hold the animal based scent as somewhat symbolic of their traditional ways. For some packs it is a loophole that they seem prepared to abuse at times. Whilst that behaviour is reprehensible and causes much angst and fury amongst law abiding packs, the use of traditional fox scent is still something of a sacred cow...
That compromise was always a pyrric victory - now also a liability in my eyes but my local pack manages to hunt legally in any case. It can be done - the scent used shouldn't really be an issue tbh but...
ETA - sorry @skinnydipper - I am mistaken; I saw your avatar and thought you were another poster with similar who is in the US. I don't think you are so I apologise for the parliamentary process explanation!
Tiddlypom
Carries on creakily
We've been round the issue of leaving the policing of hunting purely to the police before. The police are not well enough resourced to do that. To ensure that a hunt was hunting legally all day would tie up too many units for far too long. As it is, it is well known that the norty hunts may put up a brief smokescreen of legal hunting when the police attend, only to revert to fox hunting as soon as they leave.
So in step the antis...
So in step the antis...
ycbm
Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
palo1
Well-Known Member
Well morally and logically they are comparable but in terms of the law here they are not. I accept that but when anti hunters try to take the moral high ground I find it so nonsensical that one domesticated predatory animal is allowed out to kill wildlife (with no constraints) whilst another domesticated predatory animal, under control and with several constraints and legal sanction against the killing of wildlife, even vermin, is considered appallingly dangerous. Add in to that the fact that the same species of domestic animal (the dog) IS allowed to kill other wildlife/vermin (terriers on rats or any dogs on rabbits for example) then I am enraged by the total lack of logic or sense!!
I know that people feel that their cats are not an issue but really, it doesn't make sense at all, especially when a cat's natural prey are some of our most vulnerable wildlife (song birds). I know everyone howls when I mention it and it is terribly inconvenient to cat owners but I still feel morally bound to make the point.
palo1
Well-Known Member
It doesn't matter how long @ycbm - the fact is that many pro-hunters, like the anti-hunters are utterly unwilling and unable to accept further compromise. Positions are as polarised or more now than they were back at the time of the Act when pro-hunters felt repeal was possible and anti-hunters felt that the Act would see the end of people on horses following hounds.
AmyMay
Situation normal
I don’t have a cat. And your argument is nonsense. I have several feral cats visit my garden daily. The Sparrow hawks are the issue for me, not the cats. That said, my garden is full of birds- still ?
ycbm
Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
palo1
Well-Known Member
Please can you explain why the argument about cats is nonsensical? They kill birds and small mammals in huge number and I am certainly frustrated by local cats killing songbirds. I also see Peregrines killing small birds and ravens hunting larks but those are wild birds under no-one's control.
palo1
Well-Known Member
You are just being awkward - I meant that the principles and feelings have not changed. You feel they should have done, that would work for your perspective but you are not in those other people's shoes.
lannerch
Well-Known Member
My cat often brings a mouse home, and occasionally a blue tit, happily most I manage to rescue as he brings them alive and when not rescurd tortures until dead for the next hour or so. Unfortunately he’s cottoned on to the fact I take them of him as he’s started hiding with them in the neighbours garden.
Sandstone1
Well-Known Member
well for one thing cats dont go about in organised packs followed by riders and car followers or who have terrier men digging out foxes that have gone to ground.
lannerch
Well-Known Member
cats do do it purely for fun well mine does as I can assure you he is very well fed
palo1
Well-Known Member
Well no, but some people would argue that the organised nature of pre-ban hunting was much safer than the free slaughter that cats are allowed.
AmyMay
Situation normal
Because quite simply, it’s a fallacy that cats have that much of an impact on garden wildlife.
Sandstone1
Well-Known Member
I do not dispute that but its a completely different thing to fox hunting and too suggest otherwise is yet another smokescreen which you people seem to like...
lannerch
Well-Known Member
That’s just not true amymay in I think Australia they are banned from going out due to the devastation they have caused on the songbird population
stangs
Well-Known Member
Sorry I appreciate there’s a serious discussion going on but I cannot get the imagery of a bunch of cats in black and red coats racing through hedges meowing “tally ho!” out of my head
Sandstone1
Well-Known Member
Yes it is ridiculous. Just the pro hunt gang trying to throw us off the scent
Fred66
Well-Known Member
So you’re ok with dogs being allowed to roam free and kill randomly? It’s not the killing you are averse to it’s the hunt aspect ?