Hunting is in a spot of bother

[palo1]

This is frankly bollocks. In 31 years, the only work that has gone on on the hundreds of hectares of local shhoting moorland is a few days of drainage channel clearance with a JCB close to an A road. The rest of the work has consisted of fencing off a road to protect sheep and cutting square after circle after oblong in the heather to feed birds to be shot. In the areas which are not being used to raise birds, the heather/peat moor manages itself just fine with practically zero input.
.

What about this? https://www.thescottishfarmer.co.uk...iley of the,the country was deeply concerning.

The same but different source: https://www.c4pmc.co.uk/post/gameke...p-a-wildfire-on-peak-district-s-woodhead-moor

2018: https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...-knowledge-backing-help-firefighters-14840176

Wild Justice have also lost their case: ''
Mrs Justice Lang found all four of their grounds challenging the lawfulness of the burning regulations were unarguable. The regulations introduced by Defra this year restricted the burning of vegetation over deep peat in protected areas. A previous decision to award costs against Wild Justice – an organisation spearheaded by Chris Packham – was upheld.

The British Association for Shooting and Conservation, the Countryside Alliance, the Moorland Association and the National Gamekeepers’ Organisation had previously been granted interested party status in the legal challenge and participated in today’s hearing.

The interested parties had already agreed to donate their share of any awarded costs to the Gamekeepers’ Welfare Trust.

A spokesperson for the interested parties said: “This is good news for upland managers who use prescribed burning alongside other tools to manage our precious uplands. Our approach to sustainable moorland management has been vindicated as sustainable and legally sound.

“Carefully controlled heather burning is a widely recognised, legal and valuable tool in the management of upland vegetation which can produce a range of benefits for wildlife, the environment and wider society through the prevention of devastating summer wildfires.”

Who else has the money, the knowledge, the manpower and the ability to protect our heather moorlands? It may not be perfect but there isn't any other organisation that can take this on.

 

[GSD Woman]

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.

I've seen leaked videos from animal rights groups. Many of them wait months to years to catch on incident on tape. There have been instances of the undercover film maker taking part in abuse to keep the cover. Many of them are photoshopped.
I haven't seen the footage from the webinars. But having been in a field where there are many people willing to lie about what happens I do tend to be a bit skeptical.

 

[palo1]

Your whataboutery knows no limits, does it?

Not at all - I was just following that train of thought tbh.

 

[Regandal]

I’m sure I read that hare numbers go up where the area is managed for coursing, presumably because the sick and weak are eliminated. Indiscriminate culling is never good.

 

[palo1]

I’m sure I read that hare numbers go up where the area is managed for coursing, presumably because the sick and weak are eliminated. Indiscriminate culling is never good.

Coursing is illegal. (other than lure coursing!) .

 

[CrunchieBoi]

I've seen leaked videos from animal rights groups. Many of them wait months to years to catch on incident on tape. There have been instances of the undercover film maker taking part in abuse to keep the cover. Many of them are photoshopped.
I haven't seen the footage from the webinars. But having been in a field where there are many people willing to lie about what happens I do tend to be a bit skeptical.

Given the content of the webinars is available online for anyone to read in full I'm quite happy to form an opinion based on that.

Coincidently it's the same opinion as the judge who found him guilty of encouraging others to commit offences under the hunting act.

 

[GSD Woman]

Healthy foxes tend not to hunt in broad daylight, so chickens etc are safer. Whenever we shot a fox in the garden in daylight it was mangy or old and in poor condition.

Here it would be rabid.
Not hunting a species can have unintended consequences. There is an area where it was illegal to hunt deer. They overpopulated and started starving to death. I believe this was an island in either the Chesapeake Bay or off one of the barrier islands.
Most of the hunts here (USA) don't have kills <- mentioned previously, unless they are hunting coyotes. Apparently when the hunts do kill a fox it is an old and/or weak one.

 

[Koweyka]

The Warwickshire Hunt strike again, this time they killed a deer, nothing is safe while this hunt exists. Trail Hunt Lies

https://fb.watch/acGxgIu72L/

 

[meleeka]

Here it would be rabid.
Not hunting a species can have unintended consequences. There is an area where it was illegal to hunt deer. They overpopulated and started starving to death. I believe this was an island in either the Chesapeake Bay or off one of the barrier islands.
Most of the hunts here (USA) don't have kills <- mentioned previously, unless they are hunting coyotes. Apparently when the hunts do kill a fox it is an old and/or weak one.

I don’t understand why we have to be the police force of nature. There are loads of magpies where I live, I’m pretty sure the numbers are excessive to the detriment of other birds, but I don’t see anyone having a jolly day out to keep them in check.

 

[saddlesore]

I’m very late to this and highly uninformed compared to you all it would seem but my yard neighbours a hunt kennels and they still fox hunt (Scotland).

 

[C'est Moi Again]

I've seen leaked videos from animal rights groups. Many of them wait months to years to catch on incident on tape. There have been instances of the undercover film maker taking part in abuse to keep the cover. Many of them are photoshopped.
I haven't seen the footage from the webinars. But having been in a field where there are many people willing to lie about what happens I do tend to be a bit skeptical.

I hunt in the US. I have never seen it involve a fox at all, in any way. Obviously I do not speak for all hunts in the US - but its really not a popular past-time and I live in one of the few areas known for it. The video footage that you speak of is online, its not all fake, it's easy to find, and it will never go away. The internet is forever. The behaviors captured on film are damaging the reputation of all legal, well managed hunts in the UK (those without psycho terrier men and out of control hounds menacing moggies). Stop the killing, or the British public will stop the sport entirely. I think its really that simple. I just hope they don't start bothering us over here, its all managed very differently.

 

[Clodagh]

Most moorland is now, courtesy of Blair, open access. I expect shoot sabbing to ramp up hugely in the coming years, and frankly welcome it. I cannot abide the thought of winging a bird with shot, bringing it to the ground alive and terrified, sending a dog to pick it up, so it is carried in the jaws of a predator to a human who will finally break its neck.

We would prosecute anyone killing any other animal in such a prolonged fashion.
.

Have you ever seen footage of the catching up and slaughter of broiler hens?

 

[Clodagh]

Rubbish I used to be close friends with a gamekeeper who was a good shot and had the right guns ( he had a licence to shoot deer ) and still the odd one got away injured to be fair to him he did try to find it to dispatch cleanly but I’m sure not all do, the majority are not a good shot and do not have the right rifle certainly not hunting propaganda . But you believe what you want to believe it’s a lot more comfortable to think shooting is instant.

If he knows he cannot kill them reliably, or find them if injured, he shouldn’t pull the trigger.

 

[lannerch]

If he knows he cannot kill them reliably, or find them if injured, he shouldn’t pull the trigger.

He’s a good shot (hence he has the deer gun licence ) if he can’t kill them reliably then no one is guaranteed

 

[ycbm]

Have you ever seen footage of the catching up and slaughter of broiler hens?

It's a separate issue, it's more whataboutery.

They aren't bred to provide fun in the killing of them, shot in flight but not killed, fall out of the sky to the floor, picked up by a dog still alive and carried to a person who wrings its neck. Solely for the purpose of a human having a fun day out.

I don't think country sports supporters understand the depth of disgust that a very large proportion of the population feel at activities using killing animals to provide human entertainment.
.

 

[CanteringCarrot]

Originally it was said that "it's rarely a clean shot" (paraphrase) and I dont think anyone here thinks shooting is always 100% clean, all of the time. Based off of my personal experience, so purely anecdotal, most of the time it is. So, more times than not it has been a clean shot, but it isn't always.

So the fact that sometimes the shot isn't clean, somehow justifies the horrid deaths of foxes? Look, two wrongs don't make a right and the "well, they're doing xyz over there" is a bit of deflecting. Never mind that fox hunting is illegal...so you shouldn't be doing it regardless of what people are doing with their guns. It doesn't matter if I'm sacrificing goats and small children in my garden, if what is happening is wrong, it's wrong, regardless of what others are doing.

I acknowledge that it's not always a clean shot. I acknowledge that there's plenty of work to be done when it comes to humanely managing animal populations and/or slaughtering for human consumption. We have so much work to do and it's an incredible uphill battle, I'm not arguing that there is work to he done in other areas.

What I still don't get is why can't hunts just not be idiots and follow the rules? Oh, right, ego, and being above the law and all that. If your hunt does indeed follow the rules, and you're bring tarred with the same brush, that sucks. I've been there with another sport.

Should you have to police your sport? No, but if you want to save it, you might have to. If the reputation of the sport is so badly ruined and beyond salvageable, it really might die. The thing is that it's become a luxury sport on luxury pets (yes, this is what horses are even if some fail to believe this). There are other ways to control the fox population. So now you're just chasing scent. It's questionable how this scent is obtained, so there's also that. A luxury sport isn't a right, and when the few ruin it for the many, it sucks. I've been there, but I also couldn't expect the public to put up with it.

I think most wouldn't give a rats arse if you're frolicking through land you have permission to be on chasing some non living thing. However, too many "mistakes" are being made. How much do you expect the public to deal with for the sake of you having your sport? Why should they even have to deal with any of it? They shouldn't.

If you can't fix the sport beginning from the inside, then odds are it's going to die. It unfortunately doesn't matter if your hunt is perfect, and it may not be fair (either is life), but the public doesn't need to deal with it. There are bad apples in every bunch but why should I have my land trampled on, my cat eaten, my animals upset and/or harassed, or have to witness otherwise avoidable animal suffering just so the rule abiding hunts can still exist? Even if incidents are arguably rare, they still hurt, and it wasn't an unfortunate result to something necessary/that had to be done. So it's going to be a difficult battle. I don't know what the threshold will be re when people have finally had enough and it's just an outright ban, but it's heading into borrowed time territory. If the sport can turnaround and save itself, and have good practices, I have no issue with it still existing, but can it do that?

 

[CanteringCarrot]

It's a separate issue, it's more whataboutery.

They aren't bred to provide fun in the killing of them, shot in flight but not killed, fall out of the sky to the floor, picked up by a dog still alive and carried to a person who wrings its neck. Solely for the purpose of a human having a fun day out.

I don't think country sports supporters understand the depth of disgust that a very large proportion of the population feel at activities using killing animals to provide human entertainment.
.

I don't like killing animals for entertainment because I think it causes some other deep rooted and perhaps unconscious issues within the human mind. I also think it can deteriorate respect for nature.

 

[Clodagh]

I don't like killing animals for entertainment because I think it causes some other deep rooted and perhaps unconscious issues within the human mind. I also think it can deteriorate respect for nature.

I completely disagree, hunting in any form (I work my dogs) instills a huge respect for nature and the quarry. If it doesn’t yes there is something wrong.

 

[CanteringCarrot]

I completely disagree, hunting in any form (I work my dogs) instills a huge respect for nature and the quarry. If it doesn’t yes there is something wrong.

Can you explain further on why you think it instills respect? Genuinely curious. I think it has the possibility in a few instances, but that's mainly when hunting for sustenance, using the whole animals for consumption/goods, and appreciating/respecting where your meal came from. However, that doesn't meet the definition of hunting for sport, or killing for entertainment.

 

[southerncomfort]

This thread really depresses me.

A thread started to highlight problems with trail hunting that ALWAYS swings back to a defence of fox hunting.

As long as the hunting fraternity keep looping back to how unfair the ban is, the problems with illegal fox hunting by trail hunts will never be addressed.

YCBM is right. You're killing your own hobby/sport. You cover your eyes and ears and refuse to listen to the concerns from...well anyone! I've seen more anti hunt rhetoric from both the media and the public over the past couple of months than I've seen for years, but you refuse to brook any criticism or make any improvements that would ease the minds of your critics.

You need to wake up and realise that what's happening is not the fault of antis/sabs, landowners, the media, the public ( or cats.....to my knowledge hunting by cats is not illegal). It is YOUR fault.

Fox hunting is illegal and the ban will never be repealed because the vast majority of Britons find it utterly revolting. So if you want to save your sport, accept it and move on and address the issues of illegal hunting, hunts going on to land they have no right to be on, and the harm and injury caused to farm animals/horses and pets when things go wrong.

The ball is in your court.

 

[palo1]

It's a separate issue, it's more whataboutery.

They aren't bred to provide fun in the killing of them, shot in flight but not killed, fall out of the sky to the floor, picked up by a dog still alive and carried to a person who wrings its neck. Solely for the purpose of a human having a fun day out.

I don't think country sports supporters understand the depth of disgust that a very large proportion of the population feel at activities using killing animals to provide human entertainment.
.

It's not whataboutery - it is entirely valid. If you are going to make value judgements about something, then in order to be credible those judgements have to cut across the board. The accusation of whataboutery is very often a reluctance to admit that there is no logic in a position taken.

 

[palo1]

I don’t understand why we have to be the police force of nature. There are loads of magpies where I live, I’m pretty sure the numbers are excessive to the detriment of other birds, but I don’t see anyone having a jolly day out to keep them in check.

Um, pest control is actually quite a popular thing and yes, magpies and other birds will dominate where they can.

 

[milliepops]

I completely disagree, hunting in any form (I work my dogs) instills a huge respect for nature and the quarry. If it doesn’t yes there is something wrong.

yeah i agree, i am not a hunting supporter but my OH goes pheasant shooting occasionally (mainly shoots clays) and there is always a lot of talk about respecting the pheasants, i don't recognise the jolly old killing spree depictions, there's pride in the sport but in doing it skillfully rather than just blasting things out of the sky willy nilly. I am sure there are stag dos and what have you that are totally different but OH and his connections have a very different take on it. He has also brought birds home to eat many times.

 

[palo1]

Can you explain further on why you think it instills respect? Genuinely curious. I think it has the possibility in a few instances, but that's mainly when hunting for sustenance, using the whole animals for consumption/goods, and appreciating/respecting where your meal came from. However, that doesn't meet the definition of hunting for sport, or killing for entertainment.

There is not a single hunting culture that doesn't hunt for 'sport' so trying to separate subsistence hunting with sport hunting is neither possible nor logical. Hunting, in human culture, in anthropological, social and cultural terms always has purpose. You may not see that purpose or agree with it but that is just what it is.

 

[palo1]

Can you explain further on why you think it instills respect? Genuinely curious. I think it has the possibility in a few instances, but that's mainly when hunting for sustenance, using the whole animals for consumption/goods, and appreciating/respecting where your meal came from. However, that doesn't meet the definition of hunting for sport, or killing for entertainment.

In order to hunt any wild animal a considerable degree of skill and knowledge is required. That is around both the animal and it's habits but also the environment and the specific purpose of that hunt. It is not news that the most influential conservationists have traditionally come from a hunting background. Even dear old David Attenborough started out both hunting for animals to collect for zoos and working with hunters who had the understanding of those animals and their habitats. It isn't a 'convenient' idea about hunting at all but extremely well documented that hunters have a very significant relationship with the environment. London Zoological society recently published a scientific paper that described how hunters in some parts of the Amazon rivalled or outperformed 10 years worth of scientific data in relation to their ecosystem. I know that may not seem relevant in 21st century Britain but it is valid as there is a wealth of knowledge about quarry species and their likes, needs and habits that no one else has accrued. Respect is at the centre of hunting cultures no matter how much you want to decry something that results in the death of an animal in that situation.

 

[CanteringCarrot]

There is not a single hunting culture that doesn't hunt for 'sport' so trying to separate subsistence hunting with sport hunting is neither possible nor logical. Hunting, in human culture, in anthropological, social and cultural terms always has purpose. You may not see that purpose or agree with it but that is just what it is.

Ok, you're certainly entitled to your opinion.

It always has a purpose, and sometimes I don't agree with the purpose. It's not that I can't see the purpose or don't think there is one.

 

[CanteringCarrot]

In order to hunt any wild animal a considerable degree of skill and knowledge is required. That is around both the animal and it's habits but also the environment and the specific purpose of that hunt. It is not news that the most influential conservationists have traditionally come from a hunting background. Even dear old David Attenborough started out both hunting for animals to collect for zoos and working with hunters who had the understanding of those animals and their habitats. It isn't a 'convenient' idea about hunting at all but extremely wellb documented that hunters have a very significant relationship with the environment. London Zoological society recently published a scientific paper that described how hunters in some parts of the Amazon rivalled or outperformed 10 years worth of scientific data in relation to their ecosystem. I know that may not seem relevant in 21st century Britain but it is valid as there is a wealth of knowledge about quarry species and their likes, needs and habits that no one else has accrued. Respect is at the centre of hunting cultures no matter how much you want to decry something that results in the death of an animal in that situation.

I'm not arguing most of what you said here. I think my point was missed.

I'm not decrying anything/everything that results in the death of an animal. Respect isn't always at the center of hunting for sport unfortunately. Ideally, yes, respect is or should be at the center of hunting cultures.

Edit: a million edits later

 

[Ceriann]

There is not a single hunting culture that doesn't hunt for 'sport' so trying to separate subsistence hunting with sport hunting is neither possible nor logical. Hunting, in human culture, in anthropological, social and cultural terms always has purpose. You may not see that purpose or agree with it but that is just what it is.

Some might have said that about slavery at a different point in time. Now illegal in most civilised countries and socially unacceptable. Humans evolve, what we do evolves and consequently some things that used to be end. There is a continued significant mind shift by the public toward trail hunting, a follow on from the public opinion that led to the hunting ban. You will only save “legal” trail hunting if you follow the rules, and make sure you are seen to follow the rules. Arguing the toss about the benefits of fox hunting is an argument lost many years ago.

 

[Slightlyconfused]

It can happen by mistake where ground from several landowners is mixed; one or two hounds can cross a fenceline whilst still on a trail (scent can be high and drifting). Usually the best answer is for huntsman or whip to get off their horse and retrieve hounds on foot - ours do this so that they can apologise to the landowner if need be.

Out of interest what scent do you lay? If you know?

The reason i ask is because i have done scent work with my spaniel before and we teach them to scent a particular scent, gun oil or Cloves.

 

[Miss_Millie]

This thread really depresses me.

A thread started to highlight problems with trail hunting that ALWAYS swings back to a defence of fox hunting.

As long as the hunting fraternity keep looping back to how unfair the ban is, the problems with illegal fox hunting by trail hunts will never be addressed.

YCBM is right. You're killing your own hobby/sport. You cover your eyes and ears and refuse to listen to the concerns from...well anyone! I've seen more anti hunt rhetoric from both the media and the public over the past couple of months than I've seen for years, but you refuse to brook any criticism or make any improvements that would ease the minds of your critics.

You need to wake up and realise that what's happening is not the fault of antis/sabs, landowners, the media, the public ( or cats.....to my knowledge hunting by cats is not illegal). It is YOUR fault.

Fox hunting is illegal and the ban will never be repealed because the vast majority of Britons find it utterly revolting. So if you want to save your sport, accept it and move on and address the issues of illegal hunting, hunts going on to land they have no right to be on, and the harm and injury caused to farm animals/horses and pets when things go wrong.

The ball is in your court.

Possibly the best post on this whole thread.