Hunting is in a spot of bother

[Sandstone1]

I have made my own thoughts so clear so many times on this and other threads about hunting @Sandstone. Your pointed insistence on my 'personal' response to something that I have not seen is...intrusive and somehow aggressive.

Maybe not so aggressive as the fox found the hounds today.....intrusive? I am merely trying to find out how the natural conclusion of the sport you are supporting makes you feel. Never a straight answer. I did not expect one to be honest.

 

[Tiddlypom]

Of course the ban was political and brought in as a vote grabber.

But it worked as a vote grabber because the majority of people in the UK are against the idea of using the killing of animals to create entertainment.
.

This with bells and whistles on.

It's long been recognised that the ban was a Tony Blair vote grabber. I'm surprised that it's still news to anyone.

 

[ycbm]

Tony Blair changed his mind about fox hunting when he started up his Consultancy and started mixing with the kind of people who pay upwards of £1000 a day to blast birds out of the sky half dead and needed to butter them up to get work out of them.

Tony Blair's greatest skill (I mean this, it is a huge social and business skill and it was instrumental in producing the Good Friday Agreement and peace in NI) is to leave everyone he speaks with believing that he has agreed that they should have what they want.
.

 

[palo1]

This with bells and whistles on.

It's long been recognised that the ban was a Tony Blair vote grabber. I'm surprised that it's still news to anyone.

As we know though, just because something is popular does not mean it has any integrity.

 

[Sandstone1]

As we know though, just because something is popular does not mean it has any integrity.

For someone Pro hunting talking about integrity is pretty rich.

 

[Koweyka]

As we know though, just because something is popular does not mean it has any integrity.

Well for something you claim is hugely popular (hunting) and given the head of the governing body is now a convicted criminal, the integrity level in hunting is as low as it can possibly get …

 

[C'est Moi Again]

I came here because we are having a spot of bother with fox hunts in the US - not because of fox, we don't bother those - rather with the horse welfare activists. After slogging around here for a bit trying to get some perspective and enjoying the amazing level of civility between people who disagree online, I see your situation is much worse than ours, and that the few (or not so few depending on whom you ask) bad apples are likely going to spoil the lot for everyone. I do have to say that I find the arguments of "Do you eat meat?", "It's a humane death!", "Tony Blair!" and "People shoot things!" odd, but I am not in the UK, so some of the nuance is lost on me. Just keep in mind that there isn't all that much nuance required when the antis can show a video of terriermen (ghastly!) stabbing foxes with pitchforks, yet I cannot easily find videos of legal hunts proudly showing what they do and how. If I ran a legal hunt in the UK, I'd film the thing myself, just to get ahead of it. Go pros are cheap.

 

[palo1]

Well for something you claim is hugely popular (hunting) and given the head of the governing body is now a convicted criminal, the integrity level in hunting is as low as it can possibly get …

I have never claimed hunting is hugely popular in terms of numbers at all. I get the point about MH and I understand your sense of irony about integrity. The people I know involved in hunting do have integrity however so I speak as I find.

 

[palo1]

I came here because we are having a spot of bother with fox hunts in the US - not because of fox, we don't bother those - rather with the horse welfare activists. After slogging around here for a bit trying to get some perspective and enjoying the amazing level of civility between people who disagree online, I see your situation is much worse than ours, and that the few (or not so few depending on whom you ask) bad apples are likely going to spoil the lot for everyone. I do have to say that I find the arguments of "Do you eat meat?", "It's a humane death!", "Tony Blair!" and "People shoot things!" odd, but I am not in the UK, so some of the nuance is lost on me. Just keep in mind that there isn't all that much nuance required when the antis can show a video of terriermen (ghastly!) stabbing foxes with pitchforks, yet I cannot easily find videos of legal hunts proudly showing what they do and how. If I ran a legal hunt in the UK, I'd film the thing myself, just to get ahead of it. Go pros are cheap.

Those videos are posted by law abiding hunts but tend to get buried or ridiculed by sabs. There are very gradually increasing numbers of sab groups that accept hunts are trail hunting and even though videos of trail laying and trail hunting are questioned, even the anti hunters are willing to agree that some hunts are most definitely hunting within the law. One of the reasons my own hunt does not go down the go-pro route is because of genuine anxiety about being targeted by activists even when legal trail hunting is shown. It is frustrating but I understand it.

 

[Nancykitt]

Many years ago (but post-ban) I went out a couple of times with a harrier pack whose main quarry had, in the past, been the brown hare.
There's no way I would have hunted with them pre-ban because although there may have been a 'problem' with hares in the dim and distant past it was very rare to see one at all. Actually, the locals said that even though the hunt in question went out twice a week 'nothing had been killed for years' Foxes were never really mentioned.

The hunt was very, very careful about 'hunting within the law' and it was mentioned by the master at the start of the meet. One day on the moor a hare did appear and the hounds were after it. I have to say that the huntsman was off his horse and, together with the whips, they managed to get the hounds off the scent - but the hare was, fortunately, blindingly fast and had disappeared. On one hand it was interesting to see, on the other hand it made me feel uneasy. Hence I preferred clean boot hunting and occasionally drag hunting (although I wasn't a good enough rider for drag hunting really).

Although I never saw or heard anything to make me think that the harrier pack was hunting illegally, the majority believed with a passion that the ban should be overturned and they talked about it constantly. They worked with an organisation called 'Vote OK' which, I think was about supporting particular parliamentary candidates who would campaign in favour of overturning the ban. (Apparently Liz Truss was one of them - I wonder if she's changed her mind, as she has on several other issues?) Trail hunting was seen as fine, but strictly temporary until the ban was lifted.

Personally I think this sort of campaigning to overturn the ban is, at best, a waste of time and, at worse, very damaging to all types of legal hunting. Like several others on here, I have seen an increase in anti-hunting views amongst the general public. The Tories have been in power for a long time; if the ban was going to be lifted, something would have happened by now, surely?

 

[palo1]

Well for something you claim is hugely popular (hunting) and given the head of the governing body is now a convicted criminal, the integrity level in hunting is as low as it can possibly get …

How do you explain the crowds of supporters on the Boxing Day meets @Kowyka? Do you know why people turn out to support or see the hunt on that occasion?

 

[Tiddlypom]

*coughs*

And the only reason that certain hunts are now trail hunting, and the antis concur with this, is because of the previous actions of the antis in catching them out repeatedly when they were deliberately hunting illegally.

It is possible that some foxhound packs have genuinely tried to hunt legally all the time since the Hunting Act 2004 was passed. It's just that I don't know of any.

 

[TGM]

Yet I cannot easily find videos of legal hunts proudly showing what they do and how. If I ran a legal hunt in the UK, I'd film the thing myself, just to get ahead of it. Go pros are cheap.

Do you mean legal 'trail hunts' specifically, or do you mean other types of legal hunting such as drag hunting and bloodhounding? The Coakham Bloodhounds regularly post GoPro videos of their hunts in their public Facebook group. They also often have drone footage of their hunts on there also.

 

[palo1]

Many years ago (but post-ban) I went out a couple of times with a harrier pack whose main quarry had, in the past, been the brown hare.
There's no way I would have hunted with them pre-ban because although there may have been a 'problem' with hares in the dim and distant past it was very rare to see one at all. Actually, the locals said that even though the hunt in question went out twice a week 'nothing had been killed for years' Foxes were never really mentioned.

The hunt was very, very careful about 'hunting within the law' and it was mentioned by the master at the start of the meet. One day on the moor a hare did appear and the hounds were after it. I have to say that the huntsman was off his horse and, together with the whips, they managed to get the hounds off the scent - but the hare was, fortunately, blindingly fast and had disappeared. On one hand it was interesting to see, on the other hand it made me feel uneasy. Hence I preferred clean boot hunting and occasionally drag hunting (although I wasn't a good enough rider for drag hunting really).

Although I never saw or heard anything to make me think that the harrier pack was hunting illegally, the majority believed with a passion that the ban should be overturned and they talked about it constantly. They worked with an organisation called 'Vote OK' which, I think was about supporting particular parliamentary candidates who would campaign in favour of overturning the ban. (Apparently Liz Truss was one of them - I wonder if she's changed her mind, as she has on several other issues?) Trail hunting was seen as fine, but strictly temporary until the ban was lifted.

Personally I think this sort of campaigning to overturn the ban is, at best, a waste of time and, at worse, very damaging to all types of legal hunting. Like several others on here, I have seen an increase in anti-hunting views amongst the general public. The Tories have been in power for a long time; if the ban was going to be lifted, something would have happened by now, surely?

I think you are right; I would sincerely hope no government would waste time trying to repeal the Ban; Teresa May sort of wanted to but other things got in the way. There is real conviction amongst hunting people that the Hunting Act is both unfair and detrimental and I do think some find it hard or even impossible to move beyond that. It also sets a precedent for other acts which might cause further division and might be equally contested. I wish the MFHA would just sort out their governance and discipline so that hunts that are doing their level best could just get on with trail hunting. I hope that things really do improve soon; I just want to go out with friends on my horse and watch hounds working a scent (I don't care what it is). I would say that if anyone thinks that hunting (or shooting) are the most significant things our democracy has to deal with, then we are in a very fortunate position. That isn't the case of course.

 

[Koweyka]

How do you explain the crowds of supporters on the Boxing Day meets @Kowyka? Do you know why people turn out to support or see the hunt on that occasion?

Well I support a football team, they get very low crowds all season, but come Boxing Day the world and his wife want to go to a football match, never see them for the rest of the year, but they think they should go just because it’s a Boxing Day thing, look at horse racing, low crowds all year, come Boxing Day loads of people go. You never see these people for the rest of the year, if they truly truly gave a **** they would be there week in week out, day in, day out supporting the hunts, the facts are they aren’t, a few years ago there were never any anti demonstrations against hunts on Boxing Day now many demonstrations happened, how do you explain that ?

 

[Koweyka]

Those videos are posted by law abiding hunts but tend to get buried or ridiculed by sabs. There are very gradually increasing numbers of sab groups that accept hunts are trail hunting and even though videos of trail laying and trail hunting are questioned, even the anti hunters are willing to agree that some hunts are most definitely hunting within the law. One of the reasons my own hunt does not go down the go-pro route is because of genuine anxiety about being targeted by activists even when legal trail hunting is shown. It is frustrating but I understand it.

That makes zero sense, you don’t film your trails because you think you will be targeted, yet by filming the trails you have the undeniable proof you are acting legally. I am genuinely confused.

 

[palo1]

That makes zero sense, you don’t film your trails because you think you will be targeted, yet by filming the trails you have the undeniable proof you are acting legally. I am genuinely confused.

Well there is zero trust of those people who are the self appointed 'monitors' of hunting and just about everyone I know has had a poor experience with antis/sabs. I had the vile experience of sabs outnumbering hunters (and residents in fact) in a small village. I was on foot with one of my children and had my dog with me. 18 masked and be-camera'd sabs swaggered through this tiny village where the hunt had been invited. The sabs had come from big cities up to 100 miles away. Not a single local person had expressed any dismay at the hunt being there. When I asked 2 men (masked and dressed in paramiilitary black outfits) not to film my child, they told me they were filming my vehicle so that they would know who I was....

How frightening do you think that experience was? It was very, very unsettling, particularly because those people, somewhere have images of my child. I would not willingly allow that again as I neither know what would happen to those images, who would store them or share them and where they would end up. That really doesn't feel safe to me. It is frustrating that the thing that might make things safer, is not in fact in itself, safe.

ETA - in case anyone is wondering why so many antis turned up to a legal trail hunt meeting, I believe it was because they had sabbed another hunt in the vicinity without luck and were just 'convenient' to our meet. I have met monitors who have been unmasked and perfectly pleasant but our hunt hasn't had monitors or sabs (other than this incident) for as long as I can remember.

 

[C'est Moi Again]

Those videos are posted by law abiding hunts but tend to get buried or ridiculed by sabs. There are very gradually increasing numbers of sab groups that accept hunts are trail hunting and even though videos of trail laying and trail hunting are questioned, even the anti hunters are willing to agree that some hunts are most definitely hunting within the law. One of the reasons my own hunt does not go down the go-pro route is because of genuine anxiety about being targeted by activists even when legal trail hunting is shown. It is frustrating but I understand it.

I say this knowing that given human nature it is probably unlikely, but couldn't fair-minded hunts and fair-minded sabs (or antis or welfare activists) come together to certify legal hunts as cruelty free somehow? Some of our anti-hunting horse welfare activists are blue haired maniacs who jump out in front of riders looking for video footage. But some are actually concerned citizens who can be reasoned with, and we can share common ground (for us this common ground is "not wanting to hurt horses", I understand for you in the UK its more complex on all fronts). I will just say that one of the crazier activists we had has become friendlier toward us and actually keeps some of her colleagues away - they are still concerning to me but lately they spectate respectfully, as would anyone else.

 

[Nancykitt]

I have to say that there have been antis at the Boxing Day meet closest to where I lived for over 20 years. Lots of people (including me) didn't want to go on the meet because there was always a bit of argy bargy, although it was rare for violence to break out. Apparently, these days there are now fewer members of the public out to see the pre-meet hound parade; not sure if it's because they are strongly anti-hunting or they just don't want to risk being caught in the middle of a row.
We once had 'hunt monitors' out with us and I have to say that they were very civil, no screaming and shouting and most of the time they were just hanging about and watching. They were not masked and clearly not out to cause trouble, but they were definitely an organised group. It didn't really bother me, the hunt had always invited people to come along and see for themselves and that seemed to be what was happening. There was nothing to hide.
(ETA - I do accept that some sabs have been very badly behaved indeed and I would never condone intimidation or any sort of violence on either side.)

It's extremely important that the MFHA and others get their act together now if hunting is to survive at all. They must be very outspoken about illegal hunting and where hunts have broken the law there should be serious (and public) consequences for all concerned. I don't know if illegal hunting has become more common over the last few years but that's how it's coming over to me - and so it's reasonable to say that this is how many of the general public will see it too.

 

[C'est Moi Again]

Do you mean legal 'trail hunts' specifically, or do you mean other types of legal hunting such as drag hunting and bloodhounding? The Coakham Bloodhounds regularly post GoPro videos of their hunts in their public Facebook group. They also often have drone footage of their hunts on there also.

I just meant if I were running any type of legal hunt right now, I would go pro it. The general public likely can't tell one from another and just see dogs and horses. I will look up some of these videos now that I have the name of a specific Facebook group. Thank you so much!

 

[Koweyka]

Well there is zero trust of those people who are the self appointed 'monitors' of hunting and just about everyone I know has had a poor experience with antis/sabs. I had the vile experience of sabs outnumbering hunters (and residents in fact) in a small village. I was on foot with one of my children and had my dog with me. 18 masked and be-camera'd sabs swaggered through this tiny village where the hunt had been invited. The sabs had come from big cities up to 100 miles away. Not a single local person had expressed any dismay at the hunt being there. When I asked 2 men (masked and dressed in paramiilitary black outfits) not to film my child, they told me they were filming my vehicle so that they would know who I was....

How frightening do you think that experience was? It was very, very unsettling, particularly because those people, somewhere have images of my child. I would not willingly allow that again as I neither know what would happen to those images, who would store them or share them and where they would end up. That really doesn't feel safe to me. It is frustrating that the thing that might make things safer, is not in fact in itself, safe.

That’s not answering my question, how does filming your trails make you believe it will attract the anti’s ?

 

[palo1]

That’s not answering my question, how does filming your trails make you believe it will attract the anti’s ?

Publishing/releasing the films is what both publicly demonstrates that trail hunting is taking place and puts us at risk of attack by nutters! I wonder who else, carrying out a legal activity has to film that to prove it? In UK law there is always a presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

IF, IF it felt safe and others thought likewise I would love our trails filmed and released tbh but it doesn't feel safe and I don't think anyone I know wants to be coerced into that 'defensive' position by a group of people they see as deeply antipathetic and untrustworthy. Sabs say they want this but they have done nothing to truly encourage that and even on this forum, every time someone discusses legal hunting sabs and antis decry that experience or use it as a target for their own views, assertions and point scoring. That is my experience.

 

[Gallop_Away]

Because, speaking from my own experience, some sabs simply want to cause distress and disruption regardless of the fact a hunt is hunting within the law.

 

[Miss_Millie]

Because, speaking from my own experience, some sabs simply want to cause distress and disruption regardless of the fact a hunt is hunting within the law.

But if no illegal hunting happened then sabs would not need to exist? So people who wish to continue to trail hunt should put their efforts into rallying against those illegally fox hunting and distancing themselves from those people.

 

[Gallop_Away]

But if no illegal hunting happened then sabs would not need to exist? So people who wish to continue to trail hunt should put their efforts into rallying against those illegally fox hunting and distancing themselves from those people.

My own experience is that SABS take enjoyment from terrorising hunts and whether they be hunting within the law is an insignificant detail to them.
Monitors are a different kettle of fish and I know the pack I hunt with have invited monitors to watch the trail being laid.
We have nothing to hide but despite our best efforts to show we are hunting legally, sabs continue to cause disruption and harassment.
I can completely understand why other hunts don't wish to make the lives of these thugs any easier.

 

[palo1]

But if no illegal hunting happened then sabs would not need to exist? So people who wish to continue to trail hunt should put their efforts into rallying against those illegally fox hunting and distancing themselves from those people.

When I go to the pub I don't drink alcohol. I don't have to take a test to drive home as the law requires me to stay within the legal alcohol limit. I am a law abiding person so that is what I do. I am not required to provide a breath test to persuade people that all pub-goers are under the limit or to identify how many people are not abiding by the law. Those people who are abiding by the law just can't be held responsible for those that don't. There IS condemnation and fury in hunting groups about those hunts that are causing problems and I very much hope new, effective governance is brought in asap.

 

[palo1]

Before I give up on this discussion entirely (again!) please, please can someone explain to me why a truly minority activity around animal welfare, which is important to me, commands so much attention when there are massively significant animal welfare issues that need all the manpower they can get. I mean the scale of some welfare issues totally dwarf any amount of illegal hunting yet there are clearly people who have dedicated their lives to anti-hunting activities. Why do the animal welfare issues around hunting prove such a potent driving force for some people? The animal welfare issue is clear to me but there seem so many more significant welfare problems to address. Anti hunter and pro hunters agree that hunting is a minority activity too. I am asking this question absolutely sincerely and because no-one from an anti-hunting perspective has ever managed to answer that question.

 

[stangs]

Before I give up on this discussion entirely (again!) please, please can someone explain to me why a truly minority activity around animal welfare, which is important to me, commands so much attention when there are massively significant animal welfare issues that need all the manpower they can get. I mean the scale of some welfare issues totally dwarf any amount of illegal hunting yet there are clearly people who have dedicated their lives to anti-hunting activities. Why do the animal welfare issues around hunting prove such a potent driving force for some people? The animal welfare issue is clear to me but there seem so many more significant welfare problems to address. Anti hunter and pro hunters agree that hunting is a minority activity too. I am asking this question absolutely sincerely and because no-one from an anti-hunting perspective has ever managed to answer that question.

This won’t be a satisfying answer but because it’s public and easy to target. There might be thousands of sickos in this country torturing foxes, hares, deers in the privacy of their bedrooms - but how would your average Joe know about them? In contrast, hunting remains in the public eye (a bunch of people galloping around, and a pack of barking dogs, isn’t exactly subtle). If you feel like injustice is being done to wildlife, then hunts are the people you will target.

 

[milliepops]

i find that an interesting question too palo. the people that break into intensive farming units to "liberate" livestock get branded loonies (i am not in agreement with that as a plan of action but the methods and passion/attitude re animal welfare is similar to hunt sabs, or so it seems to an outsider). Personally it seems like an easy target , compared to the many tricky facets to e.g. ethical meat production.

 

[limestonelil]

If it wasn't for the very basic fact that fox hunting, harrier packs, game shoots etc involve death/murder of animals for human entertainment, I would be able to say I enjoy reading this thread for all the different opinions .