Hunting is in a spot of bother

[ycbm]

I imagine in the fairly near future our relationship with many animals will be completely different. Just as we're now appalled by bear baiting I think the idea of breeding birds, keeping them in captivity, and then forcibly moving them towards a line of people with shotguns will be equally unacceptable. We're increasingly aware of the emotional awareness of animals towards each other, and us, and we have to start to acknowledge that in our relationships with them.

This this this.

It was reported recently that goldfish have been trained to drive a fish tank through an obstacle course to obtain a reward. There is video if anyone wants to look for it.

Animals are way more aware than we have given them credit for. We are learning that fast now and need to adapt to the new knowledge.

Any yes, I am prepared to give up riding if it proves to be more detrimental than beneficial to the horse.
.

 

[Gallop_Away]

I imagine in the fairly near future our relationship with many animals will be completely different. Just as we're now appalled by bear baiting I think the idea of breeding birds, keeping them in captivity, and then forcibly moving them towards a line of people with shotguns will be equally unacceptable. We're increasingly aware of the emotional awareness of animals towards each other, and us, and we have to start to acknowledge that in our relationships with them.

Don't get me wrong there are many things involving how we treat animals that could change for the better.
I don't disagree with that view. I respect that people may hold whatever views they wish and while I may not agree with their opinion, it is their opinion which they are entitled to hold.
What I disagree with is when people try to force their opinions on others via violence and harassment in the way sabs have targeted hunting. There is a difference between voicing your opinions and campaigning for change peacefully, and acting as vigilantes taking the law into your own hands.

 

[The Fuzzy Furry]

That's kind of the point. For months and months on various threads I and others have advised what you need to do to save your sport and you have not listened to, or it seems tried to understand, one word of it.
.

Just read that back as another poster, you make it sound as if palo1 is completely responsible for hunting of all types, illegal and illegal.
Surely you can understand someone defending a legal activity they take part in? You really make it appear that you are holding palo1 utterly responsible for the lot.
Those who go legally trail hunting are in the main very much against illegal activities, please can you just step back and look again at some of your posts ycbm as you really do appear to have the knife in to her.
Thank you ?

 

[Miss_Millie]

Don't get me wrong there are many things involving how we treat animals that could change for the better.
I don't disagree with that view. I respect that people may hold whatever views they wish and while I may not agree with their opinion, it is their opinion which they are entitled to hold.
What I disagree with is when people try to force their opinions on others via violence and harassment in the way sabs have targeted hunting. There is a difference between voicing your opinions and campaigning for change peacefully, and acting as vigilantes taking the law into your own hands.

Whilst I appreciate what you are saying and I never agree with violence, I think that many people who have become saboteurs have taken this direct action because they are quite frankly fed up with hunts breaking the law every. single. damn. year. And somehow continuing to get away with it, with little to no punishment.

I feel sick every time I read the news of another fox killed, another cat killed, a calf chased to exhaustion, fences cut and land trespassed across destroying farmer's crops. The entitlement and the lack of consideration for others absolutely astounds me. The man exercising the hounds, who then killed a cat sat on someone's driveway, which he then proceeded to throw over the garden fence (thankfully all captured on someone's door cam opposite) - that sums it up for me.

If every hunt behaved impeccably then people would not feel so fed up as to revert to direct action. And yes, I know that many sabs are badly behaved. I am not a sab, but I can see why people would feel driven to taking direct action because fox hunting is meant to be illegal and yet it is still happening, all of the time.

I would feel hugely relieved to see hunting banned because unless there is some kind of huge crackdown on illegal hunting from within the governing bodies themselves, I don't see that things will ever change.

 

[Chianti]

Don't get me wrong there are many things involving how we treat animals that could change for the better.
I don't disagree with that view. I respect that people may hold whatever views they wish and while I may not agree with their opinion, it is their opinion which they are entitled to hold.
What I disagree with is when people try to force their opinions on others via violence and harassment in the way sabs have targeted hunting. There is a difference between voicing your opinions and campaigning for change peacefully, and acting as vigilantes taking the law into your own hands.

I completely agree with that. Given the numerous examples of poor hunt behaviour I don't think it's unreasonable that they are monitored but this needs to be done peacefully.

 

[YorksG]

Whilst I appreciate what you are saying and I never agree with violence, I think that many people who have become saboteurs have taken this direct action because they are quite frankly fed up with hunts breaking the law every. single. damn. year. And somehow continuing to get away with it, with little to no punishment.

I feel sick every time I read the news of another fox killed, another cat killed, a calf chased to exhaustion, fences cut and land trespassed across destroying farmer's crops. The entitlement and the lack of consideration for others absolutely astounds me. The man exercising the hounds, who then killed a cat sat on someone's driveway, which he then proceeded to throw over the garden fence (thankfully all captured on someone's door cam opposite) - that sums it up for me.

If every hunt behaved impeccably then people would not feel so fed up as to revert to direct action. And yes, I know that many sabs are badly behaved. I am not a sab, but I can see why people would feel driven to taking direct action because fox hunting is meant to be illegal and yet it is still happening, all of the time.

I would feel hugely relieved to see hunting banned because unless there is some kind of huge crackdown on illegal hunting from within the governing bodies themselves, I don't see that things will ever change.

But sabbing was very much in vogue prior to the hunting act. With a great deal of violence and attempted intimidation.So your argument doesn't stand up, I'm afraid

 

[palo1]

That's kind of the point. For months and months on various threads I and others have advised what you need to do to save your sport and you have not listened to, or it seems tried to understand, one word of it.
.

That is one of the funniest things I have heard in days!! Thanks for raising a smile@ycbm. I understand what you are getting at and I am prepared, along with other trail hunters, to listen to opposing views and advice but that has to come from a place of knowledge and willingness to listen, discuss and negotiate.

 

[Clodagh]

These seems to be a good idea. I’ve no idea what it’s chances are. As for the deer tracking I would have thought that it would be easy enough to put an exemption in place?
The tracking of a wounded deer with a dog is a clear welfare need.

 

[palo1]

Whilst I appreciate what you are saying and I never agree with violence, I think that many people who have become saboteurs have taken this direct action because they are quite frankly fed up with hunts breaking the law every. single. damn. year. And somehow continuing to get away with it, with little to no punishment.

I feel sick every time I read the news of another fox killed, another cat killed, a calf chased to exhaustion, fences cut and land trespassed across destroying farmer's crops. The entitlement and the lack of consideration for others absolutely astounds me. The man exercising the hounds, who then killed a cat sat on someone's driveway, which he then proceeded to throw over the garden fence (thankfully all captured on someone's door cam opposite) - that sums it up for me.

If every hunt behaved impeccably then people would not feel so fed up as to revert to direct action. And yes, I know that many sabs are badly behaved. I am not a sab, but I can see why people would feel driven to taking direct action because fox hunting is meant to be illegal and yet it is still happening, all of the time.

I would feel hugely relieved to see hunting banned because unless there is some kind of huge crackdown on illegal hunting from within the governing bodies themselves, I don't see that things will ever change.

But in this post you do seem to be justifying violence and intimidation 'because they are quite frankly fed up...'

I am seriously, quite frankly fed up with pet dogs harassing our sheep and hill ponies, chasing me on my horse and crapping where children play but I don't don a balaclava and start threatening other dog owners and finding any reason to cause trouble (I mean I could check everyone's tax disc and film them shouting at, smacking and yanking on their dogs leads after all...). After lots of dogs misbehave so perhaps all dog owners should be forced to stay on their property in case they do something wrong. Perhaps I will shout at their children too to make sure they know how I feel about the whole thing...

 

[palo1]

These seems to be a good idea. I’ve no idea what it’s chances are. As for the deer tracking I would have thought that it would be easy enough to put an exemption in place?
The tracking of a wounded deer with a dog is a clear welfare need.

I don't think there should be an issue with changing the scent used tbh though many would disagree with me. I am sure there is some kind of scent which could be either diluted or found good enough to replicate the challenges of the natural one. There are issues with tracking wounded deer though I think that exemption will/would be hugely unpopular and likely misunderstood.

 

[Tiddlypom]

To be clear, I'm hoping that we all agree that peaceful and non trespassing hunt monitors are not classified as 'vigilantes'?

Vigilantes are sabs?

 

[CanteringCarrot]

But in this post you do seem to be justifying violence and intimidation 'because they are quite frankly fed up...'

I am seriously, quite frankly fed up with pet dogs harassing our sheep and hill ponies, chasing me on my horse and crapping where children play but I don't don a balaclava and start threatening other dog owners and finding any reason to cause trouble (I mean I could check everyone's tax disc and film them shouting at, smacking and yanking on their dogs leads after all...). After lots of dogs misbehave so perhaps all dog owners should be forced to stay on their property in case they do something wrong. Perhaps I will shout at their children too to make sure they know how I feel about the whole thing...

No one is justifying violence, or speaking of the reason behind it. Just as you previously spoke about the reason(s) behind illegal hunting/why people may do it. So, were you justifying illegal hunting then? ?

Are you trying to justify illegal activity and/or unruly behavior by hunts/hound by saying "so what, dogs and their owners do xyz."

I mean, if we want to spin things and grasp at straws...

 

[Miss_Millie]

But in this post you do seem to be justifying violence and intimidation 'because they are quite frankly fed up...'

I am seriously, quite frankly fed up with pet dogs harassing our sheep and hill ponies, chasing me on my horse and crapping where children play but I don't don a balaclava and start threatening other dog owners and finding any reason to cause trouble (I mean I could check everyone's tax disc and film them shouting at, smacking and yanking on their dogs leads after all...). After lots of dogs misbehave so perhaps all dog owners should be forced to stay on their property in case they do something wrong. Perhaps I will shout at their children too to make sure they know how I feel about the whole thing...

I literally said in my first sentence that I never agree with violence

If you read one of my posts from earlier today, I said that I got attacked by two dogs last year. One was a farmer's border collie that went from me when I was walking along a marked footpath, it was sat on the drive of the farmhouse, I was a good 30 metres away and yet it decided it wanted to attack me. The other was a mastiff type dog that was loose in the suburbs, I crossed the road to avoid it and it chased me across the road into oncoming traffic. I would be very very happy for there to be tighter laws on dog ownership, dogs on leads at all times would stop many needless attacks on both humans and animals.

The above does not change the fact that hunting hounds are killing people's cats, horses and livestock every single year. This thread is about hunting so that is the focus of the discussion. Hunting is an organised sport and as far as I can see, it is the only organised sport that frequently results in trespass and the killing of other's animals. If you want to make another thread about people's pet dogs causing issues then feel free, I have plenty of tales to tell.

 

[palo1]

No one is justifying violence, or speaking of the reason behind it. Just as you previously spoke about the reason(s) behind illegal hunting/why people may do it. So, were you justifying illegal hunting then? ?

Are you trying to justify illegal activity and/or unruly behavior by hunts/hound by saying "so what, dogs and their owners do xyz."

I mean, if we want to spin things and grasp at straws...

No, I didn't intend to suggest that. @Miss_Millie 's post did feel like a kind of justification for sab behaviour but I accept that she has repeatedly said she wouldn't support violence and there are reasons why people behave the way they do so I get the explanation. I was trying to convey the sense in which sabbing or monitoring is so extraordinary and so extreme in a civil society where we are generally bound by the rule of law, which is enforced by the police force and in virtually any other potentially 'criminal' situation (for example drink driving, drug dealing) it is not acceptable for sabs/vigilantes to take matters into their own hands. I am regularly just gobsmacked by how people tolerate this kind of behaviour over trail hunting (which is clearly divisive) when there is a law in place to deal with it. I am well aware of the awfulness of that law too but masked, camera'ed groups of people 'monitoring' a legal activity??? When, truly did that become reasonable?

 

[ycbm]

You really make it appear that you are holding palo1 utterly responsible for the lot.

Of course I'm not. But she is the voice on this forum which echos all the other voices out there who speak and write in the same way, and she is the only one I have available to answer.

"You" is almost always meant to mean "those who are in a position to make changes that will allow hunting to survive".

Nobody seems to be listening and the sport will die if they don't.
.

 

[Gallop_Away]

I literally said in my first sentence that I never agree with violence

If you read one of my posts from earlier today, I said that I got attacked by two dogs last year. One was a farmer's border collie that went from me when I was walking along a marked footpath, it was sat on the drive of the farmhouse, I was a good 30 metres away and yet it decided it wanted to attack me. The other was a mastiff type dog that was loose in the suburbs, I crossed the road to avoid it and it chased me across the road into oncoming traffic. I would be very very happy for there to be tighter laws on dog ownership, dogs on leads at all times would stop many needless attacks on both humans and animals.

The above does not change the fact that hunting hounds are killing people's cats, horses and livestock every single year. This thread is about hunting so that is the focus of the discussion. Hunting is an organised sport and as far as I can see, it is the only organised sport that frequently results in trespass and the killing of other's animals. If you want to make another thread about people's pet dogs causing issues then feel free, I have plenty of tales to tell.

But we are not just talking about illegal hunts being sabbed. Legal ones are also being harassed by sabs.
Ok I could take your point that they take issue with illegal hunting, but as someone else has pointed out, sabs existed before the ban. Whether you agree with hunting or not, at that time it was legal.
My argument is therefore if we allow people to continue to take the law into their own hands because they are "fed up" where can we draw the line? The fact is sabs would sab hunts regardless of whether it was illegal or not.
Now there are many controversial activities that include animals that they could also take offence at. Racing is an example. Many horses are killed in the racing industry either directly through racing or once they have finished racing and sent to slaughter. But racing is not illegal. Would it be OK for a group of sabs to rock up at the local point to point and intimidate/hurl abuse at spectators and jockeys/owners?
My point is that it is not the place of members of the public to uphold the law. Nor is it acceptable to force your opinion on someone else through intimidation. My worry is if hunting is finished, sabs then turn their attention to other areas that are not illegal and the argument that they are "fed up of the law being flouted" then goes clean out of the window. It's just people who have a moral objection forcing their views onto others through violence.

 

[ycbm]

Is there anyone who regularly hunts legally on this forum who accepts that their hunt needs to move away from using fox scent for the trails?

I don't think I have heard a single person say so.
.

 

[Sandstone1]

But we are not just talking about illegal hunts being sabbed. Legal ones are also being harassed by sabs.
Ok I could take your point that they take issue with illegal hunting, but as someone else has pointed out, sabs existed before the ban. Whether you agree with hunting or not, at that time it was legal.
My argument is therefore if we allow people to continue to take the law into their own hands because they are "fed up" where can we draw the line? The fact is sabs would sab hunts regardless of whether it was illegal or not.
Now there are many controversial activities that include animals that they could also take offence at. Racing is an example. Many horses are killed in the racing industry either directly through racing or once they have finished racing and sent to slaughter. But racing is not illegal. Would it be OK for a group of sabs to rock up at the local point to point and intimidate/hurl abuse at spectators and jockeys/owners?
My point is that it is not the place of members of the public to uphold the law. Nor is it acceptable to force your opinion on someone else through intimidation. My worry is if hunting is finished, sabs then turn their attention to other areas that are not illegal and the argument that they are "fed up of the law being flouted" then goes clean out of the window. It's just people who have a moral objection forcing their views onto others through violence.

Going by what you think then, Nothing would ever change. At one time it was legal to send small children up chimneys and dog fighting was a sport. Just because something is legal does not make it right and people have a right to protest about things they do not agree with.

 

[palo1]

Is there anyone who regularly hunts legally on this forum who accepts that their hunt needs to move away from using fox scent for the trails?

I don't think I have heard a single person say so.
.

I literally just replied to @Clodagh that I couldn't see a problem with that at all! Most people I know would accept that though it would be better if that wasn't forced on them. The scent of dead fox is not the same as that of a live fox and anyone working with a scent hound would know that. The scent is not so important as the quality of the work produced by hounds but as I have said before, because of the nature of the Hunting Act and it's process, hanging on to the scent of fox became a sacred cow. That isn't my fault actually.

 

[YorksG]

Going by what you think then, Nothing would ever change. At one time it was legal to send small children up chimneys and dog fighting was a sport. Just because something is legal does not make it right and people have a right to protest about things they do not agree with.

Indeed, but I'm not aware of anyone gathering in large groups to use violence against people who were employing children. I am aware of people who campaigned and worked to have the laws around child labour changed, such as Richard Oastler.
The argument between the suffragettes and the suffragists was one of whether violence should be used, or not.

 

[Sandstone1]

Indeed, but I'm not aware of anyone gathering in large groups to use violence against people who were employing children. I am aware of people who campaigned and worked to have the laws around child labour changed, such as Richard Oastler.
The argument between the suffragettes and the suffragists was one of whether violence should be used, or not.

People did campaign against hunting for years until it was made illegal but still it goes on...

 

[Gallop_Away]

Going by what you think then, Nothing would ever change. At one time it was legal to send small children up chimneys and dog fighting was a sport. Just because something is legal does not make it right and people have a right to protest about things they do not agree with.

Did you even bother to read a word that I have said? Of course being legal doesn't make something right, and people absolutely have every right to protest against something they feel is wrong....but PEACEFULLY! Not protest through violence and intimidation to force their views onto others.

My previous post below:

No one should be allowed to make their point through intimidation and violence. I think people have the absolute right to make their views known via peaceful means, but that does not mean taking the law into your own hands

 

[ycbm]

Most people I know would accept that though it would be better if that wasn't forced on them.

But they don't seem able to accept it until it is.

So that's a no, in my book.

 

[palo1]

People did campaign against hunting for years until it was made illegal but still it goes on...

The campaigning never resulted in consensus though did it? The Act was not possible through a full democratic process and we live in a democracy. There are many imperfect things but a law was created and that should be, like other laws, subject to the normal processes and not at the whim of extremists, who ironically wanted the law that they now say is inadequate.

 

[palo1]

But they don't seem able to accept it untill it is.

So that's a no, in my book.

You really are being awkward. I said quite clearly I have no problem with a proposed change of scent.

 

[palo1]

People did campaign against hunting for years until it was made illegal but still it goes on...

So does drink driving, modern slavery, drug dealing - but no-one will countenance the use of vigilantes to deal with those very serious crimes.

 

[Tiddlypom]

People shop drink drivers in all the time...

Ditto drug dealers.

 

[Gallop_Away]

People shop drink drivers in all the time...

Ditto drug dealers.

By reporting them to the police....not by standing outside the local pub wearing a mask and threatening people as they leave.....

 

[Sandstone1]

So does drink driving, modern slavery, drug dealing - but no-one will countenance the use of vigilantes to deal with those very serious crimes.

I am not getting in to yet another pointless round of arguing as we will never agree on this matter but I will just say that a group of sabs had their tyres slashed today. Wonder who did that? Also there is still the case of the sab ran down on a public footpath by a group of riders. Not to mention the case of the terrier man stabbing a fox with a pitchfork and the woman filmed hitting her horse round the head. I could go on but I wont bother as you are so blind as to what goes on that there is simply no point...

 

[The Fuzzy Furry]

Of course I'm not. But she is the voice on this forum which echos all the other voices out there who speak and write in the same way, and she is the only one I have available to answer.

Perhaps then think about the way you are haranguing? I find it is getting quite offensive, way way more than your usual nit picking.

Nobody seems to be listening and the sport will die if they don't.
.

This forum has very little traffic regarding this subject (apart from less than a dozen posters), can I suggest you point your energies towards those who are in the organisations? ?