Hunting is in a spot of bother

[Miss_Millie]

I hunted for years, BITD, and hounds are not driven by blood lust and liable to rip children to shreds on a whim.
Not defending any of the pet attacks or riot but when you think how many hounds are out and about daily with how many hunts if they were out of control killers there would be a lot more incidences.
I’m not knocking the upset when it happens at all, hounds should be on a one strike and you are out rule for any dangerous behaviour.

If they aren't driven by bloodlust, why do they attack livestock, cats and even pet dogs?

 

[Fellewell]

The demise of hunting will not come about because of lack of country, but because the countryside is becoming a more diverse place and the majority of the public do not agree with fox hunting (hence the ban). Hunting continues to get bad press, even if it is legal trail hunting, because of damage and trespass, pets being killed, livestock being attacked, and certain individuals who think they are above the lockdown laws, that the majority of us are obeying, despite the impact on our mental health.

Not to mention, countless hunts are STILL flouting the law and killing foxes. When 'accidents' happen (like the recent killing of the cat, Spider), the general public will only become more angry and frustrated that someone's idea of a fun day out = their beloved pet being savagely murdered by dogs on their own property.

I don't think the cat was savagely murdered any more than cats savagely murder birds and rabbits or foxes savagely murder lambs and every last chicken in the coop until they stop flapping. Nature is red in tooth and claw.
Working dogs don't always make the grade, even those bred for purpose. This can be time consuming and costly, even with hounds. The same is true of sheepdogs, gundogs, police dogs and even guide dogs for the blind. Except these groups aren't under the microscope as hunts are. Two pet dogs can kill 30 sheep and it barely gets 2 lines in the press. I think some perspective is needed here.
Meet and greets with hounds are hugely popular at shows, where adults, children and their pets mingle freely with hounds. I remember one excited toddler wobbling into the midst of the pack brandishing an ice cream. Both toddler and ice cream emerged untouched and that is what I expect from a trained animal.

 

[Miss_Millie]

I don't think the cat was savagely murdered any more than cats savagely murder birds and rabbits or foxes savagely murder lambs and every last chicken in the coop until they stop flapping. Nature is red in tooth and claw.
Working dogs don't always make the grade, even those bred for purpose. This can be time consuming and costly, even with hounds. The same is true of sheepdogs, gundogs, police dogs and even guide dogs for the blind. Except these groups aren't under the microscope as hunts are. Two pet dogs can kill 30 sheep and it barely gets 2 lines in the press. I think some perspective is needed here.
Meet and greets with hounds are hugely popular at shows, where adults, children and their pets mingle freely with hounds. I remember one excited toddler wobbling into the midst of the pack brandishing an ice cream. Both toddler and ice cream emerged untouched and that is what I expect from a trained animal.

The cat was dragged from beneath the owner's car, on her property, and killed by a group of hounds in front of her. Hounds trained to kill small animals.

Your total disregard for someone's beloved pet being killed in such a horrible way speaks volumes.

 

[Tiddlypom]

There are some rogue hounds, but much of it is down to poor training.

Rogue hounds that riot have historically been culled. What has happened to the High Peak Hunt hounds? Firstly almost the whole pack rioted onto a calf, then a few weeks later they break into a property and kill a pet cat. Were the calf chasing hounds kept on?

Wrt hounds killing cats. I referred earlier to my local pack being sent in to ‘thin out’ the feral cats on a patch of waste ground - as told to me by an in hunt source. These cats were apparently something of a local nuisance, and locals were not sorry to see the numbers go down a bit.

So what happens when the same hounds later happen on a pet cat minding its own business? You can work that one out for yourselves.

 

[littleshetland]

Just feel like chucking my pennyworth in here... I have a question and an of observation that I would appreciate some comments on. As far as I know, pro fox hunters still adhere tightly to the fact that they are performing a vital service for farmers whose lambs/sheep are endangered by foxes. My observation on this, having lived in rural somerset for 30 years and having kept sheep and other livestock on my land...Ive never had anything taken by a fox. According to social media, it would appear the biggest threat to livestock these days seems to be dog walkers whose dogs are allowed to run around fields of sheep causing panic and death. Also, why do huntsmen train hounds to follow a scent using fox urine? I have it on good authority that this is common practice among hunts. Surely this increases the chances of hounds actually hunting foxes thus breaking the law.

 

[palo1]

I don't want to see the end of trail hunting if laid with a thick enough scent with obedient hounds following. I'm bemused that trail hunters can't see that they are likely to lose their sport altogether unless they completely disavow repealing the law and also distance themselves from all other blood sports. Nobody is going to trust hunts not to hunt fox until they state that they do not want the law repealed.

As a cat owner, I will answer, though. It is not my intention that my cats chase anything. I do not train them to chase anything. I do not take them out of my local area to set them chasing anything. I do not keep them for the pleasure that I see in them chasing anything except a laser dot inside a house.

It's a question of intent.

Having said that I've drag hunted often in semi urban areas and as far as I know nothing has ever been worried or killed except one lamb, and the short term let tenant farmer knew the hunt was coming through. He was compensated for the value of the lamb.
.

This is interesting really from a philosophical and logical point of view...(about your cat) as you say it is not your intention that they chase anything, yet that is essentially in their nature and inescapable. You don't keep a cat for the pleasure of them chasing anything, yet you acknowledge their instincts and 'play' with that chase instinct which could be construed as a form of 'training' as it encourages that behaviour and presumably your cats are able to go outside. Once outside they are, in all likelihood, out of your control and may well chase and kill things. Most predators don't in fact need any training or encouragement - hence all those pet dogs that DO attack and kill sheep and wildlife.

I don't personally have a problem with pet cats, and I would not want to see anyone feel criticised for having a pet cat; in fact it is considered to be a virtue and certainly not worthy of any criticism at all to use cats for mouse and rat control by most people, as that method of hunting and killing is seen as more humane generally than by baiting rodents or other means of killing (can you see any relevant parallels to hunting here?) The values and opinions we express about hunting do seem relevant to this.

I have heard so many times about how appalled people are by accidents/incidents with hounds/loss of control yet, in a similar vein to my earlier post about Chris Packham campaigning against any form of animal trapping yet acting as the poster boy for the RSPB who use this as a deliberate strategy for safeguarding ground nesting birds from predators, I see the same contradictions in owning a cat - an obligate carnivore, that WILL, unless kept in a very unnatural way, go out and kill birds and small mammals - playing with them, tearing them apart (certainly not necessarily for food). Yet that is not considered the facilitation of any kind of wildlife crime or simply the collateral damage in enjoying a pet predator? Could it not be argued that if a cat is allowed outside, without being controlled then it is no different to the loss of control of any other predatory animal?

My own view is that cats should be controlled (I think the RSPB has found that use of a bell collar is the best) but within the scope of that a cat needs to be kept humanely and I do know of people who only have indoor cats; I am not really comfortable with that. Other people have confined outdoor spaces built (catios??) but I always understood that to be so that their cat isn't at risk from traffic.

The way that we are 'comfortable' with cats killing birds, even though they are in someone's ownership and the fact that killing rats with terriers which are under the direct control of a person or people or at the teeth and claws of feral cats is fine seems utterly at odds with the anti-hunting stance where the killing of one 'vermin' animal by another predator is unacceptable even while the killing of another 'vermin' (or not even vermin in the case of wild birds) by another predator is fine. Of course, I do understand that the killing of foxes by hounds is now illegal - all I was trying to illustrate is how ridiculous that seems because it has no logical or philosophical validity and was always understood to be not related to animal welfare, nor animal cruelty or environmental health. To think that all trail hunting is put at risk because of this entirely non-sensical approach literally makes my head spin.

 

[palo1]

Just feel like chucking my pennyworth in here... I have a question and an of observation that I would appreciate some comments on. As far as I know, pro fox hunters still adhere tightly to the fact that they are performing a vital service for farmers whose lambs/sheep are endangered by foxes. My observation on this, having lived in rural somerset for 30 years and having kept sheep and other livestock on my land...Ive never had anything taken by a fox. According to social media, it would appear the biggest threat to livestock these days seems to be dog walkers whose dogs are allowed to run around fields of sheep causing panic and death. Also, why do huntsmen train hounds to follow a scent using fox urine? I have it on good authority that this is common practice among hunts. Surely this increases the chances of hounds actually hunting foxes thus breaking the law.

There has always been an insistence by trail hunts to use a fox based scent on trails; in no small part because of the value given to the fox hounds extraordinary abilities in terms of scent. No other scent has the same qualities and challenges to a hound as fox based scent and it was acknowledged by the allowed use of this that there is unique value in the skill of scent hunting in this way. It was also insisted on as necessary by Fox Hound packs because of their desire to maintain this as a a quality in their breeding. I guess the Hunting Act recognised the validity of this and the strength of feeling of hunters around this subject. Personally I believe you would absolutely lose the essential nature of hounds if they were not judged on their performance on a completely natural sense; it would be like sheepdogs rounding up robot sheep!! Drag packs tend to use human urine (usually the huntsman's...!) which is infinitely easier for hounds to follow and usually results in a much easier, more direct 'trail'. This works well where you want riders to have a good time - clean, fast trail that can incorporate jumps. A fox based scent acts absolutely fundamentally differently so results in a far more 'wandering' and often slower, more 'hesitant' line from hounds as the scent wafts, moves, dies and strengthens depending on ground conditions. That is why watching hounds work is so intensely fascinating and is recognised as having unique value in lots of way; it is an interaction between the hound, the scent itself and the landscape and weather as a whole. This is one reason why hunting people are so passionate about hunting providing a connection and understanding between people and the land/environment.

Sadly, I can say that we have had lambs taken by foxes and it is regularly debated in the Welsh parliament whether there can be dispensation for Welsh hound packs to legally hunt foxes on the uplands where no other method of fox control is considered so effective.

 

[ester]

There are some rogue hounds, but much of it is down to poor training.

Rogue hounds that riot have historically been culled. What has happened to the High Peak Hunt hounds? Firstly almost the whole pack rioted onto a calf, then a few weeks later they break into a property and kill a pet cat. Were the calf chasing hounds kept on?

Wrt hounds killing cats. I referred earlier to my local pack being sent in to ‘thin out’ the feral cats on a patch of waste ground - as told to me by an in hunt source. These cats were apparently something of a local nuisance, and locals were not sorry to see the numbers go down a bit.

So what happens when the same hounds later happen on a pet cat minding its own business? You can work that one out for yourselves.

It would be interesting to note whether hunts have to report hounds rioting to anyone/whether the governing body keeps an eye on that, with consequences if the hunt is just ignoring it and carrying on.

 

[Miss_Millie]

This is interesting really from a philosophical and logical point of view...(about your cat) as you say it is not your intention that they chase anything, yet that is essentially in their nature and inescapable. You don't keep a cat for the pleasure of them chasing anything, yet you acknowledge their instincts and 'play' with that chase instinct which could be construed as a form of 'training' as it encourages that behaviour and presumably your cats are able to go outside. Once outside they are, in all likelihood, out of your control and may well chase and kill things. Most predators don't in fact need any training or encouragement - hence all those pet dogs that DO attack and kill sheep and wildlife.

I don't personally have a problem with pet cats, and I would not want to see anyone feel criticised for having a pet cat; in fact it is considered to be a virtue and certainly not worthy of any criticism at all to use cats for mouse and rat control by most people, as that method of hunting and killing is seen as more humane generally than by baiting rodents or other means of killing (can you see any relevant parallels to hunting here?) The values and opinions we express about hunting do seem relevant to this.

I have heard so many times about how appalled people are by accidents/incidents with hounds/loss of control yet, in a similar vein to my earlier post about Chris Packham campaigning against any form of animal trapping yet acting as the poster boy for the RSPB who use this as a deliberate strategy for safeguarding ground nesting birds from predators, I see the same contradictions in owning a cat - an obligate carnivore, that WILL, unless kept in a very unnatural way, go out and kill birds and small mammals - playing with them, tearing them apart (certainly not necessarily for food). Yet that is not considered the facilitation of any kind of wildlife crime or simply the collateral damage in enjoying a pet predator? Could it not be argued that if a cat is allowed outside, without being controlled then it is no different to the loss of control of any other predatory animal?

My own view is that cats should be controlled (I think the RSPB has found that use of a bell collar is the best) but within the scope of that a cat needs to be kept humanely and I do know of people who only have indoor cats; I am not really comfortable with that. Other people have confined outdoor spaces built (catios??) but I always understood that to be so that their cat isn't at risk from traffic.

The way that we are 'comfortable' with cats killing birds, even though they are in someone's ownership and the fact that killing rats with terriers which are under the direct control of a person or people or at the teeth and claws of feral cats is fine seems utterly at odds with the anti-hunting stance where the killing of one 'vermin' animal by another predator is unacceptable even while the killing of another 'vermin' (or not even vermin in the case of wild birds) by another predator is fine. Of course, I do understand that the killing of foxes by hounds is now illegal - all I was trying to illustrate is how ridiculous that seems because it has no logical or philosophical validity and was always understood to be not related to animal welfare, nor animal cruelty or environmental health. To think that all trail hunting is put at risk because of this entirely non-sensical approach literally makes my head spin.

Once again, intent is the key word here.

I saw the video of the calf recently being chased across several fields and having to jump a stone wall. There were at least 20 dogs, if not more.

These dogs are bred to hunt and to to kill. They are bred specifically for this 'activity'. 20 dogs against one calf - that isn't nature. It isn't comparable to a cat catching a mouse.

The suffering of pets and livestocks who are attacked and killed by these dogs is surely inevitable, when they're riled up in a pack like that and trained to chase.

It begs the question, why are these dogs not muzzled at the very least, when so many animal attacks continue to happen? Not that muzzling them would prevent the distress of an animal being chased and jumped on.

 

[palo1]

There are some rogue hounds, but much of it is down to poor training.

Rogue hounds that riot have historically been culled. What has happened to the High Peak Hunt hounds? Firstly almost the whole pack rioted onto a calf, then a few weeks later they break into a property and kill a pet cat. Were the calf chasing hounds kept on?

Wrt hounds killing cats. I referred earlier to my local pack being sent in to ‘thin out’ the feral cats on a patch of waste ground - as told to me by an in hunt source. These cats were apparently something of a local nuisance, and locals were not sorry to see the numbers go down a bit.

So what happens when the same hounds later happen on a pet cat minding its own business? You can work that one out for yourselves.

Hounds should never have been used for clearing out feral cats. That is pretty disgusting to me. IF dogs were identified as the best approach to a feral cat cull, then some other dogs should have been used. Once the HP hounds had rioted there should have been a cull there too.

 

[Fransurrey]

I often wonder why things I write are ignored too tbh; I assume that either other posters can't be bothered to reply/respond or that they can't respond or even that they might be thinking about what has been written and are uncertain of how to respond.

In the case of your analogy between an obligate carnivore killing something due to a prey drive and a pack of dogs trained to kill for sport, perhaps they're just too appalled to put into words what they think? How TF can you even compare those two scenarios?

 

[Sussexbythesea]

I’ve been reading this thread with interest admittedly not every single post in detail. I see almost nothing except excuses from the hunting enthusiasts on here and virtually no acknowledgement of bad behaviour of certain hunts or how it might be addressed by the wider hunting community. It has only made me even more convinced that hunting is generally populated by a group of self-entitled individuals with no morals. I don’t think you’ve said anything to persuade anyone that this view is unjustified but rather continued to dig your own grave. Well done.

 

[Miss_Millie]

I’ve been reading this thread with interest admittedly not every single post in detail. I see almost nothing except excuses from the hunting enthusiasts on here and virtually no acknowledgement of bad behaviour of certain hunts or how it might be addressed by the wider hunting community. It has only made me even more convinced that hunting is generally populated by a group of self-entitled individuals with no morals. I don’t think you’ve said anything to persuade anyone that this view is unjustified but rather continued to dig your own grave. Well done.

This.

The total lack of empathy or disgust for what happened to Spider the cat, speaks volumes. I wonder, if someone's horse on this forum were to be chased and attacked by hounds, would they finally start to see how totally horrendous and disgusting these incidents are to the rest of us? Just imagine if it was your pet that got killed.

I would need therapy for the rest of my life; I can't imagine anything more horrifying to witness.

 

[palo1]

This is spot on. And I remember someone saying a while back on the thread, that if hunting were to completely disappear, the hunting dogs would be euthanized en masse. This is because these dogs are born and bred to kill and have blood-lust for other animals. This is their only 'use'.

This is why, I feel, hunting is a danger to the safety of local people and their pets. No-one should have to feel unsafe on their own property, or worried for the lives of their pets. The most recent incident, being the alpaca breeder who's animals were attacked on her private property.

I will say it again, there is not other sport/outdoor activity I can think of, that callously puts the lives of pets and livestock at risk, as hunting does.

Can I please just ask you to consider your use of the expression 'blood lust for other animals' in relation to hounds as that is simply an inappropriate anthropomorphic version of the expression 'obligate carnivore'.

 

[palo1]

If they aren't driven by bloodlust, why do they attack livestock, cats and even pet dogs?

Because like a cat they are 'obligate carnivores'...

 

[Miss_Millie]

Because like a cat they are 'obligate carnivores'...

Dogs are actually omnivores.

And lots of people own dogs, but most self-respecting individuals keep their dogs on a lead if they suspect there is any chance that their dog might attack another dog, cat, or child.

Apparently hunts are above this.

 

[littleshetland]

There has always been an insistence by trail hunts to use a fox based scent on trails; in no small part because of the value given to the fox hounds extraordinary abilities in terms of scent. No other scent has the same qualities and challenges to a hound as fox based scent and it was acknowledged by the allowed use of this that there is unique value in the skill of scent hunting in this way. It was also insisted on as necessary by Fox Hound packs because of their desire to maintain this as a a quality in their breeding. I guess the Hunting Act recognised the validity of this and the strength of feeling of hunters around this subject. Personally I believe you would absolutely lose the essential nature of hounds if they were not judged on their performance on a completely natural sense; it would be like sheepdogs rounding up robot sheep!! Drag packs tend to use human urine (usually the huntsman's...!) which is infinitely easier for hounds to follow and usually results in a much easier, more direct 'trail'. This works well where you want riders to have a good time - clean, fast trail that can incorporate jumps. A fox based scent acts absolutely fundamentally differently so results in a far more 'wandering' and often slower, more 'hesitant' line from hounds as the scent wafts, moves, dies and strengthens depending on ground conditions. That is why watching hounds work is so intensely fascinating and is recognised as having unique value in lots of way; it is an interaction between the hound, the scent itself and the landscape and weather as a whole. This is one reason why hunting people are so passionate about hunting providing a connection and understanding between people and the land/environment.

Sadly, I can say that we have had lambs taken by foxes and it is regularly debated in the Welsh parliament whether there can be dispensation for Welsh hound packs to legally hunt foxes on the uplands where no other method of fox control is considered so effective.[/QUOTE

so the massively increased risk of the law being broken, ie using fox urine, are secondary to the amount of human enjoyment to be experienced?

 

[palo1]

In the case of your analogy between an obligate carnivore killing something due to a prey drive and a pack of dogs trained to kill for sport, perhaps they're just too appalled to put into words what they think? How TF can you even compare those two scenarios?

The thing that you are ignoring is that hunting with dogs was never just sport; it was always functional. The sport was for those following to see if they could keep up. This has been said so many times, by so many people that it seems surprising that you don't know that. It is clear how I compared the two scenarios I think.

 

[palo1]

This.

The total lack of empathy or disgust for what happened to Spider the cat, speaks volumes. I wonder, if someone's horse on this forum were to be chased and attacked by hounds, would they finally start to see how totally horrendous and disgusting these incidents are to the rest of us? Just imagine if it was your pet that got killed.

I would need therapy for the rest of my life; I can't imagine anything more horrifying to witness.

I don't think that anyone has shown any lack of empathy tbh and of course it would be traumatic if you witnessed your pet being killed; no one has suggested otherwise nor should they.

 

[littleshetland]

so the massively increased risk of the law being broken, ie using fox urine, are secondary to the amount of human enjoyment being experienced?

 

[palo1]

Dogs are actually omnivores.

And lots of people own dogs, but most self-respecting individuals keep their dogs on a lead if they suspect there is any chance that their dog might attack another dog, cat, or child.

Apparently hunts are above this.

Yes, dogs are omnivorous. Hunts are not 'above' controlling their hounds - hence the sense of outrage and disquiet about these incidents.

 

[palo1]

so the massively increased risk of the law being broken, ie using fox urine, are secondary to the amount of human enjoyment being experienced?

It is not about 'enjoyment' but about the value given to aspects of the activity of scent hunting, the breeding of dogs, the continuation of tradition and the heritage of hunting skills in the United Kingdom. These are things that are universally recognised as valuable and culturally important and tbh Parliament passed the Act with that element fully written in to it. It is entirely legal as are other elements of the act that many people find unpalatable or 'difficult'. I personally think the Hunting Act was non-sensical and damaging to the fox population and rural ecosystem but most people who still hunt do their best to work within the law. The fact that some don't is clearly shocking (ie unusual) or there wouldn't be so much coverage of those incidents. The reason we report 'news' is because it is outside our ordinary expectations and experience.

 

[Sussexbythesea]

Yes, dogs are omnivorous. Hunts are not 'above' controlling their hounds - hence the sense of outrage and disquiet about these incidents.

I don’t think you’ve come across as outraged anywhere. Lots of “whataboutary” though.

 

[palo1]

Dogs are actually omnivores.

And lots of people own dogs, but most self-respecting individuals keep their dogs on a lead if they suspect there is any chance that their dog might attack another dog, cat, or child.

Apparently hunts are above this.

But they don't control their cats even though their cat might attack a wild animal...

 

[palo1]

I don’t think you’ve come across as outraged anywhere. Lots of “whataboutary” though.

Yes, the whataboutary is frustrating but feels necessary to bring some 'balance' to arguments and ideas which often feel just...irrational.

 

[Tiddlypom]

Wrt foxhounds still being trained to follow fox scent even when trail hunting. How is the young entry trained to follow fox scent? How is all this fox scent gathered and harvested?

We know how the now disbanded South Herefordshire Hunt did it. They threw captive fox cubs to hounds. Caught out by covert cctv.

Fox cruelty: South Herefordshire Hunt pair found guilty https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-48584227

 

[Sussexbythesea]

Yes, the whataboutary is frustrating but feels necessary to bring some 'balance' to arguments and ideas which often feel just...irrational.

I don’t think it brings any balance to bring in arguments about unrelated issues which might be an issue in themselves but do not help solve this particular issue.

I love the way you’ve by default called everyone who doesn’t see it the same way as you irrational - another own goal.

 

[Miss_Millie]

It is not about 'enjoyment' but about the value given to aspects of the activity of scent hunting, the breeding of dogs, the continuation of tradition and the heritage of hunting skills in the United Kingdom. These are things that are universally recognised as valuable and culturally important and tbh Parliament passed the Act with that element fully written in to it. It is entirely legal as are other elements of the act that many people find unpalatable or 'difficult'. I personally think the Hunting Act was non-sensical and damaging to the fox population and rural ecosystem but most people who still hunt do their best to work within the law. The fact that some don't is clearly shocking (ie unusual) or there wouldn't be so much coverage of those incidents. The reason we report 'news' is because it is outside our ordinary expectations and experience.

And yet if you go on any Facebook page reporting illegal hunting, there are several accounts (always including photos or videos of foxes blatantly being chased), per month. In my area alone, there have been many accounts since October!

The sad thing to me is that you seem to care a lot more about 'upholding tradition' than you do about the people and their animals who are hurt by the actions of the hunting community.

The reality is that the majority of the UK are against hunting full-stop, and the only reason why people keep getting away with fox hunting (despite the ban) is because they have friends in high places.

If legal trail hunting didn't continue to involve trespass and animal attacks, I'm sure that people would view it more favourably. But even many within the equestrian and farming communities, are fed up with them getting away with murder, time and time again.

 

[Miss_Millie]

Wrt foxhounds still being trained to follow fox scent even when trail hunting. How is the young entry trained to follow fox scent? How is all this fox scent gathered and harvested?

We know how the now disbanded South Herefordshire Hunt did it. They threw captive fox cubs to hounds. Caught out by covert cctv.

Fox cruelty: South Herefordshire Hunt pair found guilty https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-48584227

Sickos!

 

[palo1]

Wrt foxhounds still being trained to follow fox scent even when trail hunting. How is the young entry trained to follow fox scent? How is all this fox scent gathered and harvested?

We know how the now disbanded South Herefordshire Hunt did it. They threw captive fox cubs to hounds. Caught out by covert cctv.

Fox cruelty: South Herefordshire Hunt pair found guilty https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-48584227

Fox based scent is easily purchased online from abroad and can be used for lots of different purposes including for the garden. The young entry are trained to simply follow that amazing, natural odour that every part of them is attracted to. Hounds need very little training to follow a scent in fact but they do need considerable skilled training in listening to the huntsman about where to go and look for a scent, to stay with the pack and work together on one 'line' and if need be, leaving that scent to go to another line. What the SHH did was beyond appalling and that hunt has been utterly ostracised by the hunting community and rightly so.

ETA - you can buy fox urine in liquid, granule or spray form on Amazon.