Hunting is in a spot of bother

[GSD Woman]

Just out of curiosity, did England ever have any apex predators?

The worst way that I know to hunt/run foxes is in a "fox pen." This is an area, I think 300-500 acres that is fenced in such a way that it is very hard for foxes to get out. Then, hounds are taught to flush and run foxes by being turned loose in the area. The foxes aren't shot but there is nothing to stop the hounds from killing. Piss me off that it is allowed in my state.

I wish the hunts that are illegal there would just straighten up and trail hunt like they should.

 

[littleshetland]

Many of those runs were on good scenting days and where the fox was likely well ahead and quite probably got away.

Yes such runs would be celebrated, the hounds doing an excellent job of following their noses and the fox being strong and wily enough to get away.

'Wily and strong enough get away'.... I appreciate that it's natures way that a prey animal will sometimes avoid the jaws of its predator and avoid being eaten, but what exactly is there to celebrate when you've just caused an incredible amount of terror and fear to a fox for your own amusement?

 

[palo1]

Just out of curiosity, did England ever have any apex predators?

The worst way that I know to hunt/run foxes is in a "fox pen." This is an area, I think 300-500 acres that is fenced in such a way that it is very hard for foxes to get out. Then, hounds are taught to flush and run foxes by being turned loose in the area. The foxes aren't shot but there is nothing to stop the hounds from killing. Piss me off that it is allowed in my state.

I wish the hunts that are illegal there would just straighten up and trail hunt like they should.

Yes, penning foxes sounds grim

ETA - no, we don't have any apex predators; the last wolves were killed here in the UK in the 18th century I think. But we did used to have wolves and other things that would take foxes and the red fox is so widely established it is fairly simple to understand it's place in a system that would have worked here.

 

[palo1]

'Wily and strong enough get away'.... I appreciate that it's natures way that a prey animal will sometimes avoid the jaws of its predator and avoid being eaten, but what exactly is there to celebrate when you've just caused an incredible amount of terror and fear to a fox for your own amusement?

But it wasn't for people's own amusement; the hunting of foxes was for pest control through the use of a controlled predator. The amusement if you like for those following was to see if they could follow the predator or predict the direction taken and cross that country. The deliberate misunderstanding/misinterpretation of hunting by anti-hunters is a feature that does them no favours; it just reinforces the idea that anti-hunters don't understand the subject. The fact that you have admitted that it is 'nature's way' is sensible though.

 

[skinnydipper]

The problem with guns is, in part that they are 'instant' (there is no other benefit to their use other than the death of single or multiple animals) and have no additional subtle impact on species or habitat in the way that a top predator does.

Advantage of a person shooting a fox would be that the person would not riot onto livestock or kill people's pets.

I would be interested to know the subtle impact on species or habitat provided by a pack of hounds.

 

[palo1]

Advantage of a person shooting a fox would be that the person would not riot onto livestock or kill peoples pets.

I would be interested to know the subtle impact on species or habitat provided by a pack of hounds.

There is quite a lot of information about this available (in relation to the benefits of predator stress). Rioting onto livestock or killing people's pets is simply never acceptable and it is absolutely unnecessary.

 

[littleshetland]

But it wasn't for people's own amusement; the hunting of foxes was for pest control through the use of a controlled predator. The amusement if you like for those following was to see if they could follow the predator or predict the direction taken and cross that country. The deliberate misunderstanding/misinterpretation of hunting by anti-hunters is a feature that does them no favours; it just reinforces the idea that anti-hunters don't understand the subject. The fact that you have admitted that it is 'nature's way' is sensible though.

Thank you for being so patronising. Sorry Palo, Fox hunting exists for the hunters amusement and entertainment - no deliberate misunderstanding/misinterpretation at all. Perhaps in it's origins it served a practical and necessary purpose, but not any more.

 

[ycbm]

Shooting is done on sight generally and at a distance so it is impossible to identify whether any particular individual is old/young/nursing/in-cub/blind etc.

I would love to see the reaction on a shooting forum to this statement. The guy who usually shoots foxes here has telescopic sights, he can distinguishing which fox to shoot far better than a pack of hounds can.

I'd also love to hear how a hunt using a pack of hounds distinguishes between the scent of a nursing female and a blind male.
.

 

[skinnydipper]

There is quite a lot of information about this available (in relation to the benefits of predator stress)

Having now read that predator stress causes anxiety, sustained psychological stress and predator induced fear causes PTSD in wild animals, I think I've read as much as I want to on the subject.

 

[Dizzy socks]

I have a few questions. Apologies if these have already been answered, but I don’t think so.

1. A lot has been made of the need for an apex predator. Wolves have come up often as a historic predator - I’ve looked this up, and it seems that wolves really do not predate on foxes, and would only ever do so/have done so if they were starving? Nor are they in competition for food. Why are we trying to replace wolves with hounds if wolves don’t hunt foxes?

2. Why are hounds being assumed to have an effect like wolves/apex predators? It seems a pretty big leap to me. Pretty much none of the impacts that large predators may have are transferable to a pack of hounds situation. Nor, from the studies that I’ve read, are the effects on other non-hunted populations, e.g deer, especially beneficial.

3. I think natural on this thread has perhaps often been conflated with humane. This is perhaps more a statement, but I’m not sure why just because things may happen in nature, that is encouraging them in a man made setting is at all humane? I.e. we can choose do better, this is not a matter of life or death survival for us.

 

[littleshetland]

There is quite a lot of information about this available (in relation to the benefits of predator stress). Rioting onto livestock or killing people's pets is simply never acceptable and it is absolutely unnecessary.

But rioting happens over and over and over again....

 

[GoldenWillow]

Briefly (just dashing out!) - Shooting is done on sight generally and at a distance so it is impossible to identify whether any particular individual is old/young/nursing/in-cub/blind etc. It is possible to identify generally wounded or mangy foxes from a distance. With predator control it is almost necessarily older, sicker, weaker, less wily animals that are predated. Shooting happens in 'static' locations so habitats don't benefit from the effect of predator stress where predators move through areas on occasion. This has been demonstrated to be very beneficial to other animals and the ecosystem as a whole and they are well adapted to deal with predator stress. Shooting has no 'predator stress' effect but can make animals 'nervous and evasive' where this happens regularly in the same location; that area is then more likely to be damaged and 'denatured' in ecological terms.

In terms of disease spread, dead foxes are usually just left to rot; insects/maggots etc thrive but it is very unnatural to have say 5-20 corpses in one place and that doesn't happen in a predatory system of control (of foxes. Foxes themselves do leave a large number of corpses if they can as they will return to them - but then they eat them!). There has also been interesting research (not related to foxes) about the impact of shooting on disease as other animals are more likely to come into contact with disease via blood transmission than when a predator either eats or 'destroys' a single carcass.

Thank you for this.

The only experience I have with foxes being shot is local and here an experienced person shoots a specific fox that is causing the farmer problems. He uses sights, has a very strict code of conduct and the carcass is never left lying to rot. I have such faith in him after years of living in this area that he has permission to shoot in my field for rabbits and that is not something I give lightly.

The possibility of 5-20 fox corpses being left to rot after being shot is something that I would never come across and surely it would be very, very unusual for this to happen in one place? I'm also not sure how disease transmission via blood is more likely with a shot then carcase collected, whether fox or rabbit, than a kill and carcase eaten? I'm obviously very lucky in the way the people allowed to shoot on neighbouring land behave so you can understand why I would far prefer this to the way our particular hunt behaves.

 

[stangs]

Just out of curiosity, did England ever have any apex predators?

Wolves (with bounties on their heads) until the 18th century
Lynx, at least, up to the 7th century in England - they died out a little later in Scotland
Brown bears until around 500 AD (most common in Southern England)
If you go ever further back, we had polar bears, Ice Age leopards, and cave lions and cave hyenas too.

The fox still does have one predator - the golden eagle - though they're not a common source of food for them, and golden eagles are only found in parts of Scotland and N.Ireland. Badger numbers can also influence fox numbers, as they compete for resources, though neither preys on the other.

1. A lot has been made of the need for an apex predator. Wolves have come up often as a historic predator - I’ve looked this up, and it seems that wolves really do not predate on foxes, and would only ever do so/have done so if they were starving? Nor are they in competition for food. Why are we trying to replace wolves with hounds if wolves don’t hunt foxes?

To give some reasons:
- apex predators will kill species they don't prey on when needing to secure resources
- foxes and wolves/lynx can compete over resources - water, space, some food sources (bears also share some of their favourite foods with foxes, but don't seem to be bothered by the presence of foxes, unlike wolves from whom foxes stay away)
- wolf kills are a key source of food for foxes (granted, this conclusion has come from US studies where there's more mammals that foxes simply couldn't kill, but that the UK doesn't have)
- Swedish and Canadian studies have shown that lynx tend to kill a fair few foxes, though they don't eat them

Now, it's possible that reintroducing one of the above species will just result in increased migration by foxes into urban areas, where as they're more confident around people than the others are. However, the general argument on this thread seems to be that it's rural foxes who are sicker than urban foxes, so the introduction of animals from whom they can scavenge, and who will kill the weaker ones, could be beneficial. Urban fox populations will need to be managed differently.

That said, the main and most important reason, by far, as to why we should reintroduce wolves/lynx is to manage deer populations. Personally, I'm a huge supporter of the reintroduction of lynx for this very reason (wolves are a bit trickier as likely to harm humans and livestock). Any benefits for the fox population gained from this would just be an added bonus.

I'm also wondering whether reintroducing golden eagles to England could have improve our fox population. I don't suppose anyone here knows of any good studies on the species' impact on foxes in Scotland?

 

[ycbm]

Let's be realistic here. There will be no widespread reintroduction of wolf into the UK, neither farmers nor the rural population will allow it.
.

 

[marmalade76]

Having now read that predator stress causes anxiety, sustained psychological stress and predator induced fear causes PTSD in wild animals, I think I've read as much as I want to on the subject.

I expect my hens suffer from predator stress too.

 

[skinnydipper]

I expect my hens suffer from predator stress too.

I don't doubt it.

How do you currently manage the situation?

Would shooting the fox be an option?

The guy who usually shoots foxes here has telescopic sights, he can distinguishing which fox to shoot far better than a pack of hounds can.

The only experience I have with foxes being shot is local and here an experienced person shoots a specific fox that is causing the farmer problems.

 

[palo1]

I would love to see the reaction on a shooting forum to this statement. The guy who usually shoots foxes here has telescopic sights, he can distinguishing which fox to shoot far better than a pack of hounds can.

I'd also love to hear how a hunt using a pack of hounds distinguishes between the scent of a nursing female and a blind male.
.

I quite agree that guns who have the right kit and firearms licences are very well placed to identify specific characteristics of any prey and take them out very effiiciently. I would never suggest otherwise. You seem to think though that everyone who shoots foxes has a HVR which is the right tool for the job. In fact that is not the case and HVRs need very specific licence conditions to be met; many more foxes would be shot with a 22 by someone who is not necessarily an expert or even particularly concerned shot. A gun is not just a gun...

As for hounds and nursing vixens, you know that hunting was seasonal so the likelihood of hounds catching a nursing vixen were very unlikely. Hounds could, when they were hunting fox regularly, distinguish between those animals that were going to be effectively 'easy' and those that were not. I think you know that as you have hunted previously.

 

[GSD Woman]

As far as reintroducing apex predators goes, not a good idea. Wolves will hunt deer but will also hunt chickens, sheep, goats and the occasional horse. Lynx are animals of the far north due to their special conformation and feet. They're not as big as mountain lions but my guess is they could still do some damage to a human if needed.

A lot of the people seem to be any sort of hunting/shooting. The East Coast of the USA has a huge white tailed deer populations, estimated to be larger than when the original Europeans first come to the continent. The deer are hunted in season. In some suburban areas the deer are so common that they eat the plants in gardens. I live in the suburbs and one evening I looked up and there was a large deer standing just outside my back garden. I'm surprised my dogs didn't jump the fence and chase it. There is a local botanical garden and one night I was walking Rudy and suddenly he started acting like a wild man. This was when I worked overnights and he was about a year old. Looked over to the garden and there was a deer. I see them where we walk, grazing in front gardens from busy roads. You name it, they're there. So, controlled deer seasons requiring licensing.

 

[marmalade76]

I don't doubt it.

How do you currently manage the situation?

Would shooting the fox be an option?

It's only really a problem in the summer when they get desperate (I'm assuming), I allow my hens to free range when I'm there to supervise (they're in an electric fenced run the rest of the time but there's usually one or two that fly out, wing clipping makes no difference) and my children & I have physically chased away foxes on several occasions (sadly the dog is totally useless with foxes but will chase cats ?). If they've managed to grab one, they tend to drop them when they see me coming. I've had one nearly run into me as it was following the hens along the path to the yard. Some hens will hide for a while after a fox has had a go. One poor hen was grabbed then dropped by a fox, then had a buzzard have a go at her a couple of weeks later, she died not long after one of our favourites.

The neighbour shoots but seems to be pretty useless and a few others shoot nearby.

 

[ycbm]

You seem to think though that everyone who shoots foxes has a HVR which is the right tool for the job.

I did not say that. I responded only to your comment which suggested that nobody did.
.

 

[ycbm]

Deleted, question is not worth it.
.

 

[ycbm]

Hounds could, when they were hunting fox regularly, distinguish between those animals that were going to be effectively 'easy' and those that were not. I think you know that as you have hunted previously.

No I didn't know that. Like almost all the field I was out for a good gallop across country, the longer the better. You're actually one of the few people I've ever had a "conversation" with who gave a damn about how the hounds worked the rest couldn't care less as long as they found a scent to chase and could be followed.

Can you point me to some evidence that hounds will choose to chase a fox that will be easier to catch based on its scent, rather that just following the strongest scent? I would be genuinely interested to read it.
.

 

[coblets]

Last time I was on this forum was November-ish, how is this thread still getting so many posts??

 

[ycbm]

Last time I was on this forum was November-ish, how is this thread still getting so many posts??

Why did you read it ? ?
.

 

[Caol Ila]

As far as reintroducing apex predators goes, not a good idea. Wolves will hunt deer but will also hunt chickens, sheep, goats and the occasional horse. Lynx are animals of the far north due to their special conformation and feet. They're not as big as mountain lions but my guess is they could still do some damage to a human if needed.

Debateable. There is also evidence that reintroducing an apex predator rebalances an entire ecosystem, for the better. I think there have been some studies done on the Yellowstone wolf reintroductions. I can find them if you're interested. In any case, there is zero evidence of lynx attacking humans. I'm sure if you cornered one, it would do what it had to do, but they are shy kitties, and not aggressive. They are not fuzzy mountain lions, which are bigger and more aggressive. Nonetheless, mountain lion attacks remain rare, surprisingly so, given the proximity of significant human population to mountain lion territory.

I also think wolves and bears should be reintroduced to Scotland. The monoculture ecosystems in many upland areas is depressing, and it would have the added benefit of discouraging people from camping like twa*ts.

 

[stangs]

As far as reintroducing apex predators goes, not a good idea. Wolves will hunt deer but will also hunt chickens, sheep, goats and the occasional horse. Lynx are animals of the far north due to their special conformation and feet. They're not as big as mountain lions but my guess is they could still do some damage to a human if needed.

I’m not going to argue for wolves because, considering the population density of even the most remote parts of Scotland, I don’t think it’d be possible. And, as you said, there is a genuine risk that they’ll prey on livestock. But we really need lynx.

Our issue with deer is that, because they have no predator, the way they graze has changed. So rather than a few bites and then you move on, they will stay and keep eating, damaging the plants because they’re not afraid of anything. Lynx are the ideal predator for the UK because they’re very shy (as CI said, they’ve never attacked a human) and they don’t like leaving forested areas. Now, there are concerns as to whether they can sometimes prey on sheep, but not wanting to leave forests means deer will be their preferred choice by far, therefore keeping the deer vigilance, and benefiting the overall ecosystem.

As a result, lynx are the only apex predator being seriously considered for rewilding. Wolves are off the table as would upset anyone with livestock. I haven’t seen anything to suggest work is being done around bears.

 

[Tiddlypom]

Hounds could, when they were hunting fox regularly, distinguish between those animals that were going to be effectively 'easy' and those that were not. I think you know that as you have hunted previously.

They could? As in hounds would actively choose to follow the scent of one over the other?

That's news to me, and as you know I had many days hunting pre ban. A sick fox will be much more vulnerable than a healthy one if hounds are about, for obvious reasons, so hunting a sick or injured fox is more likely to result in a kill. A healthy fox might also have picked on the hunt being about much earlier and have exited the area.

The big posh hunts wouldn't want hounds that seek out sick foxes, though, as the hunt would soon be over. Where's the fun in that? The hunts want(ed) hounds to pick up on strong healthy foxes which would run for many miles and give their paying subscribers a good whack for their money.

 

[palo1]

They could? As in hounds would actively choose to follow the scent of one over the other?

That's news to me, and as you know I had many days hunting pre ban. A sick fox will be much more vulnerable than a healthy one if hounds are about, for obvious reasons, so hunting a sick or injured fox is more likely to result in a kill. A healthy fox might also have picked on the hunt being about much earlier and have exited the area.

The big posh hunts wouldn't want hounds that seek out sick foxes, though, as the hunt would soon be over. Where's the fun in that? The hunts want(ed) hounds to pick up on strong healthy foxes which would run for many miles and give their paying subscribers a good whack for their money.

Hmm, well that is not strictly true; some subscribers wanted a long run/hunt but they wouldn't have known or cared if that was due to 1 or several foxes being tracked. In other places where hunting has not been fashionable there possibly was more emphasis on the quality of hound work rather than a long run. In upland places (as opposed to vale country) long runs were much slower in any case due to the terrrain and difficult conditions for hounds.

 

[palo1]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...-fox-hunting-unjustified-attack-warn-farmers/

It seems bizarre that the Scottish government are considering legislating against advice from their own review.

 

[ycbm]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...-fox-hunting-unjustified-attack-warn-farmers/

It seems bizarre that the Scottish government are considering legislating against advice from their own review.

I can't read the article but this is democracy, it's a vote winner because the majority of people no longer believe in having clubs of people getting together to use a pack of dogs to chase a wild animal.

Like the Blair law, this will be being changed in the expectation of votes.
.