Lets justify Hunting for sport!:)

AnaV

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 December 2012
Messages
87
Visit site
To all of those who hunt, justify why anyone has the right to deny an animal its life?
Thank you
 

AnaV

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 December 2012
Messages
87
Visit site
In what way 'Survival of the fittest?'
It has nothing to do with aiding Natural Selection either for Natural Selection is for a start a 'natural' process whereby an organism may be geographically isolated from the rest of its species thus to adapt will breed from the better alleles which help survival chances.
 

noobs31

Well-Known Member
Joined
19 July 2011
Messages
199
Visit site
Personally, I justify it as, they will be exterminated anyway, most likely by horrid means. If I had a choice and could decree it, I'd choose lamping with a sound marksman.
 

Countryman

Well-Known Member
Joined
19 November 2010
Messages
414
Visit site
Humane wildlife management, with specific pest control, made into a pillar of the rural community, a social focus and a thrilling sport.
 

noobs31

Well-Known Member
Joined
19 July 2011
Messages
199
Visit site
Natural Selection is for a start a 'natural' process whereby an organism may be geographically isolated from the rest of its species thus to adapt will breed from the better alleles which help survival chances.
Yes. And this happens not by magic, but by the strongest, youngest, wiliest fox outsmarting the hounds. Did you imagine it meant, the rubbish ones just keel over and die?
 

AnaV

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 December 2012
Messages
87
Visit site
That is not a reason.
'What gives anyone the right to deny any animal its life?'
was the question asked. Go ahead and justify hunting and assist the peril of humanity.
 

noobs31

Well-Known Member
Joined
19 July 2011
Messages
199
Visit site
That is not a reason.
'What gives anyone the right to deny any animal its life?'
was the question asked. Go ahead and justify hunting and assist the peril of humanity.
Don't ask here. Go see the farmers who want them exterminated.
 

TarwinBate

Active Member
Joined
1 June 2011
Messages
33
Visit site
Exactly, farmers and such want them gone, and whilst hunting with dogs may cause suffering, controlling fox numbers by other means is even more cruel. For example, shooting foxes can cause either an instant kill, or lengthy periods of agony for wounded animals which can die of the trauma within hours, or of secondary infection over a period of days or weeks.
 

maccachic

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 September 2012
Messages
1,217
Location
New Zealand
Visit site
Hahaha I hope you don't use leather horse gear, shoes etc you know leather comes form a dead animal right?? Also are you a veggie? humans can live without meat so if you are going to take the moral high ground better make sure you are squeaky clean.

Personally I don't like the kill would be just as happy without it and am always happy when the animal gets away but there are plenty of people who like killing animals for sport and I stick to my beliefs and leave them to thiers. I enjoy heading out running and jumping and the kill will happen with or without me regardless.

Gee its xmas go shopping.
 
Last edited:

AnaV

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 December 2012
Messages
87
Visit site
I somehow cannot recall mentioning magic?
It is not 100 percent instinct when it comes to dogs attacking foxes. It is brought on by humans too. Why should other animal populations be controlled? When the fact is the biggest parasite on this planet is the homosapien. Humans consume more food and drink than is needed. We also exploit the earths resources to such an extent we have caused its decay. Global warming? Humans. Excessive CO2 emissions? Humans. Destruction of habitats? Humans. The list goes on. Now other animals eat and drink as much as they need to survive. They do not for no reason kill other species. Now ask yourself ' Since the existence of mankind what have we done to benefit the earth, without replacing or improving something we have already ruined?'
 

Countryman

Well-Known Member
Joined
19 November 2010
Messages
414
Visit site
We have a duty of care to manage our fox population. If we did not, the countryside would be over run with foxes. While it may be true that at certain densities, foxes may limit their numbers, the sheer amount of foxes in our countryside by that time would be utterly unsustainable - both for man and the foxes. Man has created and shaped the British countryside, and he now has a duty to manage it for the good of all wildlife as well as his own benefit. Hunting is part of fulfilling that duty.
 

Nicnac

Well-Known Member
Joined
9 May 2007
Messages
8,374
Visit site
When the fact is the biggest parasite on this planet is the homosapien. Humans consume more food and drink than is needed. We also exploit the earths resources to such an extent we have caused its decay. Global warming? Humans. Excessive CO2 emissions? Humans. Destruction of habitats? Humans. The list goes on. Now other animals eat and drink as much as they need to survive. They do not for no reason kill other species. Now ask yourself ' Since the existence of mankind what have we done to benefit the earth, without replacing or improving something we have already ruined?'

Don't sweat - it's the end of the world tomorrow so all homosapiens will be wiped off the earth and your worries will be no more :rolleyes:
 

AnaV

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 December 2012
Messages
87
Visit site
Ok, Farmers would rather not have foxes around? So you and others act upon their wish and do the deed? Farmer wants you to jump off a cliff? Do you? Using leather and other products is a different ball game all together. Eating meat is natural. So once an animal has been killed for meat using its skin is ensuring the animal has not been wasted. This is hunting for survival. Like me mentioning prior to this consuming as much as needed. Yet why if we already have a mass production of meats do people still hunt? It is unnecessary.
 

AnaV

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 December 2012
Messages
87
Visit site
That is not a duty. Why should other animals be sustained when their existence is less damaging than ours? Yes, and we eat the food, if we dont buy it they have no income to grow more crops or raise more livestock.
 

Molasses

Well-Known Member
Joined
4 October 2011
Messages
3,994
Visit site
Why should other animals be sustained when their existence is less damaging than ours?

Ok - lets justify your existence then....for sport :)
Are you curing cancer today?
Nope?
Me either


guess we'll be first to the line when the end of the world comes then:D
 

Countryman

Well-Known Member
Joined
19 November 2010
Messages
414
Visit site
Nobody's ever said that. What I did say, which is true, is that the landscape and habitat in which the English fox lives-is entirely created by man. It has been created and managed by man over the centuries and now bears no resemblance to how England was without Man. Therefore, as we have created this unique countryside, we have a duty to manage it.
 

maccachic

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 September 2012
Messages
1,217
Location
New Zealand
Visit site
Interesting you think there shouldn't be hunting because we produce meat etc have you seen the conditions animals are kept in these days in the interest of mass producing food. The increase in these practices and the processing for food is in direct correlation with increases in health issues.

Personally the hunted food have a much better existance than commercially farmed animals overall.
 

DGeventing

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 June 2012
Messages
193
Location
Upperco
Visit site
Hunting those poor little cute Foxes, how uncivilized

Personally I think killing 30 of my parents chickens in one night but only taking/eating one carcass is quite uncivilized and not very cute...

Foxes are vermin that need to be controlled. If you don't control numbers, you get a larger population encroaching further on farmers land. While a large scale industrial farm could absorb the costs of loss of animals and damage to land, small farmers can't. That means higher prices or lower sales, contributing to what I view as the demise of farming as a whole.

Yes, there are other methods of control. Trapping, where the animal will starve and dehydrate while it waits for someone to check the trap. And god forbid it be a snare type trap, and the animal starts to gnaw it's leg off... Or you could poison them, and let them linger for days, running the risk that any animal that finds the carcass will also ingest the poison and die too.

Or yes, there is the novel idea that a group of good shots could go out and just 'stumble' across a fox and shoot it. Yes, that might be less stressful to the animal, but is it likely to work, or will be be a waste of time, with low productivity?

No, we go hunting. My local hunt probably supports the livelihood of 100+ individuals, whether directly or indirectly. It keeps the huntsman, kennel men etc in work, it supports a business in the kennels, local businesses by providing business. It helps people like me, who reschool ex racehorses, get the best out of horses that may otherwise end up being put to sleep. It is closely attached to a pony club - to the extent that they share a name - setting up hunter trials, team chasing, and xc days for members of both, to help give kids a well rounded introduction to less mainstream equine sports.

It makes what could be 35 square miles of villages into a community. If I happen to go shopping in the area, I know people. I talk to the store owners, to my hairdresser, to people I see in cafes, all because I know them from hunting. The USA has a big problem with communities being 'segregated', with those who farm and those who work in town having nothing in common - hunting unites us. We've all seen in the last weeks how alienation can have awful consequences, so anything that brings people together is good in my book.
 
Top