Lets justify Hunting for sport!:)

[happyhunter123]

Killing for fun or 'sport'.

Oh good greif......

You still haven't got it.

 

[KEF]

KEF, this (rather fed-up) post:

Do we have to go through this again? We don't take pleasure in the actual killing of the fox!
Otherwise, we could still go and shoot it and be perfectly satisfied.

Presumably you don't take pleasure in the death of any foxes now

 

[Littlelegs]

That's the thing though, nobody needs to eat meat in first world countries, but the fox population does need controlling. So the former is death for nothing but pleasure, the second serves a purpose. And banning hunting with dogs just means they are killed by a different method. It's almost laughable that while the masses are objecting to hunting, more & more of the big retailers are converting to halal. And I haven't noticed the rspca being remotely interested in the fact there's virtually no chance of getting caught if you use traps, or are an awful shot & choose to maim foxes.

 

[KEF]

That's the thing though, nobody needs to eat meat in first world countries, but the fox population does need controlling. So the former is death for nothing but pleasure, the second serves a purpose. And banning hunting with dogs just means they are killed by a different method. It's almost laughable that while the masses are objecting to hunting, more & more of the big retailers are converting to halal. And I haven't noticed the rspca being remotely interested in the fact there's virtually no chance of getting caught if you use traps, or are an awful shot & choose to maim foxes.

I think my main gripe is the attitude of some people (not singling out those who hunt by any stretch) to animals... I am sure that some hunts are respectful of animals (horses, dogs and foxes alike) but my experience of the hunt local to me is that they are not... they are not even respectful of humans! I think all I would like is for people to have regard to the consequences of their actions when it comes to the treatment of animals. I am sure that all those on this forum do (since the purpose of it is to provoke debate and discussion) but there are many that do not.

 

[Countryman]

You've acknowledged that killing animals is sometimes necessary but what you object to is people enjoying it? Well that's your own moral judgement, millions disagree with it and although your view should be respected, you have no right to force your own moral views on millions of others.

 

[KEF]

Of course I don't have the right to force anything on anyone else and the only entities which do are the legislature and parliament. I just emplore that people have regard to the animals that encounter directly or indirectly. With rights come responsibilities.

 

[Countryman]

I don't think you understand that for many of us, hunting is part of fulfilling that responsibility.

 

[KEF]

I don't think you understand that for many of us, hunting is part of fulfilling that responsibility.

Of course I understand and, I am sure that for some that is indeed the case, but can you honestly say that all of those that hunt or kill animals (other than those who are licenced and employed to do so) genuinely hold that sense of responsibility rather than just using it as a convenient excuse to do something they want to do regardless of the consequences?

 

[bubbilygum]

I think my main gripe is the attitude of some people (not singling out those who hunt by any stretch) to animals... I am sure that some hunts are respectful of animals (horses, dogs and foxes alike) but my experience of the hunt local to me is that they are not... they are not even respectful of humans! I think all I would like is for people to have regard to the consequences of their actions when it comes to the treatment of animals. I am sure that all those on this forum do (since the purpose of it is to provoke debate and discussion) but there are many that do not.

That's an interesting point. A relative of mine who is also a farmer let the hunt across their land for many years until they discovered a badger sett on their land filled with concrete. They were devastated. This was the final straw - they also lost many lambs to the hunt and the amount they were reimbursed meant they made a reasonably large loss. They wanted to support the hunt but felt they could no longer, they were treated terribly by the hunt.

I must add that this is not my experience at all of hunts and 'hunters' - a few years ago a friend took my horse hunting (her first time out and also my horses first time out, very unfortunate) and came off, breaking her pelvis. The hunt were incredibly kind and helpful to us all, fed me cake and tea whilst I was crying and shaking, sent flowers to her in hospital and offered both her and myself free days out hunting.

 

[KEF]

That's an interesting point. A relative of mine who is also a farmer let the hunt across their land for many years until they discovered a badger sett on their land filled with concrete. They were devastated. This was the final straw - they also lost many lambs to the hunt and the amount they were reimbursed meant they made a reasonably large loss. They wanted to support the hunt but felt they could no longer, they were treated terribly by the hunt.

I must add that this is not my experience at all of hunts and 'hunters' - a few years ago a friend took my horse hunting (her first time out and also my horses first time out, very unfortunate) and came off, breaking her pelvis. The hunt were incredibly kind and helpful to us all, fed me cake and tea whilst I was crying and shaking, sent flowers to her in hospital and offered both her and myself free days out hunting.

The farmer from whom I rented my paddock last year lost thousands of pounds in trashed crops and was inadequately compensated. My dad's car lost a wing mirror, there are frequently unsupervised hounds running around on A roads and on many occassions the hunt leaves abandoned lorries and trailers with insufficient room for emergency vehicles to pass. The hunt local to me needs to do a better PR job. Rider/horse injuries are common and I am sure that some could be avoided with better management.

The blocking up of badger setts is senseless - presumably they were wanting to deny animals of a safe haven.

 

[bubbilygum]

The blocking up of badger setts is senseless - presumably they were wanting to deny animals of a safe haven.

Yes - a representative of the hunt told my relative that they had done it to stop the fox going to ground there (though I imagine the badger would have had something to say about that!) and also basically excepted a pat on the back and a thank you for filling it! Relative was horrified and furious.

(Would also like to add that relative lives nowhere near me, and the hunt concerned was not any local to myself).

 

[KEF]

Yes - a representative of the hunt told my relative that they had done it to stop the fox going to ground there (though I imagine the badger would have had something to say about that!) and also basically excepted a pat on the back and a thank you for filling it! Relative was horrified and furious.

(Would also like to add that relative lives nowhere near me, and the hunt concerned was not any local to myself).

I am surprised since one of the (good) arguments for hunting is that the hunt undertake wildlife management and maintain/create areas of conservation etc. I doubt concreting natural habitats would fall into either of those categories.

 

[Eagle_day]

As I said, I haven't been on her for a while. Are KEF and bubbliygum merely trolling antis? I''ll give them some credit for originality though: concreting in badger setts is a new one on me.

 

[Springy]

On a hunt how would you carry the concrete and the water to make it and the mixer and the shovels to fill it and and........

 

[Alec Swan]

Countryman - I wonder what motivated you to register? Does it really matter? Taking part in any activity (for fun) which is intended to result (directly or indirectly) in the demise or detriment of an animal is wrong and cannot be justified.

Not so.

Shall we consider your comfort? Do you enjoy wearing your expensive leather shoes? Italian, perhaps? Do you enjoy your 90 day hung fillet steak? Do you eat whilst others in this world starve? Explain that, and you will be able to understand those with whom you would take issue.

Using the word "Fun", demeans the rural pastime of hunting. The word "Fun" is an offence, but one which you will cheerfully use, as, or perhaps, you'd prefer to use the word "Murder".

There's a purity about Hunting which you will never understand, and that's because you don't actually want to. You have a closed mind.

Alec.

 

[KEF]

So I can take it that neither of you agree with the concreting of natural habitats and that you would condemn any hunts that behave in that way? I can speak first hand regarding the activities that I have witnessed. I am anti hunting, yes but that should not offend you. I am open minded but I have yet to hear an argument that justifies the hunting of foxes in the manner that took place pior to the ban.

 

[Countryman]

I don't have a problem with stopping up. However, I would condemn any hunt that knowingly stopped up a badger sett with concrete!

 

[KEF]

Not so.

Shall we consider your comfort? Do you enjoy wearing your expensive leather shoes? Italian, perhaps? Do you enjoy your 90 day hung fillet steak? Do you eat whilst others in this world starve? Explain that, and you will be able to understand those with whom you would take issue.

Using the word "Fun", demeans the rural pastime of hunting. The word "Fun" is an offence, but one which you will cheerfully use, as, or perhaps, you'd prefer to use the word "Murder".

There's a purity about Hunting which you will never understand, and that's because you don't actually want to. You have a closed mind.

Alec.

Please see my later post which I wrote before reading this. The treatment of animals for consumption can be cruel...but that does not justify other forms of cruelty - which by the way I have not been arguing. When I see a hunt, I do not see sombre faces.

 

[bubbilygum]

As I said, I haven't been on her for a while. Are KEF and bubbliygum merely trolling antis? I''ll give them some credit for originality though: concreting in badger setts is a new one on me.

Not a troll, and not an anti - genuinely on the fence regarding hunting and happily accept opinions from both sides.

Anecdote from relative was genuine, I have no reason to believe they would lie to me about this?

They filled the sett when inspecting the land before hunting on it - relative did allow hunt onto land for many years.

 

[bubbilygum]

On a hunt how would you carry the concrete and the water to make it and the mixer and the shovels to fill it and and........

Not whilst hunting, although that would be impressive in itself! It was before hunting commenced for the season.

Wanted to add that I have no idea if there were badgers in the sett or not - possibly an empty sett but possibly not. Not sure if hunt knew if empty or not either as I have only heard my relatives (possibly biased!) side of events.

 

[Alec Swan]

So I can take it that neither of you agree with the concreting of natural habitats and that you would condemn any hunts that behave in that way? Without question. I can speak first hand regarding the activities that I have witnessed. Provide the evidence. I am anti hunting, yes but that should not offend you. I am open minded but I have yet to hear an argument that justifies the hunting of foxes in the manner that took place pior to the ban. I've yet to hear the view of a bystander which has any value. That's not intended as an arrogant remark, but one to support that where those who have no experience, seem deaf to reason.

Alec.

 

[happyhunter123]

You must remember that hunting doesn't mean 'fox-killing' necessarily. 99.9% of time spent hunting pre ban was spent not killing foxes-this took only a few seconds at a time. Some of greatest days hunting, and I always maintain this, have been when we didn't catch the fox. In some of the best runs I've ever had, we lost him at the end. In terms of enjoyment of a days hunting, I don't care if they kill or not. It's whether you get a good run that counts.

 

[Springy]

Not whilst hunting, although that would be impressive in itself! It was before hunting commenced for the season.
QUOTE]

I was wondering lol

 

[JanetGeorge]

The blocking up of badger setts is senseless - presumably they were wanting to deny animals of a safe haven.

Before the ban, the blocking of badger setts made perfect sense. Farmers expected foxes to be killed. If they went to ground, the vast majority of farmers insisted they be dug and despatched. If a fox went to ground in a badger sett, it couldn't be dug as badger setts are protected. Of course, if a fox went straight into the main area of a sett when badgers were home, THEY would kill him - but setts have many tunnels and a fox could lie low there.

The hunts rely on farmers' goodwill!

 

[KEF]

Alec - you are the one that is being arrogant, in assuming that anyone that doesn't actually hunt yet disagrees with it is 'deaf to reason'.

 

[bubbilygum]

You must remember that hunting doesn't mean 'fox-killing' necessarily. 99.9% of time spent hunting pre ban was spent not killing foxes-this took only a few seconds at a time. Some of greatest days hunting, and I always maintain this, have been when we didn't catch the fox. In some of the best runs I've ever had, we lost him at the end. In terms of enjoyment of a days hunting, I don't care if they kill or not. It's whether you get a good run that counts.

I think this is the crux of the matter regarding hunting for sport. There are two sides to this: those who want to cull foxes, and those who want a fun day out. The two often overlap but its not always the case.

The fact that hunting figures rose following the ban would suggest that many new hunt members who began hunting post ban actually DIDN'T want to partake in killing a fox? Of course there are many reasons why hunt memberships rose post ban but its probably fair to say this is a contributing factor.

 

[happyhunter123]

The fact that hunting figures rose following the ban would suggest that many new hunt members who began hunting post ban actually DIDN'T want to partake in killing a fox? Of course there are many reasons why hunt memberships rose post ban but its probably fair to say this is a contributing factor.

Seeing that some hunts still offer fox-killing services, I don't think it was anything to do with the lack of fox killing. Immediately post-ban, most (if not all) hunts were trying and testing these measures out. So plenty of foxes were being killed, and in a more open manner (no chase). A member of the field is more likely to see a fox being killed now!

 

[bubbilygum]

Seeing that some hunts still offer fox-killing services, I don't think it was anything to do with the lack of fox killing. Immediately post-ban, most (if not all) hunts were trying and testing these measures out. So plenty of foxes were being killed, and in a more open manner (no chase). A member of the field is more likely to see a fox being killed now!

That is a very good point! Sorry, I don't hunt myself, but I guess now most foxes found by a hunt will be shot, rather than previously those the hounds didn't kill would get away? I hadn't thought about it that way before!

 

[KEF]

You must remember that hunting doesn't mean 'fox-killing' necessarily. 99.9% of time spent hunting pre ban was spent not killing foxes-this took only a few seconds at a time. Some of greatest days hunting, and I always maintain this, have been when we didn't catch the fox. In some of the best runs I've ever had, we lost him at the end. In terms of enjoyment of a days hunting, I don't care if they kill or not. It's whether you get a good run that counts.

Happyhunter...this is a genuine question so please don't dismiss but what do you mean by 'enjoyment'?

 

[Alec Swan]

Perhaps a short explanation of "Stopping" may be in order. Badger's setts were regularly stopped or blocked, and generally with anything to hand, soil, brashings or brush. The intention was to keep Master Fox on the move. Mostly when the day was over, those who'd done the "Stopping", would remove the impediment, and allow Brock his freedom. If they didn't, then Brock would remove it for himself. If he can move road ways, a few brashings are a minor inconvenience.

My argument would be with those who would claim the preposterous, that Setts were filled with concrete. Nonsense, and those who would make such claims can hardly expect a reasoned response.

Alec.