The Hunting Act 2004 will be repealed or amended

[Judgemental]

The Govenment has announced that there will be no vote in the House of Commons prior to the 2015 General Election concerning Repeal or Amendment of the Hunting Act 2004.

That is effectively that, it will never ever be changed.

There are many reasons but the fundamental is that the so called 'High Command' are so hopelessly out of touch with the British Public on the subject, it beggers belief.

In fact the majority of people who are Masters, Secretaries and Committee members of hunts are so up their own a...s, that it is so astonishing as to how they have comprehensively failed.

They will say, 'oh but we understand the common man and are never snooty, at least not any more'.

That is very true but the obsequious toadying, to anybody with a title, high ranking military folk, new or indeed old money is where the failure rests.

As for the Countryside Alliance, words fail me.

The large agricultural estates of the inherited variety, are unable to comprehend that the fewer folk engaged either farming or working on the estate, the fewer people to vote and or lobby their MP's.

Ownership of land is neither here nor there to the politicians.

I confidently predict that Shooting will be the next subject to have a huge number of restrictions imposed. As it is, one now has to 'ask' pigeons to politely leave one's crops before shooting them.

No the whole subject is a comprehensive failure on the part of the 'MANAGERS'. Who need to be sacked - certainly the view of Manchester United where failure is concerned.

 

[Patterdale]

I no longer think that it SHOULD be repealed - hunting has modernised and is more popular and inclusive than ever - surely that's a victory?

I do think that the ban was a mistake (as Tony BLiar himself admitted), but actually it's turned out better than anyone could have expected.

 

[PaddyMonty]

There are many reasons but the fundamental is that the so called 'High Command' are so hopelessly out of touch with the British Public on the subject, it beggers belief.

Or could it be that the vast majority of the British Public dont give it a second thought unless asked and then dont really give two hoots. Waste of govenment time to do anything about the act.
Simple

 

[marmalade76]

Agree with PaddyMonty, and neither do I TBH.

After the sec of my local hunt was really quite rude to me last time I wanted to go out, I've given up supporting them (for the time being at least), I shall go out on hound exercise with the bloodhounds instead. As for the all inclusive, all are welcome bullocks, the truth is some are more welcome than others and I have seen it with my own eyes! They deserve all they've got..

 

[Judgemental]

I confidently predict that Shooting will be the next subject to have a huge number of restrictions imposed. As it is, one now has to 'ask' pigeons to politely leave one's crops before shooting them.

Would sombody tell me what is the point in a number people lined up with shot guns and have pheasants etc driven to the guns by so called beaters, in order to kill the birds.

 

[marmalade76]

Would sombody tell me what is the point in a number people lined up with shot guns and have pheasants etc driven to the guns by so called beaters, in order to kill the birds.

'Cause it's a way of showing others that you can afford it

 

[Shay]

Good grief what a judgmental thread!

Hunting has survived the ban and done well. But the proposed amendment was very much needed largely by welsh hill farmers who need to be able to better control fox predation at lambing. Must as I would like total repeal, that is a longer term political goal. Small holding farmers loosing significant amounts of stock to fox predation need, in some landscapes and terrains, to be able to use more than 2 hounds to flush a fox to guns. That is what this amendment is - or was - about.

Fox hunting is not about a load of people - "toffs" or not, inclusive or not - riding all over the countryside in the company of a pack of hounds. We can do that pre or post ban, or in the middle. It is about responsible countryside maintenance; the balance of ecological and ethical control of an apex predator with the needs of those who farm the land and the challenges of a variety of terrain. To a lessor extent it is also about tradition. And certainly it is also about enjoying company and the countryside.

Repeal is about ending bad law, law that makes life difficult for marginal farmers in complex country and law that allows charities, big and not so big, to spend millions of pounds donated to them in failed prosecutions of people who have done no wrong. I would like to think the public would care about bad law, wasted court time and wasted tax payer money... but even I'm not quite that naive!

 

[marmalade76]

Good grief what a judgmental thread!

Hunting has survived the ban and done well. But the proposed amendment was very much needed largely by welsh hill farmers who need to be able to better control fox predation at lambing. Must as I would like total repeal, that is a longer term political goal. Small holding farmers loosing significant amounts of stock to fox predation need, in some landscapes and terrains, to be able to use more than 2 hounds to flush a fox to guns. That is what this amendment is - or was - about.

Fox hunting is not about a load of people - "toffs" or not, inclusive or not - riding all over the countryside in the company of a pack of hounds. We can do that pre or post ban, or in the middle. It is about responsible countryside maintenance; the balance of ecological and ethical control of an apex predator with the needs of those who farm the land and the challenges of a variety of terrain. To a lessor extent it is also about tradition. And certainly it is also about enjoying company and the countryside.

Repeal is about ending bad law, law that makes life difficult for marginal farmers in complex country and law that allows charities, big and not so big, to spend millions of pounds donated to them in failed prosecutions of people who have done no wrong. I would like to think the public would care about bad law, wasted court time and wasted tax payer money... but even I'm not quite that naive!

Come on! That is exactly what the ban was about and exactly what it's about for most of the people who cough up the money that pays for it!! Do you really think most these people who follow on horseback give a monkeys about farmers? Do you really think it would have been banned if it were just a few farmers out in their work clothes hunting foxes? I doubt it somehow.

 

[Alec Swan]

Would sombody tell me what is the point in a number people lined up with shot guns and have pheasants etc driven to the guns by so called beaters, in order to kill the birds.

I don't hunt, and even though I see the bulk of those who do, as being faintly ridiculous, so I none-the-less support hunting. You obviously don't shoot, but would just-the-same, attempt to rubbish another man's sport.

Not for the first time J_m, you disappoint me. I'd remind you that those who don't stand, as one, will fall.

Alec.

Ets, To those who would have an all inclusive interest in our countryside, you'll be an embarrassment.

 

[Alec Swan]

'Cause it's a way of showing others that you can afford it

Rubbish.

Come on! That is exactly what the ban was about and exactly what it's about for most of the people who cough up the money that pays for it!! Do you really think most these people who follow on horseback give a monkeys about farmers? Do you really think it would have been banned if it were just a few farmers out in their work clothes hunting foxes? I doubt it somehow.

A good post, but only in part. Were Hunting about Farmer-supported packs, then we would still be hunting, as we were.

Alec.

 

[marmalade76]

It was a joke, Alec, hence the smilie.

That said, I'm sure there are some who go shooting simply because it's the thing for certain types to do, as with most things.

 

[Judgemental]

I don't hunt, and even though I see the bulk of those who do, as being faintly ridiculous, so I none-the-less support hunting. You obviously don't shoot, but would just-the-same, attempt to rubbish another man's sport.

Not for the first time J_m, you disappoint me. I'd remind you that those who don't stand, as one, will fall.

Alec.

Ets, To those who would have an all inclusive interest in our countryside, you'll be an embarrassment.

Alec, I had a feeling I would be on the receiving end of a Right and Left from the direction of Norfolk when I posted. However it is very much a good, bad and indifferent post because it's a question not an opinion.

I always say that whilst one might be shooting pheasants for sport. There is normally, the reparing to the local pub for a grand lunch. Therefore the shooting for 'food' is justified, albeit the game shot will eventually find it's way into Leadenhall Meat Market etc.

 

[PolarSkye]

Alec, I had a feeling I would be on the receiving end of a Right and Left from the direction of Norfolk when I posted. However it is very much a good, bad and indifferent post because it's a question not an opinion.

I always say that whilst one might be shooting pheasants for sport. There is normally, the reparing to the local pub for a grand lunch. Therefore the shooting for 'food' is justified, albeit the game shot will eventually find it's way into Leadenhall Meat Market etc.

I'm sorry, but what ARE you on about?

P

 

[Alec Swan]

It was a joke, Alec, hence the smilie.

That said, I'm sure there are some who go shooting simply because it's the thing for certain types to do, as with most things.

It was a knowing wink, not a smile, but never mind.

Of course there are those who shoot for no other reason than to show off, just as there are those who walk down a street, for the very same reason. Not everyone 'Promenades'.

Alec.