Trapping/Hunting poll

Trapping or Hunting poll

  • Total voters
    0
NeilM said:
Scratchline: With all due respect, this poll is the most naive bit of nonsense I have ever seen.

Foxes kill lambs, chickens and other livestock and so farmers, or those employed by them, kill foxes.

They are not interested in trapping the sick and old and letting healthy foxes go free, to once again kill the stock that they earn their living from.

Please look at the real world of farming, the commercial world where every penny counts and every animal lost to predators is a threat the the commercial viability of that business.

As a second thought, what on earth would you expect the farmers to do with a bunch of old / sick / stupid foxes that they had trapped? Let them go again, to be re-trapped? I'm certain the farmers would sign up to that scheme.
Click to expand...

With all due respect the poll is only about the hunters claims that they only catch the sick and old ( I know that is of course a lie but they keep telling it). The poll also states trapped and humanely dispatched so why on earth you have posted what you have about releasing them again is beyond me.
 
martlin said:
Yees:D we would be delighted to play trapping:D After all we have absolutely nothing better to do in between the lambing, calving, feeding, diversifying and generally trying to keep our heads over poverty line:p;)
Click to expand...

Oh its stupid hour again lol lol You dont have to do it yourself you can pay whoever you choose. The money would be payed to you for a fox with a single bullet wound to the head and no other injuries.
 
NeilM said:
Martlin, you've not thought this scheme through, it could be a tidy earner.

Foxes are pretty bright, it won't take them long to figure that if they walk into a trap, they get a nice meal (the bait). You come along in the morning, register with DEFRA that you have trapped a fox and then let it go. Next night, smart foxy comes back for another free dinner, repeat.

You get your monthly cheque from DEFRA for the humane capture of foxes, foxy gets fed on a regular basis and the fluffys (or city dwellers as they prefer to be known), get to feel good about themselves and don't have to visit the nasty, smelly, muddy countryside anymore.
Click to expand...

How does trapping and humane dispatch lead to released foxes?!! Just as a matter of interest.
 
Scratchline said:
Oh its stupid hour again lol lol You dont have to do it yourself you can pay whoever you choose. The money would be payed to you for a fox with a single bullet wound to the head and no other injuries.
Click to expand...

So, essentially, what you are saying is I will be paid by God knows whom (DEFRA perhaps?) to pay somebody to trap and kill foxes on my land, but only the uninjured ones, because if there is some injury apart from the bullet wound in the head, I won't get paid? But presumably will have to pay the 'contractor' anyway, won't I?
 
This is a genuine question, not a sarcastic one :p But how can an elderly or sick fox cause problems? Surely they don't get about much if they are old or sick? Surely it would be the younger hoodlum foxes :D that would cause problems to farmers lambs and chickens etc? Can someone explain please?
 
sarahsum1 said:
This is a genuine question, not a sarcastic one :p But how can an elderly or sick fox cause problems? Surely they don't get about much if they are old or sick? Surely it would be the younger hoodlum foxes :D that would cause problems to farmers lambs and chickens etc? Can someone explain please?
Click to expand...

According to the hunters the old and sick take the easy meals ie lambs and chickens. You should see all the nonsense hunters post on facebook.
 
martlin said:
So, essentially, what you are saying is I will be paid by God knows whom (DEFRA perhaps?) to pay somebody to trap and kill foxes on my land, but only the uninjured ones, because if there is some injury apart from the bullet wound in the head, I won't get paid? But presumably will have to pay the 'contractor' anyway, won't I?
Click to expand...

Yes pretty much but allowing for fine tuning. Now, I realise some are having a bit of a laugh hopefully at my expense but I dont mind. The law doesnt allow you to hunt with packs so really it is me laughing because my suggestion is the best you have. Either that or you farmers and your pals are going to decimate the foxes by your own hands. Not good so the sooner you start doing something about this the better.
 
Ahhh, right, me being thick then. So you are proposing that farmers get paid for every fox they can show DEFRA (or whoever) that has been killed by a bullet.

Martlin, you're onto an earner here.

Scratchline, I find it hard to believe that you live in Cornwall, yet appear have no idea how fox number are controlled, with or without hunting with hounds.

Let me hint: Range Rover. 0.220 cal (or similar) rifle. Silencer.
 
NeilM said:
Ahhh, right, me being thick then. So you are proposing that farmers get paid for every fox they can show DEFRA (or whoever) that has been killed by a bullet.

Martlin, you're onto an earner here.

Scratchline, I find it hard to believe that you live in Cornwall, yet appear have no idea how fox number are controlled, with or without hunting with hounds.

Let me hint: Range Rover. 0.220 cal (or similar) rifle. Silencer.
Click to expand...

For heavens sake and hopefully the last time this is not about general fox control. This is only about fox hunting with packs of hounds which the hunt claim take out the sick and old which you cannot do by law. Versus a suggested legal form of fox control. Of course I know how foxes are controlled FFS but that has absolutely nothing to do with this poll does it Neil. So why post what you did?
 
Nope, I still don't get it.

How are you going to ensure the farmers only trap the old and sick foxes?

A trap is indiscriminate, if designed to catch foxes, it will catch any fox. Are you seriously proposing that farmers release healthy fit foxes back into the wild? The same healthy fit foxes that kill their livestock?

If it's a fox and it's in the trap, it WILL get a bullet in the head.

As for hunting with hounds killing only the old and sick; consider this. If ten people are about to run a 100 metre race. Three of them are trained athletes, another two are young and fit, one is a 30 year old who plays squash and one a slightly overweight person, the last three consist of a gent in his late 70's, an 50 year old business man who smokes 50 fags a day and a 35 year old with a heart condition. 5 seconds after the starter fires the gun a pack of (very friendly) hounds is released, who are they going to catch up with first?
 
Scratchline said:
Yes pretty much but allowing for fine tuning. Now, I realise some are having a bit of a laugh hopefully at my expense but I dont mind. The law doesnt allow you to hunt with packs so really it is me laughing because my suggestion is the best you have. Either that or you farmers and your pals are going to decimate the foxes by your own hands. Not good so the sooner you start doing something about this the better.
Click to expand...

In that case, you must be barking mad!
A. there is no way DEFRA will pay headage on foxes, it ain't gonna happen.
B. A rifle/poison/4x4 is working fine and farmers don't have to be particularly selective.
C. Decimating foxes doesn't bother me as a farmer tbh, although I'd rather decimate badgers.
BTW - I don't hunt, neither does hunt cross my land, so the fact that I can't hunt with a pack of dogs doesn't affect me personally.
 
NeilM said:
Nope, I still don't get it.

How are you going to ensure the farmers only trap the old and sick foxes?

A trap is indiscriminate, if designed to catch foxes, it will catch any fox. Are you seriously proposing that farmers release healthy fit foxes back into the wild? The same healthy fit foxes that kill their livestock?

If it's a fox and it's in the trap, it WILL get a bullet in the head.

As for hunting with hounds killing only the old and sick; consider this. If ten people are about to run a 100 metre race. Three of them are trained athletes, another two are young and fit, one is a 30 year old who plays squash and one a slightly overweight person, the last three consist of a gent in his late 70's, an 50 year old business man who smokes 50 fags a day and a 35 year old with a heart condition. 5 seconds after the starter fires the gun a pack of (very friendly) hounds is released, who are they going to catch up with first?
Click to expand...

That last bit started out like a mensa question lol lol I dont need to ensure the farmers will only catch the old or sick. As long as they catch the old and sick that the hunts would usually rip to shreds at least those foxes would be humanely dispatched.
The farmer may not release healthy foxes. He may indeed shoot them but once again it is more humane than at present were the pro hunters are telling us how many are being shot at and wounded, snared, gassed etc

Even if, IF all the trapped foxes ended up dead, they wouldnt have suffered before hand Neil. It is just about reducing suffering, nothing more. I dont see why that is wrong tbh.
 
martlin said:
In that case, you must be barking mad!
A. there is no way DEFRA will pay headage on foxes, it ain't gonna happen.
B. A rifle/poison/4x4 is working fine and farmers don't have to be particularly selective.
C. Decimating foxes doesn't bother me as a farmer tbh, although I'd rather decimate badgers.
BTW - I don't hunt, neither does hunt cross my land, so the fact that I can't hunt with a pack of dogs doesn't affect me personally.
Click to expand...

Well please do not take this personally but the rifle/poison/4x4 way is being slammed by your pro hunting friends as inhumane. Each to their own.
 
NeilM said:
Nope, I still don't get it.

How are you going to ensure the farmers only trap the old and sick foxes?

A trap is indiscriminate, if designed to catch foxes, it will catch any fox. Are you seriously proposing that farmers release healthy fit foxes back into the wild? The same healthy fit foxes that kill their livestock?

If it's a fox and it's in the trap, it WILL get a bullet in the head.

As for hunting with hounds killing only the old and sick; consider this. If ten people are about to run a 100 metre race. Three of them are trained athletes, another two are young and fit, one is a 30 year old who plays squash and one a slightly overweight person, the last three consist of a gent in his late 70's, an 50 year old business man who smokes 50 fags a day and a 35 year old with a heart condition. 5 seconds after the starter fires the gun a pack of (very friendly) hounds is released, who are they going to catch up with first?
Click to expand...

You make a very good point. I don't think anyone would be right to say that they ONLY catch old or sick foxes however there is little doubt that because fitter foxes are better equipped to evade the hounds they are more likely to. No other form of control has this feature from what i can see and the reason fox hunting has it is because it mimics natural predation which the fox has evolved to cope with.
 
Scratchline said:
Well please do not take this personally but the rifle/poison/4x4 way is being slammed by your pro hunting friends as inhumane. Each to their own.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say it is inhumane I'd just say that it is no more humane than hunting it has advantages and disadvantages as does hunting in specific cases a shot fox might suffer more or less or the same as a hunted fox.
 
Xlthlx said:
I wouldn't say it is inhumane I'd just say that it is no more humane than hunting it has advantages and disadvantages as does hunting in specific cases a shot fox might suffer more or less or the same as a hunted fox.
Click to expand...

Actually poison I am very strongly against because other wildlife can be seriously affected.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top