Hunting ban

[billvon 3,111]

>Leaving everything the hell alone is not the answer. They tried that
>prior to the 1900's. Without proper wildlife management and game
>laws, entire species were nearly slaughtered off.

Slaughtering entire species does not equal leaving everything alone. Nature does best when left alone. It does OK when hunting is allowed but limited. If the fees hunters pay helps reduce the number of animals killed to a sustainable level, great. But that's just a way to get money, not evidence that hunting helps them.

I have nothing against hunting at sustainable levels. As you mention above, the problems only come when you hunt at levels that the populations can't sustain.

>I think the real enemy of wildlife is not hunters. The real enemy is
> the loss of their habitat.

I agree there, at least nowadays. It sure wasn't loss of habitat that almost drove the buffalo to extinction around the turn of the century. But nowadays, since we're smarter about hunting (but using more and more land) habitat loss becomes the big problem.

[skykittykat 0]

Quote

Some people are going to lose their jobs and tied houses in area's of high unemployment

Other small countryside industries will suffer, like the pheasant or grouse shoot
ie: a growth in the fox population will see the reduction of other wild life

> My question is - if someone wants these dogs, why kill them?

The hunt dog has been reared to hunt so cannot be turned into a pet
The upkeep of these dogs is expensive, now with no hunt the dogs have to go
remember these dogs had one purpose in life to hunt foxes.

Apologies, but I haven't read through the whole of this thread, but I feel strongly about this and posted

Many villages/people rely on the hunting season as it is during winter. Think of a village where there is the local pub, the B & B's, the local garage, the local store - they all count on the hunters and their families/friends as they give them business during the winter months - there are hardly any tourists at this time of year.

There are also the people employed at the stables, kennels and estates.

Hunting dogs cannot be made into pets. I went out with a pig hunter once and one of his bitches had a litter of puppies - he banned me from having contact with the puppies other than watering/feeding them as they were born to be hunting dogs.

About the foxes - I bet if the "liberal Londoners" saw an urban fox in their back garden going for their little lap dog/cat, etc, they would be the first to call out the exterminaters and calling them vermin.

The whole situation sets my teeth on edge - champagne socialist townies having a go at the countryside and abusing a law that was put in place to protect the nation to do it.

Liz

[Ripple 0]

Um, I see where your coming from, but really loss of livelihood is not a sustainable argument. Afterall, if drag hunting was used instead of fox hunting, everyone would keep their jobs, including the hounds.

As for foxes killing domesticated pets, agreed, it does happen. I seem to remember reading something about a warning in Scotland about foxes taking pets being published recently? This doesn't have any impact on hunts, because, of course, they don't operate in urban areas.

Foxes are basically scavengers and have been encroaching on built up areas, not because of access to cats and small dogs, but mainly because people put their waste out in easily accessible bags! It wouldn't matter how many foxes were killed in the countryside, it wouldn't stop them from taking the easy option of finding food in towns etc.

Next Mood Swing: 6 minutes

[Skyrad 0]

***Which, honestly, is OK with me. Killing another hundred dogs a year is nothing compared to the 6-7 million dogs that get euthanized every year in the UK. Whether they die in a gas chamber, or by a hunter's bullet, doesn't matter all that much in the end. Just don't start with some nonsense about how hunting foxes is noble and hunting dogs is evil. ***

Actualy over here in Great Britan the prefered method of execution for dogs is the electric chair with a little doggie blindfold.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Now as of midnight in the UK no more fox hunts

News update:

"Hunt staff carrying out legal hunting activities were brutally beaten by balaclava-clad anti-hunt protesters who had trespassed onto private property on Saturday. Followers of the hunt were dragged from their horses and brutally beaten during the attack. Hunt Master, Daemon Edwards, sustained several broken ribs when he and his horse were pulled to the ground, and Duncan Cinnamond was pulled from his horse and hit on the back of the head with a piece of timber. Huntsman, Tim Staines, 26, said: "No foxes have been killed since the ban came into force, so I can only assume that the saboteurs just wanted a fight. This has nothing to do with animal welfare - you hear about hooligans beating up football fans and we've had the same sort of terrorism here in the middle of the countryside."

Source: Politics.co.uk

It's ironic that these people who are so concerned about violence against animals, don't give a darn about committing their own acts of violence against innocent people.

[dropoutdave 0]

I can honestly say I saw this coming.

------------------------------------------------------
May Contain Nut traces......

[Sen.Blutarsky 0]

Revenge of the foxes. I wonder how they are able to hold substantial pieces of timber with those little paws. Well, at least they didn't bite anyone and the horses didn't get roughed up too badly.

[CornishChris 5]

Hunt saboteurs have long been a problem in the UK. Generally they are a bunch of unwashed, uneducated degenerates just looking for any old campaign to fight for. Not that I would generalise or anything.

I have never understood the way they seem to think that human life is more expendable than animal life...

CJP

Gods don't kill people. People with Gods kill people

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Now as of midnight in the UK no more fox hunts
the animal rights people have won, I hope they are happy,
their win is a death sentance for hundreds of fox hounds
these dogs cannot be turned into pets so they will have to be shot
all for the sake of a couple of dozen foxes

Update (the law of unintended consequences):

More Foxes Suffer since Hunting Ban

The ban on hunting with hounds has increased the suffering of foxes as more are shot and wounded, according to research out today.

“This study set out to test that claim. It looked into wounding rates in various shooting regimes and varied the weapon, ammunition, distance and skill. All methods tested remain legal for fox control.

“The research proves conclusively the pro-ban groups were plain wrong. In many cases guns don’t kill the fox outright, leading to large numbers of wounded animals. Many end up dying over hours, days or even weeks. In fact, up to 50% of foxes shot with shotguns are wounded not killed.

“We’ve long suspected that shooting does not reduce suffering. After all, with dogs it’s all or nothing.

“But with guns foxes can be wounded and suffer for a long time. As the Government has pledged not to bring in new legislation to control shooting we can be certain foxes will suffer more than they did before the ban on hunting with dogs was implemented.

“The ban has guaranteed that the time and money invested by the League Against Cruel Sports and the RSPCA has increased animal suffering. We told them this would happen. This is the cost of ignoring that warning.”

Full story: The Scotsman

The animal rights folks wanted to save the foxes, and instead have caused more of them to suffer.

Congratulations!

[dropoutdave 0]

So now we have huntsman being dragged and beaten from their horses and more foxes being killed and in a more inhumane way.

Any pro ban people care to comment on their achievement?

------------------------------------------------------
May Contain Nut traces......

[mr2mk1g 10]

I completely agree with the findings of the report, though I come to this conclusion through my own experience rather than relying on it.

The one problem I see with trying to put any great weight on this report is that it was commissioned by a group called the "Middle Way" who were suggesting a pretty good compromise of licensing hunts rather than banning them. Personally I think this middle way would have been the best idea – it preserved the sport while gave the licensing authority the teeth to prevent the sort of abuse of the system that ended up causing the ban in the first place.

At the end of the day though, since the people who conducted the report are so heavily opposed to the ban, it's going to be difficult for any group to hold it up as having any true weight.

The other problem I see is that this research may well end up biting them on the arse. Remember approximately 300,000 foxes are killed each year. Only 20,000 were killed by hunts while they were legal. If some smelly tree hugger can find enough fingers to work it all out, they will realise that even while hunts were legal there were a hell of a lot of foxes getting shot at and wounded... thus the bigger quarry is not the increase in suffering... but the fact that suffering is taking place on such a scale.

That's not exactly the kind of report I would have commissioned if I were them.