Reply to THIS thread
Start a NEW Talkback Thread
Talkback Home

The Fox Hunting Debate - Freddie Dawkins (28th Jan 2005 - 08:39:33) Thought I'd carry out a quick straw poll of Talkback users. Are we in favour of the ban or not? I'm not. And I fear that a total ban on hunting with dogs will lead to a ban on using dogs on shoots, and that could lead to a ban or fishing. Freddie

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Eneida Nelson (28th Jan 2005 - 10:02:03) I've never liked the idea of killing animals for sport, but having lived in Devon for years before moving to Liphook I can see the other side. I don't think people here really understand the depth of feeling there is in the west country about this ban. They don't think of it as sport but a whole way of life, for generations, under threat. I think a ban would simply be ignored and how could you police it anyway?? So just leave it alone is what I think.

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Mike Grimes (28th Jan 2005 - 10:22:02) Fishing with dogs? How does that work then? In general I am not in favour of banning anything just because a section of society disapproves of it. For instance, I think the proposed ban on smoking in pubs is quite unnecessary (Greene King and J D Wetherspoon already have plans for a voluntary ban). Individuals should be free to choose whether to frequent an establishment that permits smoking or not. The debate should not be specifically about fox hunting but about freedom of choice for every individual.

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - S (28th Jan 2005 - 13:44:56) I have no problem with the concept of fox hunting. The chase, the horses, the dogs and the excitement is I'm sure fantastic but I strongly object to the way the fox is killed. Ripped apart by a pack of dogs? Surely thats got to be wrong. I am all for sending a couple of the fox hunting snobs out on foot and then letting loose some hyngry tigers to go after them, will that become a way of life too? I'd pay to watch that.

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Nick D (28th Jan 2005 - 21:27:36) To be honest it's something that Labour put in their manifesto in 1997 and lobby groups are making sure they stick to it. I'm not pro-countryside, just pro-liberty. It's a class war the govenment are initiating, and a waste of time when there are more pressing issues that local people feel passionate about that should be addressed.

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Wayne (28th Jan 2005 - 21:39:47) Freddie Fishing won't be banned, because you don't get toffee-nosed pillocks in red jackets and jodpurs slurping G & T's around the waterways of the UK. Wayne

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Alex (28th Jan 2005 - 22:47:35) Surprise surprise, i'm going to have to disagree here. I can definitely see how passionate the country is about this, along with the determination to wreck shooting, farming and all things non-urban. Banning things is not ther answer, but this is more about the countryside's rebellion against the giovernment than anything else. For me the debate really is quite simple: The RSPCA says it's cruel. That's enough for me to demonstrate that it needs to be stopped. The same stupid arguments were made when bear baiting and cock-fighting were banned. Yes, a fair few people will be losing their jobs and livelihoods. But its not like they haven't had any notice, now is it? Tradition it may be, but so are paganism, incest, murder, burglary and rape. There is a shelf life. If foxes come in and eat chickens, why doesn't anyone build stronger defenses, like a more effective hutch? If its such a civilised, harmless and fun day out, why do chldren have their faces smeared with animal blood? Opinion poll after opinion poll indicates that the vast majority of people want the practice stopped. If hunting is allegedly open to anyone, why are the protagonists the ones whining on about class war? If only 1 in 10 foxes (and their tiny cubs) are allegedly caught, then surely a more effective culling method is needed, as supposedly 'essential' as it is?

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Paul Robinson (29th Jan 2005 - 01:07:16) At last a topic for the web site that really excercises the correspondents. I have never hunted and do not intend to do so but I would fight, if called upon, to defend the right of those who choose to do so. Having lived in the countryside all my life I have seen, on several occasions, the carnage that a fox can wreak upon a coop of chickens. Every head bitten off and but one hen taken to feed its litter. This is nature red in tooth and claw. I have also seen the alternative to hunting. Late night lamping with high powered rifles with as many as twelve fox carcasses in the early hours. Comparisons have been made between hunting and Bear Baiting and Cock Fighting. Believe me there is no comparison. The bear and the fighting cocks were captive and led into an enclosed area where the foes were pitched against dogs or another bird until the death. As a hunt follower I have witnessed many, if not most days when the fox has eluded the field and lived to see another day. But I offer this as a fact not as an excuse, believe me the intention is to kill the fox. What intrigues me is the polarisation between the vast majority, being the townsfolk, and the minority being the country dweller who seem to be at odds over this issue. Many is the time that I have witnessed a Boxing Day meet when the majority of the witnesses were town's people bussed from their homes and hotels for a slice of what they percieve to be country folk at play. These people rarely give a a thought to the fence repairers, stoppers, knacker men, grooms and kennel maids who rely on the hunt for their livelihood. And what of those on horseback waiting for the off. They are not all 'toffs' with money to burn. Most of them are the people who provide milk, eggs and grain for the rest of us who just want to enjoy a day riding over other people's property and at the same time reducing the feral theat to their own livestock. One other factor that I have not heard mention of in the debate that has surrounded this emotive subject. The hunting field has long been a proving ground for race horses. Without hunting what will happen to National Hunt Racing? Or perhaps this will be the next target for the anti hunt brigade along with shooting and fishing. Paul Robinson

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Eneida Nelson (29th Jan 2005 - 08:50:33) I agree with everything you say Paul, because it's the truth. One thing nobody's mentioned so far are the hounds. Hundreds and hundreds will have to be destroyed - what do the 'animal lovers' think about that?? And finally...I can't see much difference between "toffs in pink coats slurping G & Ts" at a meet and fans in scarves and football strips gulping largers before a match. Perhaps we should ban football?

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Nick D (29th Jan 2005 - 09:44:28) I've seen toffee nosed pillocks at football matches too, and yes, if my memory serves me right they were "slurping" Gin and Tonics. If the argument were to be shifted to the effect on the Countryside rather than the animals then just look around you. Rural pubs and post offices shutting, as well as local shops, the Countryside has been in decline since the Thatcher years. Liphook has got a lot to answer for too, residents bemoaning the loss of village stores and then voting for a huge Sainsbury's when the village had only just been pedestrianised.

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Steve Read (29th Jan 2005 - 16:00:47) I also have lived in the "countryside" all my life, I fish & shoot but I do not personally agree with fox hunting. Although to be honest I was quite happy for all the attention of the anti brigade to be focusing on hunting thus leaving other pursuits reasonably attention free. Now this ban on hunting is to be enforced where will the anti's turn their attention to next? My arguement with fox hunting has always been thus, you talk to the majority of people who actually hunt they will say its the thrill of the chase, dressing up and the tradition of the whole day out, irrespective whether a fox is caught or not. If this is the case, if a fox manages to evade the hounds which is more than not what happens why do they then insist on putting the terriers down the hole. Where is the sport in that? Before anyone wheels out the old excuse of keeping the fox population under control have a look late at night at the urban areas and see that the majority of foxes have now adapted to live out of your dustbins etc. (Given East Hants superb timetable of emptying the bins every 2 weeks, they now dine quite well). As for Pauls comment about chickens, yes years ago everybody used to keep a few chickens, today most people will go to the supermarket for eggs, if you did keep chickens you made sure the fox couldn't get in, in the first place.(How many people are going to protest about millions of chickens kept in battery houses against a few being savaged by foxes). Eneida mentions about a few hundred hounds being put down.(What about the thousands of dogs being put down every year through neglect of their owners, how many already this year have been handed in because people thought it would be a nice cuddly Xmas present). I know it will come as a surprise but I do agree with Mike its all about freedom of choice. I'am on a looser anyway because I smoke. Its an emotive subject for a lot of people and I can understand this entirely. Just a point in closing it was mentioned on the radio the other day that with all the current problems in Iraq (whether you agree with it or not our troops are out there and we are paying for this) that over the last 2-3 months this problem has been discussed in the House of Commons for a total of 71hrs. The Hunting Ban has been discussed for a total of 700hrs. Makes you wonder what is more important.

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Chris (30th Jan 2005 - 09:07:53) I am personally against fox hunting and find some of the arguments used by the hunting lobby to justify it very suspect. For example... 1. "If hunting was banned the hounds would have to be destroyed". Why? If you think about it, it will not cost a penny more to keep them as hunting itself does not yield an income. Fox hunting isn't government subsidised either. OK, you keep a pack of hounds for a purpose but when the purpose is gone, you adapt. They can still be exercised, taken on runs etc. The hounds themselves do NOT need to be destroyed; it sounds more like a threat than a necessity. It would be like threatening to get rid of your four-wheel off-roader if the government were to ban off-roading. 2. "Reduction of vermin..." this begs the obvious question, why not just destroy the vermin humanely? It's quicker and more effective. I think the new ruling also outlaws stag/deer hunting. These animals are NOT vermin by any stretch of the imagination. Some decisions are taken for good reason and when laws are passed it is necessary to adapt. The drive to get people to stop smoking and to outlaw smoking in public places is a case in point. This will gradually decimate the tobacco indusrtry and make thousands of people unemployed, not to mention ruining the farmers who grow the product. But it has to be done and people will have to adapt to inevitable change. Huntsmen need to be honest about why they indulge in hunting. They are not performing a public service; they do it because they enjoy the sport, they like the thrill of the chase and they feel fulfilled by the sense of achievement at the end of it. Nothing more, nothing less. They also know that if they told the truth about the reasons for wishing to continue to hunt very few people would support them.

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Freddie Dawkins (1st Feb 2005 - 08:47:57) Well, I thought my message might prompt a few views but this thread has restored my faith in reasoned debate on an emotive subject. As I said when I posted the first message, I wanted to draw out views for and against and you''ve certainly aired them. I think there are some misunderstandings about how hunts are conducted and in particular the economics of organising a hunt. Unfortunately the hounds do face a very uncertain future. Drag and other forms of hunting, not involving foxes or any live quarry, will undoubtedly develop but there will be no need for many of the hounds and many will be put down. Bear in mind they are bred to hunt, live as packs in kennels and are not "domesticated" as a normal pet dog would be. They can't be homed. Horses too will be put at risk. A horse is not a cheap animal to care for. I'm afraid quite a few good horses will be put down if the owners decide not to support other forms of non-fox hunting. The cost in jobs will be substantial. Many agricultural workers earn extra money by working for hunts on very low, casual pay. But that pay can make a huge difference to their families. Will they go instead to the DSS and ask for family benefits? Many will not. They, like many pensioners, are too proud to go through a means test. As for control of foxes. They do cause massive damage. I lost my flock of hens last year. A fox got into the run, bit off the heads of all but three. Of those three, one just survived and after two days when she almost died, I managed to home her with a friend locally and she's recovered very well. The other two had been ripped apart. Bear in mind Eneida's point above - foxes kill and usually take just one chicken. They might return the next night to the scene of their slaughter and take a dead carcass - but often not. Shooting foxes has always been another form of control. The problem is that most police licensing authorities are now making it so difficult to hold a gun legally, many shooters are giving up and relinquishing their weapons and certificates and licences. Unless the police start suppoting shooters, we'll have a dwindling band of competent shots able to desptach a fox quickly and as humanely as possible. So, who knows what the futrure holds for the fox? We'll undoubtedly see over the coming months. One thing's for sure, urban foxes really are a menace and growing in population. Just check your garden waste etc. I have foxes one or two nights a week, baying in the field at the back of my house and sometimes braving the dogs and sneaking into the garden. Sadly, no more chickens for them though. rgds to all Freddie

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Alex Cameron (6th Feb 2005 - 20:36:10) Sam - "Banned", not "band". If you're going to be utterly ignorant, at least do it with grammatical dignity. I suspect the RSPCA would disagree. What of cub-hunting? We have this sad line of argument in IT land too - its called "FUD". Fear, uncertainty and doubt. Great way to sell a product or stop change in its tracks, but very little truth in it. If we believed half of the disastrous armageddon-scenarios predicted by the pro-lobby, the very fabric of society is surely dripping away out of our copies of the Daily Mail. Packs of dogs being slaughtered, children starving, crops destroyed - and what's next, all our favourite liberties taken from us. What a wonderful irony - those usually castigating "loony lefties" about civil freedoms are themselves now having an "unrealistic whinge". Is that poetic justice or an admission that they have been completely wrong? 700 hours to get sponsored cruelty eradicated - the fact that it took ius that long is what we should be ashamed of.

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Mammal (9th Feb 2005 - 10:45:17) Look on the brightside, maybe they will ban all internet forums next.

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Eneida Nelson (13th Feb 2005 - 11:54:51) I hope all the anti-hunting people watched the programme on C4 last night called 'How to Kill a Fox' presented by Germaine Greer. I thought it was excellent and fair and showed all the dire consequences that will result from a ban. I also thought it showed how much happier people would be in life with a little bit of compromise!!

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Chris (14th Feb 2005 - 13:08:43) I didn't see that program I must admit but I did see some pretty graphic detail of a stag hunt and hare coursing shown on the History channel some months back. Still not convinced that hunts take place for the purposes of service to the public at large. Whatever the economics and so on, it comes down to one thing...hunting is done primarily, first and foremost because people enjoy doing it, just like you and I might enjoy golf or some other pastime. Of incidental and secondary importance to the huntsman, gaily clad in all his/her hunting clobber, poised on a trusty horse accompanied by 50 baying hounds all off for a romp across the countryside, is the vermin destruction service that is provided as a by-product. And remember, it is not just fox hunting that will be banned. Stag hunting will also be outlawed as a result and I am all for that!

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Eneida Nelson (14th Feb 2005 - 15:23:41) I wish you had seen the programme Chris, because what it actually showed was the much more cruel way that foxes and other so called vermin are legally killed by the vermin control people and others. Snarring, slow poison, lamping, innacurate shooting etc. none of those are being banned and will presumably increase. Did you know that more foxes are killed by motorists than almost anyother way? It's just a political class thing and will mean loads of people losing thier jobs. I agree with you about stags, however.

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Chris (16th Feb 2005 - 12:36:34) Eneida, it seems that a compromise idea has been followed through in some quarters...false scents...see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wear/4269867.stm

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Mammal (21st Feb 2005 - 23:32:26) Why the pathalogical hatred of foxes? kill them all and then what? Gas them, Hunt them, shoot them, maim them. I mean if you don't keep them in their place they will sneak into every aspect of our society, take all or food, eat our babies, spread disease and completely undermine our beautiful and cultured way of life.

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Alex Cameron (22nd Feb 2005 - 09:14:13) It was good to read in the paper yesterday that over 90 fioxes were killed publicly on Saturday, mostly by shooting before being thrown to the hounds. It would seem that the hunters who, in a quite pathetic show of spite, decided to exploit every hole they could find the law by taking part in almost any barbarism they could think of. If there was ever a time when their true colours showed throuhg, it was the first weekend of the ban. Lets have a little less self-deceit in this issue - it's the ciountryside (generally Tories, referred to by John Prescott as the "Tally Ho Brigade") versus the labour government, and very little else (certainly not foxes anyway). Mammal - lol ;) Someone after my own heart...

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Steve Read (25th Feb 2005 - 21:57:01) Following on this thread, forget about watching TV, worrying about a few chickens or what will happen to all the horses (probably the same as the majority of race horses they will turn up in a burger in France). I can give an example of last weekends fiasco. On a hunt which will remain nameless 2 days before the Saturday 3 foxes were netted and kept alive in cages in the back of a vehicle moved around to different locations kept out of the way of prying eyes. Hunt day comes around and out of sight of the police and the few protesters armed with video cameras the foxes were sportingly released one at a time allowed to run a few yards then blown away using 12 bores. Picking up the dead foxes then in full view of everybody present, throwing them to the hounds with only one thing in mind to incite a near riot amongst the protesters because to all intensive purposes it looked like live foxes from a distance being thrown. These are the same responsible people worried about their future, their jobs, all the doggies and horses. Give me a break and tell it to people who are silly enough to listen!

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Simon (28th Feb 2005 - 13:44:27) Unfortunately I personally have not been able to experience hunting, although i wish i had taken the opportunity when i had it, this woujld have enabled me to make a clearer judgement. This aside I do not agree with the ban and think that to be perfectly honest, regardless of whether there is a ban, hunting will continue (supposedly within the law) as reported on the news, the police are not going to provide extra resources to stop huntsmen and women so really, what is the deterrant. Yes supposedly people say it is cruel, but it is something that needs to be done, without fox hunting the numbers of foxes will spiral out of control, There are aleady lots of foxes in the countryside, and in the towns now. The fox population cannot continue to expand! I vote keep hunting despite the ban personally!

Re: The Fox Hunting Debate - Chris (28th Feb 2005 - 14:03:01) ...and they will "take all or food, eat our babies, spread disease and completely undermine our beautiful and cultured way of life".

Reply to THIS thread
Talkback Home