Hare Coursing

Seachmall · 27-02-2013 4:40pm

Ilik Urgee wrote: »

Your dog is being held captive against his free will indefinitely,albeit he'll have a better lifestyle than if left to his own devices,which would be his natural choice.

You don't know my dog. He comes home at 5pm every evening. He licks his balls for a few hours, has some grub, and sleeps. He seems happy enough and comes home of his own free will.

And again, this has absolutely nothing to do with the point I made.

The dog won't wait to be punched, same as a hare won't wait to be bowled over.

So it's not cruel if you give them a choice or a chance?

If I told my dog to run and gave him a head start it wouldn't be cruel if I punched him in the face after catching him?

Good to know.

pickarooney · 27-02-2013 4:42pm

reprazant wrote: »

Seriously?

Are you saying that there is no difference from watching wild animals going about their daily survival from putting a hare in an enclosed space with two dogs and watch it attempt to escape for its life all for the enjoyment of those looking?

if I got a lamb and a couple of hens and put them in with a group of foxes, is that just real life then? No different from a bit of tv?

I'm not really saying anything just asking the question.

I don't know the specifics of hare coursing but what, from the hare's point of view, is the difference between chased by a greyhound or a fox?

And why is it OK to enjoy watching a lion chase a gazelle and tear it apart but not a dog do the same to a hare?

Seachmall · 27-02-2013 4:51pm

pickarooney wrote: »

And why is it OK to enjoy watching a lion chase a gazelle and tear it apart but not a dog do the same to a hare?

Because it's an orchestrated event that puts the hare in an unnecessarily cruel situation solely for enjoyment.

reprazant · 27-02-2013 4:52pm

pickarooney wrote: »

I'm not really saying anything just asking the question.

I don't know the specifics of hare coursing but what, from the hare's point of view, is the difference between chased by a greyhound or a fox?

And why is it OK to enjoy watching a lion chase a gazelle and tear it apart but not a dog do the same to a hare?

Because one is happening without interference from man, and would be happening whether somebody was there or not, while the other is only happening because a man made situation has been created where two attacking animals were chasing a another smaller animal purely for the enjoyment of the crowd.

I am pretty sure you know this and are just be contrary though.

OldNotWIse · 27-02-2013 4:55pm

Matt_Trakker wrote: »

Someone didn't read the article, eh?
How can a greyhound rip a hare to pieces if it's muzzled?
From the article the hares were just mauled, so they got a few smacks off a few dogs, they all lived.

I've no probs with it, big deal it's some dogs chasing some hares and people gamble on it.

A lot of hares are mauled to death or have their spines broken. Some die from shock. Muzzling doesnt take away the cruelty element.

OldNotWIse · 27-02-2013 4:59pm

kylith wrote: »

Greyhound racing is a horrible sport that leads to the deaths of hundreds of dogs too, but you wouldn't think it by the crowds at the track.

Is hare coursing cruel? Yes it is. Is it any worse, from the hare's point of view, than being chased by a fox or bird of prey? No.

Yup, a lot of people dont know what goes on behind the scenes, or choose wilfull blindness perhaps. We did a demo at harolds X before and there were busloads of impressionable teens being brought to the races. Feck sake. The ones we spoke to were lovely though, and I think we really opened their eyes. The oulfellas tend to be the most hostile. The type that'd shoot ya if you stepped onto their land yargh boy haha

An Bord cGon actually donate money to greyhound rescue each year...helps them sleep at night I guess.

I've cleaned up some of their dirty work in the past (with a happy ending thankfully)

Rabidlamb · 27-02-2013 5:06pm

Seachmall wrote: »

Not watching a terrified animal get ripped apart for enjoyment makes Bambi a better person.

If it was done to a dog in a garden by one man with a knife we call it animal abuse and demand he be locked up.

If it's done to a hare on a racecourse by 50 men with dogs we call it sport and let it continue.

Yet one man kills 100's of animals everyday & we call it meat production.
Yeah, we got coursing & fox hunting banned, who's for a nice steak ?

Seachmall · 27-02-2013 5:12pm

Rabidlamb wrote: »

Yet one man kills 100's of animals everyday & we call it meat production.
Yeah, we got coursing & fox hunting banned, who's for a nice steak ?

Killing for food is not the same as inflicting cruelty for enjoyment.

If you want to start a thread on the dire conditions cattle are kept in I'll be happy to rant away in it.

pickarooney · 27-02-2013 5:13pm

reprazant wrote: »

Because one is happening without interference from man, and would be happening whether somebody was there or not, while the other is only happening because a man made situation has been created where two attacking animals were chasing a another smaller animal purely for the enjoyment of the crowd.

I am pretty sure you know this and are just be contrary though.

Do you think the hare knows the difference though? I don't really see how the circumstances surounding the event change things for it. What's a pleasant or natural death for a hare?

Chuck Stone · 27-02-2013 5:15pm

Hunter21 wrote: »

they do not realise the money such events bring to local economies

A bit of an old battle in the field will bring money to the local economy too. Why don't ye just kick the living fuck out of each other every now and then and let people bet on that?

reprazant · 27-02-2013 5:15pm

pickarooney wrote: »

Do you think the hare knows the difference though? I don't really see how the circumstances surounding the event change things for it. What's a pleasant or natural death for a hare?

So because the hare doesn't know any different, it is perfectly fine to treat it as cruelly as you want?

Sure, all animal cruelty is perfectly fine by that logic. If the animal doesn't know any different, what harm?

gobnaitolunacy · 27-02-2013 5:17pm

Chuck Stone wrote: »

A bit of an old battle in the field will bring money to the local economy too. Why don't ye just kick the living fuck out of each other every now and then and let people bet on that?

It happens alright, it's called Gaelic football.

ScumLord · 27-02-2013 5:17pm

coolhull wrote: »

Its a sport, eh? Are the hares armed with weapons to give then a fighting chance against the hounds?

Yes they are, their weapons are evasionary though. So they have powerful legs, are highly alert and have exelt 360 degree vision and hearing.

If you want sports, put on a pair of boxing

Why are you humanising everything?

gloves and fight someone your own size.
Or take on a pair of greyhounds yourself.
After all, the hounds are muzzled, so you can't possibly be hurt....
Can you?

A fighting human would make short work of a fighting dog, that wouldn't exactly be a fair fight either.

reprazant wrote: »

Certain animals have a weak heart that actually protects them in the wild from being eaten alive. You may call it a serious design fault but it is a far better way to go than to be torn to bits.

I don't think it's to protect them from a horrible death. Prey animals like these need to be able to go from a standing start to maximum output in the blink of an eye. This can causes problems due to massive heart rates and huge adrenaline dumps but it's certainly not a design that's supposed to kill them at the first sign of trouble. Hares would be extinct if they dropped down dead at a shock. Shocks are a routine part of their day.

OldNotWIse · 27-02-2013 5:18pm

Chuck Stone wrote: »

A bit of an old battle in the field will bring money to the local economy too. Why don't ye just kick the living fuck out of each other every now and then and let people bet on that?

The already do that with midget stick fighting hurley

archer22 · 27-02-2013 5:34pm

Look if you like a bit of blood in your sport there are plenty of options Boxing,Cage Fighting,Kick Boxing etc..beating up a little animal for so called sport is a Cowards activity and I would have nothing but contempt for those who engage in it.

pickarooney · 27-02-2013 5:40pm

reprazant wrote: »

So because the hare doesn't know any different, it is perfectly fine to treat it as cruelly as you want?

Sure, all animal cruelty is perfectly fine by that logic. If the animal doesn't know any different, what harm?

Well, what do you define as cruelty? There are two aspects to it - the mindset of the perpetrator and the suffering of the victim. The latter is the focus of what I've been debating and, assuming you're doing the same, your post is somewhat paradoxical.

On the other point, I asked what the essential difference was between active (coursing) and vicarious (watching it unfold on TV) participation in the killing/maiming of one animal by another. All of your responses have been in the form of (presumably rhetorical) questions so I'm no closer to finding out what you think.

Seachmall · 27-02-2013 5:45pm

pickarooney wrote: »

On the other point, I asked what the essential difference was between active (coursing) and vicarious (watching it unfold on TV) participation in the killing/maiming of one animal by another.

Watching a gazelle get chased down by a lion is not the same as inflicting unnecessary pain upon that gazelle yourself.

If you enjoy watching the gazelle suffering you might be a bit weird but you're neither directly nor indirectly causing the suffering.

They're not comparable.

pickarooney · 27-02-2013 5:48pm

Seachmall wrote: »

Watching a gazelle get chased down by a lion is not the same as inflicting unnecessary pain upon that gazelle yourself.

If you enjoy watching the gazelle suffering you might be a bit weird but you're neither directly nor indirectly causing the suffering.

They're not comparable.

Well I presume there are dogs involved. I'd probably watch a man trying to chase a hare down himself.

I don't want to get too existential, but is a gazelle being killed by a lion 'suffering'? Is watching an animal documentary in the full knowledge that it contains extended scenes of animals killing each other 'enjoyment'?

reprazant · 27-02-2013 5:50pm

I would describe animal cruelty as inflicting unnecessary suffering on an animal. When I watch nature programs, which involve animals attacking another, I see animals inflicting suffering on others. But since this is (generally) for food, that suffering is not unnecessary, at least not for the animal who is doing the killing.

Blood sports such as coursing are inflicting suffering on a animals for the sole purpose of pleasure to those watching. There is not necessity from it.

To try and equate the two is frankly bizarre.

ScumLord · 27-02-2013 5:52pm

Seachmall wrote: »

Watching a gazelle get chased down by a lion is not the same as inflicting unnecessary pain upon that gazelle yourself.

If you enjoy watching the gazelle suffering you might be a bit weird but you're neither directly nor indirectly causing the suffering.

They're not comparable.

There's only suffering if the Hare gets caught and even then it's minimal. You can't say that the 90% of the time the Hare doesn't get caught that he doesn't get a big rush out of the chase and thoroughly enjoys it. Most animals don't stress out like humans do and quickly go back about there business once the immediate danger is gone. We know that the dogs enjoy it.

Seachmall · 27-02-2013 5:56pm

pickarooney wrote: »

Well I presume there are dogs involved. I'd probably watch a man trying to chase a hare down himself.

So would I, but don't tell anyone.

I don't want to get too existential, but is a gazelle being killed by a lion 'suffering'?

Presumably it experiences pain in a fashion similar to us.

Is watching an animal documentary in the full knowledge that it contains extended scenes of animals killing each other 'enjoyment'?

I occasionally enjoy nature documentaries, I'm sure many others do too.

I don't want to get into a discussion of whether it's morally wrong or absolutely wrong but I think if one agrees punching my dog in the face is wrong it must follow that coursing is wrong.

ScumLord wrote: »

There's only suffering if the Hare gets caught and even then it's minimal.

The chance of the hare getting caught isn't relevant the cruelty inflicted when it gets caught. And I'd be curious as to how minimal it is, the dog may be muzzled but it can still cause damage through blunt force (of the muzzle) and it's paws.

reprazant · 27-02-2013 5:59pm

ScumLord wrote: »

There's only suffering if the Hare gets caught and even then it's minimal. You can't say that the 90% of the time the Hare doesn't get caught that he doesn't get a big rush out of the chase and thoroughly enjoys it. Most animals don't stress out like humans do and quickly go back about there business once the immediate danger is gone. We know that the dogs enjoy it.

That a bit like saying that if, hypothetically, you got chased at night by a group of lads at night with knives but got away it would be fine because you'd have had a great rush and thoroughly enjoyed it. They did, so you must have, no?

And if they did catch you but only slapped you around it a bit, sure its grand because the suffering was only minimal.

pickarooney · 27-02-2013 6:08pm

reprazant wrote: »

That a bit like saying that if, hypothetically, you got chased at night by a group of lads at night with knives but got away it would be fine because you'd have had a great rush and thoroughly enjoyed it. They did, so you must have, no?

There's a fine line between terror and enjoyment, it has to be said. People pay good money to get the **** scared out of them and risk death and it can create good memories and stories. The worst aspect of that is the resulting fear that every time you go out you'll get attacked. This is, however, the default position of a hare so I'm not sure how they are psychologically affected.

And if they did catch you but only slapped you around it a bit, sure its grand because the suffering was only minimal.

Again, it's the psychological aspect that's important here. You'd get as bad in a boxing match or game of rugby but it wouldn't stop you enjoying it or going back again. The feeling of fear, injustice and trepidation are the worst parts of getting a bit of a beating. It's hard to say if animals experience that in the same way.

nervous_twitch · 27-02-2013 6:09pm

ScumLord wrote: »

Most animals don't stress out like humans do.

Source? Take a wander down to the DSPCA and come back and say the same.

reprazant · 27-02-2013 6:14pm

pickarooney wrote: »

There's a fine line between terror and enjoyment, it has to be said. People pay good money to get the **** scared out of them and risk death and it can create good memories and stories. The worst aspect of that is the resulting fear that every time you go out you'll get attacked. This is, however, the default position of a hare so I'm not sure how they are psychologically affected.

Again, it's the psychological aspect that's important here. You'd get as bad in a boxing match or game of rugby but it wouldn't stop you enjoying it or going back again. The feeling of fear, injustice and trepidation are the worst parts of getting a bit of a beating. It's hard to say if animals experience that in the same way.

Well, I can't say for sure but I'd imagine that no animal is too fantastically keen on the fear of death. I know I wouldn't be. And, since I can't say for sure if they are or are not, I don't think that it is fair to inflict that on another living thing just for kicks.

You can attempt to justify being cruel to any animal anyway you want, it's not for me. Taking pleasure in watching another animal suffer that has not made the choice to enter in that suffering is not my thing.

ScumLord · 27-02-2013 6:15pm

reprazant wrote: »

That a bit like saying that if, hypothetically, you got chased at night by a group of lads at night with knives but got away it would be fine because you'd have had a great rush and thoroughly enjoyed it. They did, so you must have, no?

It would be more like me getting chased by two guys with ball gags in their mouths and their hands tied behind their back.

Although I'm sure the Hare can't ell the difference between a muzzled dog and a non muzzled dog.

Your still comparing human fear to animal fear and we don't experience fear in the same way as other animals do. We're cursed with the imagination to realise what's going to happen to us. The thought process in a Hare brain could go "I'm in a box -- I'm in a field -- oh no dogs -- Run -- no dogs -- eat grass". These animals put up with being constantly on the dinner menu in the wild so it's no different to them as long as they know where to escape too.

ScumLord · 27-02-2013 6:16pm

nervous_twitch wrote: »

Source? Take a wander down to the DSPCA and come back and say the same.

Do the RSPCA take care of most wild animals? Dogs do stress through constant abuse a wild animal being put under stress for short periods of time is normal for them.

Mike 1972 · 27-02-2013 6:20pm

AH definitely not what it used to be.

I mean noone has suggested a compromise involving coursing "scumbags" yet .

nervous_twitch · 27-02-2013 6:21pm

ScumLord wrote: »

Do the RSPCA take care of most wild animals? Dogs do stress through constant abuse a wild animal being put under stress for short periods of time is normal for them.

That's really a patchwork argument to make in favour of blood sports. It's OK to terrorise an animal because, naturally, they experience stress and fear in the wild - and hypothetically - their stress and fear mightn't be as acute as that of a human?

Micky Dolenz · 27-02-2013 6:22pm

I find it distasteful even after the rules were explained to me.

First dog to turn the hare wins and once the hare makes it back to the pin it is released later, that any hare will only "compete" once.

Hare Coursing

Comments