Fox hunting poll

Sundy

brim4brim wrote: »

Where did you get your stats from? Or are they pulled out of your head to support your argument? I asked someone i know who hunts how many their hunt got this year.. about 4 or 5 she thinks (i cant find any concrete stats for that). Drive from dublin to cork and you will see more dead on the road . So yes i made up the stats from that. Wait make that 100,000 foxes on the roads http://www.heritagecouncil.ie/outlook/contents6/13.htmlthats an estimate for the uk.

Give me at least 3 ways, people can actively stop Foxes being accidently killed on the roads. I dont know any nor do i care. I just find it ironic that the save the fox people dont seem to care either.

Note: slowing down doesn't count because you can't make other people slow down. The methods should be active ways people can stop other people accidentally killing foxes. As i said i dont care about foxes either way, i was just putting it is perspective.

I'm not even going to take on the human side of your argument because its completely off the topic and has nothing to do with stopping people killing foxes for sport. I think there is very little people can do to stop foxes being killed on the roads since those are accidents. Few people go killing Foxes in their cars. Its an anology. Few people go killing people in their cars

Anyway im off to get some popcorn and watch boths sides tear into teach other..

Red Hand

thelastangryman wrote:

Upper classes? Any person who participates has no class! If I ever have the displeasure of witnessing such an event again I swear that heads will roll. Not figuratively either.

Agreed. They'd get a few whacks of a stick or more from me if I found them on my land (for real).

It wasn't me!

thelastangryman wrote: »

Upper classes? Any person who participates has no class! If I ever have the displeasure of witnessing such an event again I swear that heads will roll. Not figuratively either.

Yup, good luck with that reasoned debate there. The problem with the anti-hunting lobby is the absolute vitriolic waffle they spew. Half of it is long-discredited information, the rest is emotive language. I find it hard to take them seriously if they won't even drop their Shakespearean drama tactics long enough to debate rationally. The ICABS website even wants to stop mink being hunted. Nice to know our indigenous wildlife is safe in their hands.

WhiteWashMan

From Ah

thefinalstage

Where did you get your stats from? Or are they pulled out of your head to support your argument? I asked someone i know who hunts how many their hunt got this year.. about 4 or 5 she thinks (i cant find any concrete stats for that). Drive from dublin to cork and you will see more dead on the road . So yes i made up the stats from that. Wait make that 100,000 foxes on the roads http://www.heritagecouncil.ie/outlook/contents6/13.htmlthats an estimate for the uk.

Give me at least 3 ways, people can actively stop Foxes being accidently killed on the roads. I dont know any nor do i care. I just find it ironic that the save the fox people dont seem to care either.

Note: slowing down doesn't count because you can't make other people slow down. The methods should be active ways people can stop other people accidentally killing foxes. As i said i dont care about foxes either way, i was just putting it is perspective.

I'm not even going to take on the human side of your argument because its completely off the topic and has nothing to do with stopping people killing foxes for sport. I think there is very little people can do to stop foxes being killed on the roads since those are accidents. Few people go killing Foxes in their cars. Its an anology. Few people go killing people in their cars

Seriously? Your comparing an accident to a deliberate act. Its the same as hitting a person with a car and ripping them to pieces after goading and scaring the crap out of them.

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Yup, good luck with that reasoned debate there. The problem with the anti-hunting lobby is the absolute vitriolic waffle they spew. Half of it is long-discredited information, the rest is emotive language. I find it hard to take them seriously if they won't even drop their Shakespearean drama tactics long enough to debate rationally. The ICABS website even wants to stop mink being hunted. Nice to know our indigenous wildlife is safe in their hands.

Than persuade me with your logic on my foxes should be hunted. I will be as objective as I possibly can be.

It wasn't me!

More emotive language. If you want to be grim, the fact is, dogs break necks as a priority, to minimise danger to themselves. That's purely instinct, and is how dogs kill. So foxes shouldn't be chased? What about rabbits, ground-nesting gamebirds or other small wildlife, all of which the fox chases? Man is a predator too, make no mistake about it.

biko

Sundy wrote: »

On the other hand going to work this moring i saw 3 dead foxes, all road kill. Does that not make you angry?

Tried to find a lolcat for "I see what you are doing there".
Anyway, no - it makes me sad seeing animals run over, not angry. Killing for sport makes me angry, killing for food is OK.

I'm not vegetarian but believe in the rights of every life form. At least the right to not be killed for someone's amusement.

biko

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Man is a predator too, make no mistake about it.

You come back here after you finished eating that fox.

Oops, I thought we were still in AH

thebman

It wasn't me! wrote: »

The fox is rarely caught in a hunt. I think it's something like one in ten hunts will end in a kill. How many hundreds of foxes are killed every week with rifles? And on the roads? And no-one need spew the usual ICABS waffle about foxes not actually being a problem for farmers. They do a lot of damage, and when livelihoods are affected in an area of employment that's tough enough as is, I'm all for controlling their numbers.

So all foxes are automatically harming farmers livelihood?

I don't mind farmers killing a fox if it is attacking farm animals but to kill them on the basis that they may do so in the future is a bit harsh IMHO. What percentage of the Fox population attacks farm animals in its life time? Without that statistic, I don't think you can make the assumption that most or all Foxes kill farm animals and affect farmers livelihoods.

Lets use our people analogy that the yes people love so much. Should we bring in the death penalty and start killing people that come from areas with high crime rates on the assumption that they will become murderers (hope those people using people analogies can see how illogical they are after reading this question and this is the sole purpose of this idiotic question BTW)?

Sundy wrote: »

I dont know any nor do i care. I just find it ironic that the save the fox people dont seem to care either.

I wouldn't see they don't care. I'd rather they didn't but what can you do to stop an accident? SFA is the answer. You can't go out and train all the wild animals to avoid cars and you can't make people drive sanely no matter how many guards you have or ad campaigns you run.

I think I'd like to point out that I'm not part of any weird organisation. I've just got nothing better to do tonight as there is SFA on tv and I happened to see the thread. We have a fox that comes into our back garden sometimes and personally I don't wish it or any other Fox was dead.

It wasn't me!

Let's see. We begin with the fact that foxes are vermin whose numbers are greatly increased this year. We go on to give two main reasons for fox control, both centred on their predation.

Agricultural: Yes, foxes cause agricultural damage, kill chickens, newborn lambs and, occasionally, ewes exhausted from lambing. This can cost farmers, who aren't millionaires to begin with, a huge amount of money. Are they entitled to defend their livelihood? I should think so. Also, as has been mentioned, foxes do kill more than they eat, in many cases. Henhouses can be put to slaughter if a fox gets in, and in many case, lambs are merely killed, never entirely eaten or removed.

Second, for the benefit of our other natural wildlife: Foxes, along with avian vermin such as grey crows and magpies, cause a lot of death among ground-nesting game, small rodents, frogs and songbirds. Some of these species are in decline, with the aforementioned vermin species being directly responsible for a lot of the problem, with weather patterns also adding to the problem.

Now, while fox numbers rise dramatically, and other species are under threat as a result, and when farmers livelihoods are endangered are a result, how do you defend a position against the control of their numbers?

Red Hand

It wasn't me! wrote: »

More emotive language. If you want to be grim, the fact is, dogs break necks as a priority, to minimise danger to themselves. That's purely instinct, and is how dogs kill. So foxes shouldn't be chased? What about rabbits, ground-nesting gamebirds or other small wildlife, all of which the fox chases? .

Hmmmm...but man has advanced cognitive abilies. He isn't killing Foxes for food in this case, is he? Many mammalian carnivores are unpalatable to humans.

You aren't comparing the human sitting on horseback following specally bred dog who chase the Fox (and don't actually need to eat the Fox) to the Fox chasing gamebirds out of hunger, are you?

Man is a predator too, make no mistake about it

That doesn't mean he eats Foxes.;)

It wasn't me!

Jeremiah 16:1 wrote: »

Hmmmm...but man has advanced cognitive abilies. He isn't killing Foxes for food in this case, is he? Many mammalian carnivores are unpalatable to humans.

You aren't comparing the human sitting on horseback following specally bred dog who chase the Fox (and don't actually need to eat the Fox) to the Fox chasing gamebirds out of hunger, are you?



That doesn't mean he eats Foxes.;)

Man kills foxes to protect his interests and the interests of the natural environment. Predator numbers need to be controlled. It's that simple.

Dyr

Sundy wrote: »

Is that why you dont like fox hunting because its a class thing?

and I said I didnt like foxhunting where?

Chunky Monkey

I'm against hunting any animal for sport but when it comes to vermin control I couldn't say because I have no idea of the effects and available control methods. I haven't read through the whole thread, is anybody here advocating the sport itself?

Jrad

Fox hunting pole? I thought they just used dogs?

It wasn't me!

It's an ineffective method of control, to be frank, but it's not as cruel as people make out. I see no reason to ban it. Death is humane, which is the aim.

rrpc

It's nice to see so many new faces on our quiet little forum

Do enjoy your stay.

What was it Oscar Wilde said about hunting?

"The unspeakable chasing the inedible" I think.

In any event, God love them, they need an excuse to go hallooing around the countryside and having a jolly good time. Killing a fox is only a very occasional byproduct.

And btw, don't be wasting too much symathy on foxes. Incredibly vicious and merciless predators. Look lovely in the photos, but up close and personal would take your leg off if given the chance. One took a complete litter of kittens my cat had some years ago. The kittens mother got away with the loss of most of her tail.

Red Hand

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Man kills foxes to protect his interests and the interests of the natural environment. Predator numbers need to be controlled. It's that simple.

And Fox hunting as a past-time is the way to do it? Complete with horns blasting, red-coats and a big jumble of dogs? A f*cking circus? I'm not saying that vermin should not be controlled. In fact above I said that vermin (where they are a problem) should be controlled-it's the way you do it is what I'm talking about.

Plus, poor agriculture techniques contribute more to toad, small mammal and other falling animal numbers. Hedge rrow destruction etc. REPS schemes and other environmental preservation schemes will help combat wild animal decimation as muuch as vermin control.

Red Hand

rrpc wrote: »

And btw, don't be wasting too much symathy on foxes. Incredibly vicious and merciless predators. Look lovely in the photos, but up close and personal would take your leg off if given the chance.

Yep, and that's why I like them.;)

It wasn't me!

Most lads take the rifle and lamp out and take an enormous amount of satisfaction in properly calling a fox and dropping it humanely with a shot they can be proud of. What's wrong with enjoying a worthwhile job?

Chunky Monkey

rrpc wrote: »

And btw, don't be wasting too much symathy on foxes. Incredibly vicious and merciless predators. Look lovely in the photos, but up close and personal would take your leg off if given the chance.

Perhaps a justifiable pre-emptive defensive move?

It wasn't me!

Chunky Monkey wrote: »

Perhaps a justifiable pre-emptive defensive move?

My leg ain't my trigger finger. And they say these things are cunning...

doctor evil

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Killing something by accident and dressing up to have a grand old time out of another creatures suffering are not the same thing.

The attire worn serves a function, just as much as wearing shin gards, gum shield and gloves in other sports.

Hard hat - obvious one
stock - protect the neck
jacket - to keep warm and to provide protection, the 'pink' ones are worn by the hunt staff. Who are the people who control and work the hounds, everyone else is there for the ride.
Long boot/jod boots and chaps - to protect the leg
beige jodphurs - to make you feel fat

The sport is navigating your way over different ground and obstacles at various speeds.

The hunt staff do the real work with the hounds and behind them comes everyone else who pay a cap to be there which goes towards running the hunt.

Chunky Monkey

I guess you're someone who agrees with the sport doctor evil :rolleyes:

Aye but how to reach that ole trigger finger though...

It wasn't me!

And his/her view is no less valid for that. It's better informed, in fact.

As to reaching my finger, meh, that's a problem for the fox to figure out.

Genghiz Cohen

Voted no, on the basis that if the horse & dog hunting is banned, then how long until I can't take my shotgun out and drop a fox?

The sport of the hunting is based more in the riding of horses trying to keep up with the dogs than people enjoying seeing the kill, I've gone to a hunt or two and thats my opinion anyway.

Another major reason for banning the hunt is not the perceived cruelty of hunting, but the aforementioned damage a hunt can cause to farm land and crops, so there really should be more control in that area.

I refuse to force my beliefs on anyone, but you should consider how it will affect the other wildlife, foxes DO kill game and song birds, foxes DO get into farmers chickens, foxes will eat next to anything, they will do what they must to survive. People say that the fox kills the chickens then hides them for later, why should the farmer care? His chickens are dead, his source of income gone.

DonJose

BryanL wrote: »

83% against a ban at the moment, that'll be a nice statistic to be able to quote.

Hate to ruin your party boy!!! Quote that statistic now!!!

The voting is now at 51% YES for a hunting ban, I'm glad I brought attention to this poll, it sickens me to see the scum posting such pics of their "kills", well done fella BIG MEN all of you.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=54769066&postcount=404

It wasn't me!

Good work, it's a victory in a fundamentally flawed opinion poll. Best of luck in the real world. And like I said, there's no issue with pride in an honourable job well done.

johngalway

DonJose wrote: »

Hate to ruin your party boy!!! Quote that statistic now!!!

The voting is now at 51% YES for a hunting ban, I'm glad I brought attention to this poll, it sickens me to see the scum posting such pics of their "kills", well done fella BIG MEN all of you.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=54769066&postcount=404

You may wish to reconsider how you go about referring to people.

It wasn't me!

Also, why is the word kills in quotation marks? Does he not believe the person shot them?