Stephen's Day Anti-Fox Hunting Protests

Typedef

http://www.rte.ie/news/2002/1226/hunting.html

I must say that I admire the people who have gone out of their way to protest the practice of foxhunting in Ireland today.

To my mind a group of people riding around the country on horses with a pack of dogs to hunt a fox and tear that fox limb from limb is in my view one of the most barbaric things Irish society tolerates, after homosexual rape in prisons.

The notion that the fox has a "sporting chance" is simply a rationalisation and a platitude for the practice of fox hunting and to say that hunting foxes in this manner 'controls' the fox population is an absurdity, since there are far more foxes then there are hunts to kill them.

Whats more, if the fox has a genuine "sporting chance" the notion that hunting is 'controling' the population of foxes is in fact a misnomer of logic, as the fox may escape.

For me, foxhunting is one of those bloodsports that should be consigned to the pages of history, along with hare coursing.

Humbug.

DapperGent

You're probably right - it should go.

But have you ever been to a foxhunt? In a lot of ways it's a lovely St. Stephens day tradition. Colourful and fun to watch (them setting out not the actual hunt bit). There's a hunt beside me in Kells and it means a awful lot to an lot of people (I just think the horsies and doggie-woggies look nice). The fox population does need to be kept in check in certain areas but having said that proper hunters with rifles are better at it and far more humane.

I know this is all well and good until you get to the bit about the fox being ripped apart by a pack of dogs - I realise no amount of amusing pageantry is worth this. But I dunno I'll feel sorry for an awful lot of people when it does eventually get banned.

Also comparing foxhunting to male rape in prisons is more that a little sensationalist if not downright idiotic, don't you think?

I've never been a fan of fox hunts, most of them, nowadys use scented rags for the hunt as landowners, who give them permission to hunt are fewer, so they end up going around where theres very few foxes anyhow, at least where I live.

The get up of them is very colonial also, I mean the sight of Red coats and horns tooting, for gawds sake:o

On an aside note, my mum when we were young used keep hens and *cough* one night, I had the responsibilty of closing them into their pen for the night, they roamed free range by day...
Guess what,I forgot and at about midnight , we could hear a Ruckuss outside...
I knew full well what was going on, so my brother was sent out to have a look..., he came in and said it was
carnage
About 30 or so hens and ducks were killed by two or three foxes that night,they killed them all without mercy, and left the scattered bodies around the pen....
I was roasted for that mistake, and have had a little less sympathy for the foxes ever since.
mm

Riamfada

Originally posted by Typedef
http://www.rte.ie/news/2002/1226/hunting.html

To my mind a group of people riding around the country on horses with a pack of dogs to hunt a fox and tear that fox limb from limb is in my view one of the most barbaric things Irish society tolerates, after homosexual rape in prisons.

Im sorry but you are horrifieng an event you probably have never witnessed or experienced. Fox hunting is an age old tradition in Ireland and is part of my herritage and there is no way it will stop. Would we ban boxing because it is often horrific, no it is a popular sport. Hippies who are out there today should spend more time cleaning themselves and acting like respecatable human beings. I dont agree with many lifestyles people live but i never tell them to stop.


And Im sorry Typedef but how was your xmas turkey, did youslaughter it yourself or just ram stuffing up its arse to make it taste better? How much did you pay that contract killer of a butcher to pin it against a wall, catch it and pop its noggin off so YOU could PRACTISE YOUR XMAS TRADITION

Riamfada

Originally posted by Man

The get up of them is very colonial also, I mean the sight of Red coats and horns tooting, for gawds sake:o

Its a tradition for fs. THATS WHAT YOU DO .

hunkypex

I would not a want to be a fox in a hunt, its not a plesant way to go out. They don't eat the fox so its just for the thrill of the kill.
As for it being an age old tradition, it was practiced by the wealthy in the past. go back a bit and the penalty was death for hunting unless your upper lip was stiff enough.
The modern shower like to think that they are the landed gentry, sipping champagne in candle light dinners.
Some of my cousins are avid fox hunters and a bigger shower of sad, desperate losers could not be found.
Sod tradition it used to be a tradition to deport thieves to Australia but it was dropped, get over it.

Riamfada

Originally posted by hunkypex
I wouldn't mind it if it was mandatory for all hunters to spent a day being hunted.

Who would do the hunting you?

hunkypex

A large pack of Ravenous wolves would do the job.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Fox hunting is an age old tradition in Ireland and is part of my herritage and there is no way it will stop.

as were arranged marriages.. now we laugh at the idea times change, fox hunting serves no purpose other than so a few lads can get their kicks watching a fox being torn apart.

in the age we live in there could be alteratives to using live foxes, having people lay out a trail with a certain scent, so the dogs would have to track this instead ? *shrug* it wouldn't be the same, but at least it would be a tad more "humane"

stackboundary

Would we ban boxing because it is often horrific, no it is a popular sport

Actually, that's where we have a significant divergance of opinion, I would think.

Boxing (not that Boxing is the topic) is horiffic and stupid and quite frequently, men end up being 'punch drunk' aka brain damaged from Boxing, some even die for this 'popular sport'.

At least boxing is 'consentual', that is both parties (and the undulating industry that exploits human adversity) are sentient beings who choose (nominally) to Box as opposed to setting a pack of dogs on a fox and calling that act of brutality (population control).

Under that kind of 'remit' one might condone a miasma of draconian measures aimed at 'controlling' human's own rapidly expanding populos.

"without shedding a drop of Christian blood"

Riamfada

I have been on hunts and never seen a fox " been ripped appart" actually i have been on hunts and have never even caught a fox. Im a rider, I ride horse its what I do.

Farmers shoot animals and hunters with guns shoot game.

Fox Hunters chase an animal as inteeligent as themselves.


Sorry, whats the problem?

DapperGent

I think the problem is the bit where the animal dies horribly.

I'm with you on the tradition thing (where are you from btw Kells?) and as I said before in some ways I'll miss the hunt if it goes. But it kinda is unjustifiable in a lot of ways if you're killing an animal you should have a reason (vermin, food, cloths, disease control, livestock protection etc.) and then you should do it in the most humane way possible.

The fact that it's fun to chase away on the horse isn't really excuse enough (in my book) for the manner in which the animal dies (runs til it collapses and then savaged).

But in all fairness the life and death of the animals we eat and wear in daily life are none too pleasant either. I dunno it seems to me that there are better animal rights issues to campaign about in Ireland than the hunt. Maybe a score of foxes killed a year, while we have millions of livestock living in gluttonous misery?

I think the protesters just kinda want to piss the hunters off or make them feel like crap, or make themselves feel worthwhile. There are better things to do and worse people to annoy than them.

seamus

Originally posted by Grimes
Fox hunting is an age old tradition in Ireland and is part of my herritage and there is no way it will stop.

The point 'it's tradition' is moot. Traditions change, and go away. Other people have already pointed out traditions that we now laugh at, that were once commonplace. This one no different.

Hippies who are out there today should spend more time cleaning themselves and acting like respecatable human beings.

Well, you've just ruined any chance you might have had at having your points considered. Grow up. Get your head out of your arse and lose the righteous "I like to dress up like 19th century gentry and chase small animals around on horseback" attitude. Anyone who gets a kick out of chasing and killing another living being is sick. Period.

Who would do the hunting you?

Just give me a gun. I have no respect for foxhunters. That said, I probably wouldn't kill anyone, opting instead to string them naked to a pole, and draw funny faces on their bodies for all to see. Humiliation is far more effective than intimidation when you're dealing with ponces.

Farmers shoot animals and hunters with guns shoot game.
Fox Hunters chase an animal as intelligent as themselves.
Sorry, whats the problem?

We don't need to eat animals anymore. Farmers/hunters shooting them is bad enough. The fact that people would kill another animal for sport is just sick. Foxhunters are no better than peadophiles.

And I think typies comment comparing foxhunting to prison rape is perfectly valid, if not harsh enough.

seamus

Originally posted by DapperGent
Don't troll DG

Maybe if you made some points or pointed out the flaws in my opinions, as opposed to attacking me personally, people would take you seriously. Oh, no wait, but there's no good arguments for foxhunting is there? Oh well, you'll just have to revert to the lowest common denominator again so.......

DapperGent

My opinions are already posted above which if you cared to read them are anit-fox hunting though confused at the big deal being made about it.

Comparing fox-hunting to rape or paedophila is moronic.

<No calling people moron DapperGent. Bad. Cease and desist.>

seamus

Originally posted by DapperGent
Comparing fox-hunting to rape or paedophila is moronic.

Yeah, cos that's constructive. I, personally, draw no distinction between raping a child for pleasure and chasing and tearing apart a small animal for pleasure. If you have a problem with that, take it to another thread or PM me.

Getting back OT.....

But in all fairness the life and death of the animals we eat and wear in daily life are none too pleasant either. I dunno it seems to me that there are better animal rights issues to campaign about in Ireland than the hunt. Maybe a score of foxes killed a year, while we have millions of livestock living in gluttonous misery?

While that's fine in theory, we all know in reality that money makes the world go around. What's decreed as humane by the Government, the farmers will do to the letter. Allowing animals to go free range, especially for larger animals, is far more expensive for farmers than keeping them 'humanely' couped up. Besides this, vegetarians are still way outnumbered by non-vegetarians, so any calls for more humane treatment of animals will fall on deaf ears. There's hundreds more logistical problems with this, but put simply, it would be like trying to stop an army with a pellet gun. It's completely pointless (at least for the moment). The bigger issue needs to be chipped away at by tackling the smaller and less socially accepted issues.

Foxhunting, like the fur trade, is frowned upon by most, and so is easier to try and get banned. Once this is done, the next issue can be moved onto. Bloodsports and the killing of animals have been going on for thousands of years. The change will have to be long and slow.

No offence seamus, but I'm editing out DapperGent's troll from your quotes

Gordon

For me the death of the fox is not the main point to lead me to hate the act of fox hunting. I eat meat so I can't logicallly complain about "vermin" being killed. Vermin is how foxes are seen by "country folk" aren't they?

What I see is a living being frightened for its life, frightened for the life of its family... and scared ****less for... well its life. No amount of pleasure gained is worth the enjoyment of watching the taking of a life.

I wonder how many fox hunters would watch the Spanish bullfights and say it was inhumane, I wonder how many foxhunters would watch a Roman Gladiator slay a slave and feel a little queazy at the injustice of it, I wonder how many foxhunters would feel sick at the thought of their daughters and sons eaten alive by sharks in the Meditteranean because - they were edible vermin.

Would foxhunters care?

I guess it's all relative isn't it :rolleyes:

DMC

Isn't this really down to a urban/rural opinion?

DapperGent

Originally posted by seamus
Foxhunting, like the fur trade, is frowned upon by most, and so is easier to try and get banned. Once this is done, the next issue can be moved onto.

Point taken. I just find three thousand pigs in a shed eating their own faeces far more offensive than the practice of fox hunting. It's horrible for the animal and terrible for us.

I just think some of the real motivation behind protests of this sort is to make the hunters feel bad about themselves and to make the protesters feel good about themselves, not the actual banning of the sport.

DapperGent

Originally posted by Gordon
Vermin is how foxes are seen by "country folk" aren't they?

Unless you own some free range fowl then no, not really. I love them, they're around my house a good bit. I think they like to tease the dog.

Typedef

Isn't this really down to a urban/rural opinion?


Hmm, the urban/rural 'strife' that is supposed to exist may have some valid points to contribute to the debate, in fact, if one grows up in an environment where foxhunting is the norm, then it might seem like 'outsiders' imposing their will when urbanites cry havok and let slip the dogs of war (no pun) on the issue of fox hunting.

For sure people's environments play an important role in how adults eventually come to view the world, so a difference of opinion between city and country is enivitable. However, just because I might get pleasure from, for example, strapping a banger to a cat and igniting that banger, doesn't mean that such a practice is validated.

In fact during Haloween for years and years now, it has been the case that blowing cats apart with bangers has been practiced by many people in cities, but I doubt one would find it easy to get that particular practice legalised on the grounds of 'tradition'.

Therefore it is unlikely that foxhunting would be legalised if it were illegal and for me, if society would not legalise foxhunting 'now', the practice should not be protected on the grounds of some etheral tradition, because as is evident throughout history that practices that are enshrined as tradition like arranged marriage or official State religons are too often simply abuses of the tenents that are supposed to make up a matured and enlightened society.

Bod.

Ps. Play nice.

Jak

The old reliable hunting thread.

Don't really have the time to post much, however I would like to second just about everything dapper gent posted.

Comparing fox hunting to either rape or child abuse is just ****ing stupid. If you need to ask why, then you have a very skewed morality.

On the topic of Fox hunting, I would hate to see this tradition go.

Reason 1: Do not underestimate the value to a local economy of such an event. Nor indeed the entire industry that goes with it, or even the value the horses and dogs take from the event.

Reason 2: I am game shooter - pheasant duck etc. I have what I believe is a valid fear of the domino effect - once the antis have dealt with fox hunting they will move down the line to me and eventually anglers. :rolleyes:

Reason 3: I find hunting to be perfectly acceptable, and immensely valuable for maintaining a link between people, the land and the animals. I fear the "Why hunt, when you can get everything you need in a supermarket?" mentality (to roughly quote what Typedef posted in a former thread ) It is dangerous for the world to become so distanced as to forget the origins of their food.

Reason 4: Many hunts muzzle the dogs - so all that is at stake is the fear of the fox - which to be frank I can live with.

Reason 5: There are causes far more valuable but perhaps less enjoyable than being out than trying to ban fox hunting.

Gotta run - will come back to this.

JAK

azezil

In one word (expression ?) 'pffffffffft'

some fun facts (from my experience):
1. they rarely catch the fox
2. fox's butcher lambs/ hens etc. (do onto others as they've done onto u?)
3. ppl who complain about it are usually opinionated city folk who have no idea how much the loss of livestock really effects the farmer
4. protesting never solves anything, if anything it only makes the participants more steadfast in their ways.

Riamfada

Originally posted by seamus
Foxhunters are no better than peadophiles.

Im sorry but you disgust me

Riamfada

Originally posted by seamus
I, personally, draw no distinction between raping a child for pleasure and chasing and tearing apart a small animal for pleasure.

Would you draw a distinction bewtween raping a child for pleasure and slaughtering a cow in a meat grinder to feed somone ( i take it your a vegitarian)

Keeks

I'm very tempted to closed this thread for several reasons:

1) We've tried to have a discussion on this topic b4 but it just turned into an argument instead of a rational discussion. THis time it seems to be no different.
2) The focus of the discussion seems to have switch to the paediophile comment make 12/13 posts ago.

If you can't have a civil discussion and at least keep it on topic then I will close. If anyone has any problems with this the PM me. DON'T POST ANY COMMENTS ABOUT IT HERE!

Typedef

I don't think there is anything particularly wrong with discussing a topic more then once, in honesty, that's why I started the thread on Stephen's day, because it was 'topical' due to protests being held against hunting on the 26th.

In any case I don't particularly think that paedophilia is the same as hunting a fox, I do think that foxhunting is one of those practices that Irish society tolerates like rape of prisoners, which when examined is in fact a barbarous and repugnant act, an act that is in fact on intellectual examination, dehumanising of the participants and the people who perpitrate it, but moreover of the society that allows such acts of cruelty to take place.

For me there is no merit in hunting a fox with a pack of dogs, nor is there merit in letting dogs chase down a hare and rip that animal to pieces.

I'm still wholely unconvinced as to the 'merits' of allowing a pack of dogs to tear a fox to shreds and why such a means of propoted 'population control' is in fact a desirable, efficient and effective means of dealing with the fox population. I wonder (assuming anyone is still reading the thread) if some of the exponents of foxhunting as a means of population control, can explain why hunting the fox is the appropiate method of 'control'?

Moreover, I really need to know why it is people feel no compassion for the fox and why there is actually a 'need' (as in food) to inflict such a violent death on a comparitively intellegent organism? What is the logic, aside from the tradition?

Jak has mentioned that 'sometimes' the dogs used in the hunt are muzzled, which on the surface of it, seems to be a great compromise, you still get the hunt, but the animal in question (fox) does not get killed. The obvious question arises though. Is it really 'moral' to inflict such terror onto a fox and really isn't such a hunt, cruelty? There is no question that fido your family dog would ever have to suffer such a wretched and potracted period of persecution, because human society 'frowns' on such practices vis-a-vis the domesticated dog. So is this some sort of species cast system then?
I wonder if anyone can offer tempered and rational qualification of specifically the fox hunting position on this issue?

Cuidado con el Gato!

DMC

Originally posted by Typedef
Isn't this really down to a urban/rural opinion?

Hmm, the urban/rural 'strife' that is supposed to exist may have some valid points to contribute to the debate, in fact, if one grows up in an environment where foxhunting is the norm, then it might seem like 'outsiders' imposing their will when urbanites cry havok and let slip the dogs of war (no pun) on the issue of fox hunting.

For sure people's environments play an important role in how adults eventually come to view the world, so a difference of opinion between city and country is enivitable. However, just because I might get pleasure from, for example, strapping a banger to a cat and igniting that banger, doesn't mean that such a practice is validated.

That doesn't happen here that much here as our population is still rural in outlook but look at the fox-hunting argument in Britain. Now there is a case where vast tracts of rural England voted in Conservatives MP's, yet the urbanite Labour government call the shots. Of course the majority rules, that's accepted, but there are real concerns of the farming/rural communities in Britain that do not take their interests with full effect in central government. One only has to look at how the marked difference in how the British and Irish governments dealt with the outbreak of Foot-and-Mouth.

Fox-hunting is the flashpoint. People see Rolf Harris cooing over an injured fox in Animal Hospital, and its all cutesy and stuff. Then they see the red-jacketed brigade and their horsies and beagles and the way they slaughter the foxes. They don't make the connection.

My father told me when I was younger that I shouldn't believe anything in those Tom McCaughren novels on foxes and cubs, because they make foxes out to be cute and cuddly, when they can be the worst menace a farmer has to face.

In fact during Haloween for years and years now, it has been the case that blowing cats apart with bangers has been practiced by many people in cities, but I doubt one would find it easy to get that particular practice legalised on the grounds of 'tradition'.

Therefore it is unlikely that foxhunting would be legalised if it were illegal and for me, if society would not legalise foxhunting 'now', the practice should not be protected on the grounds of some etheral tradition, because as is evident throughout history that practices that are enshrined as tradition like arranged marriage or official State religons are too often simply abuses of the tenents that are supposed to make up a matured and enlightened society.

One other thing to put up the tradition arguement is that fox-hunting has been around longer than the gun. The laws for foxhunting were made at a time when this is the norm for killing foxes, and something that has become so established does become tradition.

xern

I think to hunting of foxes with a pack of dogs is barbaric and unnecessary!
Well aren't foxes at the top of the food chain? Their numbers have to controlled, i like going out at the weekend and hunting foxes! since baers and wolves left these shores the fox has no one but humans to hunt it!!

Riamfada

Morals souldnt come into play here, has anyone read the newspapers lately, we be lucky if we can keep oursleves alive let alone a few foxes

Typedef

Yes but, where do you draw the line as to what is 'unimportant'?

Honestly, even though people harp on about how important hospitals are, very few people actually 'do' anything about hospitals.

Ergo, if foxhunting is disgusting to you, do something about it, because for every person ready to do 'something' about an issue, there are literally thousands who think that issue is just too unimportant in the great scheme of things to matter.

Everybody has a niche in the great wheel.
Don't forget, "the machine of capitalism is oiled with the blood of workers".

azezil

Why is it barbaric, its not a sentient being, its not as melodramatic as us humans when get a little scratch we need to get therapy ... they get over it they carry on (provided they survive, which in most cases they do).

I find the way people associate human qualities to animals laughable. I would speak out against fox hunting if the population was in danger of extinction but its not, i say so what it one or two die, there's plenty more.

DeVore

The point Azezil is that we are conscious self-aware, intelligent beings who can *decide* not to partcipate or to allow others to (by way of the laws of the land).

This *IS* a moral issue. Its a conscious decision using upper brain functions regarding the interaction of men with men and men with their surroundings. Of course its moral issue.

Grimes says:

I have been on hunts and never seen a fox " been ripped appart" actually i have been on hunts and have never even caught a fox. Im a rider, I ride horse its what I do.

Then ride them. Do you require a fox to be hunted to ride your horses in groups and with pagentry? (Thats an honest question!)

Grimes, I'm glad you are explaining your point of view and ignore the paedophile comments as I'm about to knock them on their asses anyway...

I have a single question for you:
If the Fox wasnt there (ie: you used rags or just went for a long ride with dogs) would it seriously detract from your enjoyment of the day?

What I have read here are two points of view which consider themselves intractable but which are arguing two different things:
On one side you have the anti-hunters who argue the moral/fox's rights side of things.
On the other you have the hunters saying "It affects the whole countryside and the economy and its tradition etc".

Seems to me like we could just take the fox out of the picture, replace it with something which doesnt have feelings and rights etc and away ye go.

DeV.

DeVore

The Paedo Issue:

I am would consider myself a moral person with a good moral compass.

When I stand on a bug I dont feel anything (except a crunch).
When I hear of an animal abused by humans I get angry.
When I hear of a baby/child being abused by an adult I get a lot more angry.


Either there is a hierarchy of suffering, or I should cry for the bug.


The inflammatory comments will stop now.


DeV.

DeVore

Final Point:

Typedef: With your hand on your heart and the other on the collected works of Karl Marx can you HONESTLY tell me that the anti-fox hunting brigade are SOLELY thinking about the rights of the poor fox and not in some part fighting some kind of class war?

It seems to me that, while I agree that fox hunting shouldnt be allowed, the effort that has gone into sabotaging the hunts is disproportionate to the cause being fought for.
It would seem that there is more of a battle going on here then the simple rights of the foxes in question.

Its not hard to speculate either, the Fox hunters are typically well-to-do (owning a horse isnt something a regular person can afford to do really!) and the sabs are often (imho) more left-wing or socialist (yes those are generalisations, but tell me they are not broadly accurate )


I'm not sure anyone in the debate actually gives more then two fecks for the Fox. I think the protestors have found something the hunters care about but which is untenable and are using it to gleefully beat them...


DeV.

Keeks

Originally posted by DeVore
I have a single question for you:
If the Fox wasnt there (ie: you used rags or just went for a long ride with dogs) would it seriously detract from your enjoyment of the day?

From the little I do know about fox hunting, a lot of hunts conducted nowdays do use muzzled dogs so all the enjoyment is got out of the hunt and none of the mess. Much in the same way hare coursing is done nowdays aswell.

Anyway no one here on either side of the argument has actually described a hunt and what it entails. When most ppl (ie townies ) think of fox hunting they automatically come to the conclusion of the fox being ripped to shreds by rabid dogs with some tosser in a red blazer shouting "tally ho chaps". I have no figures for how many hunting societies there are in Ireland, how many foxes killed, how cruelly they are killed etc. I know little or nothing about fox hunting and I don't form opinions based on what i've seen on programs like the Irish RM (remember that).

So what exactally goes on at a hunt?

Typedef

Originally posted by DeVore
Typedef: With your hand on your heart and the other on the collected works of Karl Marx can you HONESTLY tell me that the anti-fox hunting brigade are SOLELY thinking about the rights of the poor fox and not in some part fighting some kind of class war?

Class war? Perhaps, there is an element of the trouncing of the bourgeoisie to the fox hunting causists, I wouldn't deny there is an element of that. However I doubt I have to point out that there are many, many institutions within soceity that might be identified with the 'elite', which are not so vehemently attacked, horse ownership and horse racing for example. Perhaps at a subliminal level, the protesters hate the gentry, but for me, it is the senseless and merciless execution of a fox for sport that is morally repugnant and it is for that reason I oppose the hunting of foxes, no matter how 'traditional' such a practice is proported to be.
Supression of the female is another 'traditional' paradigm in soceity, perhaps women's liberation should be derided as class war waged by a band of righteously indignant lower middle class do-goders, seeking only to overturn soceity in so far as it serves to put those same people at the apex of the 'revised' soceital infrastructure, but I doubt that would get anybody elected.

It seems to me that, while I agree that fox hunting shouldnt be allowed, the effort that has gone into sabotaging the hunts is disproportionate to the cause being fought for.
It would seem that there is more of a battle going on here then the simple rights of the foxes in question.

Admitadly, animals are killed in human soceity all the time, for me, it is the manner of the foxes death, that seems to be such an anthema to decency and 'humanity' for want of a more ill defined word.

I think the protestors have found something the hunters care about but which is untenable and are using it to gleefully beat them...

Ecological trolls? Perhaps.
Still if it is simply a troll, it has a moral basis I find hard to ignore.

“I was out to trounce on every digression and indiscretion conducted (or should I say semiconducted) in this performance” (Robert Maxwell Stern).

_CreeD_

Hmmm, not getting into the moral side of things as there are many points for and against (though those for are actually just pointing to how badly we treat other animals anyway....digressing).

The most stupendously stupid thing about this all is calling it a 'Hunt'. Chasing a single creature smaller than the average dog, that is being tracked by a pack of much larger dogs, is not a hunt it's a 'Follow'.
Hunt, ROFL, like there's actually some skill and danger on the side of the human participants. In reality it has all the tension, danger and draw of 'hunting' a mouse with a steak knife....actually that would be better since you'd actualy be doing it.

Jak

Supression of the female is another 'traditional' paradigm in soceity, perhaps women's liberation should be derided as class war waged by a band of righteously indignant lower middle class do-goders, seeking only to overturn soceity in so far as it serves to put those same people at the apex of the 'revised' soceital infrastructure, but I doubt that would get anybody elected.

Yes of course, because women were only treated unfairly in the higher echelons of society :rolleyes:

The most stupendously stupid thing about this all is calling it a 'Hunt'. Chasing a single creature smaller than the average dog, that is being tracked by a pack of much larger dogs, is not a hunt it's a 'Follow'.

It is a hunt. You may have differing opinions on the meaning of well established words in the English language, but trust me, it is a hunt.


In any case Keeks, you asked to know what exactly goes on at a Fox hunt. Here is the final report of the UK Gov on the matter


Final Report

A balanced report, with as much impartial evidence as you can hope to get. Having read it, I maintain my support for all these forms of hunting, while possibly introducing limits on the hare season or other such changes to ensure a healthy balance of animal population while maintaining the hunts themselves for reasons of sport, economy, tradition, social/community value.

If these hunts are stopped the animals will be stalked and shot. Either way, they will not and should not be left as unchecked populations.

I am amazed at the almost double standards of a city dweller who will buy processed/slaughtered meat products and condemn hunting. Personally were I a different sort of animal ...

I would rather live free range and be hunted for food than be walked into an abattoir in a queue where I would receive a complimentary a) Nail in the head or neck slicing and blood letting

Or were I an animal who would be hunted for pest control regardless, I would rather be chased in a hunt with a chance of survival rather than poisoned or quietly shot from a distance.

Animals are tough. This is not fkin watership down .. if it was surely we should be chastising the foxes (maybe try and catch and rehabilitate them) for harassing rabbits and other animals
also.

JAK.

Ro-76

I am a foxhunter and supporter of the sport.

Leaving aside the comments about tradition etc, there are a few basic facts about foxhunting which one need to accept before one can offer any manner of educated comment or opinion.

1. The fox population needs to be controlled, in the same manner as pigeons or rats in city sewers need to be controlled. Rentokil, for example, is a global company built on copntralling rodents and other vermin in cities. Deer are culled in national parks. Kangaroos are controlled in Australia.

2. The options to control foxes if foxhunting is not used basically comes down to traps and guns. With a trap the fox gets his leg caught in it, probably breaking it, and eithers dies slowly with a painful gangrenous leg, or just starves to death. If he is shot, unless at the hands of an expert marksman, the chances of dyiny instantly are probably remote. If a fox is killed by hounds, he dies instantly.

3. Animals killing animals is a law of nature. We have canine teeth, so we were also intended to kill animals.

4. The manner in which many farmed animals are bred, live and die so that we can have our nice fresh lean meat in the supermarket is a lot less humane than the manner in which foxes exist. For example, look at the practice of producing battery hens and chickens. These animals never even see daylight, let alone their intended natural habitat. Chickens are slaughtered by either breaking their necks, or electrocuting them in a pool of water. We can of course choose to buy organic produce, but are we willing to pay the premium price?

While everyone is entitled to their opinion, it is very important that those people who do not have any experience of the sport educate themselves about it and any alternatives they propose before offering an opinion.

Ro

Keeks

Firstly I should have said eairlier that I am a true neutral on this subject. Probably the only one u will ever find. Personally I think htere are more important issues.

I will thank Jak for the link. I will read it at a later date and comment on it l8r.

And finally the whole argument put forward by the pro fox-hunt so far is crap (in my opinion). I'll just take the last post by Ro-76 as an example.

The obvious thing is to say that fox population needs to be controlled. But does it really. I doubt it really. It is from my understanding that the fox population in Ireland has only recently returnd to a healthy nature. I don't have figures for this but I am trying to find out wheather this is true or not. Either way there are beeter ways of controlling them than mounting a horse with a pack of dogs shouting "tally Ho chaps".

AS for being killed instantly by a pack of dogs. Bullsh*t. Can smell that a mile away. If anybay has every wated any nature program on TV they will no that any animal kill is rarely instant.

AS for that we are all animals an animal kills side of the argument. I think u will find the sentient being argument. That us as humans being sentient beings should not have to inflict terro on other creature just for sport.

As for the farmed animal logic. I think u will find that most of those eejets on the hunt sabs are veggies as well.

RicardoSmith

This could be an interested disussion but as usual emotions run high. Everyone just back away slowly....

I think the main problem is the cruelty aspect for the animal. If foxes need to be culled then a silenced .22 rifle (ie not a shotgun) with a low vis or IR scope could do that job much better and more efficiently. (obviously with some one who knows how to shoot properly) Thats probably the least amount of cruelty to the animal. Thats how most professional culls are done. The fox isn't any different.

Trapping all vermin is cruel is an unintended part of the process. I think if a better way could be found to do it, no one would object to it. But it needs to be done, no question. But no one chases rats en mass on horses do they?

Fox hunting is a tradition and is part of culture certainly. Some way should be found to keep the tradition alive with out using a fox. Its as simple as that. In its current form is not acceptable to a lot, perhaps even the majority of people. Lots of sports originated in acts of extreme violence like playing with the heads of your enemies. But the sports have moved past that to their modern day equivents. The hunt needs to do this and develop into a modern day sport. It needs to innovate and move forward not stay stuck in the past, but at the same keep its tradition intact. Muzzles on the dogs and perhaps a rider acting as the fox with a towed fake fox? I dunno. Thats stupid I know, but something along those lines.

Other forms ofsport like boxing and hunting are going to come under scrutiny eventually. Even down to fishing. If you agree with it or not doesn't matter. it will happen eventually. Everyone of these will have its own battle to fight. Look how safety has come into many sports, even down to something simple as hurling and how helmets are now compulsory at many levels. even F1 has changed massively and a lot of that has to do with safety.

Just out of curiosity what was the last sport to be banned? Dog/cock fight? Barefist fights? Duelling? Swordfighting?

Ro-76

Originally posted by Keeks

beeter ways of controlling them than mounting a horse with a pack of dogs shouting "tally Ho chaps".

Has anyone come up with a better way of controlling the fox population? Not to my knowledge.

I think the anti-hunt argument is as much about the perception of those who engage in foxhunting as anglo-irish rich folk in pink coats galavanting about the countryside as anything else. The fact of the matter is that the majority of those who participate in foxhunting are ordinary farmers with an interest in horses.

I do agree with your point that a little perspective is necessary. I think that our energies would be better devoted to improving the lot of human beings before we start to worry about foxes.

Jak

I will read it at a later date and comment on it l8r.

This is part of your problem Keeks. Read first then comment. Most of your posts are littered with "I don't know much about this .. BUT ..." etc.

Fox Hunts are a part of the way to cull the population of foxes, there are possibly more efficient ways, however trapping or poisoning or hiring expert marksmen :rolleyes: do not accrue any economic, social or in fact any benefits to the community other than controlling the population of the fox.

The future of this world will be heavily dependent on finding sustainable means of maintaining an interaction with the countryside. If you can find hunters willing to pay the price to have a team of people run a hunt or organise a syndicated shoot which maintains a suitable environment, then we should be encouraging it. Antis will tear down these things and offer nothing whatsoever to replace the total values lost.

AS for being killed instantly by a pack of dogs. Bullsh*t. Can smell that a mile away. If anybay has every wated any nature program on TV they will no that any animal kill is rarely instant.

A lot quicker than a trap or certain poisons will kill them.

AS for that we are all animals an animal kills side of the argument. I think u will find the sentient being argument. That us as humans being sentient beings should not have to inflict terro on other creature just for sport.

What? The sentient being argument is clearly defined is it? I am a sentient being therefore I should step out of the food chain. As sentient beings we should be more concerned with more pressing issues of the era rather than a Fox having a bad day at the office.

JAK.

RicardoSmith

Anyone who isn't completely rubbish with the right shooting gear could decimate a fox population over a couple of nights. It doesn't require and "expert marksman". There are lots of animals like bears, wolves, even deer that are culled in many countries and they don't dress up and use a bunch of horses and a pack of dogs to cull them. If a farmer sees a fox that being at his livestock, is he going to think, umm nust round up a few of the lads and organise a hunt. I think not. I think he'll reach the shotgun and just do it himself. Is that not what farmers can get licences for shoguns anyway?

Hunting is a tradition and a social event period. It doesn't have any practical use, you're only fooling yourself with that line of argument. Wanting to preserve it for tradional and as a social event is fine and justified. Hanging on to the fox part of it is just being stubborn.

Trapping and poisoning is a cruel way to catch/kill animals too. Shooting is the way to go. The whole food chain is cruel theres nothing you can do about it. But theres killing for food and theres killing for sport. Anyone who works with animals can tell you theres a big difference. Even some animals can sometimes start killing for fun instead of by instinct. When that happens its best to destroy the animal. So just because animals do, doesn't mean we should do it. In fact I would have thought that we should be able to rise above it.

Interaction with the countryside is all well and good. There are inumerable ways of doing this. Riding and even some form of a hunt is all well and good. But theres no need to kill an animal to interact with the countryside. Organising any event (including a hunt) does accrue economic, social benefit to the community fair enough. Same as horse show would. But killing an animal at the end of the event doesn't. Theres a distinction to be made between the two.

Sure we should all be looking at "pressing issues of the era" and "better devoted to improving the lot of human beings" but we should be doing that aswell, not exclusively. Being ripped limb from limb is certainly a "bad day in the office" thats for sure.

Seems to a perception that only city folk have objections to fox hunting. In fact a large percentage of the farming community and country folk disagree with it to. Mainly due to the cruelty aspect of it, not for any great love of the fox though. Which is a pretty cruel animal itself.

Jak

To quickly sidetrack ..

But theres killing for food and theres killing for sport.

Game shooting is a combination of both. Something I enjoy and would like to see protected, but which will likely come under attack should fox hunting be halted.

To go back on topic...

It {Foxhunting} doesn't have any practical use, you're only fooling yourself with that line of argument

from the report

"The registered packs are estimated to kill some 21,000-25,000 foxes a year. About 40% of the foxes killed by the registered packs are killed in the autumn/cub hunting season. In Wales and other upland areas, a high proportion of foxes are dug out, using terriers, and shot. Outside the registered packs, many more foxes are dug out and shot or are killed by people using lurchers or other "long dogs". Some of these activities are carried out by farmers, landowners and gamekeepers. Others involve trespass."

Also worth noting ...

"The pre-breeding population of foxes in England and Wales is thought to number some 217,000. They are perceived as pests mainly because of predation on lambs and game birds, although there are marked regional variations. Farmers and gamekeepers consider that they need a range of methods to control foxes. There is little information about the numbers of foxes which are killed and by what methods. Shooting is the most common method, but the use of dogs is particularly prevalent in sheep-rearing upland areas."

The report mentioned


"34 In lowland areas hunting by the registered packs makes only a minor contribution to the management of the fox population, and terrierwork, especially by gamekeepers, may be more important. In these areas, in the event of a ban, other means of control have the potential to replace the hunts' role in culling foxes. (Paragraph 5.42)"

So no hunt, but the foxes would still get shredded by dogs or shot.

35 In upland areas, where the fox population causes more damage to sheep-rearing and game management interests, and where there is a greater perceived need for control, fewer alternatives are available to the use of dogs, either to flush out to guns or for digging-out. (Paragraph 5.43)"

Again ban the hunt and you are left with a similar fate for the fox.

Possibly alternatives could be derived to ensure the economic/job value of the hunt is not lost to the community - but there is no guarantee. Why take this away, when the end result for the fox is the same?

JAK.

RicardoSmith

Originally posted by Jak
...
Again ban the hunt and you are left with a similar fate for the fox.

Possibly alternatives could be derived to ensure the economic/job value of the hunt is not lost to the community - but there is no guarantee. Why take this away, when the end result for the fox is the same?...

Fair and interesting point. Some interesting data there. I assume the use of dogs is common as its v.cheap, and it can be done during the day when foxs are still in their dens. Its also a traditional way of doing it. As years ago lots of people farmer etc wouldn't have access to guns. Also as foxes are primarly nocturnal it makes shooting them a lot harder especially as most people won't have low vis and ir gear that makes this possible.

Regardless I still reckon a dedicated pest control team with nightgear would decimate a local fox population. Farmers have better things to do with their time then tramp all over the place with dogs trying to get rid of foxes. Its still an inefficient way of doing it. Shooting at night with the right gear is the best way of doing it.

Incidentally did you know its is illegal to lay poison baits for foxes. Just discovered that. I found some other articles too.

"Due to their history of raiding chicken coups, and their taking of ducks and other small farm animals, foxes have frequently been regarded as vermin. In some cases, foxes have been mistakenly accused of killing lambs and calves while they attempted to scavenge their afterbirths. As a result, many have been shot, poisoned, or snared over the years. Even today foxes are sometimes persecuted in an attempt to preserve various game birds and animals for hunting. While it is true that foxes can wreak havoc among unaccustomed bird populations, no conclusive evidence has been found to suggest that a reduction in fox population will increase the respective bird populations.

More than anything else, most farmers now welcome the sight of foxes on their land. A fox can be beneficial to agriculture by eating crop destroying vermin such as mice, voles, rats, and rabbits. Enlightened to the potential advantages of having foxes around, most farmers are now content to leave them alone, so long as individual animals don't present a problem."

I still feel that the traditional fox hunt isn't a believable form of pest control. Its a traditional community and social event. No more no less. I think its fine to want to preserve that part of it. But the killing of the fox isn't. Its not the killing of the fox thats not aceptable its the manner in which its done.

Keeks

Originally posted by Jak
This is part of your problem Keeks. Read first then comment. Most of your posts are littered with "I don't know much about this .. BUT ..." etc.

The reason I don't know is because no one here has yet described a hunt. No one from either side of the argument has stated what goes on (or thinks what goes on) at a fox hunt. And am I not allow to comment on someone else comments.

Originally posted by Jak
Fox Hunts are a part of the way to cull the population of foxes

This is an argument put forward by the pro-hunting lobby time and time again. And it makes no sense to me. And makes even less sense to me now that I've looked over the report you post the link to. Why is it necessary to cull the population of Foxes. Are they causing havoc. There are two extracts from the report seem to sugesst that Foxes aren't really that bad.

Although foxes are widely perceived as a pest, two studies suggested that rabbits, rather than foxes, were viewed as a more significant problem.

Yet we don't chase them on horse back

In a study carried out by the Game Conservancy Trust in 1995-1997 the total reported pre-weaning losses which were attributed to foxes among all 522,422 lambs (indoor and outdoor) in mid-Wales was 3,134 lambs, amounting to 0.6%.[203] As a proportion of outdoor lambs, the figure would be 1%. At a typical market price in 1996 of £31.50 per lamb the total regional loss of income would have been just under £100,000. Of course, the effect of the loss on an individual farmer will vary, depending on his or her circumstances.

Originally posted by Jak
A lot quicker than a trap or certain poisons will kill them.

As you will know from reading the report that the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 prohibits the use of self-locking snares and the setting of snares in circumstances where they are likely to kill or injure protected species. Of course this only appies to the UK, but I believe there is a similar law preventinf such snares here in Ireland too. Also from the report:

Fox snares consist of a heavy wire loop set across an area where a fox is likely to pass, with the free end anchored. The loop is designed to hold the fox by the neck until it can be killed humanely. A legal snare must have a 'stop' in order to avoid strangulation.

Fox traps typically comprise mesh cages that catch the fox alive until it can be killed humanely.

Also two other things from the report that interested me. The tail ("brush") of the fox, or possibly its feet, may be removed and given to one of the followers (why?).
And generally, few riders and followers will be present at the kill. IF you're not at the kill, why chase it in the first place?

The evidence which we have seen suggests that, in the case of the killing of a fox by hounds above ground, death is not always effected by a single bite to the neck or shoulders by the leading hound resulting in the dislocation of the cervical vertebrae. In a proportion of cases it results from massive injuries to the chest and vital organs, although insensibility and death will normally follow within a matter of seconds once the fox is caught. There is a lack of firm scientific evidence about the effect on the welfare of a fox of being closely pursued, caught and killed above ground by hounds. We are satisfied, nevertheless, that this experience seriously compromises the welfare of the fox.

RicardoSmith

I don't know if any of you have stood in front of hunt as it passes on its way, but its pretty scary. I can only imagine the terror for the fox as its being chased. And before someone asks I wasn't delibrately obstructing the hunt I was working in a field, with a couple of other people when the hunt trespassed across the land. I was wondering had anyone esle been that close to one.

The Saint

I dont think that the population control arguement control is a valid one. When the foot and mouth crisis happened and all hunting was stopped, a study was done in the UK which showed that even after a year of no fox hunting the fox populations had not increased therefore requiring no need for control. The other arguement about the antis eating meat and protesting about the killing of foxes, I have one question to ask. Do the hunters eat the fox's? Hands up who does, anyone, no, didnt think so.

Jak

Keeks.

Why is it necessary to cull the population of Foxes

There are conflicting reports on the damage they cause. Unfortunately this debate does not have the benefit of solid evidence on the exact levels of damage they cause.

Also two other things from the report that interested me. The tail ("brush") of the fox, or possibly its feet, may be removed and given to one of the followers (why?).

If it is dead - who cares? Is it insensitive to the fox's relatives?

As regards rabbits being possibly more of a pest. Relative values does not mean we should do nothing about one population. While we do not chase rabbits on horseback (though in coursing a hare is chased) we do shoot and snare them, and in the past (possibly still) poison them.


Ricardo

the terror for the fox

As cold as this may sound - I really could care less about the terror of the fox. It is a wild animal, wild animals entire existence is survival - animals suffer and recover from terror all the time. This is likely one of the sticking points in the argument.

The Saint.

When the foot and mouth crisis happened and all hunting was stopped, a study was done in the UK which showed that even after a year of no fox hunting the fox populations had not increased therefore requiring no need for control

Do you have the report? There may have been other factors in such an exceptional year which prevented growth in the fox population. In addition, leave the population utterly unchecked for 5 years and you will likely see a far more significant growth trend.

The other arguement about the antis eating meat and protesting about the killing of foxes, I have one question to ask. Do the hunters eat the fox's? Hands up who does, anyone, no, didnt think so.

The point is not whether the meat is eaten or not. It is the fact it is killed in such a way, No? Or would you find it acceptable if the fox was eaten at the end of the hunt?

Processed foods can be derived from animals killed in particularly gruesome manners, yet this is acceptable while the killing of a fox for a hunt is not. Both animals probably suffer and the hunted animal may also die, the processed one has no chance of survival though. I see it as a case of double standards or feigned mob sensitivity that a person could get so emotional about fox hunting while eating a ham sandwich.

You are fighting a losing battle if you think the world will convert to vegetarianism, and in the absence of that, I see no solid moral ground that can be taken telling me that hunting for whatever purpose should be outlawed.

JAK.

ps- I trust you have a solution to the loss to local economies and related industries of abolishing hunts and later hunting generally?