have hunted both with guns and to hound believe me having to follow a fox over a number of feilds when u have winged it is not fun for a fox when riding to hound the fox has a chance and seen many get away
also seen the ripped out throat of hens and lambs which the fox has killed for fun as they very rarely eat the animals
think then vote
You forget leprechaun, in the absence of hunting with hounds the cute little foxy woxxies will no longer be torn to shreds by the hounds of blood crazed unthinking aristocrats, but will instead be instantaneously executed by honest men of the soil acting only to preserve their fluffy bunny rabbits and baa-lambs.
(or at least that seems to be the argument. Largely propogated by people who wouldn't know which end of a rifle to hold...)
To be less flippant about the 'anti' argument -
Perhaps someone would like to outline an aspect of the argument that isn't Class War or "isn't it nasty" ?
Killing vermin is nasty. Slaughtering livestock is pretty grim too. But both of these are a fact of life and are going to remain such. Foxes are going to continue to be killed. At present, if a fox is cornered by a pack, it dies. Not prettily, but very quickly. There is no other method of killing foxes that guarantees that. An expert marksman with a Lightforce on a .22 will not kill every fox he hits outright.
Neil, I was not first to mention the 'class' aspects of hunting, nor would I have done had they not been brought up in other posts. Not least because they are not as evident as some on the anti side would have you believe.
Both sides, as you have pointed out, are guilty of oversimpllification, and the anti side, and the mass media, have increasingly used the suggestion that the only people who will be affected by a ban are 'toffs on horses', easily ridiculed. The argument has been steered away from the economic impact, not on rich landowners, but on ordinary working people.
I do not think that the town v country argument as perpetuated by the Countryside Alliance is a helpful one, but I do not think it can be denied that both this and the 'Class War' standpoint are being promoted ?
Whilst you do not accept that a fox can be regarded as vermin, most farmers would take this view. The government also is going to allow a continuation of the killing of foxes as vermin. So my point is this: Many people, here and elsewhere, have taken the view that hunting is barbaric and that 'humane methods' should be used instead. These humane methods do not exist and to perpetuate the myth that foxes can be killed without any suffering does suggest a naivety about the realities of country life, which hardly serves to destroy the 'meddling townies' perception.
Thankfully the majority of people are not put in a position where animals affect their livelihood, but in other jobs where vermin do cause the loss of income they are exterminated. Warfarin is a very unpleasant poison, yet I do not see a campaign to ban the poisoning of rats ?
well JonJon yes i take your point entirely. and i apologise for the personal tone of my previous post. i genuinely do.
if rats we're invading my home, and were a threat to my health, then i would probably take action. i have posted in a flippant way some time ago, that tells you i have a complete phobia of rats, and the very word is enough to make me cringe. i prefer "longtails".
nevertheless, i do not feel that even there, i have the right to exterminate them. if my *health* is threatened by them, well yes, i think and feel more than a rat, and i value *my* life above their's. my point is, i do not value a chicken above even a rat. i know they will eat their way through concrete to find food in my cupboards given half a chance. i can only make it a less attractive / more difficult option for them. as for my livelihood? i'm not sure on that one. i knew this argument would come up days ago when i first posted, and i still can't give you a good answer. i simply know in my heart that it is cruel, verging on sadistic, to rip a fox, rat, rabbit, whatever apart by a pack of hounds, and take pleasure from it, and try and defend it with weak argument. i will never, ever, support it. and that i have a chance to finally make my disgust felt? well it's not before time.
what i do know is, my feelings on the entire hunting debate, whether it's foxes, rabbits, rats, or fish, remain steadfast and unshakeable, because it is not a political argument, despite the hijacking by both sides of this particular equation. i can say no more on this than i have already said on this thread, and others.
neil x x x;-)
joj jon...as stated more times than i care to add up.......it is not the killing of a pest on farmers land that I oppose....it is the glorification of the death. Do you think it is civilized to stand and watch an animal that has just been chased by a pack of dogs, then be torn apart in a frenzy. And may i say not just watch but to cheer, slap each other on the back. And they call it a sport. maybe you would be in favour of badger baiting....dog fighting...cock fighting ??
there are reasons for killing animals...we eat them..they are pests....but we don't stand around and revel in that death !!
it will now soon be illegal and in years to come people will look back and wonder why we ever allowed it for so long.
