# Fox hunting



## Tom Bell-Drier (Mar 1, 2006)

following on from a thread posted in the fashion forum where some discusion about fox hunting was refered to. any one wish to discuss the merits or otherwise. With particular refrence to hunting in the uk

I am pro hunting


----------



## Jill (Sep 11, 2003)

Agreed. But I don't know enough about the actual details of the issue there, as it has been debated. What are the primary arguments against it?


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

'Fox Hunting' is a sport with so deep a patina of tradition contemporary views are lost in the Currier and Ives prints. Bullfighting is also abhored by many, though it's roots go back to ancient Crete if not the paleolithic peoples who gave us Altamira. Briefly, it has been officially banned after efforts of animal rights groups who successfully argued the barbarity of running down a single animal to exuastion by a pack of dogs and horsemen.That the actual killing is an adjunct for an excuse to ride crosscountry is lost in the melee. As I understand it, many rural landowners are relieved too. The hunts are notorious for damaging property, crops, livestock and pets, not to mention the usual percentile of injured dogs, horses and riders.There was a western america version, targeting our native coyotes or wolves. One new money aristocrat even imported a pack of wolfhounds for the sport. Sadly, the wolfpack targetted employed that most ancient of weapons, a female in heat. One by one the wolfhounds became the hunted.Our landbaron then employed range poison, killing a local Basque sheepherder's dog. The Basque took an old hammer shotgun to the baron.The feble excuse has always been control of vermin. That the 'vermin' on both sides survives today negates that argument.


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

Its a tradition. Let it continue. That is what animals were put on this earth for.


----------



## jackmccullough (May 10, 2006)

Although there are obviously circumstances in which killing animals is necessary and a boon to humanity, I would agree with the characterization of the practice of running down a single animal to exhaustion as barbaric.

I also understand (please correct me if I'm wrong) that the hunt is not confined to the property of the person conducting the hunt, so that the hunt does involve the pack of dogs and hunters running over many neighbors' property, with the likelihood of damaging the neighbors' property. I don't know if the adjoining landowners can bar the hunters from their property, but that would mitigate this objection in my mind if they can.

I don't think stating that it's a tradition is a sufficient defense. Dog fighting, cock fighting, bull baiting, and other practices that most people would consider barbaric are also traditional in certain cultures, but that doesn't justify them.

Finally, I really don't understand the defense that this is what the animals were put on this earth for, unless it's a joke. Even if you believe that a god created the earth and put the earth and all living things on it at the disposal of man, which I do not, it's a major leap to conclude that foxes are here so that humans can kill them for their amusement.


----------



## Doctor Damage (Feb 18, 2005)

Inre the trespassing issue, organized fox hunts these days are quite careful to get prior permission from landowners (although in the old days they did just run rampant, and damn the peasants!).


----------



## Jill (Sep 11, 2003)

The only Fieldmaster I know personally, of the Galway Blazers Hunt, has clearance to ride across practically the entire Connemara region of western Ireland. So I don't think that's much of an issue.

I've ridden the same trail across Ireland, without the foxes, for a week-long ride. My hunch is that the riders are just looking for an excuse to run their ponies and jump walls.


----------



## Trenditional (Feb 15, 2006)

pt4u67 said:


> Its a tradition. Let it continue. That is what animals were put on this earth for.


Give the animals weapons, then let hunting continue.


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

*Abuse is abuse*

I freely admit to having a cloudy vision of this whole debate.

I don't see that the abuse of hunting a fox is that much different than abusing a pet dog or cat by over feeding it and keeping it prisoner in a house or apartment. Likewise I don't see that much difference in hunting a fox and eating my eggs for breakfast which came from chickens kept in small cages or eating beef from cows raised in dung filled feed lots with no room to even walk around. It is all abuse, and it all could be stopped if people wanted it to stop.

I guess I just cannot condem the foxhunter while eating my steak and eggs while wearing my leather handsewns after I walk the dog.


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

Trenditional said:


> Give the animals weapons, then let hunting continue.


Yes I agree that would make things much more interesting.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Sometimes it pays off to make like Aesop instead of Nimrod. I was out riding one day and found a coyote pup half dead. She had an extra forelimb growing out at the knee and was probably abandoned by her mother. I brought her back to the barn and a nursing collie. 'Suzy' grew into a great friend of thehorses, dogs and people until the inevitable day nature called her to move on. It was late at night and one of the mares had just foaled. I saw two pairs of eyes approaching and went for the 97 Winchester. A third pair came in at an angle and I heard a very brief battle followed by pained yelps. Suzy emerged into the arena lights victorious, gave a friendly howl and faded into memory. We saw here briefly, always at a distance. For a few generations the local 'yotes had a most friendly disposition and awareness that avocadoes and mice were food, foals offlimits.


----------



## tabasco (Jul 17, 2006)

*hunting with dogs*

In my part of the world (Northern Wisconsin), bear hunts are conducted with a pack of radio-collared dogs, followed by hunters driving in pickups with directional antennas (and presumably with guns). This hardly seems sport in the sense of fox hunters jumping fences etc.

I've killed animals to eat, some I raised, some I hunted; I believe that in order to eat meat, one must kill, clean, and process the animal, the better to know life and death. I am a better man for having knowingly killed and eaten.

Although I know nothing about contemporary fox hunting, I think I'd probably really enjoy the thrill of the ride, the baying of the hounds, etc.

The FOX part of the deal bothers me because of the gratuitous suffering of the fox.


----------



## crazyquik (Jun 8, 2005)

It's simply another example of urbanites telling rural people how to live. It happens all over the Disneyfied West; because the civilized and enlightened politicians, activists, and editorial writers in the city know the best way for the rest of us to live. Labour is no friend of firearms or lawul gunowners, Scotland is implementing knifecontrol, and the class warfare continues with the ban on foxhunting.

Would the predator have any moral qualms with running a sheep, goat, colt, calf, deer, or elk untill it was exhausted and then kill it? I doubt it, seeing as how this is the preferred hunting method of coyotes and wolves in much of the US. Practically every week there is a show on PBS, Discovery, Animal Planet, or National Geographic of a pack of canines running an herbivore to death. Either "distract the mother while my buddies eat the baby" or "take turns running untill the animal is exhausted and then coordinate an attack".

If only the wolves and coyotes would do something useful, like kill the feral horses and donkeys...[flame suit on]

Perhaps the next Conservative government will overturn the law.


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

I don't understand the pleasure some apparently derive from killing another creature for the "sport" of it. Thankfully, that's alien to me. 

I do understand the traditional role of hunting throughout human history (e.g. food, shelter) and have no quarrel with that. 

I've seen footage of hunters in ATVs chasing down their kill before letting loose with their high-powered scope rifles. That's sporting? 

Barbaric.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

crazyquik said:


> Labour is no friend of firearms or lawul gunowners, Scotland is implementing knifecontrol...


No kidding!

Hate to say this though, and I have no moral justification as I have taken a few deer and moose in my time (no GPS, no ATV, guys on foot and we always ate our game, in fact I know families that count on the meat), but somehow fox hunting does seem a little Gladiator at the heart of it, what?


----------



## TheSaint (Jun 28, 2005)

*Bull Fighting*

I agree with many that hunting for food/meat is ok. Hunting for sport, or, aka "kill for the sake of killing" (Fox Hunting) in my opinion is barbaric. During my many travels to London, I had the opportunity to watch live Spanish Bull Fight(s) on British TV. Needless to say, I was appalled. The Matador would inflict the final blow by thrusting a sword into what I think is the spine behind the neck of the bull. The bull would take a few minutes to die standing there coughing up massive amounts of blood before finally collapsing. Perhaps some would argue that the bull would probably be used for meat anyway, so why not do this. As I understand, Bull Fighting is a very long tradition in Spain. Still barbaric though. Definitely an unforgettable sight.


----------



## patbrady2005 (Oct 4, 2005)

Bull fighting, cock fighting, fox hunting - IMO these are all disgusting needless acts that serve no practical purpose in any sense.

A hunter killing animals for food (or farmers/ranchers "processing" animals for mass consumption) is entirely another topic - at least it fulifills a need.

Believe me, I'm no bleeding heart PETA type, but I think that anyone who defends these sorts of things has a twisted heart.

I just ate filet mignon kabobs for dinner by the way.


----------



## Tom Bell-Drier (Mar 1, 2006)

having grown up and been part of the community of the country side and still living in the country , along with being a member of a hunt ,I feel I have some validity in putting forward my point of view.

there is no denying there is a sporting aspect of fox hunting,however this is not the whole story.In the british countryside foxes are regarded as vermin unfortunately they are not particually clean or efficient killers (any one who has not stood in a chicken shed witnessing the display of carnage in particular the sight of chickens with their backsides ripped out with their innards dragging on the floor behind them (yes still alive) ,I can assure you it is not a pretty sight.

It is difficult initially to understand but the fox hunter is in actuall fact completely against cruelty to any animal the fox included and in some respects a friend of the fox, how are these conclusions drawn well the alternative to hunting foxes with hounds are:

snaring, a long slow drawn out death through either starvation,shock,infection,strangulation or internal injury.

poison, again a long slow drawn out death for obvious reasons.

shooting with shootgun, difficult to be accurate over anything but short distances leading to the very high chance of injury but not death ,again leading to a long drawn out painfull death.

shooting with rifle, unless the marksman is very efficient and accurate (there is a reason foxes are reffered to as sly-they are wary of everything, and rarely give themselves to be a standing target in the open) there is again the high risk of injury but no instant kill.

without fox hunting there is a good chance of over population of the fox leading to scarcity of food and again starvation.

there can be no denying a fox kill by a pack of hounds is dramatic and sometimes bloody but it is also quick and efficient these hounds do not toy with the fox as a cat with a mouse does ,or indeed the fox with it`s prey,they are big dogs who with long linage are bred for a specific job.

although the popular image of fox hunting is of landed gentry riding across the country side in pursuit of a fox in red coats this is not entirely accurate there are many footpacks in England and wales, and many ordinary every day people who partake in hunts such as builders , electricians, teachers, policemen, bankmanagers , mechanics in fact pretty much people from every walk of life partake.

I feel it is particually telling that the current chairman of the countryside alliance,( a pro hunt lobby group) Kate Hoey is also a labour politician and former minister ( the labour party forming the government and enacting the current legislation of banning hunting with hounds).
www.countryside-alliance.org

I feel I have tried to give a ballanced view of my beliefs in fox hunting ,I am sure there are many who still disagree with my view,but I can at least speak from a position of experience rather than rhetoric and hearsay.

thankyou for reading.


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

Agree with the foregoing. I think overlooked in some of the previous threads is that quite frequently the fox gets away unscathed. It certainly gives the fox a much more sporting chance than other forms of control. When the hounds get the fox it is all over in a few seconds. This strikes me as much better than steel leghold traps, poison or even shooting, which can often result in wounded animals escaping to die lingering deaths.

Some other forms of animal "cruelty" I am fairly sympathetic to: Given all that we do to chickens, cocking does not offend me in the slightest. If there is any truth to the oriental doctrine of metempsychosis and I am compelled for my many sins to return as a chicken, I would incomparably rather be a fighting cock than some poor caponized broiler chicken. "Cockfighting, what a shocking business! Oh say, how about picking up dinner at the Colonel tonight?"

I have known quite a few dogfighters, reformed or otherwise. The culling practices I find far more morally unsettling than the actual pitting of the dogs. I prefer the Japanese system, where losing dogs are not customarily put down and are allowed to make comebacks.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Crazyquik, Your knowledge of coyote/wolf behavior needs some tuning. The rapid expansion of coyotes from a confined southwestern range to Alaska and Canada in the north and as far south as Central America is directly a result of the eradication of the wolf.Nature abhors a hole. You show prejudice in wishing 'feral' horses and donkeys were predated by these two species. Well, I hate to tell you this, but the number one population control of wild horses is predation; mostly lions and opportunistic coyotes exhibiting new pack behavior. Donkeys are another issue, and a cronic lung disease in the wild populations may yet eradicate this symbol and 'TRADITION' of the Old West faster than the tradition of fox hunting. You may be interested to know donkeys, AKA burros are being adopted for predator control, bonding with sheep herds and famous for kicking or biting wild dogs, coydogs and coyotes into oblivion. Hunting and anti hunting is an old argument, with people singing to their own choirs, parting wind with stale arguments, statistics, anecdotes and emotion on both sides. I find it ironic man, the early hunter is most hostile and passionate against other alpha predators. Indeed, anthropological studies postulate wolves exhibit the closest social behavior to early mankind, and his 100% genetic cousin the dog came from chosen individuals from early symbiotic hunting partnerships. It was that very partnership in Paleo America that is now theorised to have 'pushed' allready troubled populations of the Pliestocene new world mammals into regional extinction; the HORSE ( unique to N.A.) camel, elephant, giant sloth etc. A wolf may 'run an herbivore to exaustion' but at least he doesn't do it on asphalt, cement and steel that have run far more of the earth's citizens to oblivion. The KOYANNISQUATSI of some megafauna SUV prowling California's central route through a vanished wetland filled with ghost grizzlies and silenced massive flight paths of geese is more worisome to me than God's Dog, the great trickster laughing at our hypocrisy, and eventual failure to uphold our stewardship of the land, a responsibility and gift mentioned and ignored in most major religons.


----------



## jackmccullough (May 10, 2006)

Mr. Bell-Drier, I'm trying to understand your point, but the utilitarian argument sounds invalid to me. I suspect that there may have originally been a utilitarian reason for the hunt but that it now serves mainly as a rationalization. Is there really no more efficient and effective way to protect the livestock of a farm from predation than to get several dozen horses, dogs, and people together and spend most of a day chasing them across the countryside?

You undoubtedly know more about how it works than I do, but over on this side of the Pond we get the impression that these fox hunts are social events that don't necessarily happen all that often, that there is one fox involved (maybe caught and released for the purpose? I don't know.), and that often the fox gets away. I also gather that these hunts are huge social events (which I have nothing at all against, of course).

Do I have it right, or am I missing something? If the goal is to defend against predation wouldn't it be better to have dogs out in the farmyard, or some other approach that provides for a more consistent defense?


----------



## AlanC (Oct 28, 2003)

JLibourel said:


> "Cockfighting, what a shocking business! Oh say, how about picking up dinner at the Colonel tonight?"


LOL

...


----------



## Old Brompton (Jan 15, 2006)

jackmccullough said:


> I would agree with the characterization of the practice of running down a single animal to exhaustion as barbaric.


Interesting point. Hell, I think sodomy is barbaric. Shall we ban it? Sodomy arguably is far more destructive, both to those who indulge in it as well as to society, than is fox hunting. Shall we ban sodomy?

By the way, the ban on foxhunting is a perfect example of the "anarcho-tyranny" that currently prevails in Western societies. While Muslims parade through London streets demanding the beheading of "infidels" and shouting slogans such as "Europe, you will pay--your 9/11 is on its way," the British authorities spend precious time and resources and the media darlings waste column inches persecuting...fox hunting advocates!

The REAL criminals are coddled, while ordinary citizens are punished and persecuted and outlawed.

We live in interesting times.


----------



## AlanC (Oct 28, 2003)

Old Brompton said:


> By the way, the ban on foxhunting is a perfect example of the "anarcho-tyranny" ...


Has someone been reading his Chronicles?


----------



## Tom Bell-Drier (Mar 1, 2006)

jackmccullough said:


> Mr. Bell-Drier, I'm trying to understand your point, but the utilitarian argument sounds invalid to me. I suspect that there may have originally been a utilitarian reason for the hunt but that it now serves mainly as a rationalization. Is there really no more efficient and effective way to protect the livestock of a farm from predation than to get several dozen horses, dogs, and people together and spend most of a day chasing them across the countryside?
> 
> You undoubtedly know more about how it works than I do, but over on this side of the Pond we get the impression that these fox hunts are social events that don't necessarily happen all that often, that there is one fox involved (maybe caught and released for the purpose? I don't know.), and that often the fox gets away. I also gather that these hunts are huge social events (which I have nothing at all against, of course).
> 
> Do I have it right, or am I missing something? If the goal is to defend against predation wouldn't it be better to have dogs out in the farmyard, or some other approach that provides for a more consistent defense?


there is no denying fox hunts are a social occasion,generally speaking the hunt is formed of 1 to maybe upto five huntmasters these are non payed stewards of the hunt whos responsibility it is to organise various aspects of the running of the hunt (obtaining permission to ride over others land, wage payments to hunt staff etc.)
there would then be the hunt staff who are renummerated such as the staff looking after the hounds and horses ( where applicable).
then the huntsman himself who is responsible for the field on huntdays ,this is the man who knows the hounds best ,who rears them , exercises them, he also has the job of blowing the "horn "to instruct the hounds he also organises the meat run gathering fallen stock from local farms (this is a great service to the farmers as all disposal of fallen stock is taken care of by the hunt rather than the farmer having to make his own expensive arrangements for disposal).
whipper ins help the huntsman on hunt days controlling the dogs and keeping the field in a group.

hunting generaly takes place twice a week usually wedensdays and sataurdays.

obviously more people are able to turn up on saturdays.

the foxes are wild in there natural habitat.

the vast majority of the people you see hunting are the lowly hunt supporters and subscribers who allow the hunt to maintain itself by paying dues so the animals can be kept and fed ,and staff wages payed .


----------



## jackmccullough (May 10, 2006)

Thanks. Is it considered an effective way to keep the fox population down?


----------



## Tom Bell-Drier (Mar 1, 2006)

jackmccullough said:


> Thanks. Is it considered an effective way to keep the fox population down?


It is considred the most effective- least cruel option availlable for reasons stated in my other posts on the subject.

obviously if a young fit fox is chased there is a good chance it will get away.
not every chase or perhaps every 1 in 5 chases leads to a kill.

obviously the chances of a kill increase if the fox chased is an old ill or injured fox.

the fox is considred to be a worthy adversary and not that easy to track down and kill. it`s really not a case of "look there`s a fox lets kill it"- the fox is more willy than that.


----------



## tabasco (Jul 17, 2006)

*predator control*

I've raised chickens, rabbits, pigs, geese. All these animals spent their time (when not eating) trying to get out of the pen, or fence that confined them.
I also raise vegetables and have fruit trees. Wild animals (mainly deer, bear, raccoon, and rabbits) on the outside of the fence try to get IN.

Before I built proper fencing, I had chicken coop carnage, and cabbage & corn patch carnage, my apples were eaten in the fall, and the fruit tree blossom ends eaten.

Proper fences will keep the foxes out; "predator control" is a non-starter with me on the fox issue.

I've got so many deer in my area that car insurance rates reflect the inevitable collisions, and I welcome the increase in wolves.

I'm not a sheep farmer, however.ic12337:


----------



## crazyquik (Jun 8, 2005)

Kav said:


> Crazyquik, Your knowledge of coyote/wolf behavior needs some tuning. The rapid expansion of coyotes from a confined southwestern range to Alaska and Canada in the north and as far south as Central America is directly a result of the eradication of the wolf.Nature abhors a hole.


Coyotes have expanded across Tennessee, VA, SC, and NC as well, and I suspect other states in the region. This has happened in the last 5 years where I live, and perhaps the last 20 in the greater area. Why, I can't say.

Evidently the feral hogs still breed faster than the coyotes/wolves/mountain lions can eat them. I understand this is more of a problem in California, Texas, and some other western areas, but they populations are growing in parts of the South too.


----------

