Chasing a wild animal for hours deliberately prolonging the chase and then being torn apart by dogs

Where do you get your propaganda, TJ? You do realise that there was a study done which showed that the average chase was less than half an hour (significantly less I think, but really can't be bothered to go and look it up). As to it being killed by being torn apart, that bit is hardly a scientific fact either, much as the anti-hunt people like to keep repeating it (saw an interview with Mike "Hypocrite" Foster the other day where he said it every other sentence).

Chameleon; I'm not attacking, just genuinely curious about what folk get out of hunting.

I've spent time talking to Norwegian hunters, and can see the traditions and reasons behind their form of hunting. Interestingly, they were all highly critical of fox hunting.

I see no problem at all with hunting for food, be it with guns, or other relatively quick and humane methods. I appreciate hunting serves some form of primal need within us, especially men, to prove yourself within an environment. Like with sex, perhaps there needs to be an element of enjoyment in order to provide the necessary drive to make people want to kill. And perhaps, it's just an idea, the reason so many people act like violent thugs at football matches and in town centre pubs, is because they have no other outlet for these instinctive urges.

I think I would quite 'enjoy' the Norwegian style of hunting, as it strikes me as one of the most humane methods of getting meat. I dare say I might get a thrill from a kill.

As for those who dismiss the issue of Class in fox hunting; this form of hunting has, until recently, been the exclusive preserve of the very wealthy; commoners were involved only to look after horses and dogs, and to find foxes lairs and stuff. They weren't allowed on the hunts themselves. Indeed, considering that more 'lower Class' forms of hunting rituals such as badger baiting etc have been outlawed, I think it's pretty safe to say that the powerful and far more influential upper classes have definitely had a hand in preserving their 'sport'.

West Kipper – the issue with food production is that potentially most of the people slating shooting and hunting eat meat that has been ill treated. I refer to cheap meat and meat from abroad.

I'm not sure you've properly read my post, chameleon.
Whether its meat or arable production, there will be some inevitable accidental cruelty and deaths, some necessary pest control issues
Whatever food you've eaten, even if you're a vetetarian, will have resulted in animals dying somewhere along the line.
My point is that with foxhunting its unnecessary and deliberate.

aracer – thats right – deliberately prolonging. The dogs are bred not to be too fast so they don't catch them too quickly.

TJ – where is your proof of this??? Just out of interest?

Talkamada – hate to disappoint you but I dont feel that while shooting i am trying to prove myself as a man.
I would also like to point out that there are many women who shoot and hunt so it isn't a world of men trying to prove themselves.

Just refresh my mind on the Norwegian style of hunting please – I am familiar with boar hunting in Europe and that is basically herds of pigs driven by men with dogs towards the guns. i'm not sure how similar Norwegian hunting is to this?

Well, in Norway, it's more about tracking the animals (mainly types of deer and elk), and shooting them with high-velocity rifles. Sort of thing depicted in 'Deerhunter'. It is very strictly controlled, and animal populations are closely monitored. This form of hunting serves to keep control of animal populations, 'culling' as it's known.

The animals are killed almost instantly, and therefore feel minimum pain and stress. The whole point is to approach the animal so that it isn't startled, and runs off. Virtually every part of the animal is used, and Norwegian culture reflects this strong tradition in it's traditional crafts. I found it fascinating.

It is far removed from the barbary of fox hunting.

cynic-al – Member
That's just naive.

Nicely justified.

The idea that the legislation against hunting foxes with hounds is to do with the welfare of foxes is complete nonsense. It is still perfectly legal to kill them with guns, traps and by gassing.

Shooting and trapping often leaves the fox to die a long drawn-out and agonisingly painful death where the animal is injured and still escapes the attention of the hunter. Trapped foxes often escape the trap by gnawing off the trapped limb, dragging themselves away to die in agony.

Gassed in the set, the vixen and cubs die in a particularly horrible way together, aware of each other's suffering.

To date, there is no outcry from the anti-foxhunters with regard to these methods of killing. What hypocrisy.

The upshot of the legislation is that you can still kill foxes, you just can't do it in a posh way…

I would feel happier about the situation if the anti's were honest about it and just admitted that the campaign is/was simply a matter of class/cultural prejudice.

When hunted by dogs, the fox:

1: has a chance of getting away and

2: if caught, is despatched quickly by a bite that severs it's spinal chord.

It seems obvious to me which is the more humane method.

Dont you think that drag hunting is deliberately being undersold a bit?
In the process of sticking to their guns, the countryside communities are ignoring something that could be non divisive, and promoted as a spectacle that would draw in money and visitors to an area. A bit like Up Helly Aa, The Hawick Common Riding or even The Palio in Siena.
Instead, we have a rather discredited, insular and bad tempered affair, unless of course thats the whole point?

Toys it's an obvious point that needs no justification.

You have taken a vote-seeking proposal from a Tory and turned it into "no one cares about anything else".

Not being funny but how old are you?

woppit – you think chasing a terrified animal for a deliberately long time then it being torn to death once it is exhausted is humane?

The quick nip on the back of the neck is a myth. Very rarely happens. Plenty of evidence of this.

Remember the fox hunt is not about getting rid of predators as is clearly established. Fox hunts nurture and support foxes to ensure a supply of prey. Again established fact.

Support it on grounds that make sense – tradition and culture but don't try to pretend its anything but killing for the fun of killing.

cynic-al – Member

Toys it's an obvious point that needs no justification.

You have taken a vote-seeking proposal from a Tory and turned it into "no one cares about anything else".

Not being funny but how old are you?

No I haven't, I merely pointed out that its not anywhere as important as many other issues, it about priorities. I don't need the tories or you to help me decide what's right or wrong.

As regards my age, I'm shy, why don't you tell us how old you are?

TJ I corrected this for you.

Support killing animals for meat eating on grounds that make sense – utility, reasons? Tradition and culture, but don't try to pretend its anything but killing for the fun of killing.

41 and grumpy. Your view of these things just strikes me as naive but I'm not bothered enough about it to argue with you.

38 and optimistic. Calling me naive strikes me as horribly patronising, but I don't really care how superior you think you are.

Talkemada – I'm sorry you're wrong as that isn't norwegian style hunting at all, it is basic stalking which is what goes on in Scotland and the UK and the world over. It is only an instant kill if the shot is perfect – I have seen Deer shot, only for it to run on for about 5 or more minutes with another shot or two required to finish it off provided you can keep up with it, which some would envisage as cruel.In some cases a dog is used to follow the injured deer and take it down. In the UK you have to take a test to prove that your shot grouping meets a required standard to give you permission to stalk and kill. I'm not so sure if the europeans are so hot on that, I may stand corrected though.

I think this thread could go on forever as its such a contentious subject as to what is cruel and what isn't.

Personally while i don't condone hunting with dogs I believe that the fox would die quicker by the dogs. whether its pointless or not is another thing and down to personal opinion.

Don't take it personally.

cynic-al – Member

Don't take it personally. [/quote]

Thanks, I realise now you are the supreme being, everyone is naive in your eyes! 😆

Talkemada – I'm sorry you're wrong as that isn't norwegian style hunting at all, it is basic stalking which is what goes on in Scotland and the UK and the world over.

I meant, the style of hunting that is done in Norway. 🙄

Chamealeon – the pointlessness of it is fact. Fox hunting does not remove foxes from the ecology as the hunts nurture foxes by feeding and by providing artificial earths – and there is no fox problem in areas with no hunts. As for it being quicker – that opinion and all the evidence points to other methods being quicker and more humane should there be a need to cull foxes.

You've lost me but happy to see you smiling.

Mr Woppit – you couldn't have said it better. Spot on.

Like Woppit said the fox isn't chased for hours on end, usualy the hunt is only out for a couple of hours and it is unlikely that they find a fox, in the rare case that they do the chase usually ends pretty quickly with either a kill or the fox getting away.

If thats the case chameleon, why is the precise technicality of a fox death so important? such a sticking point?

Talkemada – that 'style' of hunting in Norway is the same 'style' that goes on here I'm afraid.

TJ – Where are you getting supporting evidence for these claims? Hunts usually operate to eradicate a pest on farmland – the fox. Why would a farmer deliberately allow a fox den to be built purely to get foxes in? I'm sorry but that is a load of Bollox.
As to other methods being more humane and quicker, please read Mr Woppits post. You can add to that death by a golden eagle. look it up see what you think is more humane.

I remember a program – kill it cook it eat it. On one episode they were shooting rabbits that were causing a problem on some farm land. One person on the show was an animal rights woman – she couldnt shoot the rabbits because it was in her words barbaric and there were more humane man made methods of killing them, to which the presenter replied "You think Mixamatosis is a more humane death than one shot?" the woman had no response and couldn't justify what she'd said. Point being that she was very blinkered in her opinions.

trailmonkey – as a self righteous fascist i no longer feel i can add to this post. Are you seriously suggesting people on here of being fascists over comments for and against hunting with dogs?????? You need help!!

i find the attitude of the anti hunt lobby to be both highly self righteous and also fascistic in its heavy handed approach to liberty heritage and tradition in a way that has no mandate from a majority of the public.

i also rather suspect that you haven't really bothered to read what i have posted.

Is hunting on public land allowed in the UK? I thought it was only allowed on private estates?

West Kipper – it isn't, just trying to get the point across that other methods of killing can be less humane.

Trailmonkey – there is a clear majority of the public in favour of banning hunting with dogs – again no doubt about that whatsoever.

The rank hypocrisy and tortuous justifications of the hunt supporters are really laughable.

Trailmonkey – there is a clear majority of the public in favour of banning hunting with dogs – again no doubt about that whatsoever

Evidence please

You'd probably find a majority of the public were in favour of capital punishment too.

Chameleon – admitted by hunts many times over. Plenty of evidence.

Well according to the guy I mentioned some pages ago, chameleon, it isn't more humane than skillful shooting. And while he's not mentioned any artificial den building, he is aware of feeding of foxes, since he's been called into shoot them.

New Ipsos MORI polling published today shows the latest public views on hunting (including fox hunting, deer hunting and hare hunting and coursing).

Among the general public as a whole, three quarters (75%) support the ban on fox hunting remaining, while 21% want it repealed. Over eight in ten (84%) think the ban on deer hunting should stay in place. A similar number – 85% – say hare coursing and hunting should remain illegal.

http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemId=2479

And
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1389913.stm

This is the repeated pattern over many years – the overwhelming majority of the british public believe in a ban on fox hunting.

If you follow the text down a little you will find this…….

The poll was commissioned by the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) and the League Against Cruel Sports

Hard to imagine that this was completely free of influence.

Hard to imagine that this was completely free of influence.

Ah, attempts to discredit the sources now… 🙄

Face it; no-one can come up with a proper reasonable intelligent justification for hunting foxes with dogs.

Therefore, the only conclusion that can be made is that it is wrong, and should stop.

Case dismissed!

clearly a biased source so please accept this large pinch of salt. Please also look at the direct quotes from hunts.

http://www.acigawis.co.uk/artificial_earths.htm

There is lots more. Beaufort hunt were caught doing it. Many other hunts have been. Its simply common practice to feed foxes and to create artificial earths

Again – don't be hypocritical and try to pretend fox hunting is about pest control – it simply is not.

Face it; no-one can come up with a proper reasonable intelligent justification for 22 grown men kicking a ball around a field.

Therefore, the only conclusion that can be made is that it is wrong, and should stop.

Case dismissed!

😉

Captan Flashheart, I hold you in contempt of court, and sentence you to fifty lashes from Madame Fou-Fou of Wardour St…

Mind you, having watched Birmingham v Liverpool today, you might have a point…

One of the protesters’ key arguments — that foxes need to be destroyed — has been undermined, however, by the discovery of a letter sent by the Master of Foxhounds Association to masters and hunt chairmen.

Complaining about “a shortage of foxes”, it berates landowners who did too little to encourage the animals to breed.

The letter, circulated last March, has come to light following the leak of documents from the Countryside Alliance. It is referred to in an e-mail from Simon Hart, chief executive of the alliance, to Lord Daresbury, the chairman of the foxhounds association. Hart warns the letter would be damaging if it were made public.

“The notice refers in line one to a shortage of foxes,” he wrote. “What for? For several years we have articulated a case for wildlife management.

“That management should be accounting for every rural interest not just hunting. I am concerned that nowhere in the letter do I see reference to the needs of farmers . . . only the interests of foxhunters.

“This would play badly in almost every sector outside hunting itself, and within too.”

Hart takes exception to the suggestion that hunt masters ought to put pressure on members to maintain fox populations: “This can only be interpreted by the outside world as suspicious — the artificial enhancement of a ‘pest species’ for purely sporting benefit.

“We would be ridiculed (if the remarks were published) in parliament and the media.”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article486999.ece?print=yes&randnum=1151003209000

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/this-fox-was-reared-for-a-yorkshire-hunt-to-one-end–to-be-killed-for-pleasure-1167496.html

Again – don't be hypocritical and try to pretend fox hunting is about pest control – it simply is not.

TJ, I have continually stated that my argument is based solely on tradition, culture and heritage, I think that you are confusing my comments with someone elses.

Even if pro hunters were in a tiny minority of the population, I would still back their right to hunt based on those principles. It's not about proving or disproving animal welfare or fighting class politics, it's about defending multi culturalism, preseving heritage and preventing iconoclasm.