Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 4
Do you have lace on your drawers?; Not if you're a real man....
Topic Started: Jan 9 2006, 12:25 PM (1,456 Views)
Jolly
Member Avatar
Geaux Tigers!
The 89th Key
Jan 9 2006, 02:37 PM
Foxhunting? Never really had a problem with it, but never really thought about it either.

Let's think about it....hunting for food or survival? Fine.

Hunting for sport? Unacceptable.

You can fish for sport, but you can throw it back afterwards (or eat it :P).

You can squish bugs, but we've established before here that there's a difference between a dog's "intelligence and cognitive reasoning" and an insects usually "automatic and reactionary process" without emotions.

But having a bunch of men, chase after a fox. All with horses and guns and shooting said fox simple for sport? Simply to have your picture taken with it? Simply to win an award?

Inhumane.

Can someone please explain how it *is* ok?

Maybe if foxes are legitimately over-populated...but that's the only reason I can think of and I highly doubt foxhunters are out there to maintain an healthy ecological environment. :rolleyes:

They ain't bad if you cook 'em right....
The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
The thing about fox-hunting in the UK is that, as far as I'm aware, the majority of the population wanted it banning.

A very vocal minority want to charge about the countryside on horseback, and ignore the wishes of the rest of the country. So?

Personally, I don't care much either way about fox hunting, but if the majority of the country don't want something to occur, that's what the election's for.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
I go fox hunting all the time......... ;)

I catch them, too......
Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
phykell
Member Avatar
Senior Carp
LWpianistin
Jan 9 2006, 09:58 PM
Aqua Letifer
Jan 9 2006, 01:52 PM
LWpianistin
Jan 9 2006, 12:46 PM
...i like fox hunting (damn idiot Blair banned it! :veryangry: )...

Doing my best to bite my tongue. " :P "

:biggrin: i don't mind. i do enjoy a good hunting debate, especially becuase it is hard to debate about in the US since it's useless over here, being all drag hunting, and foxes aren't as much of a "pest" as they are in the UK. but, i have to get packed, and am afraid i would miss the fun. i need to leave this forum...ready...one, two...ok. leaving for a few minutes. but, please PM me if you want! i don't bite hard when debating...

Go for it then. No I'm not from the US but let's show them what real polarisation is shall we?

How about this for openers:

It's cruel, sadistic and unnecessary.

Let me nail my flag to the mast first though: The people who kill defenceless animals for nothing more than the sick, sadistic pleasure of killing and inflicting pain disgust me.

The hunting dogs are bred for stamina, not for speed, thus ensuring that the chase is extended as much as possible. It is the pursuit of the quarry that the hunters enjoy, and the bloody, ghastly end for the fox as it is hunted to exhaustion and finally ripped to pieces and eaten alive.

Hunts frequently use artificial earths feeding foxes to encourage them to breed exploding the myth that hunts exist to control the fox population.

But don't let me jump the gun, let's hear your arguments *for* fox-hunting...
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way it's animals are treated. - Ghandhi

Evil cannot be conquered in the world. It can only be resisted within oneself.

Remember, bones heal and chicks dig scars
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally

Fox hunting:
"The unspeakable in pursuit of the uneatable."

- Oscar Wilde
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
Oh, I wouldn't say that........... :D
Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mister Soak
Member Avatar
Junior Carp
I'm thinking hunting isn't nearly as cruel and unusual as corporate farming techniques in use today. At least the foxes in question had a reasonably free and happy life until the dogs tear 'em apart.

That being said, I prefer getting my meat from the grocery store. It does me good cheer to know that the animal suffered unduly for my benefit. Call it a God complex.

Mr Soak

The Lord Locrian and tiny cages.
Mister Soak
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
phykell
Member Avatar
Senior Carp
Mister Soak
Jan 10 2006, 02:50 AM
I'm thinking hunting isn't nearly as cruel and unusual as corporate farming techniques in use today. At least the foxes in question had a reasonably free and happy life until the dogs tear 'em apart.

What about the cubs then? They didn't have much of a life before they were thrown to a pack of dogs did they? Ah but you probably don't know about that side of UK fox-hunting do you?

The process by which hounds are entered into the hunting is known as cub-hunting. Most hunt followers are probably not aware of this little publicised activity. In spite of the claim by hunters that hounds hunt by inherited instinct it is, nevertheless, necessary to train them by hunting with more experienced hounds.

In the three months leading up to the start of the main hunting season, usually early in the morning, hunt followers surround small areas of woodland where foxes are known to be living. The pack is entered into the covert to find and kill any foxes they find. By this means young hounds gain experience of killing foxes. Older experienced foxes are most likely to escape the hounds and avoid being driven back into the woodland by the hunt followers whose job it is to keep as many foxes as they can in the area to be killed by the hounds. Cub-hunting has since been renamed Autumn hunting in an attempt to disguise its true purpose, claiming that most foxes killed are nearly adult. However, it was the hunters themselves who called this activity cub-hunting. Vixens can give birth up to March and later and cub-hunting begins in August. Many of the foxes hunted and killed will be as young as four to five months.

Young hounds with little experience of killing foxes will not be efficient killers and many foxes must die agonising deaths. Cub-hunting is also the process by which older unfit hounds and younger hounds, which do not hunt to form, are identified. Hounds which are no longer part of the pack, or are not to be entered into it, will be shot.

There is common agreement, even among hunting’s supporters that cubhunting is one of the least acceptable elements of hunting:

‘Cubbing’ is an unsporting part of the sport in which hounds, including fresh young ones, are put into coverts containing foxes while the riders ring the wood to keep the foxes in. It is done to kill some of the cubs and to ‘introduce’ the new hounds to hunting

"There is a harder purpose to cubhunting that from the education of young hounds, for implicit in that education is learning to kill foxes and "…its primary object is to make hounds that will provide fun later on"

"Never lose sight of the fact that one really well-beaten cub killed fair and square is worth half a dozen fresh ones killed the moment they are found without hounds having to set themselves to the task. It is essential that hounds should have their blood up and learn to be savage with their fox before he is killed."
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way it's animals are treated. - Ghandhi

Evil cannot be conquered in the world. It can only be resisted within oneself.

Remember, bones heal and chicks dig scars
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LWpianistin
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
phykell
Jan 9 2006, 07:54 PM
Mister Soak
Jan 10 2006, 02:50 AM
I'm thinking hunting isn't nearly as cruel and unusual as corporate farming techniques in use today.  At least the foxes in question had a reasonably free and happy life until the dogs tear 'em apart.

What about the cubs then? They didn't have much of a life before they were thrown to a pack of dogs did they? Ah but you probably don't know about that side of UK fox-hunting do you?

The process by which hounds are entered into the hunting is known as cub-hunting. Most hunt followers are probably not aware of this little publicised activity. In spite of the claim by hunters that hounds hunt by inherited instinct it is, nevertheless, necessary to train them by hunting with more experienced hounds.

In the three months leading up to the start of the main hunting season, usually early in the morning, hunt followers surround small areas of woodland where foxes are known to be living. The pack is entered into the covert to find and kill any foxes they find. By this means young hounds gain experience of killing foxes. Older experienced foxes are most likely to escape the hounds and avoid being driven back into the woodland by the hunt followers whose job it is to keep as many foxes as they can in the area to be killed by the hounds. Cub-hunting has since been renamed Autumn hunting in an attempt to disguise its true purpose, claiming that most foxes killed are nearly adult. However, it was the hunters themselves who called this activity cub-hunting. Vixens can give birth up to March and later and cub-hunting begins in August. Many of the foxes hunted and killed will be as young as four to five months.

Young hounds with little experience of killing foxes will not be efficient killers and many foxes must die agonising deaths. Cub-hunting is also the process by which older unfit hounds and younger hounds, which do not hunt to form, are identified. Hounds which are no longer part of the pack, or are not to be entered into it, will be shot.

There is common agreement, even among hunting’s supporters that cubhunting is one of the least acceptable elements of hunting:

‘Cubbing’ is an unsporting part of the sport in which hounds, including fresh young ones, are put into coverts containing foxes while the riders ring the wood to keep the foxes in. It is done to kill some of the cubs and to ‘introduce’ the new hounds to hunting

"There is a harder purpose to cubhunting that from the education of young hounds, for implicit in that education is learning to kill foxes and "…its primary object is to make hounds that will provide fun later on"

"Never lose sight of the fact that one really well-beaten cub killed fair and square is worth half a dozen fresh ones killed the moment they are found without hounds having to set themselves to the task. It is essential that hounds should have their blood up and learn to be savage with their fox before he is killed."

well, i actually agree about Autumn Hunting, and am aware of it. It usually takes place from September through to November, and it is indeed used to train the new hounds. I disagree with it. It is very cruel and serves no purpose since the innocent cubs aren't exactly able to go and kill chickens etc. I am glad hunting was banned only because it meant that Autumn Hunting was banned as well. So, I did know about it, and I only follow the hunt an average of once a year. Were you ever involved in hunting at all, or did/do you live in the countryside? Just wondering, because i find that many people who wanted hunting banned had never lived in the country and had probably never seen a fox, so they have no clue what really happens. they read what the media tells them about hunting. sure, the majority of them don't know about cubbing, but they also tend to think that hunting is a past time that only the elite "snobbish" group follows. i'm of lower-middle class status, i think, and so is my best friend and many other hunt supporters i know. so, it's not true that it is a sport enjoyed by only the wealthy. as far as shooting a useless hound, it does occur, but not in all Hunts. the Hunt that I follow does not shoot hounds, and they treat their hounds very well. i know because i worked in the kennels. unfortunately not all hounds are treated as well, and Hunts that are responsible for shooting or mistreating hounds should be put out of business. Now on to the hunt itself. a day will start at about 5:30 at the kennels, selecting that day's pack, as not all hounds go all the time. the Hunt gathers at a field or someone's farm at about 10. they usually socialize for an hour or so with snacks and drinks until 11 when they set off on the hunt. hunting will go on until around 4 or 5, maybe earlier, with a break around 1 in which the master will commonly switch horses. whether or not they make a kill that day, everyone is in a good mood, as it is always an enjoyable day out. and, 89th, the Hunt doesn't carry guns and shoot from horseback. most hunters that follow the traditional way of foxhunting are very much against shooting them as a poor shot can cause a very slow death or just injure the poor creature by taking a leg off or something, leaving the wound to get infected etc etc. it is true that hounds are bred for stamina. DUH! that's a given. nothing new there. if you want to know, they are also built to run through undergrowth and all the obstacles they may encounter during a day's hunt. the horses known as 'hunter' type are also built for stamina, but also speed, and they must be able to jump many different obstacles. going on to hunt sabotage (sp?) now. peaceful protesting is ok with me, and tolerated by MOST hunters (although there are the few who are arrogant and stupid and get themselves in trouble by sabotaging the protests :rolleyes2: idiots). however, there are many hunt saboteurs who go to far. my friend mentioned that one day out hunting, a field member was about to go over a hedge when his horse luckily refused and he saw barbed wire strung throughout the hedge and on the other side. it was obviously put there with the intent to injure horse and rider. sabotuers have also thrown rocks at horses and riders at Hunt meets, but that's nothing, really. i heard about a case where sabotuers had strung wire throughout a wood at the height of a rider's neck and a horses knees and hound's neck. what the hell!?!?! they had every intention to decapitate hunters and breaking horses' knees and hounds' necks, leaving them in agony. what i gather from all of those incidents is that sabotuers will do anything to save the life of one fox, even if it means potentially killing about 40 humans, 40 horses, and 30 hounds. oh yeah, so worth it..... :banghead: and, 89th, all of the hunters i know are out there to control vermin. sure, it's a fun day out, with the intention to kill a fox or two, but the highlight of the day is not the kill, but the chase and trip to the pub afterwards ;) also, they don't get trophies for killing foxes or take pictures (well, obviously they must at some point, for all of the photos there are on the net....). how many pictures can you find of the chase? not many. the kill? more. the meet? even more. anyway, my point about your comments is that the majority of hunters aren't out there simply to get their picture taken with a dead fox and a trophy. that would be some deer hunters, many of whom bring in fawns with spots still on them, and some who kill for nothing but the simple pleasure of killing. they bring in deer all shot up, and obviously don't care about the meat, they just wanted to kill something. i know that because my uncle is a butcher and i help him do everything, from skinning and cutting to taking the hunter's orders. just saying that deer hunting (and all types of hunting) can be as cruel, sometimes worse, than foxhunting. i have a lot more to say, but i won't be on for a day or two or three. i know this was a LONG post, but i DO love discussing hunting, because it is one of the few debate topics i really know about :smile:
And how are you today?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LWpianistin
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Larry
Jan 9 2006, 04:56 PM
I go fox hunting all the time......... ;)

I catch them, too......

can it be?!? do i agree with Larry on something? wow! :silly:
And how are you today?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LWpianistin
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
phykell
Jan 9 2006, 05:35 PM
The people who kill defenceless animals for nothing more than the sick, sadistic pleasure of killing and inflicting pain disgust me.

It is the pursuit of the quarry that the hunters enjoy, and the bloody, ghastly end for the fox as it is hunted to exhaustion and finally ripped to pieces and eaten alive.


have you ever witnessed a kill or at least been to a Hunt meet?

unfortunately there are many hunters out there with the ideals of a disgusting kill and nothing more. most hunters aren't like that, and hate those that are because they are the stereotype, which is not right. also, foxes aren't eaten alive. sure, the kill might be messy, but it's a lot less painful than a slow death caused by poison or poor shooting. can you imagine being shot in the stomach, having it get infected, and dying a week or so later of starvation and infection? or having a leg shot off and starving to death because you are unable to eat? sounds a lot worse than being quickly "torn apart" by about 5 hounds.
And how are you today?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bernard
Member Avatar
Senior Carp
HA!

Kim du Toit?

You all do know the redneck pronunciation of "Toit", dontcha?

HA!


I'm not surprised... when your head is up your ass as this guy's is everything looks like a pussy then don't it? That's because his own bush is coming between him and the world.

He's what I call a pansy.

Well, while we're being objective.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
phykell
Member Avatar
Senior Carp
LWpianistin
Jan 10 2006, 06:24 AM
well, i actually agree about Autumn Hunting, and am aware of it. It usually takes place from September through to November, and it is indeed used to train the new hounds. I disagree with it. It is very cruel and serves no purpose since the innocent cubs aren't exactly able to go and kill chickens etc. I am glad hunting was banned only because it meant that Autumn Hunting was banned as well.

Well, there's something we agree on then. Can I just ask you though, if that's *your* perception as well, do you understand why many people are pretty much unwilling to believe that hunting for so-called "sport" is anything other than for the sake of killing an animal.

LWpianistin
Jan 10 2006, 06:24 AM
So, I did know about it, and I only follow the hunt an average of once a year. Were you ever involved in hunting at all, or did/do you live in the countryside? Just wondering, because i find that many people who wanted hunting banned had never lived in the country and had probably never seen a fox, so they have no clue what really happens. they read what the media tells them about hunting.

I knew about it because I made it my business to know about it. >>>
The hunting world has been very secretive over the last few decades due to growing public condemnation of this bloodsport.

LWpianistin
Jan 10 2006, 06:24 AM
sure, the majority of them don't know about cubbing, but they also tend to think that hunting is a past time that only the elite "snobbish" group follows. i'm of lower-middle class status, i think, and so is my best friend and many other hunt supporters i know. so, it's not true that it is a sport enjoyed by only the wealthy. as far as shooting a useless hound, it does occur, but not in all Hunts. the Hunt that I follow does not shoot hounds, and they treat their hounds very well. i know because i worked in the kennels. unfortunately not all hounds are treated as well, and Hunts that are responsible for shooting or mistreating hounds should be put out of business.

There's all sorts of terrible stories about how many hunts treat their hounds and in my opinion, they shouldn't be allowed to treat dogs as inhumanely as they do. Again, there's a misconception amongst many that the hunt cares for and loves its dogs, when in fact the hunt uses them cynically, not caring about older dogs' welfare. I feel that this is a particularly damning indictment of the endemic cruelty in the hunting "industry".

LWpianistin
Jan 10 2006, 06:24 AM
Now on to the hunt itself. a day will start at about 5:30 at the kennels, selecting that day's pack, as not all hounds go all the time. the Hunt gathers at a field or someone's farm at about 10. they usually socialize for an hour or so with snacks and drinks until 11 when they set off on the hunt. hunting will go on until around 4 or 5, maybe earlier, with a break around 1 in which the master will commonly switch horses. whether or not they make a kill that day, everyone is in a good mood, as it is always an enjoyable day out. and, 89th, the Hunt doesn't carry guns and shoot from horseback. most hunters that follow the traditional way of foxhunting are very much against shooting them as a poor shot can cause a very slow death or just injure the poor creature by taking a leg off or something, leaving the wound to get infected etc etc. it is true that hounds are bred for stamina. DUH! that's a given. nothing new there. if you want to know, they are also built to run through undergrowth and all the obstacles they may encounter during a day's hunt. the horses known as 'hunter' type are also built for stamina, but also speed, and they must be able to jump many different obstacles.

The whole idea of the social aspect of hunting is no excuse for the inhumane treatment of a sentient creature. To my mind, I couldn't care less whether or not a tiny minority were deprived of a little "socialising" if it means saving a living, breathing creature a grisly death by a pack of snarling, hungry dogs. However, drag-hunting has been run successfully by hunts in this country for decades as it has by many other countries throughout the world. The experience is virtually the same, and if anything, a human runner can offer much more challenge than a humble fox. Let's get this straight, drag-hunting can completely replace the social aspect of hunting for live quarry.

LWpianistin
Jan 10 2006, 06:24 AM
going on to hunt sabotage (sp?) now.  peaceful protesting is ok with me, and tolerated by MOST hunters (although there are the few who are arrogant and stupid and get themselves in trouble by sabotaging the protests :rolleyes2:  idiots). however, there are many hunt saboteurs who go to far. my friend mentioned that one day out hunting, a field member was about to go over a hedge when his horse luckily refused and he saw barbed wire strung throughout the hedge and on the other side. it was obviously put there with the intent to injure horse and rider. sabotuers have also thrown rocks at horses and riders at Hunt meets, but that's nothing, really. i heard about a case where sabotuers had strung wire throughout a wood at the height of a rider's neck and a horses knees and hound's neck. what the hell!?!?! they had every intention to decapitate hunters and breaking horses' knees and hounds' necks, leaving them in agony. what i gather from all of those incidents is that sabotuers will do anything to save the life of one fox, even if it means potentially killing about 40 humans, 40 horses, and 30 hounds. oh yeah, so worth it..... :banghead:

I'm sorry but that's mere hearsay and speculation. There has not been a single proven case of where hunt saboteurs have deliberately injured a horse, rider or hound in the manner you suggest and over the last decade or so, hunts have been carefully policed and anti-hunt groups investigated. Conversely, there are plenty of assaults, filmed ones, carried out by huntsmen and their "minders" on peaceful protestors and sabs. If you've ever been on a hunt protest, you will have witnessed the "shady" members who follow on quad bikes and similar, waiting to get any protestors on their own, following them to their cars, taking down car number plates, etc. If you've ever taken part in a protest, you'll have seen and heard the abuse ordinary, peaceful protestors are subject to by the hunters, including being threated, having bottles and bricks thrown at them, etc.

LWpianistin
Jan 10 2006, 06:24 AM
and, 89th, all of the hunters i know are out there to control vermin.

No they're not, because if they were at all interested in controlling foxes, hunts wouldn't have been shown to engage in deliberately promoting the breeding of foxes, as has been quite clearly shown. Anyway, hunting is just about the most inefficient method of "controlling" foxes that there is. Also, foxes, like many other creatures, "self-manage" their population. The population of foxes depends on how much food is available. It has been shown that many animals reduce and increase the average number in litters depending on prevailing circumstance and the fox is one such example. It's only common sense anyway, that if there is little food, there will be fewer foxes. The term "vermin" is just a convenient way of implying that foxes somehow "deserve" to be killed. They are not vermin at all whatever that means anyway.

LWpianistin
Jan 10 2006, 06:24 AM
sure, it's a fun day out, with the intention to kill a fox or two, but the highlight of the day is not the kill, but the chase and trip to the pub afterwards ;)

So, drag-hunting can replace it yes?

LWpianistin
Jan 10 2006, 06:24 AM
...and some who kill for nothing but the simple pleasure of killing.

There is no utility in controlling foxes by hunting them - MAFF showed fox hunting to have a negligible effect on fox numbers and drag-hunting offers exactly the same experience of fox-hunting apart from the end where an animal is torn apart. So tell me, why is fox-hunting any different from deer-hunting? There's *no* difference whatsoever. The people who fox-hunt do so because they enjoy chasing down a living creature and having it torn apart and eaten alive by a pack of dogs. If they can witness the event, so much the better, but it's enough for them to know it has been done in many cases, plus they get to find out all the grisly details in the pub afterwards don't they? You "know" hunting, you should know that's true.

LWpianistin
Jan 10 2006, 06:24 AM
i have a lot more to say, but i won't be on for a day or two or three. i know this was a LONG post, but i DO love discussing hunting, because it is one of the few debate topics i really know about :smile:

I'll be here :)
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way it's animals are treated. - Ghandhi

Evil cannot be conquered in the world. It can only be resisted within oneself.

Remember, bones heal and chicks dig scars
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
phykell
Member Avatar
Senior Carp
LWpianistin
Jan 10 2006, 06:38 AM
have you ever witnessed a kill or at least been to a Hunt meet?

unfortunately there are many hunters out there with the ideals of a disgusting kill and nothing more. most hunters aren't like that, and hate those that are because they are the stereotype, which is not right. also, foxes aren't eaten alive. sure, the kill might be messy, but it's a lot less painful than a slow death caused by poison or poor shooting. can you imagine being shot in the stomach, having it get infected, and dying a week or so later of starvation and infection? or having a leg shot off and starving to death because you are unable to eat? sounds a lot worse than being quickly "torn apart" by about 5 hounds.

First you say that the fox is not eaten alive and then you say it is quickly torn apart by five hounds. Exactly what is your definition of being eaten alive then?

And again, I'll draw your attention to the fact that there is no need to shoot foxes or poison them, and that hunting is certainly not a replacement for that type of "control" anyway.

Hunting is particularly ineffective at controlling the fox population, being dismissed by the Ministry of Agriculture, etc. as having a "negligible effect" as I've already said. It's all there in the Government-commissioned Burns' report.
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way it's animals are treated. - Ghandhi

Evil cannot be conquered in the world. It can only be resisted within oneself.

Remember, bones heal and chicks dig scars
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Moonbat
Member Avatar
Pisa-Carp
Quote:
 

I'll draw your attention to the fact that there is no need to shoot foxes or poison them


Don't farmers complain of having livestock taken by foxes?
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
phykell
Member Avatar
Senior Carp
Moonbat
Jan 10 2006, 11:07 AM
Quote:
 

I'll draw your attention to the fact that there is no need to shoot foxes or poison them


Don't farmers complain of having livestock taken by foxes?

The fox has frequently been portrayed as a major killer of farm livestock. Claims made by hunting organisations have even included claims that foxes attack cows. Professor Harris has concluded that foxes can actually be of net benefit to farmers. "Foxes do not warrant their reputation as major pests of agriculture. Losses of lambs, piglets and poultry to foxes are insignificant relative to other causes of mortality. Vastly greater improvements in lamb survival can be made by improving husbandry than by fox control. Local problems with fox predation of livestock can be prevented by electric fencing and secure housing. Foxes can be beneficial by consuming rabbits and other pests of agricultural crops." (5)

Harris points out that of the land used for agriculture in the UK, 25% is under crops and much of the remaining land is used for dairy and beef production (6). Foxes are not a pest on arable, dairy or beef farms, which use the majority of the land used for agriculture in the UK.

The argument that farmers support hunting due to universal agreement that foxes are a pest that need controlling do not bear up to farmers’ actual views. When asked about their views: 70% of all farmers did not believe the number of foxes on their farms was harmful; 64% suffered no financial loss from damage proven to have been caused by foxes; 2% claimed losses of more than £100 per year (in 1974) from damage that was attributed to foxes; and, 46% considered foxes to be useful in controlling rabbits and rodents. (7).

The main argument put forward for keeping fox numbers down is their predation on sheep, pigs and poultry. Around one fifth of lambs die shortly after birth (8) of which 0.5%, and at most, 3% of otherwise viable lambs may be taken by foxes (9). Foxes are sometimes seen on fields where ewes are giving birth but they are more likely to be looking for lamb carcasses and afterbirth. The small number of newly born lambs which may be taken by foxes represents a very small economic loss to sheep farmers compared with other causes of death. One study of lamb deaths gave the following causes: abortion and stillbirth, 40%; exposure and starvation, 30%; disease, 20%; congenital defect, 5%; misadventure and predation (including dogs and foxes), 5%. (10). The death rate of one in five new born lambs is high and may be due in part to the upland areas where many lambs are farmed, but given the small number of those that die due to fox predation, it would make better economic sense for sheep farmers to look at ways of reducing mortality from the main causes of lamb deaths. There is evidence that increasing winter feed available to ewes reduces the number of lambs reportedly killed by foxes. (11)

‘Considering the number of foxes in most areas, if most of them killed lambs habitually the losses would be astronomical. Since they are not, I presume most foxes rarely or never kill a lamb’ (12)

Pig losses are less easy to quantify due to the lack of scientific studies. Foxes are less likely to take newborn pigs than lambs because sows are better able to defend their offspring. Outdoor pig herds are most likely to be victim to fox predation. A telephone survey of pig farmers, carried out by Bristol University found that: 69% of outdoor pig farmers reported no problems with foxes; 25% reported minor problems with less than 1% of piglets thought to be lost to foxes; and, 6% had major problems with foxes reputedly taking more than 1% of piglets (5). Outdoor pig herds suffer higher levels of natural mortality. Harris reports that between £5.3million and £6.8million may be lost to outdoor pig farmers losing piglets to natural causes, of which less than £150,000 is due to fox predation. Once again any losses due to foxes are only a very small part of overall mortality.

MacDonald endorses this view: "Existing evidence is that the general economic impact of fox predation on lambs and piglets is small, although particular cases can doubtless be severe." (1) The hunting season is no more than half a year and, as MacDonald shows, hunts usually meet at most venues only once in each season. There is no guarantee that the hounds will pick up the scent of a particular fox. Farmers are therefore extremely unlikely to rely on the hunt to deal with problem foxes. The most likely solution will be to shoot the animal.

The overwhelming majority of laying hens in the UK are kept indoors out of the reach of foxes. Of 43 million laying hens in 1993 only 2.5 million were free-range (6). Harris found that the top 30% most profitable free-range poultry units may not have suffered any loss to foxes at all. These units will tend to be the larger ones, which are in a better position to provide electric fencing. In 1993, 50 free-range units, representing 200,000 laying hens, had electric fencing protecting their flocks and none reported any losses to predators (13) Smaller units should be able to remedy problems from predators by better husbandry and ensuring their hens are securely locked in at night.

A Master of Foxhounds stated in a British Field Sports Society leaflet: ‘The staple diet of a fox is not, as so many people apparently imagine, hens and ducks. Indeed it is probably true to say that not five per cent of all the foxes in Christendom ever taste domestic poultry at all.... The majority of foxes live largely upon beetles, frogs, rabbits and wild birds: carrion does not come amiss to their diet, while they are the biggest destroyers of rats and mice in the world, far excelling the domestic cat in this useful art.’(14)

All references provided on request :)
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way it's animals are treated. - Ghandhi

Evil cannot be conquered in the world. It can only be resisted within oneself.

Remember, bones heal and chicks dig scars
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
Quote:
 
Vastly greater improvements in lamb survival can be made by improving husbandry than by fox control.


That reminds me of a supposedly true story. A group of sheep farmers were losing sheep due to foxes, but couldn't kill the foxes because of a law that had been passed as a result of some environmentalist group. A meeting was held between the farmers and government officials to discuss the problem. The farmers made their case, and one of the environmentalists got up to explain to the farmers that the solution was birth control. A farmer stood up and said "Sir, I don't think you understand the problem. They ain't f**king our sheep, they're eating them."

Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

Wow, I didn't know Phykell knew (or cared) this much about fox hunting!

Anyway, good posts...

LW, thanks for taking the time to explain your side and explain how fox hunting works...but that doesn't change what is going on here.

I have yet to see a reasonable explanation for what's going on. Could you please try and sum up the rationale that foxhunting isn't bad or wrong?

And PLEASE...no more monster paragraphs!!!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aqua Letifer
Member Avatar
ZOOOOOM!
Sorry to jump in late and ambush some arguments, but I mean, I just don't buy what's being said here.

Quote:
 
Just wondering, because i find that many people who wanted hunting banned had never lived in the country and had probably never seen a fox, so they have no clue what really happens.


I must admit, I come from a fairly rural area, and have been hunting, but never fox hunting (although I have seen them). However, the idea of fox hunting is simple, and phykell and others have already done a great job explaining.

If the purposeful killing of ANYthing serves no end, it's immoral and, well, f***ed up. Cutting a tree down because you can is certainly bad, as you're contributing to the reckeless abuse of the environment. Now, disrespecting the life of an animal is worse in my book. I find hunting to be "okay", so long as you at least do something with the body, and at least make your "sport" mean something. The wanton killing of an animal simply for pleasure is amoral and abusive, pure and simple.

Quote:
 
and, 89th, all of the hunters i know are out there to control vermin. sure, it's a fun day out, with the intention to kill a fox or two, but the highlight of the day is not the kill, but the chase and trip to the pub afterwards


I'm sorry, but you have to be kidding me. I simply refuse to believe the elaborate means by which a fox is hunted down and killed (which you have explained with great detail) is done for the sole purpose of population control. Come on. Were that the case there would be no "socializing for an hour or so with snacks and drinks until 11".
I cite irreconcilable differences.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jolly
Member Avatar
Geaux Tigers!
Foxes?

Rather deal with them than coyotes. Both can put a hurt on the chicken population, and young livestock such as piglets.

I've trapped 'em, poisoned 'em and shot 'em when they aggravated me enough. Nothing personal...as long as they don't bother me, I don't bother them.

Now...coyotes....I'll go out of my way to stick a 22-250 through a taco dog. Whereas foxes will knock down the quail and rabbit population, and eat some chickens, coyotes will cleanse the area of small game, eat any livestock they can drag down, kill the family farm dog, tear up your watermelon patch, and scatter your trashcan about the place.

I can't stand them. I've shot them, caught 'em with #2 jump traps, poisoned them with antifreeze and hung them with piano wire snares. I don't enjoy killing, but I make an exception for coyotes. And bobcats...
The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
FWIW I lodged with a guy who used to hunt 2 or 3 times a week, along with his friends. He was most definitely NOT lower-middle class (which enabled him to hunt 2-3 times a week), and was also most definitely NOT interested in vermine control. Clearly, not everyone who's involved with a hunt is upper-middle class, but as far as I could tell most of the hunts were on Tuesdays and Thursdays in the daytime, when working people are, well, working.

As he put it, it's not the kill, it's the tally-ho that makes it fun.

The Cheshire hunt (I think I recognize the bloke on the left):

Posted Image
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aqua Letifer
Member Avatar
ZOOOOOM!
Going by the explanation of the activity alone, I buy Jolly's story of population/pest control a lot more than that of the fox hunters. :thumb:
I cite irreconcilable differences.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
phykell
Member Avatar
Senior Carp
Jolly
Jan 10 2006, 03:51 PM
Foxes?

Rather deal with them than coyotes. Both can put a hurt on the chicken population, and young livestock such as piglets.

I've trapped 'em, poisoned 'em and shot 'em when they aggravated me enough. Nothing personal...as long as they don't bother me, I don't bother them.

Now...coyotes....I'll go out of my way to stick a 22-250 through a taco dog. Whereas foxes will knock down the quail and rabbit population, and eat some chickens, coyotes will cleanse the area of small game, eat any livestock they can drag down, kill the family farm dog, tear up your watermelon patch, and scatter your trashcan about the place.

I can't stand them. I've shot them, caught 'em with #2 jump traps, poisoned them with antifreeze and hung them with piano wire snares. I don't enjoy killing, but I make an exception for coyotes. And bobcats...

The UK is a little different to your neck of the woods Jolly and you know I couldn't possibly approve of killing animals inhumanely.

Incidentally, can't you just put up a decent fence?
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way it's animals are treated. - Ghandhi

Evil cannot be conquered in the world. It can only be resisted within oneself.

Remember, bones heal and chicks dig scars
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
Aqua Letifer
Jan 10 2006, 10:55 AM
Going by the explanation of the activity alone, I buy Jolly's story of population/pest control a lot more than that of the fox hunters. :thumb:

To be fair, there are big differences between rural communities in the UK and US. Obviously, there's no coyotes in Britain, in fact by comparison there isn't a whole lot of predatory wildlife at all, which is possibly why the fox rather stands out. In addition, I think that farms tend to be more remote in the US, than in much of the UK, because of the restrictions in available land.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aqua Letifer
Member Avatar
ZOOOOOM!
Well okay, let's go with another correlation that might be better-suited.

In my community back home, we used to have a pretty big deer problem. (The only reason the deer were so "meanacing" was because we were the ones who were infringing on their home, shrinking their habitat, but hey, we can get into that another time :P ). There was a large over-abundance, and so many were worried about road hazards, crop/lawn degredation, and so on.

So, they asked the community not to leave out any food for the deer, and with careful manipulation (and a few traps), they were able to move the population somewhat so they weren't as much of a concern.

The DNR at no point suggested red-coated townsfolk on horseback take to hunting the deer for sport, followed by tea parties and cigar smoking. Somehow, I don't think that would be part of their procedure. :rolleyes: (And to be fair, stout guys with shotguns, beer bellies, and hunter orange apparel wasn't part of the solution, either.)
I cite irreconcilable differences.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
Learn More · Register for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 4