How do they get away with hunting foxes?
Scroll to see replies
i watched a hunt today and I think a fox or 2 were killed but you can't get into trouble because it is the dogs that kill the foxes not humans. The dogs follow a scent that is laid by a quadbike or horse rider but foxes are quite common and the dogs can pick up their scent easily and get distracted.
Those hunters should be hunted...
Original post by Square
http://www.vet-wildlifemanagement.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=30&Itemid=32
supported by over 540 vets from the royal college of veterinary surgeons. Here's the conclusion:
"As members of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons we submit therefore that hunting by hounds is the natural and most humane way of controlling the population of all four quarry species, fox, deer, hare and mink, in the countryside. Humane, since at all times the wild animal remains in its natural environment and the relatively short period of physiological stress that may be suffered in the final phase of the hunt, followed by the almost instantaneous kill must be the preferred method of culling a wild animal. Hunting produces no wounded survivors. Hunting is the only method of culling that selectively maintains the health and vigour of the species and which allows the quarry species respite during the breeding season. Hunting is environmentally friendly to both the quarry species and to other wildlife. It is the natural, balanced, biological method of controlling wildlife, proven over centuries."
Do those who pass judgment on fox hunting really think they know better than these leading vets?
supported by over 540 vets from the royal college of veterinary surgeons. Here's the conclusion:
"As members of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons we submit therefore that hunting by hounds is the natural and most humane way of controlling the population of all four quarry species, fox, deer, hare and mink, in the countryside. Humane, since at all times the wild animal remains in its natural environment and the relatively short period of physiological stress that may be suffered in the final phase of the hunt, followed by the almost instantaneous kill must be the preferred method of culling a wild animal. Hunting produces no wounded survivors. Hunting is the only method of culling that selectively maintains the health and vigour of the species and which allows the quarry species respite during the breeding season. Hunting is environmentally friendly to both the quarry species and to other wildlife. It is the natural, balanced, biological method of controlling wildlife, proven over centuries."
Do those who pass judgment on fox hunting really think they know better than these leading vets?
Hmm, interesting. Has definitely made me rethink the issue to some extent.
Original post by Square
http://www.vet-wildlifemanagement.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=30&Itemid=32
supported by over 540 vets from the royal college of veterinary surgeons. Here's the conclusion:
"As members of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons we submit therefore that hunting by hounds is the natural and most humane way of controlling the population of all four quarry species, fox, deer, hare and mink, in the countryside. Humane, since at all times the wild animal remains in its natural environment and the relatively short period of physiological stress that may be suffered in the final phase of the hunt, followed by the almost instantaneous kill must be the preferred method of culling a wild animal. Hunting produces no wounded survivors. Hunting is the only method of culling that selectively maintains the health and vigour of the species and which allows the quarry species respite during the breeding season. Hunting is environmentally friendly to both the quarry species and to other wildlife. It is the natural, balanced, biological method of controlling wildlife, proven over centuries."
Do those who pass judgment on fox hunting really think they know better than these leading vets?
supported by over 540 vets from the royal college of veterinary surgeons. Here's the conclusion:
"As members of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons we submit therefore that hunting by hounds is the natural and most humane way of controlling the population of all four quarry species, fox, deer, hare and mink, in the countryside. Humane, since at all times the wild animal remains in its natural environment and the relatively short period of physiological stress that may be suffered in the final phase of the hunt, followed by the almost instantaneous kill must be the preferred method of culling a wild animal. Hunting produces no wounded survivors. Hunting is the only method of culling that selectively maintains the health and vigour of the species and which allows the quarry species respite during the breeding season. Hunting is environmentally friendly to both the quarry species and to other wildlife. It is the natural, balanced, biological method of controlling wildlife, proven over centuries."
Do those who pass judgment on fox hunting really think they know better than these leading vets?
It was Dr.L.H.Thomas' confessions and omissions to his argument which in the end conversely supported the ban being implemented in the first place.
Coming from an equine background myself, rural vets get a lot of income from the Hunts. It's a massive business and of course they will support it. There's a lot to think about.
Original post by Square
http://www.vet-wildlifemanagement.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=30&Itemid=32
supported by over 540 vets from the royal college of veterinary surgeons. Here's the conclusion:
"As members of the Royal College ........... of controlling wildlife, proven over centuries."
Do those who pass judgment on fox hunting really think they know better than these leading vets?
supported by over 540 vets from the royal college of veterinary surgeons. Here's the conclusion:
"As members of the Royal College ........... of controlling wildlife, proven over centuries."
Do those who pass judgment on fox hunting really think they know better than these leading vets?
It is an opinion piece written by some Vets. That is it.
It was not " a study by the royal college of veterinary surgeons" as you initially claimed.
Furthermore, getting 400 Vets to sign up is not hard. There are 17000 Vets in the UK.
Just because they're on horses wearing red jackets and have the hounds doesn't mean they're fox hunting.
Quite a lot of hunts that you will see are actually drag hunting or trail hunting. That is a pre-laid scent trail which is set before the hounds are released. No foxes are supposed to be hunted on them (sometimes the hounds can catch the scent of a fox that's in the area ).
Don't assume that the people you see are actually going fox hunting. Did you ask any of them? I would bet that if you'd bothered to ask instead of jumping to conclusions then they would have told you that they were drag/trail hunting.
Should point out that I'm against fox hunting but I've friends who go drag/trail hunting (and did so before the ban) and they've received abuse from people who've assumed they're going fox hunting without even bothering to ask.
And believe me, the trail hunts my friends go on are not fronts for illegal fox hunting (although there are stories of that happening
) . My friends are all vegetarian and have always been against fox hunting. Heck, one of them had a massive argument with Otis Ferry when he went to one of the riding stables to try to drum up support against the ban. (He's the joint master huntsman of the local hunt hence why he was going around all the local riding and livery stables. )
Quite a lot of hunts that you will see are actually drag hunting or trail hunting. That is a pre-laid scent trail which is set before the hounds are released. No foxes are supposed to be hunted on them (sometimes the hounds can catch the scent of a fox that's in the area ).
Don't assume that the people you see are actually going fox hunting. Did you ask any of them? I would bet that if you'd bothered to ask instead of jumping to conclusions then they would have told you that they were drag/trail hunting.
Should point out that I'm against fox hunting but I've friends who go drag/trail hunting (and did so before the ban) and they've received abuse from people who've assumed they're going fox hunting without even bothering to ask.
And believe me, the trail hunts my friends go on are not fronts for illegal fox hunting (although there are stories of that happening
) . My friends are all vegetarian and have always been against fox hunting. Heck, one of them had a massive argument with Otis Ferry when he went to one of the riding stables to try to drum up support against the ban. (He's the joint master huntsman of the local hunt hence why he was going around all the local riding and livery stables. )(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by Hravan
Don't assume that the people you see are actually going fox hunting. Did you ask any of them? I would bet that if you'd bothered to ask instead of jumping to conclusions then they would have told you that they were drag/trail hunting.
Don't assume that the people you see are actually going fox hunting. Did you ask any of them? I would bet that if you'd bothered to ask instead of jumping to conclusions then they would have told you that they were drag/trail hunting.
I was literally about to comment on this! People don't realise a lot of the hunts have converted to this style where they aren't actually hunting a live fox. They just do it for the tradition and social aspects, not to kill anything, so don't start protesting before you know anything illegal is actually going on . . .
But also, people may be interested to know that more foxes have been killed by pest control services and farmers now the ban is in action than were being killed when hunts were allowed (I'll try and get a link, potentially in one of this year's BSAVA monthly supplement type magazines). . . and there have (at least in my dad's veterinary surgery) been more injured foxes brought in injured from human actions (pellet shots etc) So Fox suffering and culling has carried on regardless
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by Lewis :D
Because fox hunting usually takes place in Tory heartlands where it's supported, people probably don't alert the police.
For example my county, where our mascot is the fox and people are obsessed with killing it. Lovely.
Edit: Why the neg? What the **** do you know? You're probably not even from leicestershire.
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by Computerised
But why? it's so obvious, you got guys in red jackets on big horses chasing loads of dogs around. Surely all the police have to do is drive around in a land rover to look for any wrongdoing?
or is it because a) the police secretly supports it (their dads probs takes part in the hunt) b) nobody tells the police or c) the area of land is too vast and rural to cover and horsemen have the advantage?
Im just curious because I didn't know the rule of law was so weak out in the country. In the city you cant get away with anything lol (tons of CCTV and metropolitan gestapo)
or is it because a) the police secretly supports it (their dads probs takes part in the hunt) b) nobody tells the police or c) the area of land is too vast and rural to cover and horsemen have the advantage?
Im just curious because I didn't know the rule of law was so weak out in the country. In the city you cant get away with anything lol (tons of CCTV and metropolitan gestapo)
Think how many police officers it takes in a city centre on a Saturday night to arrest a few pugilistic punters, and then try to imagine them nicking a whole load of huntsmen in leafy Buckinghamshire.
Original post by JollyGreenAtheist
Probably because they have more money than the people that oppose it.
Animal rights activists aren't exactly rolling it in, but The Countryside Alliance is made up of upper class Tories and a segment of the aristocracy. They can financially influence authorities.
Animal rights activists aren't exactly rolling it in, but The Countryside Alliance is made up of upper class Tories and a segment of the aristocracy. They can financially influence authorities.
That's actually quite a myth. Farmers are generally Tory inclined, but even with land assets, they are neither aristos or upper class. In fact, I wager that hunts actually contain a lot of working class villagers and enthusiasts and they are well represented in the CA too.
Original post by QwentyJ
That's actually quite a myth. Farmers are generally Tory inclined, but even with land assets, they are neither aristos or upper class. In fact, I wager that hunts actually contain a lot of working class villagers and enthusiasts and they are well represented in the CA too.
That's actually quite a myth. Farmers are generally Tory inclined, but even with land assets, they are neither aristos or upper class. In fact, I wager that hunts actually contain a lot of working class villagers and enthusiasts and they are well represented in the CA too.
http://www.countryside-alliance.org.uk/ca/article/our-structure
Count the titles.
Original post by Computerised
No comment on my views on foxhunting, all I wasn't to know is if it is illegal why are there thousands of guys on horses with dogs sauntering around the high streets of Britain on their way to hunt foxes? Surely it's obvious lawbreaking? Why aren't the police doing anything?
How do you know they are going to hunt foxes? they could be going for a long walk... after all now that fox hunting is banned, the dogs can't just stop with the amount of exercise they have, that is just wrong.
Anyway in the country the police don't tend to do very much unless they see it with their own eyes and even then they don't like to travel very far to see it... so unless they are in the fields/woods watching the hunt, nothing will be done.
Original post by JollyGreenAtheist
That's just the board, matey.
Original post by QwentyJ
That's just the board, matey.
But the board represent their membership and are the individuals who will liaise with authorities and lobby MPs. The fact that their board is incredibly wealthy and powerful as it is gives them a ridiculous advantage.
There's a lot of loopholes in the hunting act, for example you are allowed to go out with hounds but are not allowed to let the hounds attack a fox. But if they do it can fall under an 'accidental killing' or something. There a few others too but I can't remember them all.
I think it's barbaric myself.
I think it's barbaric myself.
Original post by Square
http://www.vet-wildlifemanagement.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=30&Itemid=32
supported by over 540 vets from the royal college of veterinary surgeons. Here's the conclusion:
"As members of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons we submit therefore that hunting by hounds is the natural and most humane way of controlling the population of all four quarry species, fox, deer, hare and mink, in the countryside. Humane, since at all times the wild animal remains in its natural environment and the relatively short period of physiological stress that may be suffered in the final phase of the hunt, followed by the almost instantaneous kill must be the preferred method of culling a wild animal. Hunting produces no wounded survivors. Hunting is the only method of culling that selectively maintains the health and vigour of the species and which allows the quarry species respite during the breeding season. Hunting is environmentally friendly to both the quarry species and to other wildlife. It is the natural, balanced, biological method of controlling wildlife, proven over centuries."
Do those who pass judgment on fox hunting really think they know better than these leading vets?
supported by over 540 vets from the royal college of veterinary surgeons. Here's the conclusion:
"As members of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons we submit therefore that hunting by hounds is the natural and most humane way of controlling the population of all four quarry species, fox, deer, hare and mink, in the countryside. Humane, since at all times the wild animal remains in its natural environment and the relatively short period of physiological stress that may be suffered in the final phase of the hunt, followed by the almost instantaneous kill must be the preferred method of culling a wild animal. Hunting produces no wounded survivors. Hunting is the only method of culling that selectively maintains the health and vigour of the species and which allows the quarry species respite during the breeding season. Hunting is environmentally friendly to both the quarry species and to other wildlife. It is the natural, balanced, biological method of controlling wildlife, proven over centuries."
Do those who pass judgment on fox hunting really think they know better than these leading vets?
Firstly - have you read that report? It is out of date, terribly written and uses 'probably' and 'likely' far too many times to be remotely credible. I'd be putting that in the same bracket as referencing Wikipedia.
Secondly - I don't know whether those vets are 'leading' and whether any of them hunt. I'd suspect a few of them get paid for looking after hunt animals tho.
The hunts are not illegal - they 'follow drag trails' now. Hunting with dogs is not efficient or effective - hunting with a rifle is.
Original post by Computerised
No comment on my views on foxhunting, all I wasn't to know is if it is illegal why are there thousands of guys on horses with dogs sauntering around the high streets of Britain on their way to hunt foxes? Surely it's obvious lawbreaking? Why aren't the police doing anything?
Erm..it is not illegal to sit on horses and have lots of dogs!!! You can drag hunt with dogs and horses, where no foxes are involved. Don't assume that in all cases they are setting out after foxes. The law is, as many have said, a joke. Lots of loopholes around it. It was just introduced by Labour to be a show of ideology.
Original post by JollyGreenAtheist
Yes, titled people are some of the biggest landowners and have generations of experience with countryside involvement..what is that to do with fox hunting?
Original post by JollyGreenAtheist
The Countryside Alliance is made up of upper class Tories and a segment of the aristocracy.
What are you on about, those in agriculture generally are right leaning as the right see the value of what they do more so than the left. Yes the board of the CA is made up of wealthy influential people but wouldn't you want that if you wanted your livelihood to stay alive? better to have those with influence fighting for your cause than against it.
Original post by JollyGreenAtheist
But the board represent their membership and are the individuals who will liaise with authorities and lobby MPs. The fact that their board is incredibly wealthy and powerful as it is gives them a ridiculous advantage.
From experience there are a lot of farmers that hunt and they are not wealthy or an aristocrat in any sense, they do it for the day out.
Just because the board is full of wealthy people doesn't mean that those it represent are also wealthy.
I understand that foxes are pests, but why could farmers not simply be insured against losses caused by foxes?
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Professor Hunting
- Why do people let their cats go outside?
- how to cope with post-a-levels stress?
- Post your biggest secret anonymously
- Favourite Videogames Of All Time - Only remove 4 and add 4 from the last poster.
- comebacks for when you get called emo
- Name a film without the letter 'E' in the title
- Around what time should you expect calls regarding job applications?
- I think I've been scammed by ''the booking team / model hunt''
- I can't get a job
- Advice on finding work placement year as a disabled student
- 1 exam away from ACA qualification
- Next steps to help with phd chances
- Current affairs website
- PWC Graduate Programme Offer Holders UK
- bullying (please help)
- Home or away?
- Selfcare Tips!
- Need help, got a lower level exit award certificate in my postgrad
- I need help with talking to girls
Latest
Last reply 1 minute ago
The Pupillage Interview/Acceptance/Rejection Thread 2024 WatchLast reply 1 minute ago
BAE systems degree apprenticeships September 2024Posted 1 minute ago
Did Cambridge maths students find maths and further maths a level very easy?Last reply 1 minute ago
Economics and Economic History 2024 ThreadLast reply 2 minutes ago
JK Rowling in ‘arrest me’ challenge over hate crime lawLast reply 3 minutes ago
Official London School of Economics and Political Science 2024 Applicant ThreadPosted 5 minutes ago
Which Ms in HCI is better to pursue a career in UX: Nottingham or Newcastle?Last reply 5 minutes ago
TFL Apprenticeship Scheme 2024Last reply 7 minutes ago
Official University of Bath Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryLast reply 9 minutes ago
Haven't heard back from LSELast reply 11 minutes ago
Children to no longer be prescribed puberty blockers, NHS England confirmsLast reply 11 minutes ago
Government Social Research - Research Officer Scheme 2024Last reply 12 minutes ago
Accenture Degree Apprenticeship 2024Last reply 13 minutes ago
Medical doctor degree apprenticeship 2024Last reply 20 minutes ago
Official UCL Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryLast reply 20 minutes ago
British Council English Language Assistants 2024/2025Last reply 23 minutes ago
Woodhouse College applicants 2024Trending
Last reply 3 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 6 days ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 2 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Last reply 3 weeks ago
How did John Major become PM with barely any qualifications?Trending
Last reply 3 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 6 days ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 2 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Last reply 3 weeks ago
How did John Major become PM with barely any qualifications?
