Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

Fox hunting to be legalised if Tories win 2015 General Election Watch

    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by moonfacebear)
    Far more lambs die from poor husbandry than from predation, even those that are taken are more likely to be weak or dying or have poor mothers - husbandry!

    Every commercial poultry farm worth it's salt will have predator resistant fencing and probably use guns, traps, snares etc as they see fit. Do they rely on the local hunt happening to ride through a couple of times a week in the season? I don't think so, especially in the vast areas of the country that have never had a fox hound pack and functioned just fine.




    Erm no it's not. You are allowed to use no more than two dogs to flush a fox to a gun. Or you could just use the gun....



    Killing badgers randomly is a good way to spread TB by perturbation. The odd scavenged lamb vs 200 + head cattle on the farm down the road.....
    There is a very important word there in bold, what about the non-commercial?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    This has nothing to do with foxes

    It is

    labour vs conservative

    countryside people vs city people

    country life vs city life

    posh kids vs city slummers

    the cultured vs the modern cosmopolitans

    No one actually believed Blair cared about the wellbeing of foxes ?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blackmagicv)
    because they maul livestock on a large scale. In my area, this mainly consists of chickens, but they have also been known to attack horses turned out in the fields. During lambing season, they can cause havoc, as they can traumatise ewes and cause them to miscarry or have complications in pregnancy, they also kill lambs. They tend to kill chickens en masse, not just for fun, but because they will kill ten, eat one and intend to return later for the rest (this tends to be more with free range chickens in my experience). That's why the numbers are kept down, i don't like it, but it is a bit of a necessary evil.

    Also, murder is a crime exclusive to humans. I might not have eaten meat or fish for the last ten years, but i still know the law.
    thank you someone who actually understands
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by carstairs)
    thank you someone who actually understands
    You are not fit to where the avatar of Daenerys Targaryen - the breaker of chains, freer of foxes *ahem* I mean slaves.


    Also you clearly don't understand :dontknow:

    I never new foxes hunt fully grown stallions in packs :eek: The crafty buggers are getting smarter.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by democracyforum)
    This has nothing to do with foxes

    It is

    labour vs conservative

    countryside people vs city people

    country life vs city life

    posh kids vs city slummers

    the cultured vs the modern cosmopolitans

    No one actually believed Blair cared about the wellbeing of foxes ?
    Not this again. It is all about the foxes! Yup Blair was just playing the politics card. So what? I have and always will be against fox hunting of this kind. Regardless fo which slimey politicians are in office. It's you that can't think outside the politics game. I like the countryside. I spend a lot of time in it. I have volunteered in maintaining ti with rangers who know a thing or two about foxes. Albeit I don't rely on it for a living directly speaking. Where do I fit on on the countryside vs city people bit?

    Also where do the scientists fit in with your little vs of sides?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)

    I never new foxes hunt fully grown stallions in packs :eek: The crafty buggers are getting smarter.
    ???

    idk i prefer drag hunting myself, but if a fox has killed an entire shed of a farmers chickens/injured livestock/hurt horses etc etc i think kits in their right to call up the hunt secretary to organise a hunt. Not killing random foxes living in the woods mind, just ones that pose a risk to livestock and would otherwise be killed. If theres no fox fitting the description, then just go drag hunting
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reluire)
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/gene...-election.html

    What do people think about this then? Personally I see no reason to legalise fox hunting. What is there to be gained?
    Don't think foxes should be hunted - hence I can now guarantee that I won't vote Tory.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Not this again. It is all about the foxes! Yup Blair was just playing the politics card. So what? I have and always will be against fox hunting of this kind. Regardless fo which slimey politicians are in office. It's you that can't think outside the politics game. I like the countryside. I spend a lot of time in it. I have volunteered in maintaining ti with rangers who know a thing or two about foxes. Albeit I don't rely on it for a living directly speaking. Where do I fit on on the countryside vs city people bit?

    Also where do the scientists fit in with your little vs of sides?
    Where DO scientists fit in?

    When a scientist issues a normative statement, especially on issues of policy, he is not acting in a scientific capacity.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by spotify95)
    Don't think foxes should be hunted - hence I can now guarantee that I won't vote Tory.
    Foxes are seriously a deal breaker for you?
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BitWindy)
    Foxes are seriously a deal breaker for you?
    No they are not, but:
    a) I wouldn't want the fox population to decline to nothing - which is basically what would happen if hunting was allowed. Foxes have a right to live, like us humans
    b) I wouldn't vote Tory anyway considering how the coalition went.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by spotify95)
    No they are not, but:
    a) I wouldn't want the fox population to decline to nothing - which is basically what would happen if hunting was allowed. Foxes have a right to live, like us humans
    Ummm, that's atrocious logic for two reasons:
    1) If it were to happen now then surely it would have happened over the centuries that it was legal
    2) why would you hunt a species to [local] extinction> If you do that you can't keep hunting it

    Well, then you also have the third point that it isn't actually illegal now, the rules are just different.

    b) I wouldn't vote Tory anyway considering how the coalition went.
    So because of the policy to allow a free vote on the matter (which means it's not going to pass anyway) you're not going to vote for a party you weren't going to vote for anyway, because that makes sense(!)
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BitWindy)
    Where DO scientists fit in?
    On the intellectual high ground :adore:

    Wouldn't it just be awful if policy was made on evidence.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    OMG why the foxes? I mean, even those in London?
    Is this a serious political campaign? How desperate are they? UK politicians are really weird can't they find a proper issue? Why using animals for political goals? Wtf don't vote them people... If they have to use foxes to win the votes they really suck.
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Ummm, that's atrocious logic for two reasons:
    1) If it were to happen now then surely it would have happened over the centuries that it was legal
    2) why would you hunt a species to [local] extinction> If you do that you can't keep hunting it

    Well, then you also have the third point that it isn't actually illegal now, the rules are just different.
    Well, I didn't think of it that way but yes I do see your point. I was just thinking that if the hunting was allowed, the population of foxes would just plummet, and never recover.

    So because of the policy to allow a free vote on the matter (which means it's not going to pass anyway) you're not going to vote for a party you weren't going to vote for anyway, because that makes sense(!)
    I didn't actually see that there would be a vote on the matter. If that's the case, the let the people decide, but there'd probably be quite a few supporters of keeping the ban in place.

    And why would I vote for someone who I wasn't going to vote for anyway?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SiminaM)
    OMG why the foxes? I mean, even those in London?
    Is this a serious political campaign? How desperate are they? UK politicians are really weird can't they find a proper issue? Why using animals for political goals? Wtf don't vote them people... If they have to use foxes to win the votes they really suck.
    Haha no one hunts in london just in the country...and actually most of the time its the sick foxes that get caught as they are the slowest, and who needs sick vermin?
    And its more of a lifestyle issue anyway, some people cant see spending their Saturday any other way as its something they and their forefathers have done for ages. Hunting is actually great fun.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Not this again. It is all about the foxes! Yup Blair was just playing the politics card. So what? I have and always will be against fox hunting of this kind. Regardless fo which slimey politicians are in office. It's you that can't think outside the politics game. I like the countryside. I spend a lot of time in it. I have volunteered in maintaining ti with rangers who know a thing or two about foxes. Albeit I don't rely on it for a living directly speaking. Where do I fit on on the countryside vs city people bit?

    Also where do the scientists fit in with your little vs of sides?
    The real clash of civilisations is not

    Islamic Extremism vs the West

    It is the

    countryside fox hunters vs the city dwellers

    The differences couldn't be more obvious. Scientists are irrelevant.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by elhm1800)
    Haha no one hunts in london just in the country...and actually most of the time its the sick foxes that get caught as they are the slowest, and who needs sick vermin?
    And its more of a lifestyle issue anyway, some people cant see spending their Saturday any other way as its something they and their forefathers have done for ages. Hunting is actually great fun.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Oh, okay then I guess.
    Still why is it a political campaign issus? I imagine Britain has bigger problems than foxes
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by spotify95)
    ]I didn't actually see that there would be a vote on the matter. If that's the case, the let the people decide, but there'd probably be quite a few supporters of keeping the ban in place.
    Most of Labour would vote against it on principal (of it being something, stereotypically, for the wealthy) and not enough Conservatives would support it to pass

    And why would I vote for someone who I wasn't going to vote for anyway?
    that's my point
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by democracyforum)
    The real clash of civilisations is not

    Islamic Extremism vs the West

    It is the

    countryside fox hunters vs the city dwellers

    The differences couldn't be more obvious. Scientists are irrelevant.
    What possible role could scientists play in conservation/environment/livestock management eh?

    Well at least now I can justify in ignoring your views now I guess. You would be rights at home in government though.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    What possible role could scientists play in conservation/environment/livestock management eh?

    Well at least now I can justify in ignoring your views now I guess. You would be rights at home in government though.
    It is killing foxes.

    There's no scientific studies involved

    Did Blair read a scientific study on fox hunting and decide to ban it ?
 
 
 
Poll
If you won £30,000, which of these would you spend it on?
General election 2017 on TSR
Register to vote

Registering to vote?

Check out our guide for everything you need to know

Manifesto snapshots

Manifesto Snapshots

All you need to know about the 2017 party manifestos

Party Leader questions

Party Leader Q&A

Ask political party leaders your questions

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.