Fox Hunting - Right or Wrong?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by raphael123

So the individual should start making moral decisions themselves? That's a bit of a cop out. Should the individual start making moral decisions on other things too then, maybe such as whether domestic abuse is acceptable? :dozey:

---

Of course not. That is just taking the discussion way out of context. Why are you trying to compare fox hunting to domestic abuse? Your making mountains out of mole hills.

I wouldn't go fox hunting because the idea of riding around on a horse in stupid outfit doesn't appeal to me. However, if I did I wouldn't care less if a fox was killed or not. I wouldn't get any pleasure from killing a fox, but I wouldn't feel guilty if I killed one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Ok Jon,

I'll decide to hunt YOU! Now don't YOU decide what I can and can't do.

Is that alright? :laugh:

---

Well you can if you think animal rights are more important than human rights, and only idiots believe that is true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by theugsquirrel

Why would people pay more for livestock protected by an electrified fence?

---

We already pay for the losses caused by shop-lifters and marketing. I haven't heard anyone demanding the shop-lifters and marketing people to be killed (well, maybe some would like to kill the marketing people).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brown, Jon Brow

Of course not. That is just taking the discussion way out of context. Why are you trying to compare fox hunting to domestic abuse? Your making mountains out of mole hills.

---

No, I was trying to use your way of thinking, that the individual should choose what is morally right and wrong.

Quote:

---

I wouldn't go fox hunting because the idea of riding around on a horse in stupid outfit doesn't appeal to me. However, if I did I wouldn't care less if a fox was killed or not. I wouldn't get any pleasure from killing a fox, but I wouldn't feel guilty if I killed one.

---

There you go then. Are you glad I answered your points? :) Was it worth it? :laugh:

Quote:

---

Well you can if you think animal rights are more important than human rights, and only idiots believe that is true.

---

BDunnell and my canadian friend Schemke. Are you going to quote this man and tell him it's not stupid to believe animal rights are as important as human rights? Afterall, a contrary opinion to another peron isn't necessarily stupid, it's just different, isn't it :dozey:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brown, Jon Brow

Well you can if you think animal rights are more important than human rights, and only idiots believe that is true.

---

No, only if you think human rights are as useless as animal rights. Privileges aren't the same as rights. I think nobody should be allowed to kill their competition in order to increase your own profit.

I would love to know why anyone would think Hunting is a version of torture yet shooting isn't :confused:

I'd also love to know how you know about this torture, because if it's from one-sided animal right videos taken in the early seventies (I've not seen any newer ones ;) ) perhaps you'd consider doing what I did and get both sides before making a judgement. As a kid I was bang against Hunting, shooting, poisoning and gassing of foxes, feral cats, escaped fur farm animals, rabbits and deer. Then I learned about them all and made an educated choice.

I'm still against shooting, poisoning, gassing and actively fight using sighthounds to course or lamp. Some Hunting is cruel, some is far and away the best, fastest, cleanest method. Depends on the quarry and all sorts of other things.

Of course, I'm wasting my time posting the above - some of you are obviously soooo well versed on the subject you're talking about ......

Electric fences, by the way, won't work in about 50% of cases. UK weather breaks the wires that carry the current and no farmer has time to check every length each day, nor ability to supply power in some remote areas. Cutting grass and hedges to stop earthing is also a problem, as are deer hung up on the fence as they try to move from area to area. Larger animals such as horses and cattle break the fences sometimes, too. We use electric and it's a pain the backside both on fixed posts and mobile ones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazell B

I would love to know why anyone would think Hunting is a version of torture yet shooting isn't :confused:

---

Ok, maybe I should re-phrase it. I think killing animals for your own pleasure is wrong.

Quote:

---

I'd also love to know how you know about this torture,

---

Hunting down an animal before letting the dogs rip you to pieces, and shoot them? Maybe it's not torture in your eyes. It's killing anyway. And killing animals for 'fun' is wrong in my eyes.

Quote:

---

perhaps you'd consider doing what I did and get both sides before making a judgement. As a kid I was bang against Hunting, shooting, poisoning and gassing of foxes, feral cats, escaped fur farm animals, rabbits and deer. Then I learned about them all and made an educated choice.

---

I think hunting, shooting, poisoning animals for fun is wrong. However, for some purposes it's perfectly ok (in my opinion). If it's to protect your livelyhood I can perfectly understand why you'd want to get rid of them.

Why don't you tell us what you learnt? Maybe some people can be persuaded to change their opinion on the matter :)

Quote:

---

I'm still against shooting, poisoning, gassing and actively fight using sighthounds to course or lamp. Some Hunting is cruel, some is far and away the best, fastest, cleanest method. Depends on the quarry and all sorts of other things.

---

What kind of hunting is cruel, and what kind of hunting is the cleanest method?

At the end of the day, if you kill them for your pleasure, whether its done cruelly, or the 'clean' way, I think it's wrong. Killing for pleasure isn't right.

Quote:

---

Of course, I'm wasting my time posting the above - some of you are obviously soooo well versed on the subject you're talking about ......

---

Why not tell us what you know. Educate us :)

Anyway, as I say. If you have to kill them, I'd rather you do it the 'nice' (if there is a nice way to kill an animal) way. However in my opinion, killing for fun is wrong, I'm not objecting to the fact it may be a better way to die, its the fact your killing for fun which I don't approve of.

You seem to have completely missed that point :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by raphael123

Ok, maybe I should re-phrase it. I think killing animals for your own pleasure is wrong.

Hunting down an animal before letting the dogs rip you to pieces, and shoot them? Maybe it's not torture in your eyes. It's killing anyway. And killing animals for 'fun' is wrong in my eyes.

---

The dogs don't rip the fox to bits. That's a common mistake made by people who don't know about it. As I already said, I've never been at a kill, but I have Hunted for years prior to the ban. The idea is that dogs, being pack animals, have a leader and he or she (some packs are all bitch) grabs the fox and kills it with a shake. I've seen sight hounds do it and it's incredibly fast, the prey is dead within a half second often as not. If it's already dead, so what if the hounds did rip it to bits anyhow? They don't, but if they did would it matter at all?

Most foxes are so covered in mange the hounds never actually go near it, they're just used to flush it out for a gunman waiting at a specific place. Hounds would be infected if they got near the fox, so they don't. That's why some hound bloodlines are slower moving than others, they are just there to chase out a fox to open ground where he can be shot.

Quote:

---

I think hunting, shooting, poisoning animals for fun is wrong. However, for some purposes it's perfectly ok (in my opinion). If it's to protect your livelyhood I can perfectly understand why you'd want to get rid of them.

Why don't you tell us what you learnt? Maybe some people can be persuaded to change their opinion on the matter :)

---

Already did that in earlier posts.

Hunting foxes is to protect assorted other interests, like lambs, chickens and so on. Getting rid of foxes near a school or boarding kennels will stop mange (scabies) affecting humans or pets, lowering a fox population will help rarer wildlife like adders, newts, frogs, dormice and so on. So, numbers do need to be controlled and there's no way around that fact.

The fact that some bright spark hundreds of years ago saw wolves preyed on foxes and decided to chase foxes with his own domesticated wolves means we now have Hunting as an organised thing. Now, in our financial climate, everything costs money, so Hunting bacame a serious business perhaps 80 or so years ago. Hunts needed to cover costs. This meant land owners could call on a Hunt to clear out (out being off his land as much as dead) foxes and expect to be paid for his broken fences and trampled crops too. It gave men a job before horses became the pets they are now. It now means somebody like me pays twenty quid to basically be allowed on private land twice each week to thunder about on a horse legally. For my twenty quid the hounds are kept fit and the land owner feels he's sorted his fox worries without resorting to paying somebody with a gun - a win/win you could say.

Quote:

---

What kind of hunting is cruel, and what kind of hunting is the cleanest method?

At the end of the day, if you kill them for your pleasure, whether its done cruelly, or the 'clean' way, I think it's wrong. Killing for pleasure isn't right.

---

Hunting with terriers is cruel. Hunting without them isn't. A Foxhound pack is maybe 30 hounds who chase a scent then stop when the scent ends at a fox hole. If terriers are employed, once the fox runs down a hole the Hounds are removed and the ride is over, then terriers are put in the hole to drag out or kill the fox. That is very, very cruel and is killing for the sake of it. Not many packs use terriers so therefore not many packs actually catch foxes. They just move them about from one bit of land to another.

I've seen hundreds of foxes, both during and away from Hunting. I've only a few times seen one run at full speed. More often when being Hunted they will happily have a sit down and scratch, stop for a drink, scent mark and just lop about at half speed. They know the score and know how to escape a Hunt.

Quote:

---

If you have to kill them, I'd rather you do it the 'nice' (if there is a nice way to kill an animal) way. However in my opinion, killing for fun is wrong, I'm not objecting to the fact it may be a better way to die, its the fact your killing for fun which I don't approve of.

You seem to have completely missed that point :(

---

What's you 'nice' way then? The fox is naturally prey only to the wolf in the UK. We have no wolves. Alternatives are shooting, gassing, poison and hounds. Shooting a small animal is hard, so in actual fact most foxes killed by Hunts have previously been shot and only injured hence the pack's ability to catch them up. Shooting doesn't work, then. It leaves a fox hurt and more liable to attack easy prey like chickens. Gassing is just plain wrongness, as is poison. Both kill anything under the ground, whatever the species. If the body isn't taken away it also kills things that eat the corpse - especially birds of prey. Hound use is the most natural method, quick when they catch one and I genuinely believe a fox would rather take on a pack then some bloke with a gun - his odds are far better!

I haven't misunderstood anything. You simply don't like the idea of anyone appearing to enjoy a fox being chased and perhaps killed. Problem is that those who shoot love doing that, those who set traps, use gas and lay poison wouldn't do it if the job offened them plus they make a damned good living out of it - so every method of killing a fox brings pleasure in some way. I learned that and live with it. Even the man who came to shoot one of my horses said he loved his job and wouldn't do anything else. He hated that split second when the trigger was pulled, yet loved that he clears up fallen stock from the countryside, meets so many interesting people and goes to lovely places.
The fact that some people want to use their horses in a thrilling way is what offends you, that's all. It offends thousands of people. I can't see the problem as the fox would be hunted and killed anyhow, with or without the riders paying to follow. However, that crowd of riders do mean Hunt staff can't get away with much by the way of cruelty - I would have happily gone home from a day's Hunting and called the RSPCA had I seen anyone treat any animal in a cruel way just for the sake of it! The riders slow down the Hunt too, so foxes do get away as I've already said.

Anyway, this is all pointless. It's been banned ...... and even though not one of you appear to have noticed it, I do support that ban.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by raphael123

BDunnell and my canadian friend Schemke. Are you going to quote this man and tell him it's not stupid to believe animal rights are as important as human rights? Afterall, a contrary opinion to another peron isn't necessarily stupid, it's just different, isn't it :dozey:

---

Let me re-phrase what I said, they are not stupid. They are liars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eki

No, only if you think human rights are as useless as animal rights. Privileges aren't the same as rights. I think nobody should be allowed to kill their competition in order to increase your own profit.

---

So you are saying that it is okay for foxes to kill my brothers 'assests'? :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by raphael123

......my canadian friend Schemke. ...

---

Why are you trying to drag me into this? Why the bold font? :s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brown, Jon Brow

So you are saying that it is okay for foxes to kill my brothers 'assests'? :confused:

---

If he can't protect his assets properly without killing anybody, he's part to blame. BTW, have foxes ever actually killed your brother's assets, or are you just afraid they could?