Televised Fox Hunting On The Evening News

[12gauge82]

2 hours ago, CharlieT said:

Fox hunting has always been both, sport and pest control. Primarily sport with the added bonus of pest control. As you say, with a shift in public opinion and a perceived need to defend our sport, there became a reluctance to admit it and the narrative changed to pest control. As livestock farmers, we always insisted that any fox that went to ground was dug out and killed. 

It's the same argument many fox shooters on here use when that say they don't shoot foxes for enjoyment, but purely for altruistic reasons in doing their landowner a favor.

In today's climate it is becoming increasingly difficult, if not impossible, to justify any sport in which any animal or bird is killed for sport be that fox, pheasant or pigeon. In the cold light of day I don't see how pheasant shooting can ever truly justify its continuance when the spotlight falls that way. 

It always amazes me that people will accept a couple of terriers killing a rat, but be absolutely be appalled by a couple of large foxhounds killing a fox. Both capable of killing their prey as fast as a bullet will.

I don't buy it. As shooters we always strive to humanly dispatch what we kill in as humane and quick way possible. Yes there are always exceptions to the rule and sometimes shots are misplaced but the point is the intent is there. I also don't know any shooter's who take pleasure from the kill itself, its all about the stalking and/or skill in placing the shot. 

Now what h that video back and tell me that hunt hold the same principles? 

That's without getting into the debate on the effectiveness of gathering scores of people, a pack of dogs, horses and the rest of the support to go after a couple of foxes. I could take more in one evening on my own, The Hunts can not claim they are only doing it for pest control. 

[CharlieT]

6 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

The Hunts can not claim they are only doing it for pest control. 

But they are not, they're doing it because they enjoy it, just like those that shoot enjoy it. Thays the whole point of the exercise. Anyone who says they do so for any other reason is telling fibs or coming up with an excuse to justify their actions.

[Retsdon]

From the fox's perspective, it probably doesn't make a lot of difference at all. When a wild fox gets too old or sick to feed itself nobody is going to gather it up in a blanket and take it to the vet for a humane injection. Unless it's lucky enough to get killed on the road or shot it's going to die a slow and lingering death from disease of starvation anyway. That's just how it works. No happy endings...

Given that reality, if people were honest they'd acknowledge that the issues around hunting are in truth less issues about animal welfare than they are issues about the policing of morality.

But it's an emotive topic and there's a lot of smoke blown on both sides...

[12gauge82]

Just now, CharlieT said:

But they are not, they're doing it because they enjoy it, just like those that shoot enjoy it. Thays the whole point of the exercise. Anyone who says they do so for any other reason is telling fibs or coming up with an excuse to justify their actions.

I never said different, if you re-read my above post, you will see the points I was making.

It boils down to the hunts take pleasure in the process of killing, shooters don't. 

Shooting is a far more effective method of pest control. 

Shooting is generally humane, with a quick painless death. Hunting with hounds is anything but. 

Appart from a couple of antis, the public is generally not against shooting, they are absolutely against the hunts. 

Shooters are generally very law abiding and considerate, the hunts are not. 

[Rim Fire]

Killing Foxes is a form of pest controll what is shooting Phesants oh I know a ritchmans pleasure

[CharlieT]

I have yet to meet anyone who enjoys killing for killing's sake be they hunters or shooters. That's just emotive drivel put about by the anti brigade. However, that said, both hunting and shooting end with the death of the quarry. The death in both cases be it bullet or hound is humane and instant.........I've never in my 79 years seen a wounded runner with a pack of hounds, it's either dead or gets away.

[Scully]

3 hours ago, CharlieT said:

Fox hunting has always been both, sport and pest control. Primarily sport with the added bonus of pest control. As you say, with a shift in public opinion and a perceived need to defend our sport, there became a reluctance to admit it and the narrative changed to pest control. As livestock farmers, we always insisted that any fox that went to ground was dug out and killed. 

It's the same argument many fox shooters on here use when that say they don't shoot foxes for enjoyment, but purely for altruistic reasons in doing their landowner a favor.

In today's climate it is becoming increasingly difficult, if not impossible, to justify any sport in which any animal or bird is killed for sport be that fox, pheasant or pigeon. In the cold light of day I don't see how pheasant shooting can ever truly justify its continuance when the spotlight falls that way. 

It always amazes me that people will accept a couple of terriers killing a rat, but be absolutely be appalled by a couple of large foxhounds killing a fox. Both capable of killing their prey as fast as a bullet will.

I quite agree. Game shooters also have the added quandary to justify ( to those who are interested enough to question it ) that they actively pursue the sourcing and purchasing, and then the rearing of those birds with the sole intention of killing them for entertainment. 

In my opinion the only saviour ( if indeed there is one ) game shooting currently has, is the conservation aspect, and all that is shot is eaten, and if it weren’t, the industry that is shooting in the UK, would collapse. 

The fact that most shoots, that I know of anyhow, put more into the land than they take out of it, is a fragile claim, but a fact all the same. If we didn’t shoot, we wouldn’t be doing it. 
Saying all that, a mate who farmed in the Lune Valley, said he wouldn’t allow the hunt on his land, but that didn’t always stop them. 🤷‍♂️

[Gordon R]

I am no fan of fox hunting - each to his own. That said, there appear to be double standards. 

Fox killed by hounds or killed and then fed to the hounds - outrage.

Rats killed by terriers - no-one bats an eyelid.

Halal slaughter - well it's part of tradition.

CharlieT has it right in my book.

[12gauge82]

16 hours ago, CharlieT said:

I have yet to meet anyone who enjoys killing for killing's sake be they hunters or shooters. That's just emotive drivel put about by the anti brigade. However, that said, both hunting and shooting end with the death of the quarry. The death in both cases be it bullet or hound is humane and instant.........I've never in my 79 years seen a wounded runner with a pack of hounds, it's either dead or gets away.

Re watch that video and tell me the members of the hunt didn't enjoy the killing. Disgraceful spectical in my opinion. 

Hunting with hounds is finished in this country, your deluding yourself if you think otherwise and the hunts have bought it on their own heads, re read this thread and people's experiences of them, they are the opinions and experiences of country and shooting folk, not a load of antis and even they've had enough of the hunts. 

[marsh man]

At the time I and a lot of our shooting members went on all the rallies up London to try and defend the hunting with hounds way of life , would I go back and try and defend what they do now ? , without even giving it a thought  NO.

[Dougy]

6 hours ago, marsh man said:

At the time I and a lot of our shooting members went on all the rallies up London to try and defend the hunting with hounds way of life , would I go back and try and defend what they do now ? , without even giving it a thought  NO.

The feeling of emotion on the march was, and still is a feeling i will never forget and i doubt ever feel or witness again. We went to try and protect our country sport and way of life, we walked side by side with every level of people on the day, we talked on one level with hundreds of people all about the same thing. "The countryside and field sports" 

But what i see now is a different culture of hunting, those now dont give a care about anything but their own gratification, knowing full well that they WILL be filmed followed every possible chance and reported and they continue to carry on with a finger up to everyone. 

We stopped having anything to do with the hunt after a numerous comments ranging from being downright rude with no manors whatsoever after a huntsman demanded we open a gate, no P's or Q's even after politely being asked for some manors and we got a foul mouthed reply and another was while attending a hunt supporters day being asked what are you doing. 

 

In short they are their own worst enemy. 

[jall25]

On 11/02/2023 at 16:30, Rim Fire said:

Killing Foxes is a form of pest controll what is shooting Phesants oh I know a ritchmans pleasure

Shooting pheasants could also be seen as  the key to increased habitat creation, the pooling of resources - part of feeding the hungry gap. Maybe even a necessary in some areas to boost such limited biodiversity  

 

[bluesj]

Sorry to say it but it doesn't matter what you think of hunting or how much you condemn it or the shooters that also do things to get negative press shooting in this country is ****ed it's just a case of when not if, so enjoy it well you can!

[Rim Fire]

45 minutes ago, jall25 said:

Shooting pheasants could also be seen as  the key to increased habitat creation, the pooling of resources - part of feeding the hungry gap. Maybe even a necessary in some areas to boost such limited biodiversity  

 

But it won't be seen as will it its killing for pleasure and thats all it is for the ritch .Woodland cops and hedge cover was always left for fox in hunting strong holds which also benefits  bio diversity as blues said enjoy  while you can

[scolopax]

3 hours ago, jall25 said:

Shooting pheasants could also be seen as  the key to increased habitat creation, the pooling of resources - part of feeding the hungry gap. Maybe even a necessary in some areas to boost such limited biodiversity  

 

Think how many woods are called, covert, or thorns or gorse or whins.  Nearly all planted for foxes back in the day, not pheasants.

[jall25]

2 hours ago, scolopax said:

Think how many woods are called, covert, or thorns or gorse or whins.  Nearly all planted for foxes back in the day, not pheasants.

 

Indeed - however many many are being planted now for game birds 

Not many rich men in our syndicate and the bio diversity boost we have given the area is incredible !

[Penelope]

On 11/02/2023 at 13:26, CharlieT said:

Fox hunting has always been both, sport and pest control. Primarily sport with the added bonus of pest control. As you say, with a shift in public opinion and a perceived need to defend our sport, there became a reluctance to admit it and the narrative changed to pest control. As livestock farmers, we always insisted that any fox that went to ground was dug out and killed. 

It's the same argument many fox shooters on here use when that say they don't shoot foxes for enjoyment, but purely for altruistic reasons in doing their landowner a favor.

In today's climate it is becoming increasingly difficult, if not impossible, to justify any sport in which any animal or bird is killed for sport be that fox, pheasant or pigeon. In the cold light of day I don't see how pheasant shooting can ever truly justify its continuance when the spotlight falls that way. 

It always amazes me that people will accept a couple of terriers killing a rat, but be absolutely be appalled by a couple of large foxhounds killing a fox. Both capable of killing their prey as fast as a bullet will.

Agrred.

 

IMO it is our human right to hunt; one of the major cornerstones of our evolution as a species; out closest living relatives do it.

If men can become 'women' as their human right???............

[12gauge82]

37 minutes ago, Penelope said:

Agrred.

 

IMO it is our human right to hunt; one of the major cornerstones of our evolution as a species; out closest living relatives do it.

If men can become 'women' as their human right???............

Define 'hunt'? 

Our laws are ultimately decided and set by the people either through laws I acted in parliament by the peoples representatives, or one could argue through the sovereign which is then tested at trial by 12 peers who can in theory overturn a law by refusing to find guilty when someone has committed all the points to prove the crime. 

The point is, the public have given a very clear mandate hunting fox with hounds is unacceptable and found abhorrent by the vast majority of the population, your argument that it is your right has no more merit than a person who feels they should be allowed to torture animals and define it as hunting (I in no way compare the two by the way, I'm simply making a point). 

As I said earlier, hunting with hounds is now illegal and is confined as a barbaric sport the same as dog fighting and will soon be in the history books and I've got to say I'm not sad about it. Generally speaking, the Hunts have only themselves to blame. 

[Rim Fire]

1 hour ago, 12gauge82 said:

Our laws are ultimately decided and set by the people either through laws I acted in parliament by the peoples representatives, or one could argue through the sovereign which is then tested at trial by 12 peers who can in theory overturn a law by refusing to find guilty when someone has committed all the points to prove the crime.

Dose this apply to refugees as well 

[12gauge82]

2 minutes ago, Rim Fire said:

Dose this apply to refugees as well 

Yes it does and you will find if the problem grows enough, the system will eventually kick in and people will vote a party in to power who will deal with it.

What you question shows is the level of feeling in the uk against hunting fox with hounds is so strong, laws have been enacted to prevent what is a minority past time, Hunts continuing to flout the law will only nail the coffin shut more firmly. 

[PeterHenry]

19 hours ago, bluesj said:

shooting in this country is ****** it's just a case of when not if, so enjoy it well you can!

 

19 hours ago, Rim Fire said:

But it won't be seen as will it its killing for pleasure and thats all it is for the ritch .Woodland cops and hedge cover was always left for fox in hunting strong holds which also benefits  bio diversity as blues said enjoy  while you can

 

Sorry to pull you both up on this - and it's understandable given the pressures shooting as a sport is currently under, especially if its a sport you hold dear - but that kind of mindset is only going to result in a self fulfilling prophecy.

The future of shooting is far from certain, but its far less so if pepole just give up on it (and cast negative and non constructive opinions around public forums to boot).

Shooting is going to change - there's no doubt in my mind of that - but it's up to us all to find a way to accommodate that change and work along with it.

Two things I try to keep in mind -continuity presupposes change / there is no ban in the pipework when change is sought and regulations are mooted.

Shooting isn't some island that parliament will never touch again - but likewise, just because changes re poor practice in gamebird releases / lead shot / doctors signing off certificates / etc are suggested or come into force, doesn't mean its the end, or even near it.

Rant over - and its not even directed at either of you personally. More a sort of insidious defeatism that I see creeping in from the corners.

Anyway, nothing personal - I've had my say now.

Peter

Edited February 13, 2023 by PeterHenry

[Scully]

2 hours ago, Penelope said:

Agrred.

 

IMO it is our human right to hunt; one of the major cornerstones of our evolution as a species; out closest living relatives do it.

If men can become 'women' as their human right???............

You don’t have any ‘rights’. The only ‘rights’ we have are those as allowed by law, and if they can be taken away by changes in legislation, then they aren’t ‘rights’. 

[discobob]

2 hours ago, PeterHenry said:

Shooting isn't some island that parliament will never touch again - but likewise, just because changes re poor practice in gamebird releases / lead shot / doctors signing off certificates / etc are suggested or come into force, doesn't mean its the end, or even near it.

But when all those things are making it so damned hard (eco wads, steel, doctors refusing etc.) to continue the sport isn't it in any other terms an effective ban - and indeed - a death by a thousand cuts...

[PeterHenry]

2 minutes ago, discobob said:

But when all those things are making it so damned hard (eco wads, steel, doctors refusing etc.) to continue the sport isn't it in any other terms an effective ban - and indeed - a death by a thousand cuts...

I think possibly if you view them all together - but just take them one by one. 

Steel / eco wads - OK, I won't feel comfortable using my old side by sides, and prices per shot will go up. I may shoot less, but it won't stop me shooting. This has been coming for ages, and isnt necessarily an attack on shooting as a general attack on lead - Hasselblad had to stop using lead in their camera lenses back in the early 2000's and discontinued a fantastic camera line called the x-pan. Lead crystal decanters and glasses come with warnings now...

Doctors signing off - there's medcert, so that's not a big issue. 

General license challenges - yes, that was an attack by WJ, but it clarified existing law. The law itself didn't change (from memory). Regardless, pest control continues much the same as for the last 30 or so years.

Releasing gamebirds on / near SSSI's - we have a general licence in place for this now, so little change in practice, and (if you take away WJ from the picture) as conservation minded individuals, its no bad thing to my mind. 

Regardless, WJ are a nuisance, but they are suffering from diminishing returns.

I know there are other things in the pipeline - just break them down and realise that they are not all coming at us from one great fictional 'enemy'.

On the bright side, there are some brilliant initiatives going on at the moment such as the Country Food Trust / British Game Assurance / getting venison into NHS hospital meals. There's also a growing public acceptance around deer control.

My main point is that if we all subscribe to the death by a thousand cuts theory, it becomes self fulfilling.

I have two jobs - I run a farm and I work at a law firm. I get stuff thrown at me nearly constantly. You just have to move through it and pick yourself up. If I gave up the whole thing would collapse in on itself and where would I be then? I just apply the same stoic approch to everything else in this (seemingly ever) changing world.

 

[discobob]

5 minutes ago, PeterHenry said:

I think possibly if you view them all together - but just take them one by one. 

Steel / eco wads - OK, I won't feel comfortable using my old side by sides, and prices per shot will go up. I may shoot less, but it won't stop me shooting. This has been coming for ages, and isnt necessarily an attack on shooting as a general attack on lead - Hasselblad had to stop using lead in their camera lenses back in the early 2000's and discontinued a fantastic camera line called the x-pan. Lead crystal decanters and glasses come with warnings now...

Doctors signing off - there's medcert, so that's not a big issue. 

General license challenges - yes, that was an attack by WJ, but it clarified existing law. The law itself didn't change (from memory). Regardless, pest control continues much the same as for the last 30 or so years.

Releasing gamebirds on / near SSSI's - we have a general licence in place for this now, so little change in practice, and (if you take away WJ from the picture) as conservation minded individuals, its no bad thing to my mind. 

Regardless, WJ are a nuisance, but they are suffering from diminishing returns.

I know there are other things in the pipeline - just break them down and realise that they are not all coming at us from one great fictional 'enemy'.

On the bright side, there are some brilliant initiatives going on at the moment such as the Country Food Trust / British Game Assurance / getting venison into NHS hospital meals. There's also a growing public acceptance around deer control.

My main point is that if we all subscribe to the death by a thousand cuts theory, it becomes self fulfilling.

I have two jobs - I run a farm and I work at a law firm. I get stuff thrown at me nearly constantly. You just have to move through it and pick yourself up. If I gave up the whole thing would collapse in on itself and where would I be then? I just apply the same stoic approch to everything else in this (seemingly ever) changing world.

 

So in other words - the operation was a success but the patient will die 😆

I do know it is a culmination of things and after watching Clarksons Farm I tip my hat to you with what you have to deal with on that side - but again your legal training/bent helps you to see it in that broken down way.

For the rest of us it feels like "they are all out to get us"