My feed
Premium
Please
or
to access all these features

AIBU?

To think there are good arguments for an urban fox cull

81 replies

OwlCapone · 03/10/2014 12:34

Firstly, I'm not actually suggesting there should be one and I wouldn't actively support one because I don't actually like the idea of killing them.

However, I am fed up with the amount of fox poo (one on the drive yesterday and one on the front doorstep this morning and it's like an obstacle course on the walk to school in the morning) and the area around my doors smells rank from fox urine too.

Also the damn things keep destroying my garden fence so that I can never let my dog our off the lead as he is like bloody houdini and can go missing for hours. (Ther is a chance it's being destroyed by badgers, to be fair)

The problem seem to have got far, far worse recently. Why is the urban fox population so strong now?

OP posts:
Report
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 04/07/2015 09:52

The human species are responsible for a hell of a lot more damage than a few mangy foxes.

"It’s frightening but true: Our planet is now in the midst of its sixth mass extinction of plants and animals — the sixth wave of extinctions in the past half-billion years. We’re currently experiencing the worst spate of species die-offs since the loss of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. Although extinction is a natural phenomenon, it occurs at a natural “background” rate of about one to five species per year. Scientists estimate we’re now losing species at 1,000 to 10,000 times the background rate, with literally dozens going extinct every day [1]. It could be a scary future indeed, with as many as 30 to 50 percent of all species possibly heading toward extinction by mid-century [2].

Unlike past mass extinctions, caused by events like asteroid strikes, volcanic eruptions, and natural climate shifts, the current crisis is almost entirely caused by us — humans. In fact, 99 percent of currently threatened species are at risk from human activities, primarily those driving habitat loss, introduction of exotic species, and global warming [3]. Because the rate of change in our biosphere is increasing, and because every species’ extinction potentially leads to the extinction of others bound to that species in a complex ecological web, numbers of extinctions are likely to snowball in the coming decades as ecosystems unravel."
www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/biodiversity/elements_of_biodiversity/extinction_crisis/

Report
RachelRagged · 04/07/2015 09:40

Cantbelievethisishappening Fri 03-Oct-14 22:54:03

Oh the fucking arrogance of the human species. Yes.... because our needs and wants are sooooo much more important aren't they.
Am sick to the back teeth of culls. If it moves shred it, shoot it, snare it, gas it.
The human species are responsible for a hell of a lot more damage than a few mangy foxes.


Bravo .. Completely agree with you Cantbelieve.

Report
Toughasoldboots · 04/07/2015 09:11

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Toughasoldboots · 04/07/2015 09:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Toughasoldboots · 04/07/2015 09:08

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

GirlSailor · 04/07/2015 09:04

The fox population has remained static for 30 years or more and that isn't to say that there was an increase before, that's just when they counted it. More people live in urban areas now, and what was rural land has been built on. That's why it seems to us that there are more foxes but there aren't.

The fox population self regulates so if there is a cull, new foxes move into the area. They actually keep pigeons and rat populations down so even if there were fewer foxes, there would just be more rats - potentially worse for us as they can get into houses.

The famous story of the fox attacking the baby was looked at in great detail in case fox behaviour was changing. It was a juvenile fox unused to hunting and most likely attracted by the smell of the baby's nappy and was going for that rather than the baby. Doesn't make it any better for the people involved but it does mean foxes don't intend to attack children.

Completely agree about leaving rubbish in bags on the street - it should all be in lidded bins (this is surely also cleaner for the people having to pick it up as no chance of it spilling on them). The amount of chicken bones thrown on the floor is ridiculous and I can't understand why it's necessary. If people were eating at home they would leave them on their plate, so why can't they leave them in the box and then throw that away? I don't understand why people litter anyway - it's hardly inconvenient to carry an empty bottle or wrapper for a few minutes until you find a bin.

Report
worridmum · 04/07/2015 06:07

maybe we should cull humans because if you use the termonogloy of vermin our speices is techically vermin so we shouldnt have a problem culling our own number and leaving speices like foxes alone .......

and as said foxes play a key role in our enviroment (as do badgers but conversitives supported a scientifically flawed cull to appise farmers even tho the science said it would not work but it was a relitively cheap methord to show they are doing something rather than actully inforcing a bloody vaccine program for TB which their is one that is reltively cheap and is used in god damn africa to protect wild bolivnes (aka wilde beasts etc) but apprently its too expesive to do in the UK....

Sorry for the rant

Report
LaLaLaaaa · 04/07/2015 05:42

Oh god not this again. Why have you revived an old thread?

The reason these things make headlines is because they are rare. Think about it.

Report
George199 · 04/07/2015 03:49

Gosh yes, there should be a cull of these fiendish foxes. Last week, 3 of these red furry beasts of evil snuck into my detached urban mansion and stole my widescreen tv and all the organic steaks in my fridge. They then had saucy antics under my framed oil painting of The Great Boris. Thank God my offspring were in boarding school, else I fear the giant fanged foxes may have menaced them with their devilish ways and stolen their phones and trainers. Oh the humanity... please look out for my tale of foxy woe in a smashing right-wing paper soon.

Report
AllMimsyWereTheBorogoves · 04/10/2014 08:31

Of course they do, londonrach! They live on a luxurious diet of fried chicken bones and catfood left out by softhearted people like my neighbour!

Report
Leela5 · 04/10/2014 08:31

I wish it was possible to give contraceptive laced bait to cats :) would solve a lot of animal welfare problems!

Report
londonrach · 04/10/2014 08:24

No. As someone who grow up in the country and is being forced by work to live in london i love seeing the foxes. The ones that live near us have three cubs who are so cute. They dont bat an eye when you walk pass them. Tbh they look healther than their country cousins....

Report
AllMimsyWereTheBorogoves · 04/10/2014 08:19

Speaking as someone who is immune to the charms of cats, I would have no problem with the idea of cats eating contraceptive-laced bait either.

Report
Leela5 · 04/10/2014 08:14

wakey that's completely untrue. Where did you find that information?

'Urban' foxes are no different to rural foxes in social behaviour or feeding behaviours. Both rural and urban foxes are opportunistic predators and both disperse from group at same age to find their own territories. Difference is what they are eating - in rural areas they are more likely to scavenge road kill, carrion and catch own prey such as rabbits. Urban they will take what's left out by humans if available.

www.thefoxwebsite.net/old/urbanfoxes/urbandiet.html#q4

Report
WakeyCakey45 · 04/10/2014 08:04

*for a cull

Report
WakeyCakey45 · 04/10/2014 08:03

Urban foxes are evolving at an alarming rate - their social, reproductive and predation characteristics are totally different to the rural foxes from which they have decended.

They have adapted to the habitat that "we" have created - they are an unintended consequence of urban sprawl.

For that reason, there are good arguments for a full (they wouldn't be there in the first place if it hadn't been for "our" actions) and good reasons against ("we" created the problem, now we have to live with it).

Bait laced with chemical contraceptive would work, but it would require "us" to change the way we keep companion animals to prevent our pets from inadvertently being drugged.

Report
AllMimsyWereTheBorogoves · 04/10/2014 07:53

OK, what about a couple of things we might all be able to agree on:

  1. Humans shouldn't put food out for urban foxes. I'd make an exception for food laced with some sort of contraceptive that works on foxes left out by vermin control officers. My neighbour People who persist in feeding these urban pests should be fined.


  1. Fast food outlets should have to pay a hefty extra levy on the rates to cover the costs of clearing up after their litterbug customers.


  1. In towns and cities, rubbish should never be left out on the street in bags alone. It should always be in bins with a lid. Our local park has plenty of bins but only the dogpoo bins have lids. The result is that first thing every morning there is rubbish strewn all around the bins because during the night the foxes go through them looking for food.
Report
Leela5 · 04/10/2014 07:50

Ah it does annoy me when humans decide wildlife is in their way or and inconvenience and therefore should be culled.

Learn to live alongside wildlife, stop wanting to kill everything just because it causes you the occasional inconvenience. Otherwise I'd be killing next door's cat who poos in my garden, next door's dog who barks all the time and the couple next door who have noisy sex. Much more irritating than a fox.

Whoever mentioned culling red deer - it's completely different ecologically. In localised populations culling of deer is sometimes recommended because the population cannot successfully continue. Again arguments for and against but it's a different scenario to urban foxes.

For deterrence of foxes see foxwebsite www.thefoxwebsite.net/old/urbanfoxes/index.html

Report
Leela5 · 04/10/2014 07:35

A cull won't work biologically - populations would simply move into vacant territories. Instead humane deterrent is more effective, removing what attracts them in the first place; food, shelter. Humans keep building into their habitat and as a result they have no choice but to adapt and coexist.

Report
OwlCapone · 04/10/2014 07:28

By saying there are good arguments that is supporting it.

Nonsense.

I also said there are good arguments for a human cull - we have no predators other than ourselves, the means to prolong life beyond what would be possible in nature and we are over-running the planet whilst destroying it at the same time. Do you think I support that too?

It is possible to see the theoretical benefits without agreeing with a cull. I made it clear in my first sentence and subsequent posts that I did not actually support killing them.

You said You think it's ok to kill animals so that your dog (just another animal) can go off their lead. No I didn't, that was one small part of my OP and you simply chose to ignore the rest and anything else I said. Foxes do bring health risks.


If you support killing animals you shouldn't have one in your house.

This is ridiculous. Are only vegetarians allowed pets?

I have enjoyed watching a mother fox lounging in the sun whilst her cubs plaed at the end of my garden. They are beautiful.
Over the last couple of years, the population seems to have gone through the roof and it is like turd city on the walk to school, something for which inconsiderate dog owners are getting the blame for I think. It's only recently that I realised what a fox actually sounds like as I've not heard them before. One of last nights troop sounded like a bunch of Howler Monkeys at 3am, the others sounded like banshees from the gates of hell.

OP posts:
Report
Hurr1cane · 04/10/2014 06:49

There's probably a better argument for a human cull.

We probably piss off a lot more species with our litter and destroying the environment than any other species on the planet.

But we think we are god and are allowed to kill other species because their an inconvenience to us. US the works destroyers.

Report

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

GerundTheBehemoth · 04/10/2014 06:03

The outdoors has wildlife in it... The changes people make to the environment in order to feed and accommodate their huge population is devastating our wildlife (look at the Vote for Bob thread to see how much is already lost). And when we encounter the occasional species that, rather than quietly dying out, manages to adapt to the impoverished environment we've created and live alongside us, we want to cull it rather than find ways to sharing our space.

Report
MyBaby1day · 04/10/2014 05:05

YABU, I don't agree with killing little foxes, badgers, or any other innocent animal. As for the hygiene issue then maybe spaying/neutering them so their numbers wouldn't be so high, that I would advocate, but not killing them, it's wicked.

Report
SunshineAndShadows · 04/10/2014 03:13

I totally understand the desire to say yes to a cull if you're family is at risk - it's a reasonable emotional response. However it's not an effective response and will not confer your LO protection from fox bites so I'd advise a less hysterical and more rational redponses in the form of food restriction and or contraception which has a proven track record in protecting humans.

Report
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.