Agricultural Minister thinks that the hunting ban should be repealed...

[malakadoush]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16331762?postId=111273844#comment_111273844

Interesting slant - people are ignoring the law, the police aren't policing it - so lets scrap it!

Hmmm...

Kelly2000 - your post is amazingly ill-informed and ignorant. There are many very serious animal rights issues on the continent. If you want sheer cruelty have a look at Spain and some of the things that go on there.

Well written post Pony. X

The way that statute normally works in a democracy is by having the consent of those it affects. The Hunting Act seems unique in not having this consent from the only people it affects.

That makes no sense. That's like saying that as habitual drink-drivers haven't consented to drink-driving legislation, that law should be repealed.

No Snorbs, the drink drive legislation has the consent of the vast majority of DRIVERS. The Hunting Act does NOT have the consent of the vast majority of farmers, landowners, hunters, riders etc who are the only people it effects!

PS Snorbs I have just completed a degree level law module and I quote from book 1: 'the wider the gulf between the law and common sense morals, the more likely that these laws are either not obeyed, or are obeyed through fear of punishment'. Country people like myself (a farmer) generally do not see any moral problem with hunting, quite the opposite in fact; we feel it is a GOOD thing, practically and spiritually; so we believe it is not wrong to break a law which is so out of touch. The Hunting Act was NOT brought in for animal welfare reasons.

Makes me laugh how the Countryside Alliance tries to portray anti-hunt people as 'Townies' with little understanding oh how the countryside 'works'.

I am anti hunting. Born and bred in the country until adulthood. My Grandfather was a farmer. My father still owns some of the land previously farmed. Both my father and grandfather banned all local hunts from their land because they were and are a bloody nuisance showing less 'respect' for the land they swagger and thunder across than most 'townies'. Damaged hedgerows, trampled crops, frightened livestock, arrogant attitude when asked to explain themselves....I could go on.

If it's about 'humane' pest control then why the pageantry, the drunken badly behaved hunt balls, the socialising...? Just go out there, a group of you in more suitable weatherproof clothing and hunt the (self-regulating rural) foxes with no fanfare....

But that'd be no fun would it?

And as for the 'wicked, murderous' fox anthropomorphism...A fox is an animal. Stop attributing human motivation and characteristics to it. It does what it does through instinct. Yes, it kills chickens in a distasteful manner (for us). But it is a wild animal. It does what it does because it is driven to by complex genetic and behavioural coding/imprinting/instinct.

Stop already with the sociopathic human labelling to justify ugly murderous human responses to nature. We have a higher intelligence. Shame huntspeople seem to have overridden theirs...no pun intended.

it leads to an interesting state of affairs if we, the citizens of a country, are free to pick and choose which laws we obey and which we flaunt. Everyone who deliberately chooses to break the law thinks he is right in doing so for his own reasons. This is actually why we do have laws because otherwise people will choose for themselves what they think they should or could get away with. I'd consider it in a case where the law disregards basic human rights as a reasonable act of protest. I don't see how a ban on hunting contravenes "common sense morals".

I am hugely divided on this as it is cruel but a lot of things are which stand. I think it is a cultural thing and don't think we would be so quick to barge into another cultures traditions and ban them without some sort of uproar. It does still go on and I think the authorities turn a blind eye. I have been on a hunt and would never go again as I love animals and found it distressing but those involved were on such a high and the atmosphere is probably v addictive. I think there is a town country divide and am also of the opinion that buying plastic wrapped meat and blanking out how it came to be in the supermarket is a similar thing,

nursenic, that is a shame that your grandparents and father had a bad experience of hunts. Nowadays, most hunts go out of their way to repair any damage that may have been caused & are usually very respectful of farming land.
Second everything said by Ponyofdoom.

Going out of their way to repair any damage....

1. Why should farmers and landowners have to tolerate an activity that causes any damage at all?
2. They do not go out of their way. I know plenty of cases where farmers have had to waste precious time they do not have photographing damage, emailing, phone calling, traipsing round the field with some officious little prick intent on minimising impact.

Of course the landowner has to agree to the hunt using their land. Most people know that if horses cross your land in the winter, there may be some impact.
My experience is that a member of the hunt turns up the day after and asks if there has been any damage & then immediately arranges for it to be made good.
Seems a no-brainer to me, as a hunt that doesn't do this, is going to be locally unpopular & find that it will have very limited territory to hunt on.

It does seem a no brainer doesn't it? But it does not always happen with anything like that amount of goodwill. And of course the farmer and his staff have to find the time to inspect for damage. It was too much of a nuisance for my GF, DF and several other landowners. Also objectionable is this attitude of causing damage and turning up expecting a cheque to sort everything out. A bit Bullingdon club for my family.

nursenic, a high proportion of those who hunt ARE farmers like myself. My farming friends always used to love it when the hunt broke their ropey gates or fences because they got nice new ones in exchange! Hunt staff are rarely arrogant these days, they got out of their way to have good relaitonships with farmers and land owners. As I said before, if the vast majority of farmers did not want the hunt, the sport would cease tomorrow!

Sure many farmers do hunt. But not my farming family, both past and present-plenty of my cousins still farm and many of their friends are anti hunt.

They could be the new threat you see- landowners and farmers/farming related businesses that do not hunt and do not see the value of or need for it. One of your last bastions of support potentially dying out could be a concern. Because you cannot call us ignorant country-hating townies in the way that most anti hunt folks are labelled.

All hunt supporters are already acutely aware that we hunt only thanks to the goodwill of the farming community. I have already stated that if we didn't have that support, hunting would cease tomorrow. I have hunted since the mid '80s and there have always been 'anti' farmers, including friends and relatives of mine, however they have always been a small minority and hounds have always been called off their land. However I agree, the farmers' and landowners' support must never be taken for granted.

pony,
Your statement that farmers and hunters should be the only ones who have a say is silly. Are people who get their kicks fox hunting going to ban it any more thna those who get their kicks dogfighting are going to ban it.
And we are not talkign about hunting, we are talkign about hunting to hounds. We are one of the only countries that insist on killing the animal by watching it being ripped apart by dogs.
And your attitude that you can break a law of the land ebcause you do not agree with it, and think it is out of touch with what you want is just disgusting. and whether you think it is cruel or not, it is is cruel, which is why the Uk is one of the only countries that does it.
Oh and I love the way you say hunt staff are nto arrogant in one moment, when just before you were saying you feel that as a hunter you can pick and choose which laws you obey.
besides which laws are not made with referendums. the people vote for the party (labour promised to ban fox hunting), and the laws are made. Just because a minority of people think that they should be the only ones to get a say does nto mean it is right. the vast majority of the country do not support hunting to hounds (or using birds of prey), that is democracy accept it. Killing the animal with dogs is a criminal activity now whether you like it or not, the police need to be a bit more proactive in prosecuting.

pony sorry, but the shotgun versus dogs argument is total rubbish.

I'm a countryside girl too and always have been. Also involved in countryside management and farming.

Round our way we have the fox hunters blooding children with fox carcasses, blocking up roads, trashing private land (and conservation areas) with landrovers, horses, dogs and people and catching and killing very few foxes, and none of it is humane or necessary.

On my old farm, I had one bloke who went out lamping a few times a year with a gun and a torch. He'd kill several pests/vermin in one evening in as a short and least cruel way as possible. No disruption, no charade and no one else dragged into the whole mess.

But, that argument doesn't suit the hunting lobby, because there's no glorification of brutality, just a man going quietly about an evening's work and doing a good job.

Er Bornsickly I said about SHOTGUNS not being humane, which they aren't unless at close range. Your chap would almost certainly have used the correct calibre rifle for lamping which is fine and humane IF you are a good shot and IF the terrain is suitable for lamping, which often in the UK it is NOT. Neither does this method allow the fox any chance of escape, which hunting does. It is no good just saying 'hunting is cruel' without looking at the alternatives. Foxes do not live in a void, they are considered vermin and therefore if farmers perceive that hunts are not being effective then they will be shot, snared etc at every opportunity. Organised hunting with hounds has generally kept the UK fox population controlled and healthy for hundreds of years- if it ain't broke, dont fix it! As for the rubbish about 'brutality' I have seen several kills and they were all within split seconds. The Hunting Act should never have been passed constitutionally as it was forced through by the use of the Parliament Act, which was designed for major matters of national importance -not about methods of killing vermin! I previously explained that many other countries hunt live quarry- check it out!! As for disobeying laws which are morally wrong- hmm this is not always a cut and dried matter is it!?

why else would you have a job doing pest control with a gun if you weren't a good shot? What a daft argument.

As is the idea that it's somehow fair and reasonable because the foxes are perceived to have a chance of escape.

blood sports have been the subject of legislation for a very long time - fox hunting is hardly a special case in that respect.

and i'm not sure what you mean about disobeying laws... are you insinuating it's ok to trespass, damage private and public property and ignore the Hunting Act because you feel like it?

I didn't say he wasnt a good shot; I said much terrain is not suitable for the use of the necessary high powered rifle!!! We have a lot of small areas of land in the UK and a lot of footpaths!! Please explain why it is not better to give the quarry a chance of escape?! Most hunted foxes do escape and it does tend to be the old and weak who get caught which is one of the reasons it is often the best methods. Hounds can also track individual foxes which are causing problems at lambing time. My last comment referred to the fact that some laws should be broken, ie unjust or immoral law.

Doesn't matter how quick a 'kill' is if an animal has been chased around for miles, terrified, exhausted and in distress. That is so irrelevant.

As is the 'chance of escape'. Again, that argument involves anthropomorphism- do you think a chased fox is thinking, "never mind, at least I have more of a chance to escape this way!" Do you think that this 'chance of escape' actually reduces the terror and distress of a hunted fox?

I mean, really! Come on, that is such a dumb argument.

As for lamping- in skilled hands it is instant and unknowable. But the most 'efficient' despatch by hounds always involves an element of hunted, chased distress/terror/physical discomfort for the fox. Always.

It is obviously better if the healthy foxes escape- fewer sickly wounded ones to suffer or prey on farm livestock, but still enough healthy foxes around- no one wants to wipe them out!! From watching many hunted foxes, there are no signs of distress; the quarry is normally a LONG way from the hounds, even a mile or so, in countryside they are familiar with and they are quite often to be seen stopping for a scratch or a sniff! There may be fear in the last few seconds, but far less than say an animal trapped in a cage trap or suffering from gunshot wounds! There are far more important matters to be worrying about then exactly how vermin is killed.

No! it is how we treat the most vulnerable inclusive of animals that is the mark of how civilised a country is.

It does matter. What you get otherwise is a gradual slide into dismissive cruelty and neglect.

Not true about foxes being untraumatised or relatively not so by the hunting process. Not true at all. That's just the hunting fraternities way of trying to deal with the cognitive dissonance caused by the undeniable suffering and fear their activities cause a living creature.

The alternative to hunting with dogs is not the equally cruel snare and trap or inexpert shots. Too much research into the tendency of any indigenous creatures ability to self regulate populations over short periods of time.

Plenty of evidence of Man's arrogance in assuming that without him, we'd be over run with over breeding foxes and other creatures. Arrogant, arrogant and arrogant.

Er I am somehow not convinced the country is getting any more civilised, we have had riots and stabbings etc etc going on since the hunting ban! 'Cruelty and neglect' has nothing to do with comparing two methods of culling vermin. Lamping and hunting both have their place. Animals may self regulate, but obviously only when they have already hit the tipping point where they have starved and died of disease. Natural yes, but much nastier than the aforementioned culling methods. Actually, I would think hunt followers are LESS arrogant as at least we are doing the dirty work of killing ourselves instead of leaving it to others and we are generally prepared to stand up for what we do. None of my hunting friends is arrogant and whilst I am sure I have many failings, that is not one of them.

As i said...it's how we treat the most vulnerable...'

And increasing calls for hunting laws to be repealed would fit perfectly in with political, cultural and economic climate which gives a home to the increasing violence we saw on the streets. You have illustrated my point perfectly.

Arrogant disregard towards animals by politicians breeds a climate in which we all become less sensitive towards how the most vulnerable or voiceless are treated.

i never heard of hunters eating foxes. maybe if you did that then the 'killing our own food' argument might hold water.

ponyofdoom
i'm sure you are not arrogant. You sound like a really decent, reasonable person. In fact your posts have been politer than mine. But my goodness I have met so truly horrid entitled attitudes from hunters.