WHY IS IT THAT WHEN I READ QUESTIONS ON HERE I AM SHOCKED BY THE IGNORANCE SOME PEOPLE HAVE. FOXHUNTING IS NOT A BARBARIC 'SPORT', IT IS A MEANS TO AN END. IT IS A FACT THAT FOXES HAVE TO BE CULLED, AND IT IS FACT THAT THE MOST HUMANE WAY TO DO SO IS BY HUNTING WITH HOUNDS. SHOOTING THE FOX WILL ONLY INJURE THE ANIMAL AND LEAVE IT TO BLEED FOR WEEKS ON END FINALLY TO DIE OF INFECTION OR BLOOD LOSS. WHEN A HOUND GETS THAT FOX IT IS DEAD INSTANTANIOUSLY. THE REASON THIS BAN HAS BEEN PUT INTO EFFECT IS BECAUSE OF THE PREJUDICE PEOPLE HAVE FOR WHO IS DOING IT. I DONT MIND PEOPLE NOT AGREEING WITH THE 'SPORT' AS LONG AS IT IS FOR THE RIGHT REASONS. PLEASE READ UP ON IT FIRST BEFORE MAKING RASH BELIEFS. AM I WRONG?
2006-07-21 03:11:05 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Outdoor Recreation ➔ Hunting
Without fox hunting the fox will become extinct in parts of the UK. The fox hunters are the ones who compensate farmers for their losses to foxes. Without that compensation foxes will just be shot as vermin.
The fox hunters want foxes to breed and are prepared to pay for that to happen. Farmers want foxes dead. With hunting removed as an economic counterbalance to agriculture - no more foxes.
For an individual fox whether it dies by bullet, trap or hounds the end is the same. Whether foxes are being culled or exterminated has a major impact on the species.
With fox hunting forbidden the packs and the stables will be broken up and destroyed. So the loss of the fox will mean a reduction in the number of horses and hounds. Horse friendly hedgerows will be ploughed up and replaced with crops and fencing. Some of the hedgerows are thousands of years old and their loss is sickening.
The money put into hunting has preserved more than it has destroyed. The new forest started off as a hunting preserve and most of the other nature reserves in the UK only survived because hunters were the only people prepared to pay to preserve them.
2006-07-21 03:30:13 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
Oh please love - give me a break with your its a "necessity". Whilst you are completely right about the risk of farmers not hitting an animal correctly when shooting them, but this is few and far between - you are under a fantastic illusion if you think that its a "sport".
Do you honestly think that its HUMANE for an innocent animal to be chased for miles by several hounds and horses - putting unbelieveable strain on their little heart and lungs? Then when caught by hounds to have their flesh pulled open and torn in several different ways by the hounds? And as for humane - I dont see WHAT there is to brag by these stupid fat huntsmen detailing a fox and brandishing their tail as a trophey.
As an acomplished horsewoman I support every angle of horsemanship EXCEPT foxhunting. Whilst i appreciate the buzz of galloping horses and hounds across country - I would recommend you take up draghunting - its the exact same but without the cruelty.
Harecoursing was banned due to the cruelty of it - can you explain the difference between a hare being chased and torn apart by dogs and a fox being chased and torn apart by dogs? And before anyone gets smart - I know a hare and fox are different animals!!!
You talk about the ignorance of people in here - well YOU sound the most ignorant of all - actually believing foxhunting is HUMANE. Get a life you sad sad murderer
2006-07-21 03:21:27 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
IT IS A FACT THAT FOXES HAVE TO BE CULLED, AND IT IS FACT THAT THE MOST HUMANE WAY TO DO SO IS BY HUNTING WITH HOUNDS.
i'm sorry, but whilst i see how the first point is, in fact, indisputable, I can't see what makes you say that the most humane way to do so is to hunt with hounds. God will judge whether you're right or wrong, all i can say is that to me it seems pretty sad that in this day and "civillised age" there are still people around who think that chasing a small defenceless animal for hours, inducing terror and probably causing it to die from a heart attack (that's if the nice hound doesn't get it) is a legitimate - or fun- SPORT. If nothing else, there are 10s of you, 100s of the dogs and 1fox - how is that fun, fair or sporty?
Is this really how far we have come as a civilised society?
2006-07-21 03:20:01 · answer #3 · answered by Squirrel 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
It is a most inefficient method of control. Keeping horses and hounds (and all the paraphernalia of the hunt) takes *a lot* of resources (money). Compared to even the wildest estimates of damage to farmers livelihoods by foxes - it just does not add up. If just a fraction of that money was instead spent of providing effective defence against foxes on the farms, then the foxes would be cut off from an easy supply of food, thereby creating a natural control, IE lack of food to support the same number of foxes.
The tradition of fox hunting always was about establishing the social order - never about being a useful or economic way of controlling the fox population. It's how the land owners make a big show of letting their tenants know just how much better (richer) they are whilst maintaining a facade of protecting the interests of the farmers.
2006-07-21 03:33:02 · answer #4 · answered by blank 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Foxes control their own population, by dispersing at the end of autumn. Where there is not enough food or den sites, they don't breed as successfully. A stable population controls itself.
Foxes may prey on free range hens, but most live in battery houses or barns. And they may take the placenta and stillborn or weak lambs, but a healthy ewe can see off a fox; plus they should be lambing in a shed anyway. Pet dogs kill more sheep than foxes.
Fox hunting is not a means of population control; its a sport. I guess its been banned along with bull baiting, dog and **** fights because killing for fun sickens people.
Fox hunting has never stopped people shooting and using fox bait. Not everyone calls out the local hunt when they have a problem fox.
Drag hunting is an adequate replacement for fox hunting.
2006-07-21 03:58:19 · answer #5 · answered by sarah c 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
The fox does not die instantaneously not only is there the chase but the hounds do not always kill the dog straight off & the fox is bitten, chewed until death which to anyone is torturous.
There are many other ways to cull the foxes, much less cruel and torturous ways the reason these aren't used is because not only do they cost money but they're not traditional & they aren't as much fun to the hunters as the chase is.
And I live in the countryside I got to see this on a regular basis
2006-07-21 03:23:04 · answer #6 · answered by madamspud169 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Fox hunting along with other hunting of wild life is cruel and unnecessary. Bear baiting was stopped along with other vicious activities. My father approved of the hunt and went out shooting, I am only pleased he is not longer on this earth. We have friends who own three farms, they live on one and have managers in another two. They rear foxes but what they do not have is rats. The fox sees to that. They do not lose hens as they leave food out for their resident fox at night time. Other farmers have become very interested in.this and are becoming converted which to my mind is great. No before it is asked I do not eat meat because I choose not to do so that is before I am asked if I have meat on my plate.
2014-12-27 07:29:04 · answer #7 · answered by kath 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, I'm not a Brit, but it's quite obvious that there's nothing humane in hunting foxes with hounds. Given a choice, would YOU want to be hunted down by a pack of dogs or be given some other means of death?
2006-07-21 03:17:22 · answer #8 · answered by clarity 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
9 Times out of 10 the fox gets away. The ones that get caught are usually old or ill, it keeps control on the eco-system - you don't want thousands of the buggers running around. It provides a lot of jobs and generates revenue for rural folk i.e. farriers, stablehands, kennels, etc. Anyhow, the fox gets a better chance of getting away than the piece of meat these folk had for Sunday roast.
Don't get me wrong, I love foxes they're beautiful creatures, but we don't want loads of them about. Look what happened with the badger population after they were protected, they're everywhere and they're a pain in the @rse, one of them attacked my dog the other day.
How do city folk feel about pigeons? Bet they would relish the chance to rip one of them up after it's cr@pped on their suit.
2006-07-24 03:41:29 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
I am all with culling to keep numbers down but it is cruel the way they go about it. The dogs rip that poor fox to pieces. I think it is a shame.
2006-07-21 03:16:13 · answer #10 · answered by MissBehave 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋