# Silly question I'm sure ! Old hounds?



## Smellycob (9 January 2017)

Please forgive my ignorance on this subject! Hunting is something I am becoming increasingly interested in and having never been on a hunt in my life (I watched one from a distance many moons ago) I am trying to acquire as much knowledge as possible. With regards to foxhunting, obviously I am aware of the 'debate' and the emotions this evokes. With that in mind I would really like to find a straight answer to a question I have  - what happens to hounds when they become too old/ are injured / not really up to it anymore? Is it the same for all breeds of hound? I am aware of the view that foxhounds are not pets so euthanasia is best and am pretty stoic about these things (I know with my horses God forbid but I'd rather PTS than pass around), but how are they euthanised (if they are)? Shooting? I suppose what I'm asking is what actually happens as the information I have found from my own research into this comes form biased sources... Many thanks in advance xxx


----------



## Judgemental (9 January 2017)

Smellycob said:



			Please forgive my ignorance on this subject! Hunting is something I am becoming increasingly interested in and having never been on a hunt in my life (I watched one from a distance many moons ago) I am trying to acquire as much knowledge as possible. With regards to foxhunting, obviously I am aware of the 'debate' and the emotions this evokes. With that in mind I would really like to find a straight answer to a question I have  - what happens to hounds when they become too old/ are injured / not really up to it anymore? Is it the same for all breeds of hound? I am aware of the view that foxhounds are not pets so euthanasia is best and am pretty stoic about these things (I know with my horses God forbid but I'd rather PTS than pass around), but how are they euthanised (if they are)? Shooting? I suppose what I'm asking is what actually happens as the information I have found from my own research into this comes form biased sources... Many thanks in advance xxx
		
Click to expand...

I suspect you are some sort of Troll and that you know perfectly well.

As for your so called desire to acquire as much knowledge as much possible with regards foxhunting, there is no such thing as foxhunting, it was banned in 2004 under the Hunting Act 2004

Plainly you are a person whose intentions are less than genuine and we, who post regularly on this forum can INSTANTLY 'smell' them.


----------



## AdorableAlice (9 January 2017)

Smellycob said:



			Please forgive my ignorance on this subject! Hunting is something I am becoming increasingly interested in and having never been on a hunt in my life (I watched one from a distance many moons ago) I am trying to acquire as much knowledge as possible. With regards to foxhunting, obviously I am aware of the 'debate' and the emotions this evokes. With that in mind I would really like to find a straight answer to a question I have  - what happens to hounds when they become too old/ are injured / not really up to it anymore? Is it the same for all breeds of hound? I am aware of the view that foxhounds are not pets so euthanasia is best and am pretty stoic about these things (I know with my horses God forbid but I'd rather PTS than pass around), but how are they euthanised (if they are)? Shooting? I suppose what I'm asking is what actually happens as the information I have found from my own research into this comes form biased sources... Many thanks in advance xxx
		
Click to expand...

Why do you ask ?


----------



## Judgemental (9 January 2017)

AdorableAlice said:



			Why do you ask ?
		
Click to expand...

Alice I feel the OP would more comfortable on the LACs website


----------



## AdorableAlice (9 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			Alice I feel the OP would more comfortable on the LACs website
		
Click to expand...

Sorry.


----------



## Judgemental (9 January 2017)

AdorableAlice said:



			Sorry.
		
Click to expand...

No need to apologise, we can all see these people coming. They are remarkably naive.


----------



## Smellycob (9 January 2017)

Curiosity and a desire to give it a go (when ponio is fitter!!!) A google search comes up with 'clubbed to death' and stuff like that but it's all from sab pages so I don't think I can trust it (if it is true that's OK - contrary to what the others on this thread seem to think - I don't live in big hunting country so I dont think its my place to judge). I thought they were shot but I'm not actively involved I'm not sure. Thanks for asking though and not jumping my throat x


----------



## Smellycob (9 January 2017)

Nope wrong clean your nose out.


----------



## Smellycob (9 January 2017)

Nope, no idea what a LACS is so try again. I did say I was clueless mind...


----------



## Smellycob (9 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			No need to apologise, we can all see these people coming. They are remarkably naive.
		
Click to expand...

'These people' . Lovely. Your name suits you. For your information I am working class through and through, the only person to have a horse in my family and the only person who went to uni where I was lucky enough to study an equine degree ...guess what everyone there hunted and spoke about it.  But the discussion of hounds never arose. So who do you suggest I ask to find out more then? My next door neighbour? The one who works in Tesco maybe? Rather than just take the word of sab pages on google and the like I thought who better than the people who would know on the forum I enjoy reading. My next question would have been how to get more involved as a complete (older) newbie. Stuff it. Obviously I've mentioned some deep dark secret I'm not supposed to and hunting packs aren't as friendly to people like me as I thought. ps. I don't shop in lush either.


----------



## Judgemental (9 January 2017)

Smellycob said:



			'These people' . Lovely. Your name suits you. For your information I am working class through and through, the only person to have a horse in my family and the only person who went to uni where I was lucky enough to study an equine degree ...guess what everyone there hunted and spoke about it.  But the discussion of hounds never arose. So who do you suggest I ask to find out more then? My next door neighbour? The one who works in Tesco maybe? Rather than just take the word of sab pages on google and the like I thought who better than the people who would know on the forum I enjoy reading. My next question would have been how to get more involved as a complete (older) newbie. Stuff it. Obviously I've mentioned some deep dark secret I'm not supposed to and hunting packs aren't as friendly to people like me as I thought. ps. I don't shop in lush either.
		
Click to expand...

Rubbish, thou protesteth too much and what gave the game away was "Foxhunting" there is none, so I am sure nobody could possibly shed any light on your disingenuous questions. Working Class, saw through it all like a plate glass window. LOL


----------



## Shay (10 January 2017)

Even if I was prepared to overlook the foxhunting comment - I'm afraid the working class comment was a dead giveaway.  Really?


----------



## jrp204 (10 January 2017)

I guess its not a silly question if you don't know the answer. OP, unfortunately a lot of trolls will post wishing to cause trouble and certain statements in your post sort of point that way. So for the innocent poster it can come over as everyone being very harsh. 
Fox hunting no longer exists, but Trail hunting does which obviously still uses hounds. I have no idea how hounds are dispatched and as far as I am concerned as long as it is done quickly and humanely in a situation that causes the animal no stress I am happy. 
If you want to get involved find your nearest hunt and contact the secretary or tag along with someone who already rides or follows the hunt. 
The beauty of hunts is the diversity of people involved, most people will be ordinary working people who work very hard to support and ride with the hunt.


----------



## Equi (10 January 2017)

I have no idea if you are genuine or not, but to get onto the topic, each packs carer is trained to shoot them cleanly and quickly in the back of the head with legally held weapons and licenses. They are given a special meal, and shot. Quick as that. Much like a horse would be shot if it needed to be. They are not aware of the action - even less aware than a dog who is taken to the vet and injected which is more stressful to a hound. Sabs will say anything to discredit the hunting community, and i might be feeding you some more ammo if you are a sab under cover, but there you go. Nothing unruly, no clubbing them to death, no strangling them or dumping them in the river - its all very above board and humane. As to why and when this is done, it depends on the dogs. Life in a pack is fast paced, and the dogs would be very stressed if they were left behind and they are totally unsuitable in most cases to rehome due to their insane prey drive which is a natural trait of any dog. Some, do however get long term homes and any that are not up to the job as yougnsters sometimes get rehomed with members of the hunting or farming community.


----------



## Smellycob (10 January 2017)

jrp204 said:



			I guess its not a silly question if you don't know the answer. OP, unfortunately a lot of trolls will post wishing to cause trouble and certain statements in your post sort of point that way. So for the innocent poster it can come over as everyone being very harsh. 
Fox hunting no longer exists, but Trail hunting does which obviously still uses hounds. I have no idea how hounds are dispatched and as far as I am concerned as long as it is done quickly and humanely in a situation that causes the animal no stress I am happy. 
If you want to get involved find your nearest hunt and contact the secretary or tag along with someone who already rides or follows the hunt. 
The beauty of hunts is the diversity of people involved, most people will be ordinary working people who work very hard to support and ride with the hunt.
		
Click to expand...

That's fantastic thank you that's all I wanted to know : ) Sort of separate but there are two packs near me-foxhounds and bloodhounds. Now the bloodhounds advise that you would benefit from some experience with foxhounds before going with bloodhounds BUT from a location point of view the bloodhounds are closer. Would it be a foolish thing to aim to go straight with bloodhounds? Or is it all pretty similar with regard to the speed you travel on horseback? x


----------



## Smellycob (10 January 2017)

equi said:



			I have no idea if you are genuine or not, but to get onto the topic, each packs carer is trained to shoot them cleanly and quickly in the back of the head with legally held weapons and licenses. They are given a special meal, and shot. Quick as that. Much like a horse would be shot if it needed to be. They are not aware of the action - even less aware than a dog who is taken to the vet and injected which is more stressful to a hound. Sabs will say anything to discredit the hunting community, and i might be feeding you some more ammo if you are a sab under cover, but there you go. Nothing unruly, no clubbing them to death, no strangling them or dumping them in the river - its all very above board and humane. As to why and when this is done, it depends on the dogs. Life in a pack is fast paced, and the dogs would be very stressed if they were left behind and they are totally unsuitable in most cases to rehome due to their insane prey drive which is a natural trait of any dog. Some, do however get long term homes and any that are not up to the job as yougnsters sometimes get rehomed with members of the hunting or farming community.
		
Click to expand...

That's fabulous thank you that was what I thought so thank you for answering me politely : ) There are some bloomin' awful stories out there and I knew they were't true (they get fed to the other hounds and all this rubbish). Just didn't actually know. Thank you x


----------



## Smellycob (10 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			Rubbish, thou protesteth too much and what gave the game away was "Foxhunting" there is none, so I am sure nobody could possibly shed any light on your disingenuous questions. Working Class, saw through it all like a plate glass window. LOL
		
Click to expand...

That's OK my question was answered in a non-pompous manner by other users. And I'm very grateful to them. It was just what I thought - no cruelty involved : ) BTW might I suggest you don't look down your nose too much on the working class oiks like me - some of us have interests in the countryside too just aren't as fortunate to have as much of it around. Oh and regards the 'foxhunting' comment, everyone here just calls it that or says going with the foxhounds or hunt. Anyway, hopefully I can get ponio out and about and join in some of the fun- the people who spoke to me decently have renewed my dampened spirit. Best of luck to you, stay safe bit please God lets never meet x


----------



## Smellycob (10 January 2017)

Shay said:



			Even if I was prepared to overlook the foxhunting comment - I'm afraid the working class comment was a dead giveaway.  Really?
		
Click to expand...

Yep working class - slogged my guts out to be able to buy a horse, love dogs of any description, have friends who shoot and was looking at some fun for me and the horse. Keep reading everywhere that 'all are welcome' 'come and try hunting'. I suppose it depends who you hunt with judging by attitudes on here! Other posters answered my question so no worries : ) Take care of yourself.


----------



## Judgemental (10 January 2017)

Smellycob said:



			Please forgive my ignorance on this subject! Hunting is something I am becoming increasingly interested in and having never been on a hunt in my life (I watched one from a distance many moons ago) I am trying to acquire as much knowledge as possible. With regards to foxhunting, obviously I am aware of the 'debate' and the emotions this evokes. With that in mind I would really like to find a straight answer to a question I have  - what happens to hounds when they become too old/ are injured / not really up to it anymore? Is it the same for all breeds of hound? I am aware of the view that foxhounds are not pets so euthanasia is best and am pretty stoic about these things (I know with my horses God forbid but I'd rather PTS than pass around), but how are they euthanised (if they are)? Shooting? I suppose what I'm asking is what actually happens as the information I have found from my own research into this comes form biased sources... Many thanks in advance xxx
		
Click to expand...

If you have never hunted what business is it of your's concerning the hounds and why do you want to know and if you do elicit any information what difference is it going to make to you, or are you proposing to rehome a couple of hounds.  

From what I have seen a very large Chip on the Shoulder is relevant. Perhaps you would do well to change your handle to 'Working Class'


----------



## Equi (10 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			If you have never hunted what business is it of your's concerning the hounds and why do you want to know and if you do elicit any information what difference is it going to make to you, or are you proposing to rehome a couple of hounds.  

From what I have seen a very large Chip on the Shoulder is relevant. Perhaps you would do well to change your handle to 'Working Class'
		
Click to expand...

Your posts are entirely unnecessary at this point. Everyone must learn, and presuming they have not been tied to a shetland and dragged around a childs hunt from day dot, they have to do this later on in life. Not everyone who hunts wants to kill something, some just want a good bloody day out with their horse. Although, OP, i do think you need to be aware that in some cases the dogs do find an animal and do kill it - so mentally you must be prepared to take the good with the bad.


----------



## Smellycob (10 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			If you have never hunted what business is it of your's concerning the hounds and why do you want to know and if you do elicit any information what difference is it going to make to you, or are you proposing to rehome a couple of hounds.  

From what I have seen a very large Chip on the Shoulder is relevant. Perhaps you would do well to change your handle to 'Working Class'
		
Click to expand...

My apologies but this turned into an essay. As far as I'm concerned we're done my friend but so we are clear:
1) I don't see the acquisition of knowledge as a bad thing, ignorance being an evil and all that. Perhaps if more people were clear on what actually happens out hunting, who is involved etc. you would garner further support?
2) Information I get stays with me or is used to correct people I hear or read about saying ridiculous things (did you know hounds go into pedigree chum? That's why its called that you see - its full of dog). It also goes towards my own conscience and allows me to seriously consider taking part in a new hobby with the knowledge of what, and for whom, my subscription would be funding. As for re-homing hounds- hadn't crossed my mind. Thinking on it now I'd be terrified I wouldn't care for them well enough!
4) Working class and yes VERY proud. I've worked bloody hard to get where I am thank you. I dislike being derided for my background, which is how I took your comments. You can have all the money you want (or not), be landed gentry, be the bloomin' Queen! I don't judge people on where they are from and simply ask the same. So yes I could have this as my handle but I don't think it should define me. I merely mentioned it to illustrate I have no one else at all to ask. The working class saw through it all comment...well I'm still not sure what you mean but I can only view it as a dig. You know, the whole working class scum thing. Which sits nicely with your other dig about chips on shoulders. Yup, I'm horribly jealous. It's class warfare. That's what I spend my days thinking about...(rolls eyes)

As a side point, I seem to get a lot of mixed messages regarding hunting. Horse and Hound, hunt websites and various facebook pages seem to want to encourage newbies. The poster here who mentioned a good mix of people - that is a message I see repeated often. Then there is the other side I see and hear about, where hunting is for an 'elite' or 'toffs' (and worse) and I'm sorry if it offends you but your post didn't help with that one. No, I've never hunted but yes, I'm sympathetic. I understand how frustrating it must be to have to protect livestock from vermin within the law (if foxes are classed as that-again it depends on whose facebook page I read) and to now follow a law that I gather many feel is ridiculous. HOWEVER my sympathy only stretches so far and the attitudes of the people involved in hunting, even if they are just perceived, has a lot to do with that. Nobody likes to feel like a mug and the messages on here from yourself seem to suggest I should stick to my place and mind my own business etc.  If this wasn't how it was meant please correct me, but that is how I took it. The snide remarks of duplicity annoyed me no end too. I'm one of a very few people I know in my area who is actually interested in anything horsey/countryside/farming related and don't fancy sticking my neck on the line spouting the views of the pro-hunters (which I completely understand) to be unceremoniously shat on from a great height.  Obviously I'm aware of the antis and sabs. Friends have told me terrible stories about children being pulled from ponies etc. and they have no reason to lie to me so I'm certain people do try to cause trouble for hunts and appreciate you have to watch what you say  (especially on a forum)  BUT innocent until proven guilty please. 

All I'd really say I suppose is don't alienate people who would otherwise be allies. I'm not out to get you, just wanted to know a simple answer to a simple question. I concede my post maybe wasn't the best worded. But as far as answers go, I got it, now I know. I'll never have to ask again or feel stupid for being ignorant. As far as I'm concerned that's an end to it. Like I said before stay safe, no ill will to you x


----------



## Smellycob (10 January 2017)

Thank you for your support. I do think maybe my original post wasn't the best worded. Yes I am a later learner - only started riding at 17 and I'm not that now! As for hounds coming off trail I appreciate that can happen and hounds will do what they do. I'm not completely put off as it does seem like fun


----------



## jrp204 (10 January 2017)

Very well written.


----------



## Equi (10 January 2017)

Smellycob said:



			My apologies but this turned into an essay. As far as I'm concerned we're done my friend but so we are clear:
1) I don't see the acquisition of knowledge as a bad thing, ignorance being an evil and all that. Perhaps if more people were clear on what actually happens out hunting, who is involved etc. you would garner further support?
2) Information I get stays with me or is used to correct people I hear or read about saying ridiculous things (did you know hounds go into pedigree chum? That's why its called that you see - its full of dog). It also goes towards my own conscience and allows me to seriously consider taking part in a new hobby with the knowledge of what, and for whom, my subscription would be funding. As for re-homing hounds- hadn't crossed my mind. Thinking on it now I'd be terrified I wouldn't care for them well enough!
4) Working class and yes VERY proud. I've worked bloody hard to get where I am thank you. I dislike being derided for my background, which is how I took your comments. You can have all the money you want (or not), be landed gentry, be the bloomin' Queen! I don't judge people on where they are from and simply ask the same. So yes I could have this as my handle but I don't think it should define me. I merely mentioned it to illustrate I have no one else at all to ask. The working class saw through it all comment...well I'm still not sure what you mean but I can only view it as a dig. You know, the whole working class scum thing. Which sits nicely with your other dig about chips on shoulders. Yup, I'm horribly jealous. It's class warfare. That's what I spend my days thinking about...(rolls eyes)

As a side point, I seem to get a lot of mixed messages regarding hunting. Horse and Hound, hunt websites and various facebook pages seem to want to encourage newbies. The poster here who mentioned a good mix of people - that is a message I see repeated often. Then there is the other side I see and hear about, where hunting is for an 'elite' or 'toffs' (and worse) and I'm sorry if it offends you but your post didn't help with that one. No, I've never hunted but yes, I'm sympathetic. I understand how frustrating it must be to have to protect livestock from vermin within the law (if foxes are classed as that-again it depends on whose facebook page I read) and to now follow a law that I gather many feel is ridiculous. HOWEVER my sympathy only stretches so far and the attitudes of the people involved in hunting, even if they are just perceived, has a lot to do with that. Nobody likes to feel like a mug and the messages on here from yourself seem to suggest I should stick to my place and mind my own business etc.  If this wasn't how it was meant please correct me, but that is how I took it. The snide remarks of duplicity annoyed me no end too. I'm one of a very few people I know in my area who is actually interested in anything horsey/countryside/farming related and don't fancy sticking my neck on the line spouting the views of the pro-hunters (which I completely understand) to be unceremoniously shat on from a great height.  Obviously I'm aware of the antis and sabs. Friends have told me terrible stories about children being pulled from ponies etc. and they have no reason to lie to me so I'm certain people do try to cause trouble for hunts and appreciate you have to watch what you say  (especially on a forum)  BUT innocent until proven guilty please. 

All I'd really say I suppose is don't alienate people who would otherwise be allies. I'm not out to get you, just wanted to know a simple answer to a simple question. I concede my post maybe wasn't the best worded. But as far as answers go, I got it, now I know. I'll never have to ask again or feel stupid for being ignorant. As far as I'm concerned that's an end to it. Like I said before stay safe, no ill will to you x
		
Click to expand...

I like you. Do stick around.


----------



## Smellycob (10 January 2017)

equi said:



			I like you. Do stick around.
		
Click to expand...

Cheers x


----------



## Alec Swan (10 January 2017)

Smellycob said:



			My apologies but this turned into an essay. As far as I'm concerned we're done my friend but so we are clear:
1) I don't see the acquisition of knowledge as a bad thing, ignorance being an evil and all that. Perhaps if more people were clear on what actually happens out hunting, who is involved etc. you would garner further support?
2) Information I get stays with me or is used to correct people I hear or read about saying ridiculous things (did you know hounds go into pedigree chum? That's why its called that you see - its full of dog). It also goes towards my own conscience and allows me to seriously consider taking part in a new hobby with the knowledge of what, and for whom, my subscription would be funding. As for re-homing hounds- hadn't crossed my mind. Thinking on it now I'd be terrified I wouldn't care for them well enough!
4) Working class and yes VERY proud. I've worked bloody hard to get where I am thank you. I dislike being derided for my background, which is how I took your comments. You can have all the money you want (or not), be landed gentry, be the bloomin' Queen! I don't judge people on where they are from and simply ask the same. So yes I could have this as my handle but I don't think it should define me. I merely mentioned it to illustrate I have no one else at all to ask. The working class saw through it all comment...well I'm still not sure what you mean but I can only view it as a dig. You know, the whole working class scum thing. Which sits nicely with your other dig about chips on shoulders. Yup, I'm horribly jealous. It's class warfare. That's what I spend my days thinking about...(rolls eyes)

As a side point, I seem to get a lot of mixed messages regarding hunting. Horse and Hound, hunt websites and various facebook pages seem to want to encourage newbies. The poster here who mentioned a good mix of people - that is a message I see repeated often. Then there is the other side I see and hear about, where hunting is for an 'elite' or 'toffs' (and worse) and I'm sorry if it offends you but your post didn't help with that one. No, I've never hunted but yes, I'm sympathetic. I understand how frustrating it must be to have to protect livestock from vermin within the law (if foxes are classed as that-again it depends on whose facebook page I read) and to now follow a law that I gather many feel is ridiculous. HOWEVER my sympathy only stretches so far and the attitudes of the people involved in hunting, even if they are just perceived, has a lot to do with that. Nobody likes to feel like a mug and the messages on here from yourself seem to suggest I should stick to my place and mind my own business etc.  If this wasn't how it was meant please correct me, but that is how I took it. The snide remarks of duplicity annoyed me no end too. I'm one of a very few people I know in my area who is actually interested in anything horsey/countryside/farming related and don't fancy sticking my neck on the line spouting the views of the pro-hunters (which I completely understand) to be unceremoniously shat on from a great height.  Obviously I'm aware of the antis and sabs. Friends have told me terrible stories about children being pulled from ponies etc. and they have no reason to lie to me so I'm certain people do try to cause trouble for hunts and appreciate you have to watch what you say  (especially on a forum)  BUT innocent until proven guilty please. 

All I'd really say I suppose is don't alienate people who would otherwise be allies. I'm not out to get you, just wanted to know a simple answer to a simple question. I concede my post maybe wasn't the best worded. But as far as answers go, I got it, now I know. I'll never have to ask again or feel stupid for being ignorant. As far as I'm concerned that's an end to it. Like I said before stay safe, no ill will to you x
		
Click to expand...

I do rather find myself in approval of all that! 

In answer to your opening question and regarding elderly hounds which can no longer hunt,  with the possible exception of the odd hound which has managed to inveigle it's way in to the affections of Hunt staff,  they're quite correctly put to sleep.  There is no other alternative if Hunstman and Master are to consider the well being of the individual animal,  or the pack.

Alec.


----------



## Equi (10 January 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			I do rather find myself in approval of all that! 

In answer to your opening question and regarding elderly hounds which can no longer hunt,  with the possible exception of the odd hound which has managed to inveigle it's way in to the affections of Hunt staff,  they're quite correctly put to sleep.  There is no other alternative if Hunstman and Master are to consider the well being of the individual animal,  or the pack.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Thats it OP, youre staying....Sir Alec has approved you!!


----------



## Bernster (10 January 2017)

I didn't grow up in a horsey family, or area, and was a late comer to hunting.  In terms of how welcoming they are, I've only had limited experience. On the whole I'd say yes generally they are welcoming, but even with neighbouring hunts I've found a slightly different atmosphere, so you may want to try a few and see how you get on.

Have to say, I did think your qu was a bit odd OP so can understand why some found it suspicious.


----------



## Equi (10 January 2017)

Bernster said:



			I didn't grow up in a horsey family, or area, and was a late comer to hunting.  In terms of how welcoming they are, I've only had limited experience. On the whole I'd say yes generally they are welcoming, but even with neighbouring hunts I've found a slightly different atmosphere, so you may want to try a few and see how you get on.

Have to say, I did think your qu was a bit odd OP so can understand why some found it suspicious.
		
Click to expand...

Quite. Which is why i waited for a few replies from OP first. And the reply i got from my post was encouraging. If they are under cover, they are doing it well and saying everything we would expect someone who is genuine to say; so for this one i'm giving a benefit of doubt for.


----------



## Maesfen (10 January 2017)

Smellycob said:



			Anyway, hopefully I can get ponio out and about and join in some of the fun- the people who spoke to me decently have renewed my dampened spirit. Best of luck to you, stay safe bit please God lets never meet x
		
Click to expand...

You've said to J what many of us have thought over the years, well done!

Bloodhounds tend to be a bit faster; they sometimes have two trails, one for mere mortals or beginners, the other for those that want to go like stink and jump themselves stupid.  If you want to see hounds work then the foxhounds are better IMHO but if you prefer the riding then the blood or draghounds might suit you better.  Hope you enjoy whichever you choose or try both and see what suits you better.


----------



## Colivet (11 January 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			I do rather find myself in approval of all that! 



Alec.
		
Click to expand...

As do I !!


----------



## KittenInTheTree (11 January 2017)

Remind me why Judgemental hasn't been banned yet?


----------



## Judgemental (11 January 2017)

KittenInTheTree said:



			Remind me why Judgemental hasn't been banned yet?
		
Click to expand...

Because one has never ever been personally rude to any poster.

That said the old adage of,  "you can fool some of the people some of the time but you can't fool all the people all the time" could not be more apt. I am not fooled by all the protestations.

There is a very good chance there will have to be an early General Election (bearing in mind Mr Corbyn is rapidly shelving all his left wing nonsense) and if that happens it is likely the Conservative party will be returned with a huge majority.

Whether or not that could bring about Repeal remains to be seen.

As a result and to that end, there are Operational Units being deployed by the Anti's to use Social Media, to denigrate, spread dissent and disinformation, where such as Country and Field Sports are concerned.  

So whether or not the OP is genuine or not, they have served and obliged with the very useful function, in highlighting the ongoing risks we face on this forum in the context of the above paragraph.

Therefore, we should all be very careful about new posters who should be viewed with suspicion, when they immediately embark upon controversial subjects linked to Country and Field Sports.


----------



## Shay (11 January 2017)

OP - Apologies for my earlier comment.  I clearly took you wrongly - but I hope you can understand a level of caution given the persecution many hunts face from a certain faction of society.

In the spirit of gaining knowledge - it is a common misconception among those opposed to hunting (or at least it is around here ) that everyone who hunts in "upper class" which could not be further from the truth.  That is a common thread of the verbal abuse to which we are very often subject here.   Consequently your reference to being working class without any apparent other connection took me by surprise and was a red flag.  I was wrong - I apologise.

Going back to a previous question...  bloodhounding, a bit like drag hunting, tends to run faster than trail hunting - particularly in  the early part of the season.  That might be why your bloodhound pack recommends previous trail hunt experience.  But if you call the secretary they will be able to advise you which hunts are calmer, and what types of fences you will encounter.  Some hunts will have a non jumping line which you might prefer first time out.


----------



## Pinkvboots (11 January 2017)

Wasn't J the same poster that took offence to the John Lewis Christmas advert ?

and by the way judgemental you have been rude on this thread you said the op has a chip on her shoulder I would class that as being personally rude to another forum user.


----------



## Judgemental (11 January 2017)

Pinkvboots said:



			Wasn't J the same poster that took offence to the John Lewis Christmas advert ?

and by the way judgemental you have been rude on this thread you said the op has a chip on her shoulder I would class that as being personally rude to another forum user.
		
Click to expand...

Ha no you have to read the comment very carefully it was not "you have a chip on your shoulder", the comment was "a chip on shoulder is relevant", relevant being the operative word, not directed to the OP. The OP is not named as Relevant, of course if you wish to think that that is your prerogative but that was not what was said.

Rudeness has to be a direct comment that is personally disparaging.

As to the relevance of John Lewis, please do enlighten one as to the relevance.


----------



## Alec Swan (11 January 2017)

KittenInTheTree said:



			Remind me why Judgemental hasn't been banned yet?
		
Click to expand...

Mostly because we accept him as he is,  warts an' all! 

Alec.


----------



## KittenInTheTree (11 January 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			Mostly because we accept him as he is,  warts an' all! 

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

I don't.


----------



## Judgemental (11 January 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			Mostly because we accept him as he is,  warts an' all! 

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you Alec for rescuing me from I don't know quite what, I keep envisaging the claws of the cat on Ernst Stavro Blofeld's lap.:eek3:

I feel this little dialogue has been somewhat timely.

There are clearly a large number of younger members, who do not realise just how devious the Sabs and Anti's can be, in trying to undermine Country and Fieldsports as agent provocateurs,  (nothing to do with chain of lingerie shops:smile3 for which they are being trained by LACs and in their Cyber activities.


----------



## ester (11 January 2017)

You will note J is currently mostly obsessed with a general election like yesterday, and believes that with everything going on in the world hubting will be high up on he agenda of the new government so that gives you an idea 

I only hunted age 25+ OP got contacts from a couple of friends originally, in wilts just emailed. I have now done a couple of packs in different areas of the country and can honestly say they have all been lovely. Tag yourself on to an old timer if they are willing and you will learn loads. One lady at my old pack was queen bee of hound breeding and I could have listened to her all day. - she was also handy to keep an eye on as she would be the first to hear them think about going


----------



## ester (11 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			Thank you Alec for rescuing me from I don't know quite what, I keep envisaging the claws of the cat on Ernst Stavro Blofeld's lap.:eek3:

I feel this little dialogue has been somewhat timely.

There are clearly a large number of younger members, who do not realise just how devious the Sabs and Anti's can be, in trying to undermine Country and Fieldsports as agent provocateurs,  (nothing to do with chain of lingerie shops:smile3 for which they are being trained by LACs and in their Cyber activities.
		
Click to expand...

I think you somewhat underrate the intelligence of younger users. What happens to old hounds is hardly unknown information in any circle so I am not sure which info on this thread is going to help any sab or anti, many of whom seem to struggle with the concept of bloodhounds at all!


----------



## conniegirl (11 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			Thank you Alec for rescuing me from I don't know quite what, I keep envisaging the claws of the cat on Ernst Stavro Blofeld's lap.:eek3:

I feel this little dialogue has been somewhat timely.

There are clearly a large number of younger members, who do not realise just how devious the Sabs and Anti's can be, in trying to undermine Country and Fieldsports as agent provocateurs,  (nothing to do with chain of lingerie shops:smile3 for which they are being trained by LACs and in their Cyber activities.
		
Click to expand...

and clearly certain members are overly paranoid to the point of seeing monsters round every corner.

People cannot learn if they do not ask questions and if you have nothing to hide then you should answer those questions. Refusing to answer and calling people Trolls/Sabs with out proof is a perfect way to drive people away from hunting!


----------



## Judgemental (11 January 2017)

ester said:



			You will note J is currently mostly obsessed with a general election like yesterday, and believes that with everything going on in the world hunting will be high up on he agenda of the new government so that gives you an idea 

Click to expand...

If there is a big enough majority yes it will be high on the agenda, because it is a very old score to be settled with the Labour Party (along with the parasite Blair) and the SNP.

Not to mention the fact, all the members of hunts who turn out to canvess in labour strongholds and marginal seats.

No, we want our hunting and repeal, which will be a constant and important pressure point from a whole host of sources.

Apart from anything else it symbolises everything that is properly British and patriotic. Bearing in mind many Countrymen and women went to fight a war in 1939, because they were angry that Hitler shot all the Hounds in Nazi Germany in 1936 and abolished hunting.

Perhaps the OP if he/she is so interested, would care to look into the history of hunting in Nazi Germany and how the Gestapo shot any hunt servant who got in their way, so far as abolishing hunting and the wholesale killing of the hounds was concerned.

That, in the light of BREXIT is another very good reason to have repeal of the Hunting Act 2004 and settle that particular score with the Germans.


----------



## ester (11 January 2017)

Nazis... really we are only on page 2!


----------



## conniegirl (11 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			If there is a big enough majority yes it will be high on the agenda, because it is a very old score to be settled with the Labour Party (along with the parasite Blair) and the SNP.

Not to mention the fact, all the members of hunts who turn out to canvess in labour strongholds and marginal seats.

No, we want our hunting and repeal, which will be a constant and important pressure point from a whole host of sources.

Apart from anything else it symbolises everything that is properly British and patriotic. Bearing in mind many Countrymen and women went to fight a war in 1939, because they were angry that Hitler shot all the Hounds in Nazi Germany in 1936 and abolished hunting.

Perhaps the OP if he/she is so interested, would care to look into the history of hunting in Nazi Germany and how the Gestapo shot any hunt servant who got in their way, so far as abolishing hunting and the wholesale killing of the hounds was concerned.

That, in the light of BREXIT is another very good reason to have repeal of the Hunting Act 2004 and settle that particular score with the Germans.
		
Click to expand...

Perfect example of Godwins law in action!


----------



## Judgemental (11 January 2017)

conniegirl said:



			Perfect example of Godwins law in action!
		
Click to expand...

If memory serves me correctly that is not the first time you have invoked Godwin. However Godwin did not have the issue of BREXIT in mind when considering Hitler and the Internet, so we now have inter alia a new dimension to the German problem namely BREXIT, which when concluded will show that we don't want anything to do with the Germans and repeal of the Hunting Act 2004 will be an added bonus.

Furthermore, anybody who is opposed to repeal of the Hunting Act 2004 is to my mind unpatriotic.


----------



## conniegirl (11 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			If memory serves me correctly that is not the first time you have invoked Godwin. However Godwin did not have the issue of BREXIT in mind when considering Hitler and the Internet, so we now have inter alia a new dimension to the German problem namely BREXIT, which when concluded will show that we don't want anything to do with the Germans and repeal of the Hunting Act 2004 will be an added bonus.

Furthermore, anybody who is opposed to repeal of the Hunting Act 2004 is to my mind unpatriotic.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry but the world has bigger problems to worry about than the hunting act.
Infact the hunting act is  so low down the agenda that it is now frivolous.

Brexit is not about the Germans! I realy do think you need to get over your hatred for them, they are perfectly nice people., thier politicians are no worse than ours.


----------



## ester (11 January 2017)

The german problem namely brexit!??? 

You're the one that brought up the nazis on a thread about what happens with old hounds.... 

It does further explain your reaction to the OP though.


----------



## Judgemental (11 January 2017)

conniegirl said:



			Sorry but the world has bigger problems to worry about than the hunting act.
Infact the hunting act is  so low down the agenda that it is now frivolous.

Brexit is not about the Germans! I realy do think you need to get over your hatred for them, they are perfectly nice people., thier politicians are no worse than ours.
		
Click to expand...

That is how you see the current position and I concede with the passage of time your reasoning may be reasonable.

However think forward and consider the position and we are about to leave or have left the EU. Farmers, Landowners, Country folk all with EU subsidies having vanished.

I hear you say, "ah but the Chancellor promised to replace them to a greater or lesser extent". A promise LOL.

So the 'farmers,' my collective for all of the above, are more than a little unhappy, especially when those replacement subsidies are then tailored to genuine need and agriculturally disadvantaged land. 

What's the cheapest way to keep them all happy, Repeal the Hunting Act 2004. The Minister will say, "look what we have done for you, given you back your hunting, aren't we wonderful". Believe me Hunting and Repeal will play a major part in the whole scenario of subsidies and agriculture, for quite a while and increasingly so.


----------



## conniegirl (11 January 2017)

I sincerely doubt it and believe you are massively out of touch with the general population of the UK, i think you need to come doqn from your high horse and remove the silver spoon from your posterior!
Appeasing farmers will be done through extra funding, not by pissing off approximately half of the general population (farmers are a minority compared to those in cities and who dislike hunting).


----------



## Smellycob (11 January 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			I do rather find myself in approval of all that! 

In answer to your opening question and regarding elderly hounds which can no longer hunt,  with the possible exception of the odd hound which has managed to inveigle it's way in to the affections of Hunt staff,  they're quite correctly put to sleep.  There is no other alternative if Hunstman and Master are to consider the well being of the individual animal,  or the pack.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you x


----------



## Smellycob (11 January 2017)

Shay said:



			OP - Apologies for my earlier comment.  I clearly took you wrongly - but I hope you can understand a level of caution given the persecution many hunts face from a certain faction of society.

In the spirit of gaining knowledge - it is a common misconception among those opposed to hunting (or at least it is around here ) that everyone who hunts in "upper class" which could not be further from the truth.  That is a common thread of the verbal abuse to which we are very often subject here.   Consequently your reference to being working class without any apparent other connection took me by surprise and was a red flag.  I was wrong - I apologise.

Going back to a previous question...  bloodhounding, a bit like drag hunting, tends to run faster than trail hunting - particularly in  the early part of the season.  That might be why your bloodhound pack recommends previous trail hunt experience.  But if you call the secretary they will be able to advise you which hunts are calmer, and what types of fences you will encounter.  Some hunts will have a non jumping line which you might prefer first time out.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you. That's OK, apology completely accepted and no hard feelings at all. I did re-read my original post and yes I don't think I worded it very well and I completely understand caution. Thanks for the advice about non-jumping routes - I think that will be the safer option for a first timer! x


----------



## Smellycob (11 January 2017)

ester said:



			You will note J is currently mostly obsessed with a general election like yesterday, and believes that with everything going on in the world hubting will be high up on he agenda of the new government so that gives you an idea 

I only hunted age 25+ OP got contacts from a couple of friends originally, in wilts just emailed. I have now done a couple of packs in different areas of the country and can honestly say they have all been lovely. Tag yourself on to an old timer if they are willing and you will learn loads. One lady at my old pack was queen bee of hound breeding and I could have listened to her all day. - she was also handy to keep an eye on as she would be the first to hear them think about going 

Click to expand...

Good plan Batman! Thanks x


----------



## MiJodsR2BlinkinTite (11 January 2017)

Welcome on here OP, as you've seen, we're a pretty rum lot, but welcome anyway, whoever you are and wherever you come from!

Please don't let this discourage you from hanging around. You'll notice various little squabbles and foibles come up here from time to time, you just need to get the knack of not letting it get to you!

Enjoy!


----------



## Smellycob (11 January 2017)

MiJodsR2BlinkinTite said:



			Welcome on here OP, as you've seen, we're a pretty rum lot, but welcome anyway, whoever you are and wherever you come from!

Please don't let this discourage you from hanging around. You'll notice various little squabbles and foibles come up here from time to time, you just need to get the knack of not letting it get to you!

Enjoy!
		
Click to expand...

Will do! Thanks x


----------



## Judgemental (11 January 2017)

conniegirl said:



			I sincerely doubt it and believe you are massively out of touch with the general population of the UK, i think you need to come doqn from your high horse and remove the silver spoon from your posterior!
Appeasing farmers will be done through extra funding, not by pissing off approximately half of the general population (farmers are a minority compared to those in cities and who dislike hunting).
		
Click to expand...

Well time will tell.

Whilst my predictions are so you think, massively out of touch.

Things will become very 'old school' with the advent of leaving the EU, coupled to our friends in the US who will be even 'older school'. Bearing in mind the average of Mr Trump's cabinet is 67, indeed the oldest is 80 and I don't believe there is a single politician therein. The US and Canadian trading relationship with the UK in agricultural products will be consequently wholly different.

Coupled to a wholesale Sea Change in the trading relationship with the former Commonwealth   

Along with all the chumminess and cosying up to the Russians who will be given an open door to our agricultural markets.

Farmers will not be given the extra support you anticipate. Why because the country cannot afford the cost.  

EU subsidies, indeed all subsidies are a political tool, if in the fullness of time there are fewer politicians running the world, there will be fewer subsidies.


----------



## Rowreach (12 January 2017)

Please stay OP, it's a delight to read a well written comment with paragraphs and actual punctuation


----------



## TGM (12 January 2017)

With regard to whether to go bloodhounding or out with the foxhounds, a lot does depend on the individual packs.  In our area, the foxhound packs are varied, some have a reputation for being very welcoming, and some not so much!  Generally in our area they tend not to go so fast as the drag packs and the bloodhounds and not do so much jumping.  (By drag packs, I mean those packs that have always dragged).  Our local drag pack is very fast and furious and they love jumping huge hedges all the time, whereas the bloodhound pack is more in between - fast-paced with usually lots of jumping but always ways round the big hedges and sometimes have optional jumping days or a non-jumping fieldmaster. 

Drag hunts and bloodhound packs have the advantage that they are not usually bothered by antis/sabs so they often have very informative websites and Facebook groups with lots of pictures, videos, reports etc which can give you a good idea of what is involved.  If you are in the South East I would recommend you have a look at the Coakham Bloodhounds website on:

www.coakhambloodhounds.org.uk

which will tell you a lot about the Coakham in particular, but also about bloodhounding in general.  They also have a very active Facebook group where you can find lots of videos and photos that give you a taste of the days that they put on.


----------



## Judgemental (12 January 2017)

Smellycob said:



			Will do! Thanks x
		
Click to expand...

So OP, clearly you are such a splendid chap or chapess, are you with us, in other words are you for Repeal?


----------



## conniegirl (12 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			Well time will tell.

Whilst my predictions are so you think, massively out of touch.

Things will become very 'old school' with the advent of leaving the EU, coupled to our friends in the US who will be even 'older school'. Bearing in mind the average of Mr Trump's cabinet is 67, indeed the oldest is 80 and I don't believe there is a single politician therein. The US and Canadian trading relationship with the UK in agricultural products will be consequently wholly different.

Coupled to a wholesale Sea Change in the trading relationship with the former Commonwealth   

Along with all the chumminess and cosying up to the Russians who will be given an open door to our agricultural markets.

Farmers will not be given the extra support you anticipate. Why because the country cannot afford the cost.  

EU subsidies, indeed all subsidies are a political tool, if in the fullness of time there are fewer politicians running the world, there will be fewer subsidies.
		
Click to expand...

it is a simple numbers game, there are vastly more people who dislike hunting (whether educated about hunting or not) then there are farmers.
Politicians get into office on strength of numbers, they will not piss off the many to appease the few, particularly not on a issue such as hunting where feeling tend to run extremely strongly.


----------



## Amymay (12 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			So OP, clearly you are such a splendid chap or chapess, are you with us, in other words are you for Repeal?
		
Click to expand...

Why do they have to be for or against a repeal? 

Let's face it,  the vast majority of those that hunted prior to the ban were simply there for a cracking day out and riding across the country - and had no interest in whether a fox was caught or not. 

Those that continue to hunt post ban get all that, and more.


----------



## Judgemental (12 January 2017)

amymay said:



			Why do they have to be for or against a repeal? 

Let's face it,  the vast majority of those that hunted prior to the ban were simply there for a cracking day out and riding across the country - and had no interest in whether a fox was caught or not. 

Those that continue to hunt post ban get all that, and more.
		
Click to expand...

I was not talking about hunting on a day to day basis, I was asking the OP what their view is on the legislation.

Are you for Repeal or not?


----------



## Amymay (12 January 2017)

Actually, no I'm not for repeal.


----------



## conniegirl (12 January 2017)

amymay said:



			Actually, no I'm not for repeal.
		
Click to expand...

ditto this.


----------



## Maesfen (12 January 2017)

For me; the big plus for repeal would be the lifting of restrictions on hunt staff who are the ones that have borne the brunt in this stupid act which has been totally unfair on them.  It would also help in the welfare of the fox which is not to be taken lightly.


----------



## ihatework (12 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			Thank you Alec for rescuing me from I don't know quite what, I keep envisaging the claws of the cat on Ernst Stavro Blofeld's lap.:eek3:

I feel this little dialogue has been somewhat timely.

There are clearly a large number of younger members, who do not realise just how devious the Sabs and Anti's can be, in trying to undermine Country and Fieldsports as agent provocateurs,  (nothing to do with chain of lingerie shops:smile3 for which they are being trained by LACs and in their Cyber activities.
		
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but just climb down of your high horse and think about how your posting might be perceived.

Even if this was a post made by an anti, what has your response achieved other than to reaffirm preconceptions that people who hunt are ******'s 

Remember lots of people read responses to posts, it's not all about the OP.

No need for cloak and daggers. A straight forward and honest response to the question was all that was needed.

I'm pro countryside, including 'hunting' but boy am I anti 'hunt' at times, or more specific anti a subset of people who hunt.


----------



## Judgemental (12 January 2017)

ihatework said:



			I'm sorry, but just climb down of your high horse and think about how your posting might be perceived.

Even if this was a post made by an anti, what has your response achieved other than to reaffirm preconceptions that people who hunt are ******'s 

Remember lots of people read responses to posts, it's not all about the OP.

No need for cloak and daggers. A straight forward and honest response to the question was all that was needed.

I'm pro countryside, including 'hunting' but boy am I anti 'hunt' at times, or more specific anti a subset of people who hunt.
		
Click to expand...

NO I WILL NOT!

Any New Boy/Girl - Foal who comes onto this forum, in particular and starts asking controversial questions, wrapped up in simpering platitudes is bound to be challenged. 

Go into them hard and fast, 'shoot first' and ask questions afterwards, apart from anything else it's character building, for the challenger, challenged and spectators.

Trust nobody and be suspicious of everybody.

There are far too many lily livered Liberal Elitists (which is reflected in many of the comments and barbs directed at my excellent Judgement) who have been mucking the world around and the the Hunting Act 2004 is a prime example, this side of the Atlantic.

Let's hope some robust Republicanism will rub off from the States and our politicians/civil servants stiffen up.


----------



## ester (12 January 2017)

How is it contraversial? As I said it would hardly be news to anyone inside or outside of hunting! And definitely not to any anti?!


----------



## conniegirl (12 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			NO I WILL NOT!

Any New Boy/Girl - Foal who comes onto this forum, in particular and starts asking controversial questions, wrapped up in simpering platitudes is bound to be challenged. 

Go into hard and fast, 'shoot first' and ask questions afterwards, apart from anything else it's character building, for the challenger, challenged and spectators.

Trust nobody and be suspicious of everybody.

There are too many lily livered Liberal Elitists who have been mucking the world around and the the Hunting Act 2004 is a prime example, this side of the Atlantic.

Let's hope some robust Republicanism will rub off from the States and our politicians/civil servants stiffen up.
		
Click to expand...

you are the perfect example of why the stereotype of the stuck up Toff going hunting prevails.

YOU are the problem, untill public perception changes, the hunting act will not be repealed, public perception cannot change whilst there are people like you who perpetuate the problem.

anyone with a genuine question gets shut down fast by an arrogant, entitled idiot with a silver spoon shoved where the sun dont shine and a very skewed perception of reality, is it any wonder that hunting is badly perceived by the general public?


----------



## Judgemental (12 January 2017)

ester said:



			How is it contraversial? As I said it would hardly be news to anyone inside or outside of hunting! And definitely not to any anti?!
		
Click to expand...

Yet another example of Liberal Elitism. 

We do not talk about the hounds in a right thinking hunting world. It is simple not done and extremely discourteous to the Masters or Trustees of the Hounds.

For example, have you ever (assuming you are not a Master or Hunt Servant) been to the kennels without the permission of the Master?


----------



## Judgemental (12 January 2017)

conniegirl said:



			you are the perfect example of why the stereotype of the stuck up Toff going hunting prevails.

YOU are the problem, untill public perception changes, the hunting act will not be repealed, public perception cannot change whilst there are people like you who perpetuate the problem.

anyone with a genuine question gets shut down fast by an arrogant, entitled idiot with a silver spoon shoved where the sun dont shine and a very skewed perception of reality, is it any wonder that hunting is badly perceived by the general public?
		
Click to expand...

No you are wrong. There are a variety of protocols where the hounds are concerned and plainly, you have not been properly schooled in the correct etiquette on the subject. 

As I said to ester it is discourteous to the Masters and Trustees of the Hounds.

Furthermore if we do not follow the Protocols set down over at least 200 years, then the whole procedure fails. Yet another reason we have the Hunting Act 2004, too many people failing to respect the correct etiquette.


----------



## conniegirl (12 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			No you are wrong. There are a variety of protocols where the hounds are concerned and plainly, you have not been properly schooled in the correct etiquette on the subject. 

As I said to ester it is discourteous to the Masters and Trustees of the Hounds
		
Click to expand...

well then I'm like the other 99% of the population who did not grow up hunting therefore dont give a flying fig about the correct etiquette of asking about potential animal welfare issue.

I dont care if you or the masters etc concider it discourteous, if they made the information available people would not have to ask about it, the information is not easily available and telling people they are not allowed to ask is perpetuating the stereotype! 
If they are not allowed to ask the people doing it then all we can assume is that those lovely videos done by PETA of hounds being clubbed to death or torn apart whilst still alive are correct.

Until the hunts climb down from thier high horse and engage with the common man they will never get the support of the common man and thus they will never get the act repealed. this is not the 1920's where people have been trained to deffer to the aristocracy as their supposed "betters", this is 2017 where people can and do question, challenge and campaign on issues regardless of their social background.

I will add that before this thread I was ambivalent about hunting, could take it or leave it, probably would have voted to repeal it if the matter came up for a referendum. Now thanks to your attitude and replies I would vote against repeal!

Bravo, wonderful job done there!


----------



## Judgemental (12 January 2017)

conniegirl said:



			entitled
		
Click to expand...

 Really? I must have missed the letter from The Lord Chamberlain's Office.


----------



## The Fuzzy Furry (12 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			Furthermore if we do not follow the Protocols set down over at least 200 years, then the whole procedure fails. Yet another reason we have the Hunting Act 2004, too many people failing to respect the correct etiquette.
		
Click to expand...


Oh dear  
JM, get off that ruddy great horse you are on and take a LOOk at the world around you dearie, just for once take the blinkers off eh?
YOU are really not 'helping' anything right now, however 'misguided' you might think other posters are (OP and also those who have posted in response to you above).

I actually read one of your posts above (ok, more than 1) to others - and the comments back were rather unfavourable towards you to say the least - this coming from a hunt secretary, a kennel man and 2 field masters.

And by the way, yes I do have a wee bit to do with hounds and hunt staff too.


----------



## Judgemental (12 January 2017)

conniegirl said:



			well then I'm like the other 99% of the population who did not grow up hunting therefore dont give a flying fig about the correct etiquette of asking about potential animal welfare issue.

I dont care if you or the masters etc concider it discourteous, if they made the information available people would not have to ask about it, the information is not easily available and telling people they are not allowed to ask is perpetuating the stereotype! 
If they are not allowed to ask the people doing it then all we can assume is that those lovely videos done by PETA of hounds being clubbed to death or torn apart whilst still alive are correct.

Until the hunts climb down from thier high horse and engage with the common man they will never get the support of the common man and thus they will never get the act repealed. this is not the 1920's where people have been trained to deffer to the aristocracy as their supposed "betters", this is 2017 where people can and do question, challenge and campaign on issues regardless of their social background.
		
Click to expand...

Anti in sheep's clothing springs to mind.


----------



## conniegirl (12 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			Anti in sheep's clothing springs to mind.
		
Click to expand...

actually untill I came across your replies and attitude I probably would have voted for a repeal had it come up in a referendum. Now you can jog right on I will vote against repeal simply for the fact I do not like being spoken to as though I am thick or too much of a pleb to know, if that is the prevailing attitude amongst those campaigning for repeal then they are doomed to failure.


----------



## Judgemental (12 January 2017)

The Fuzzy Furry said:



			Oh dear  
JM, get off that ruddy great horse you are on and take a LOOk at the world around you dearie, just for once take the blinkers off eh?
YOU are really not 'helping' anything right now, however 'misguided' you might think other posters are (OP and also those who have posted in response to you above).

I actually read one of your posts above (ok, more than 1) to others - and the comments back were rather unfavourable towards you to say the least - this coming from a hunt secretary, a kennel man and 2 field masters.

And by the way, yes I do have a wee bit to do with hounds and hunt staff too.
		
Click to expand...

Yet more Liberal Elitism, it's like a disease and needs to be eradicated rather like the Warble Fly.


----------



## Tiddlypom (12 January 2017)

I do wonder sometimes if JM is a sab under cover, as he does such a good job of alienating folk from hunting.


----------



## conniegirl (12 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			Yet more Liberal Elitism, it's like a disease and needs to be eradicated rather like the Warble Fly.
		
Click to expand...

I propose that Judgemental is the Troll here!

 or maybe they are the Anti, they are certainly doing the Antis job for them very well!


----------



## Judgemental (12 January 2017)

conniegirl said:



			actually untill I came across your replies and attitude I probably would have voted for a repeal had it come up in a referendum. Now you can jog right on I will vote against repeal simply for the fact I do not like being spoken to as though I am thick or too much of a pleb to know, if that is the prevailing attitude amongst those campaigning for repeal then they are doomed to failure.
		
Click to expand...

That rather proves that you do not have the interests of the hounds at the forefront of your thinking. Otherwise you would realise that a well bred pack, functioning to take a deer or chop a fox, is essential for their ongoing mental and physical well being.

The Hunting Act 2004 has diluted the operational cutting edge of all hounds bred to take live quarry.


----------



## conniegirl (12 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			That rather proves that you do not have the interests of the hounds at the forefront of your thinking. Otherwise you would realise that a well bred pack, functioning to take a deer or chop a fox, is essential for their ongoing mental and physical well being.

The Hunting Act 2004 has diluted the operational cutting edge of all hounds bred to take live quarry.
		
Click to expand...

actualy I rather think that not being tortured to death is rather more important than thier efficiency in tracking prey.
Not living is squalid filthy conditions is also very important but i suppose we are not allowed to ask about those either!


----------



## The Fuzzy Furry (12 January 2017)

Tiddlypom said:



			I do wonder sometimes if JM is a sab under cover, as he does such a good job of alienating folk from hunting.
		
Click to expand...




conniegirl said:



			I propose that Judgemental is the Troll here!

 or maybe they are the Anti, they are certainly doing the Antis job for them very well!
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely spot on. either that or an over 80yr old with a dinosaur head on.
What an exremely unpleasant individual indeed, certainly someone I wouldn't want to meet at my 2 local kennels, nor anywhere in the hunting field.

I strongly suggest that all other posters put him on ignore, as I am now going to do, as he is just bringing the sport into disrepute by his outdated, moronic and quite frankly very offensive tirades :mad3:


----------



## ester (12 January 2017)

So JM you believe that for the last 12 years mental and physical well being is being compromised?


----------



## Judgemental (12 January 2017)

The Fuzzy Furry said:



			Absolutely spot on. either that or an over 80yr old with a dinosaur head on.
What an exremely unpleasant individual indeed, certainly someone I wouldn't want to meet at my 2 local kennels, nor anywhere in the hunting field.

I strongly suggest that all other posters put him on ignore, as I am now going to do, as he is just bringing the sport into disrepute by his outdated, moronic and quite frankly very offensive tirades :mad3:
		
Click to expand...

Yes well one can see you are not the slightest bit interested in the hounds.


----------



## Judgemental (12 January 2017)

ester said:



			so jm you believe that for the last 12 years mental and physical well being is being compromised?
		
Click to expand...

yes yes yes

Confirmation is enhanced by good fast hunts with the quarry changing it's point. Once caught the hounds are rewarded and look eagerly for the same reward next time they are out.

However with this Lilly Liberal Trail Hunting or Dragging, the hounds are not rewarded and they never really enjoy the variations in scent that a fox emanates, along with the height of the scent with temperature changes. Thereby providing a too consistent confirmation at pace.


----------



## ester (12 January 2017)

Gosh, maybe they should stop hunting altogether then if it is becoming a welfare issue. 

I must have been lucky to come across only fit, happy hounds I guess. Well one lame one once who was very cross to be sent straight back into the lorry.


----------



## Judgemental (12 January 2017)

ester said:



			Gosh, maybe they should stop hunting altogether then if it is becoming a welfare issue. 

I must have been lucky to come across only fit, happy hounds I guess. Well one lame one once who was very cross to be sent straight back into the lorry.
		
Click to expand...

No they are not happy because they are bred to hunt and kill.


----------



## conniegirl (12 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			No they are not happy because they are bred to hunt and kill.
		
Click to expand...

well in that case lets just ban all hunting with dogs in any form (including drag hunting), and shoot all the dogs because that it clearly best for thier welfare, cant have them chasing a fox and it getting away on them, must be mental torture.


----------



## ester (12 January 2017)

Are they still bred to hunt and kill though? After this amount of time, I'd be surprised if hunts hadn't been selecting the best trail followers instead.


----------



## ihatework (12 January 2017)

ester said:



			Are they still bred to hunt and kill though? After this amount of time, I'd be surprised if hunts hadn't been selecting the best trail followers instead.
		
Click to expand...

Begrudgingly, to be fair to JM (who I still think is a prize twonk), I would be pretty positive that the hunting traits are so genetically strong they would be very difficult to alter in such a short space of time.
On a smaller and maybe not even comparable basis, I take my lab out picking up on a small local shoot. On a bad day when he hasn't had some good retrieves he is noticeably frustrated.


----------



## Judgemental (12 January 2017)

ester said:



			Are they still bred to hunt and kill though? After this amount of time, I'd be surprised if hunts hadn't been selecting the best trail followers instead.
		
Click to expand...

That is a very interesting point. Bearing in mind the Foxhound has been bred and evolved over about 200 years, their  'in built hard disk' to use a contemporary analogy, is never likely to be diminished in it natural power of seeking a quarry and expecting to make a kill.

Hounds are happy if they sing at night, once they are comfortable on their benches.

Apart from anything else, your comment about selecting the best trail followers is reasonable in theory, but not sustainable because to do so, would be to compromise the desire and intention to have Repeal.


----------



## ester (12 January 2017)

True but I am not sure every hunt is so sure repeal is going to happen as you are. 

I just thought it an interesting point as we are now quite a few years, and hence potentially a few generations in. 
I wonder if the bloodhounds feel differently because they do actually 'catch' their quarry as any tracking dog would, and how important the catch/kill element is to a foxhound compared to the rest of their work, because they do still seem to work, happily. If they weren't getting any mental reward for that work at all you might expect them to give up bothering. - Hence my comment that even if not intentionally hunts might have selected those that get reward from the trail not the kill because you want the ones that keep bothering.
What you say is true IHW but keeping in the back of mind how quickly it has been possible to alter, sometimes quite dramatically, traits in other domesticated dogs.


----------



## Judgemental (12 January 2017)

ester said:



			True but I am not sure every hunt is so sure repeal is going to happen as you are. 

I just thought it an interesting point as we are now quite a few years, and hence potentially a few generations in. 
I wonder if the bloodhounds feel differently because they do actually 'catch' their quarry as any tracking dog would, and how important the catch/kill element is to a foxhound compared to the rest of their work, because they do still seem to work, happily. If they weren't getting any mental reward for that work at all you might expect them to give up bothering. - Hence my comment that even if not intentionally hunts might have selected those that get reward from the trail not the kill because you want the ones that keep bothering.
What you say is true IHW but keeping in the back of mind how quickly it has been possible to alter, sometimes quite dramatically, traits in other domesticated dogs.
		
Click to expand...

I am going to have a think about that point and question. So if you will excuse me, I will revert shortly.


----------



## ester (12 January 2017)

I love a good revert, I have only just read the post telling me that we shouldn't talk about hounds oops!


----------



## Crosshill Pacers (12 January 2017)

amymay said:



			Why do they have to be for or against a repeal?
		
Click to expand...

Ironically my current Master's wife only started hunting AFTER the ban.  Prior to that she point blank refused to go along with her husband and son.  Post-2004 she took up riding (in her mid-30s) and 12 years later she is now the wife of the Master.  She often jokes that it took a hunting ban to get her out hunting.

So your question is a good one.  I am all for a repeal for so many reasons but to enjoy hunting now doesn't require a desire to see the 2004 Act repealed.  A lot of my hunting friends simply enjoy riding out across normally inaccessible land in good company.


----------



## Smellycob (12 January 2017)

Well this threads certainly has been busy! Blimey at least I can say I've made an impression! I'm loathe to do it but, as I am such a thoroughly decent person according to my sarcastic friend, I will respond... 



Judgemental said:



			NO I WILL NOT!

 controversial questions, simpering platitudes  

That's me! 

Go into them hard and fast, 'shoot first' and ask questions afterwards, apart from anything else it's character building, for the challenger, challenged and spectators.

Yup or might just convince people that you are a thoroughly unpleasant person and lose support for your group or cause by default. As for character building, well I suppose it depends on what character you are trying to build...

Trust nobody and be suspicious of everybody.

What a horrible world you must live in. Having been brought up correctly (money doesn't buy you class and all that) I would say I care. Then again, that might equate to a bit more simpering and we can't have that. Stiff upper lip and all!

There are far too many lily livered Liberal Elitists.... reflected in many of the comments and barbs directed at my excellent Judgement 

...I have no words....




Judgemental said:



			Yet another example of Liberal Elitism. 

We do not talk about the hounds in a right thinking hunting world. It is simple not done and extremely discourteous to the Masters or Trustees of the Hounds.

My crystal ball is at the menders. Without it I'm stuck. Have to ask questions if I want answers.



conniegirl said:



			actually untill I came across your replies and attitude I probably would have voted for a repeal had it come up in a referendum. Now you can jog right on I will vote against repeal simply for the fact I do not like being spoken to as though I am thick or too much of a pleb to know, if that is the prevailing attitude amongst those campaigning for repeal then they are doomed to failure.
		
Click to expand...

This. To my shame it does make me feel like being spiteful.



Tiddlypom said:



			I do wonder sometimes if JM is a sab under cover, as he does such a good job of alienating folk from hunting.
		
Click to expand...




conniegirl said:



			I propose that Judgemental is the Troll here!

 or maybe they are the Anti, they are certainly doing the Antis job for them very well!
		
Click to expand...

Funny you mention it I was actually wondering if I'd been had! 



Judgemental said:



			Yes well one can see you are not the slightest bit interested in the hounds.
		
Click to expand...

Is anyone allowed to be? 

For anyone who was wondering, regarding repeal, as I didn't hunt before the ban and have yet to do so I don't know much about how the ban has actually affected the people who live in the countryside and have to work with the legislation. Apart from youtube videos that is. As far as actual foxhunting goes.... with a view to eradicating a problem pest I gather there are a few ways to do it. Hunting with hounds where if caught I can't see any way out for Mr Fox. He's dead or not. Shooting, where I would think the appropriate person would be very competent BUT there is that risk of a miss and a slow death with some horrible festering wound. And snares and poison (I think) neither of which I fancy very much. So its hounds (which I've read kill instantly) or shooting with a risk of a long death. From a fox welfare pov I know which way I'm leaning BUT it is a lean as I just don't feel educated enough about the issue to make a decision that will affect animal welfare and people's lives. Hence I thought me getting involved and educating myself a bit more would be a good thing. I gather more foxes are also killed when they are shot as opposed to being hunted with hounds. But anyway...my initial question was about the hounds and how they were dealt with at the end of their days. Humanely was my answer. I don't quite know where the Nazi's came from but I suppose you can't have a good story without them-just look at Indiana Jones.
		
Click to expand...



Click to expand...


----------



## Judgemental (12 January 2017)

The foxhunting ban 10 years on: has the countryside changed for ever?
It was one of New Labour&#8217;s defining policies &#8211; but a decade after the hunting ban came in, enthusiasts still ride out across the country. So did the law change things? Can the pursuit survive? And what&#8217;s it like chasing fox urine?

 &#8216;Hunting is completely different now&#8217; &#8230; riders about to set off on the Cotswold hunt
 &#8216;Hunting is completely different now&#8217; &#8230; riders about to set off on the Cotswold hunt Photograph: Graham Turner for the Guardian
Stephen Moss Stephen Moss 
Saturday 22 November 2014 08.31 GMT Last modified on Tuesday 20 September 2016 15.07 BST
Comments
756
&#8220;Lovely music,&#8221; says the stately, somewhat forbidding, weatherbeaten woman sitting on a dark bay Irish hunter at the edge of a field in the Cotswolds. The music to which she refers is the eruption of barks and yelps from the pack of hounds in the neighbouring wood. The music, she says, is at its most lyrical in woodland, where the sound echoes through the trees

Ten years ago, before foxhunting was banned, the symphony of squeals would have signified that the 40-strong pack of hounds had hit on the scent of a fox. The half-dozen red-coated huntsmen and 25-strong field would have set off in urgent pursuit, as the hounds barrelled through the wood and flushed the fox into open country. The reality now is more prosaic: the hounds have picked up a scent laid by a hunt supporter carrying a rag impregnated with fox urine. The music may be real, but everything else is artificial.

It is a glorious morning and I am out with the Cotswold hunt, meeting a few miles from Cirencester. The music lover is Lavinia Black, a huntswoman of 50 years&#8217; standing (or, more accurately, sitting). She is acting as an amateur whipper-in: the role entails being stationed at the edge of the field in case the hounds happen on a real fox and set off in pursuit, in which case she is supposed to stop them. Under the ban, fox hunts can do everything except hunt foxes. A roe deer, disturbed by the hounds, springs out of the wood and races across the field. Happily, the pack ignores it, so Black&#8217;s whipping in is not put to the test.

The morning on which I join the hunt &#8211; following on foot with local supporter David Hicks &#8211; is a significant one. It is 10 years to the day since the bill to ban foxhunting in England and Wales received the royal assent. The meet opens at 10.45am, when the huntsmen (two of the joint masters, the professional huntsman responsible for the hounds and two young professional whippers-in), the mounted field (most of whom are female), and the car and foot followers gather. Hicks, a retired teacher and son of a farmer who has followed hunts since he was a child, describes this brief social gathering as &#8220;a mad cocktail party in the middle of the country&#8221;. A glass of port is taken, sausage rolls and pork pies consumed, pleasantries and gossip exchanged.


The stories you need to read, in one handy email
 Read more
This is where I encounter the woman who makes my day. June Stevens is more than 90 years old &#8211; she won&#8217;t be more precise than that &#8211; and walks with the aid of two sticks, but she has driven to the meet to lend her support. She tells me she farmed locally (one of the few women that did so on her own in the Cotswolds), has hunted for 70 years and rode until she was 80. &#8220;I loved riding,&#8221; she says, &#8220;and was quite good. I went round Badminton [a tough cross-country course] twice and did a bit of show-jumping. Hunting fitted in well with my farming in the winter.&#8221; What, I ask her, did she think of the ban when it was introduced? &#8220;I thought it was damn stupid, in plain English,&#8221; she says. And how does hunting now compare to the way it used to be? &#8220;Completely different.&#8221;

Joe Edwards, another retired farmer and former hunt secretary, has been listening to our conversation and chimes in. &#8220;It&#8217;ll never be the same,&#8221; he says. &#8220;Even if there was no ban, it wouldn&#8217;t be the same, for various reasons, environmental, roads ...&#8221;

 &#8216;Very few of the people who ride now have an affinity with the land&#8217; &#8230; says a supporter of the Cotswold hunt.
 &#8216;Very few of the people who ride now have an affinity with the land&#8217;: some traditionalists feel things have changed for the worse. Photograph: Graham Turner for the Guardian
&#8220;The people who hunt now are different,&#8221; Stevens adds. &#8220;It used to be farmers&#8217; sons and daughters who came hunting. Well, there aren&#8217;t any now. The farms are much bigger and they&#8217;re all mechanically minded &#8211; they sit on tractors.&#8221;

Stevens reckons the fact that hunters (or, if the law is being observed, pseudo-hunters) are now more likely to be professional people who have moved to the Cotswolds than farmers who were born there has changed the nature of hunting. Doctors, lawyers, business consultants, even &#8211; Hicks tells me &#8211; a woman who works on a supermarket checkout. Enthusiasts like to emphasise hunting&#8217;s classlessness, and, while this may be overegged, the pursuit is certainly not the Wodehousian caricature portrayed by some antis.

&#8220;Very few of the people who ride on horses now have an affinity with the land,&#8221; says Stevens. &#8220;In my day, we were farmers ourselves, we knew all the farmers, and we would help to look after each other&#8217;s crops. If you had a few ignorant people out riding across the winter corn, you&#8217;d shout at them.&#8221; She says a key reason to hunt then was the chance to have a nose around your neighbours&#8217; farms.

These two, who between them have hunted for 150 years (I discover later that Edwards, also still following the hunt by car, is 96), open my eyes to the crucial truth about hunting: for all the arguments over the ban, it had already changed irrevocably long before the anti-hunt campaigners got their teeth into it. What the hunters were fighting for in 2004, and continue to fight for as they demand repeal, is a simulacrum of the hunting these two nonagenarians practised in the rooted rural England of the middle of the last century. Farmers had a vested interest in killing foxes, which preyed on their livestock; a hobby rider out for an enjoyable day&#8217;s riding in the autumn sunshine doesn&#8217;t really care what is being pursued, a fox or a scented rag. Hunting was maimed long before the 2004 ban, a victim of social change and brutal economies of scale as family farms gave way to industrialised agriculture.

James Chamberlain, one of the Cotswold&#8217;s joint masters, says these changes are by no means new, and argues that hunting remains a &#8220;social glue&#8221; that binds the countryside together. &#8220;The countryside is still a community, and there is a very strong link around hunting. We have many events &#8211; the point-to-point, the hunt ball, a team chase &#8211; and our fundraising side has got stronger and stronger. In a fortnight, we&#8217;ll have a country fair, where we raise money for charity as well  as for the hunt, and people will come from miles around to do their Christmas shopping.&#8221;

There is no denying the camaraderie among the hunters &#8211; the hunt meets on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays, and subscribers will ride out together regularly on one or more of those days &#8211; but if the connection with the land has largely gone, and an ever more disparate collection of people, many of them second-homers, are riding with the hunt, how rooted can it be?

Chamberlain bridles when I suggest that hunting trails rather than foxes is no more than a glorified hack &#8211; a chance to enjoy a pleasant day out with some challenging riding &#8211; but that&#8217;s the way it looks to this townie and hunting agnostic. Where once it could claim to be a central part of rural life &#8211; hymned by writers as varied as RS Surtees, Anthony Trollope and Siegfried Sassoon &#8211; hunting now seems an add-on, a quaint remnant. The artificiality of trail hunting seems to mirror the hollowness of what the hunt wants to represent &#8211; the continuance of rural traditions. If rural settlements today are, in the main, Potemkin villages, perhaps they are skirted by Potemkin hunts.

 Hunters now follow an artificial trail, instead of chasing real foxes.
 Hunters now follow an artificial trail, instead of chasing real foxes. Photograph: Graham Turner for the Guardian
Seen in that context, the continuing struggle between the pros and the antis needs to be reframed. The League Against Cruel Sports produced a report this week to mark 10 years of the ban. It concluded that the Hunting Act had been successful, and pointed to the 341 convictions for illegal hunting between 2005 and 2013. The photograph next to the graphic charting these convictions is of a league investigator filming a mounted hunter in a red jacket. The clear conclusion we are supposed to draw is that these 341 convictions have been recorded against organised hunts. However, the Countryside Alliance, which campaigns for repeal of the ban, offers a different interpretation of these figures. It says only 21 of the 341 convictions involved hunts &#8220;registered with the Council of Hunting Associations&#8221;. The rest, they say, resulted from &#8220;casual hunting&#8221; and &#8220;poaching&#8221; &#8211; individuals and small groups using dogs to chase and kill wild mammals. Without condoning the organised hunts that are flouting the ban &#8211; and they undoubtedly exist &#8211; the league is arguably giving a misleading impression of where the real problem lies.

Michael Stephenson, director of campaigns at the league, insists there is no attempt to mislead. &#8220;This is not an attack on the hunts per se. It&#8217;s an attack on people who break the law. A criminal is a criminal.&#8221; He claims 20% of the convictions involved people associated with hunts; the Countryside Alliance reckon the figure is 3%; I make it 6%. Whichever figure is correct, the key fact is that hunts &#8211; now essentially hobbyist &#8211; are not the ones primarily doing the illegal hunting. Hunters are now more likely to wear bobble hats and padded jackets than red coats.

Cont/2.......


----------



## Judgemental (12 January 2017)

Page 2 of the above

The league&#8217;s report argues that the ban has largely worked, but it wants it tightened. &#8220;It needs work to iron out the inconsistencies,&#8221; says Stephenson, &#8220;and we&#8217;ve put forward three areas where we&#8217;re lobbying for change.&#8221; It wants tougher sentences, including imprisonment, for illegal hunting; the use of terriers flushing out foxes underground to be banned (at present it is legal to use two dogs to flush out a fox as long as it is then shot, and gamekeepers are permitted to use terriers to go underground after a fox); and, crucially, the league wants to stop trail hunting, which they believe is a cover for illegal hunting because, if a fox is &#8220;accidentally&#8221; caught up in the hunt, it is difficult to prove intent. Oddly, it is not calling for an end to hunting with birds of prey, which some hunts use to circumvent the ban. &#8220;We defend the act,&#8221; says Stephenson, who claims 80% public support for a continuation of the ban, &#8220;but with some targeted improvements it will be a better piece of legislation.&#8221;Tim Bonner, Stephenson&#8217;s opposite number at the Countryside Alliance, is pleased the league at least now accepts that aspects of the act aren&#8217;t working. &#8220;They wrote the law and used to say it was perfect,&#8221; he says. &#8220;Here we are 10 years down the road, and they&#8217;ve suddenly decided it isn&#8217;t. We think the issue [for them] is not whether it&#8217;s workable or not; it doesn&#8217;t deliver what they wanted. They wanted rid of hunts. The whole anti-hunting campaign was based on a strange political obsession with the people who hunt. Where&#8217;s the evidence that animal welfare has improved dramatically since the Hunting Act came in? You can still shoot a fox; you can still trap a fox; you can still gas a fox. There&#8217;s not a jot of evidence that foxes are any better off as a result of this.&#8221;

I ask Bonner whether it&#8217;s been hard to keep the show on the road during the past 10 years. &#8220;There were huge concerns when the law first came in,&#8221; he says. &#8220;Hunts were not investing or employing people, and they were very concerned about the future. But it rapidly became clear they would be able to do something, and that people were going to continue to support you whatever you did.&#8221;

 'The hunting community was determined not to give up&#8217;  &#8230; A 2003 Countryside Alliance protest in London.
 &#8216;The hunting community was determined not to give up&#8217; &#8230; A 2003 Countryside Alliance protest in London. Photograph: Janine Wiedel/REX
How relevant the arguments of the league and alliance are, however, is a moot point. The chances of a government, of whatever persuasion, taking another look at the legislation any time soon are slim. The hunters&#8217; hope is that if the Tories win a majority in 2015, David Cameron &#8211; who comes from a hunting family &#8211; will honour his long-standing pledge to repeal the act. But a source close to official party thinking on the issue tells me that, even with a working majority, it is unlikely a Conservative government would take it on. &#8220;The political will is not there,&#8221; she says. &#8220;It&#8217;s not a vote-winner, and there is no upside for the party. Hunting people already vote Conservative, and you will just galvanise the antis.&#8221; And so the peculiar situation we now have &#8211; trail hunting in which the odd fox might semi-inadvertently get mangled &#8211; is likely to continue.

It is a typically British fudge that leaves neither side satisfied. The league realises that some hunts &#8211; the ones using birds of prey, others who are beyond the video cameras of the antis &#8211; are still catching foxes. But the true hunters, too, know that this pseudo-hunting is second best. &#8220;It&#8217;s crap,&#8221; says Tim Bellamy, field master on the day I go out with the Cotswold. &#8220;It&#8217;s nowhere near as good as it used to be. We can&#8217;t do this, we can&#8217;t do that.&#8221; It&#8217;s not just that they can&#8217;t deliberately chase foxes. Their &#8220;country&#8221; &#8211; the area over which they can ride &#8211; is also increasingly circumscribed by roads, the growth of commercial shooting estates and landowners who no longer give them access because they can&#8217;t claim a pest control function. Hunts may have survived the ban &#8211; the Countryside Alliance says numbers have held up over the past 10 years and 45,000 people still regularly follow hunts &#8211; but they are ever more hedged in. There has been no quick kill, as the antis had hoped in 2004, but hunts may instead face a lingering death.

Bellamy is a hunter of the old school &#8211; a farmer with a broad Gloucestershire accent who has hunted all his life. &#8220;I don&#8217;t want to ride from A to B; I want to ride via Z,&#8221; he says when I ask him to explain the appeal of hunting. The thrill and uncertainty of the chase; the randomness of a day&#8217;s hunting. These are the facets of the pursuit they love, and explain why, rather than laying just one trail, they lay many, so that no one knows precisely which one (if any) the hounds will follow.

Bellamy smiles mischievously as he talks, but beneath the good humour you can sense his anger. He thinks hunting&#8217;s long-term future is bleak. &#8220;As long as my generation are around, there will be hunting,&#8221; he says. &#8220;But what about the generation after me? They won&#8217;t have the skill even to simulate hunting.&#8221; Goodnight, as the hunters always say, whatever the time of day, when one of their number makes for home.


----------



## Goldenstar (13 January 2017)

I have long suspected that JM is deep plant by LACS hoping to drive us all I to their fold.


----------



## Judgemental (13 January 2017)

ester said:



			True but I am not sure every hunt is so sure repeal is going to happen as you are. 

I just thought it an interesting point as we are now quite a few years, and hence potentially a few generations in. 
I wonder if the bloodhounds feel differently because they do actually 'catch' their quarry as any tracking dog would, and how important the catch/kill element is to a foxhound compared to the rest of their work, because they do still seem to work, happily. If they weren't getting any mental reward for that work at all you might expect them to give up bothering. - Hence my comment that even if not intentionally hunts might have selected those that get reward from the trail not the kill because you want the ones that keep bothering.
What you say is true IHW but keeping in the back of mind how quickly it has been possible to alter, sometimes quite dramatically, traits in other domesticated dogs.
		
Click to expand...

As I said I would have a think about your points and I hope the piece from the Guardian goes some way to answer your question.

It throws up a considerable number of other questions and the whole matter and all the issues have to be considered in a wholly intellectual genre, leaving aside any sentiment.

Plainly certain posters have to realise that there is a considerable amount of academic positioning, that needs to unfold over time.

Like so many things, much is contained in what is not said but the established unwritten codes of conduct.

Beyond that which we know and the way matters are evolving it is difficult to make any hard and fast predictions.


----------



## ycbm (13 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			That rather proves that you do not have the interests of the hounds at the forefront of your thinking. Otherwise you would realise that a well bred pack, functioning to take a deer or chop a fox, is essential for their ongoing mental and physical well being.

The Hunting Act 2004 has diluted the operational cutting edge of all hounds bred to take live quarry.
		
Click to expand...

My understanding of deer hunting is that it is only ever stag hunting?  The females can be stalked and shot but the males need to be pursued by hounds first. Can you explain the reason for that? I have always assumed that it's because only the males will give the hunt a decent run, but I would be really pleased to be corrected on that one.

I am against repeal of the act, just to be clear.


OP, in order of speed, it goes foxhounds on a proper drag hunt, bloodhounds following the scent of a man, foxhounds hunting trail. In general, though packs differ depending on country and whether they are a 'thruster' field.

You will also find if you go out with a fox hound pack and they accidentally light on a fox, little effort is likely to be made to call the pack off and they will be allowed to hunt it down, as this is still within the law.


----------



## Clodagh (13 January 2017)

Doe hunting takes place, it is more like fox hunting (in the old days) as the does do not seperate and run like stags, they stop sooner. It has a different season to stag hunting, and off the top of my head I cannot remember when that is.


----------



## ycbm (13 January 2017)

Thanks, I didn't know that. 



Clodagh said:



			Doe hunting takes place, it is more like fox hunting (in the old days) as the does do not seperate and run like stags, they stop sooner. It has a different season to stag hunting, and off the top of my head I cannot remember when that is.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## LadySam (13 January 2017)

ycbm said:



			You will also find if you go out with a fox hound pack and they accidentally light on a fox, little effort is likely to be made to call the pack off and they will be allowed to hunt it down, as this is still within the law.
		
Click to expand...

Is it?  My understanding is that two dogs may pursue a fox if they come across one, but not a whole pack of hounds.   I thought this was one reason the current law is meant to be "unworkable".

Happy to be corrected - this is a genuine question.  I very well may have misunderstood something I've read.


----------



## Judgemental (13 January 2017)

Clodagh said:



			Doe hunting takes place, it is more like fox hunting (in the old days) as the does do not seperate and run like stags, they stop sooner. It has a different season to stag hunting, and off the top of my head I cannot remember when that is.
		
Click to expand...

No such thing as Doe hunting because the 'Doe' is the female of the Fallow Deer.

What you are refering to is Hind hunting which is the female of the Red Deer.


----------



## Amymay (13 January 2017)

LadySam said:



			Is it?  My understanding is that two dogs may pursue a fox if they come across one, but not a whole pack of hounds.   I thought this was one reason the current law is meant to be .
		
Click to expand...

Yes, you are correct.


----------



## Fellewell (13 January 2017)

Judgemental, if this op is genuine I'll eat your old Patey ;-)

There's a very good piece, written by Andrew Sallis in this weeks Horse and Hound magazine. Do have a read.


----------



## Clodagh (13 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			No such thing as Doe hunting because the 'Doe' is the female of the Fallow Deer.

What you are refering to is Hind hunting which is the female of the Red Deer.
		
Click to expand...

You are absolutley right, I knew it looked wrong when I wrote it. I may have been talking about female rabbits!?


----------



## Clodagh (13 January 2017)

LadySam said:



			Is it?  My understanding is that two dogs may pursue a fox if they come across one, but not a whole pack of hounds.   I thought this was one reason the current law is meant to be "unworkable".

Happy to be corrected - this is a genuine question.  I very well may have misunderstood something I've read.
		
Click to expand...

You may find it takes some time for the huntsman to stop them. As he was intending to hunt a trail no law has been broken, as it is intent to hunt that is the deal breaker.


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (13 January 2017)

Op as long as you stick judgemental on your ignore list (as many do for the amount of seriously one sided and twisted drivel that erupts a lot of the time) then you will get on fine.

As far as I am concerned no question in the pursuit of knowledge is a stupid one, it's what one does with the knowledge is what defines the person, not the question.


----------



## Judgemental (13 January 2017)

Fellewell said:



			Judgemental, if this op is genuine I'll eat your old Patey ;-)

There's a very good piece, written by Andrew Sallis in this weeks Horse and Hound magazine. Do have a read.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you for that Fellewell. I will have a look at Andrew's piece shortly.

I don't care what flack comes in my direction. 

At the end of the day, the Old Hands (Hounds) owe it to Horse and Hound to hit the correct line and ensure that there is no embarrassment generated for the Editor etc. If we allow younger hounds to run a heel line or end up drawing the wrong covert, with a timely check, at least we have done our best to properly whip in. Also not to pay any attention to Cur Dogs speaking and to say it's a Cur Dog.

So far as this thread is concerned, I feel we have Tufted the OP reasonably well but it's still not smelling quite right to put the pack on.


----------



## conniegirl (13 January 2017)

Black Beastie said:



			Op as long as you stick judgemental on your ignore list (as many do for the amount of seriously one sided and twisted drivel that erupts a lot of the time) then you will get on fine.

As far as I am concerned no question in the pursuit of knowledge is a stupid one, it's what one does with the knowledge is what defines the person, not the question.
		
Click to expand...

well said, i've often found that judgemental posts are normaly totaly irrelevant drivel or totaly paranoid drivel! either way its total drivel. 

I'm fairly sure Judgemental is a SAB now and in league with LACS as they are currently doing a 5* job of re-enforcing the stereotypes that got hunting in the position it is now and driving people into the Anti Camp at one hell of a rate of knots!


----------



## Judgemental (13 January 2017)

conniegirl said:



			well said, i've often found that judgemental posts are normaly totaly irrelevant drivel or totaly paranoid drivel! either way its total drivel. 

I'm fairly sure Judgemental is a SAB now and in league with LACS as they are currently doing a 5* job of re-enforcing the stereotypes that got hunting in the position it is now and driving people into the Anti Camp at one hell of a rate of knots!
		
Click to expand...

LOL :devilish:

I can understand you are infatuated. I am used to it, happens all the time out hunting. Superb horseman, good looking, especially charming to  the ladies both mature and more youthful, kind to children, well mounted x 2nd horses, fast and fearless across country, polite gate opener, shutter and exacting damage steward, all in all thoroughly:cool3:


----------



## Fidgety (13 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			LOL :devilish:

I can understand you are infatuated. I am used to it, happens all the time out hunting. Superb horseman, good looking, especially charming to  the ladies both mature and more youthful, kind to children, well mounted x 2nd horses, fast and fearless across country, polite gate opener, shutter and exacting damage steward, all in all thoroughly:cool3:
		
Click to expand...

You sound like Rob Titchener (when he's not beating his wife and sabs)


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (13 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			LOL :devilish:

I can understand you are infatuated. I am used to it, happens all the time out hunting. Superb horseman, good looking, especially charming to  the ladies both mature and more youthful, kind to children, well mounted x 2nd horses, fast and fearless across country, polite gate opener, shutter and exacting damage steward, all in all thoroughly:cool3:
		
Click to expand...




Fidgety said:



			You sound like Rob Titchener (when he's not beating his wife and sabs) 

Click to expand...

Pfffffft sounds like someone's been on the gin and is in lalaland more likely


----------



## Smellycob (13 January 2017)

Fellewell said:



			Judgemental, if this op is genuine I'll eat your old Patey ;-)

There's a very good piece, written by Andrew Sallis in this weeks Horse and Hound magazine. Do have a read.
		
Click to expand...

Hope your hungry x


----------



## ycbm (13 January 2017)

Clodagh said:



			You are absolutley right, I knew it looked wrong when I wrote it. I may have been talking about female rabbits!?
		
Click to expand...

Oh now I have such a fun picture in my head!  Hunting rabbit on horseback . Good way to teach zig zag half pass, maybe?


----------



## Stark Dismay (14 January 2017)

Wow! Just wow. 

Not only is JM arrogant, he is deluded too. One overbearing voice such as his in a public place, whether it be in the press, on the hunting field or on a public forum such as this does considerable damage to the reputation of hunting


----------



## Judgemental (14 January 2017)

Stark Dismay said:



			Wow! Just wow. 

Not only is JM arrogant, he is deluded too. One overbearing voice such as his in a public place, whether it be in the press, on the hunting field or on a public forum such as this does considerable damage to the reputation of hunting
		
Click to expand...

Gets your attention. Call it Trumpery.:clap:

Part of the new world order, in case you have not noticed.


----------



## Fiagai (15 January 2017)

Smellycob said:



			Well this threads certainly has been busy! Blimey at least I can say I've made an impression! I'm loathe to do it but, as I am such a thoroughly decent person according to my sarcastic friend, I will respond ...

My crystal ball is at the menders. Without it I'm stuck. Have to ask questions if I want answers.
...
For anyone who was wondering, regarding repeal, as I didn't hunt before the ban and have yet to do so I don't know much about how the ban has actually affected the people who live in the countryside and have to work with the legislation. *Apart from youtube videos that is. *
...
As far as actual foxhunting goes.... with a view to eradicating a problem pest I gather there are a few ways to do it. Hunting with hounds where if caught I can't see any way out for Mr Fox. He's dead or not. Shooting, where I would think the appropriate person would be very competent BUT there is that risk of a miss and a slow death with some horrible festering wound. And snares and poison (I think) neither of which I fancy very much. So its hounds (which I've read kill instantly) or shooting with a risk of a long death. From a fox welfare pov I know which way I'm leaning BUT it is a lean as I just don't feel educated enough about the issue to make a decision that will affect animal welfare and people's lives. Hence I thought me getting involved and educating myself a bit more would be a good thing. I gather more foxes are also killed when they are shot as opposed to being hunted with hounds. 

*But anyway...my initial question was about the hounds and how they were dealt with at the end of their days.*

Click to expand...

Smelly cob- excuse my random editing of your last post as some of JM's  posts appeared to have been truncated therin.

My first response to your initial enquiry would be welcome and that it is always good to ask questions.  

However considering many posters experience of antis using questions to render division and argument on this forum in the past, it is perhaps not surprising that some may be be a tad reluctant to answer at all.

I would add that to find the answers to your enquiry - don't use Facebook / youtube or similar in a fact finding mission.  In my experience 'facts' derived from Facebook and such ilk are perhaps best placed under the descriptions as fantasy and cracked. 

What I would suggest is that you seek first hand experience - find your nearest local hunt. Get involved - gain experience and most importantly meet people who  look after hounds and those who volunteer as puppy walkers. See how hounds are exercised and work together as a pack. See how the live and interact together. This more than anything will provide answers to your queries.

Best of luck.


----------



## GirlFriday (15 January 2017)

Fiagai said:



			What I would suggest is that you seek first hand experience - find your nearest local hunt. Get involved - gain experience and most importantly meet people who  look after hounds and those who volunteer as puppy walkers. See how hounds are exercised and work together as a pack. See how the live and interact together. This more than anything will provide answers to your queries.
		
Click to expand...

For a minute there I thought you were going to suggest the OP get first hand expereince of shooting the hounds...

Serious question: do you think that, eventually, there will be HH (hunting dog to home dog) type classes like there are ROR classes? Or perhaps hunt dog agility? We are beginning, as a nation, to have more qualms about what happens to working animals (eg greyhounds) at the end of their first careers...

Less serious question: are there now packs that shoot more hounds than foxes each year? Was always surprised at how fox-focussed the debates seemed to be when they were only harmed on occasion rather than routinely...


----------



## Fiagai (15 January 2017)

GirlFriday said:



			For a minute there I thought you were going to suggest the OP get first hand expereince of shooting the hounds...

Serious question: do you think that, eventually, there will be HH (hunting dog to home dog) type classes like there are ROR classes? Or perhaps hunt dog agility? We are beginning, as a nation, to have more qualms about what happens to working animals (eg greyhounds) at the end of their first careers...

Less serious question: are there now packs that shoot more hounds than foxes each year? Was always surprised at how fox-focussed the debates seemed to be when they were only harmed on occasion rather than routinely...
		
Click to expand...

Unlikely that anyone would suggest an untrained  person to shoot an animal domestic or otherwise...

Really not sure what shooting foxes has go to do with this post however for what it's worth my opinion on the matter is that:

Hounds are as already stated are a pack animal - they live as a group much in the way dogs in the wild do. Take a hound away from this environment as an older animal and the majority would simply be miserable in my experience. 

Hunting was / is not always about the kill / shooting foxes. Many hounds are used in trail hunting where there are no 'shot foxes".
Shooting of foxes outside 'fox hunting' remains the single biggest method of fox control in the UK and in that instance has nothing whstsover to do with mounted hunts. The hunting "ban" has in fact really no impact on this type of hunting. Shooting as a method of dispatch remains at best controversial. 

Dispersal, removal of old and sick foxes and the making of foxes both human and habitation shy played a large part in preventing reaccuring predation and helped population management. Take that away and you are left with the mess exemplified by urban fox populations today.


----------



## GirlFriday (15 January 2017)

It was just that OP was asking abt hounds being despatched, not puppy walked so I didn't see what difference seeing them trained/working would really make when (s)he was asking about the other end of their lives - not serious suggestion!

Entirely understand that there are packs where the only casualties are hounds (and occasionally really sadly horses and riders). Was just wondering if anyone had the stats on how many hounds/foxes were killed through hunting each year. I find the debate is, in general, a bit funny because
1) antis might be able to convince more people if they had made more of the dog welfare issues
2) hunts do a really hypocritical line in saying if they were restricted hounds would have to be shot... when they are anyway.

I rather think that the urban foxes in our large cities are long beyond any hereditary fear of hunts and would have been without a ban too. They still fear my little cur though!

I've heard the arguments about retraining hounds - similar could equally apply to race horses & grey hounds, staffies used as weapons etc really. None are bred as cuddly pets - but some are now retrained as such.

Why is it more controversial to shoot foxes than hounds? Due to difficulty in getting a clean kill?

I thought the biggest means of fox control was actually road building - more certainly killed on roads than ever in hunting but I think more than other human-instigated ways too.

Edited to add: I'll probably never hunt myself but have plenty of friends who do (pre/post/in Ireland/...) and am slightly open minded on the topic. I suspect the average man in the street does far more of detriment to animal welfare via unseen factory farming than anyone did by by more visible hunting.


----------



## Fiagai (16 January 2017)

GirlFriday said:



			It was just that OP was asking abt hounds being despatched, not puppy walked so I didn't see what difference seeing them trained/working would really make when (s)he was asking about the other end of their lives - not serious suggestion!
		
Click to expand...

Exacctly because hounds generally live very different lives to dogs. Understanding this and the importance of the pack to their wellbeing is essential in order to understand the choices taken in ensure quality of life for these animals. Seeing how hounds live and interact with people and most importantly their own kind and their end of lives is essential to explaining this issue.
Looking at only one part of an issue is nearly always pointless. 



GirlFriday said:



			Entirely  understand that there are packs where the only casualties are hounds (and occasionally really sadly horses and riders). Was just wondering if anyone had the stats on how many hounds/foxes were killed through hunting each year.
		
Click to expand...


Again I don't know how foxs being shot is relevant to this thread  - however it remains that the point was that thousands of foxes die each year. They are shot by shooters that have nothing to do with mounted hunts. They are killed on roads and eradicated by pest control companies. 

Hounds like companion dogs were bred for human use . Foxes were hunted as a way of managing predation. It's a comparative  ratio that really makes no sense.  Antis frequently used similar botched and misquoted information to keep up what is in all respects a socio-political attack against mounted hunts. And even despite the hunt ban they maintain this perogitive on the off chance that a hound just <may> meet a fox whilst legally on trail!



GirlFriday said:



			I find the debate is, in general, a bit funny because
1) antis might be able to convince more people if they had made more of the dog welfare issues
2) hunts do a really hypocritical line in saying if they were restricted hounds would have to be shot... when they are anyway.
		
Click to expand...

See the first point ref. hounds and how they live regarding 'dog welfare issues". Hounds are incredibly well cared for. Even domestic dogs are frequently put down to ensure quality of life. The reality of hound management is no much different with the provisions that they are not 'dogs' in the sense of someone's couch companion. 

The point regarding hounds being shot related to hounds being pts of where hunts are forced to close.  

Antis don't need a rationale for what they do - there actions defy all logic and common sense. 



GirlFriday said:



			I rather think that the urban foxes in our large cities are long beyond any hereditary fear of hunts and would have been without a ban too. They still fear my little cur though!
		
Click to expand...

And that is the point and part of the problem. Lack of human and habitation shyness has lead to increasing problems both in cities and increasingly rural areas.



GirlFriday said:



			I've heard the arguments about retraining hounds - similar could equally apply to race horses & grey hounds, staffies used as weapons etc really. None are bred as cuddly pets - but some are now retrained as such.
		
Click to expand...

It remains hounds live and breath as a pack animal.  That is the main concern. 



GirlFriday said:



			Why is it more controversial to shoot foxes than hounds? Due to difficulty in getting a clean kill?
		
Click to expand...

One is a predator that unfortunatly has become a farthing wood / Disney cartoon character.  A hound is a working animal whose owners have responsibility for welfare and end of life issues.  



GirlFriday said:



			I thought the biggest means of fox control was actually road building - more certainly killed on roads than ever in hunting but I think more than other human-instigated ways too.Edited to add: I'll probably never hunt myself but have plenty of friends who do (pre/post/in Ireland/...) and am slightly open minded on the topic. I suspect the average man in the street does far more of detriment to animal welfare via unseen factory farming than anyone did by by more visible hunting.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Fellewell (16 January 2017)

Thousands of years ago canines joined forces with early man. These early canines helped man to hunt and retrieve prey. It could be argued that without this early partnership, civilisation would not have happened. Without canines to guard stock and help man hunt they would not have been able to make settlements.
And still today canines want to work with man. Sadly, few get the opportunity to do so but hounds are still living the dream. Especially when compared with their pet cousins who due to inappropriate housing, exercise,feed and criminally poor breeding achieve little more than to keep small animal vets in Ferraris.

Why is it controversial to shoot a fox? Because an injured animal could wander for days. No self-respecting MFH would leave a wounded animal. They need to be found and the best way to track anything, since time immemorial, is with hounds. But you need more than two.


----------



## Smellycob (16 January 2017)

Fiagai said:



			Smelly cob- excuse my random editing of your last post as some of JM's  posts appeared to have been truncated therin.

My first response to your initial enquiry would be welcome and that it is always good to ask questions.  

However considering many posters experience of antis using questions to render division and argument on this forum in the past, it is perhaps not surprising that some may be be a tad reluctant to answer at all.

I would add that to find the answers to your enquiry - don't use Facebook / youtube or similar in a fact finding mission.  In my experience 'facts' derived from Facebook and such ilk are perhaps best placed under the descriptions as fantasy and cracked. 

What I would suggest is that you seek first hand experience - find your nearest local hunt. Get involved - gain experience and most importantly meet people who  look after hounds and those who volunteer as puppy walkers. See how hounds are exercised and work together as a pack. See how the live and interact together. This more than anything will provide answers to your queries.

Best of luck.
		
Click to expand...

Thanks very much. Yes, getting involved with hounds is something I can see myself doing, particularly as I have a sibling who is a fair weather rider but very much into anything with a wagging tail! Thought I could make it a bit of a family hobby : ) As for finding hunts I have contacted one of my local packs already. After deciding said smelly coblet would probably not be the best mount for a somewhat terrified newbie in the field, I have been informed by the Master about (very reasonably priced I must say) hirelings which I think will make for a more enjoyable and safer time all round. I think coblet will be for competition and shows and maybe small jumps days etc. when I am more experienced. Thank you for your suggestions x


----------



## Smellycob (16 January 2017)

Fellewell said:



			Why is it controversial to shoot a fox? Because an injured animal could wander for days. No self-respecting MFH would leave a wounded animal. They need to be found and the best way to track anything, since time immemorial, is with hounds. But you need more than two.
		
Click to expand...

What I say might upset people so be warned! Not shooting related but with regards to quick dispatch, albeit it might be a bit off topic. Me and my friend were driving along a country lane when she hit a fox - it was an accident, it ran out. It ran for a little bit then dropped and I could literally see it laying in the road lifting its head up and down. We couldn't stop owing to other cars, but I remember saying to her (sorry : ( for this ) could we not find somewhere to turn and (I'm really sorry) run the thing over again. Before anyone jumps on me for cruelty all I was thinking was the poor thing must have been in absolute agony and was still alive. I can tell you now there was no way that fox was getting up again. She looked at me absolutely horrified and  drove off. That sight made me feel physically sick and I just hope that another driver squashed the poor thing and quickly : ( I hope I haven't upset anyone but that is my opinion xxx


----------



## Alec Swan (16 January 2017)

GirlFriday said:



			&#8230;&#8230;..

Serious question: do you think that, eventually, there will be HH (hunting dog to home dog) type classes like there are ROR classes? Or perhaps hunt dog agility? We are beginning, as a nation, to have more qualms about what happens to working animals (eg greyhounds) at the end of their first careers...

&#8230;&#8230;.. ...
		
Click to expand...

The 'qualms' which you mention would have anyone who has the well being of hounds at heart,  resisting any attempt at re-training.  It works,  only occasionally with TBs,  providing that their new roll is closely linked to their previous,  greyhounds almost always are condemned to lives of a sofa and a lead walk,  and hounds?  Just what secondary roll could they be happy in,  do you suppose?  Would you suggest that having been pack animals and having lived on kennel boards all their lives (as have generations before them),  that they move in to a home and perhaps take up agility at the age or perhaps 7 or 8 years?  Would that be humane to the animal concerned?  Most who understand hounds would think it highly unlikely and to the point where there would be no point to the experiment.

Qualms,  a good word.  Releasing hounds in to secondary rolls should have anyone involved in the keeping of hounds recoiling from the idea.

Alec.


----------



## GirlFriday (17 January 2017)

I walk my similarly aged rehomed mutt (not exactly from a puppy farm but certainly from a place where he didn't get walked) with fox and basset hounds (not rehomed) living very urban and apparently happy lives. There are a few ex racing grey hounds (who seem *delighted* to do rather less exercise than one might imagine) around as pets too.

Now, I don't think there will likely ever be enough demand for /all/ hounds to be homed but the idea one can't teach an old dog new tricks and that death is preferable to sofas and walks is a bit closed minded. There are plenty of dogs who are used for fighting/caged breeding/racing that go on to lead very different lives later with varying degrees of support. And there are plenty of hounds, albeit, yes probably from different lines, living happily in family homes.

I've also seen huskies and malamutes rehomed from pet homes to working/live outdoor in pack type homes successfully.

If a breed is capable of something (and fox hounds seem to be) then there is no particular reason it can't learn later in life with sufficient support and patience.

In the same way that there are plenty of horses who may be 'wasted' under particular care/competition regimes who really don't give a stuff it is hard to see why a hound going to a home with other dogs/access to fields/patient owner couldn't be perfectly happy too... is there?


----------



## GirlFriday (17 January 2017)

PS to SmellyCob - I always make sure wild animals that need despatching are helped... not been a fox to date but various other mammals and birds... either with something to hand if I have ability/means or, in one instance, I actually took something blinded but not otherwise passing very quickly/static enough for me to deal with successfully to a vet for PTS. Not, to be fair, with the same degree of ceremony I would choose for a pet, but as quickly/painlessly/stress free as possible in whatever the circs are.

Was def *not* suggesting foxes deserve lingering deaths!


----------



## Alec Swan (18 January 2017)

GirlFriday said:



			&#8230;&#8230;..

If a breed is capable of something (and fox hounds seem to be) then there is no particular reason it can't learn later in life with sufficient support and patience.

&#8230;&#8230;.. ?
		
Click to expand...

I'm surprised that you believe that you're right and that the vast majority of those who deal with hounds on a daily basis are wrong.  Have you any experience,  at all,  of pack kept hounds?  I suspect not because had you,  you wouldn't make such silly statements.  If re-homing to pet homes was a realistic option,  do you not think that it would be taken up?

Alec.


----------



## GirlFriday (5 February 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			I'm surprised that you believe that you're right and that the vast majority of those who deal with hounds on a daily basis are wrong.  Have you any experience,  at all,  of pack kept hounds?  I suspect not because had you,  you wouldn't make such silly statements.  If re-homing to pet homes was a realistic option,  do you not think that it would be taken up?

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Not a question of right/wrong, I already know I have different views on hound (dog) welfare than the average hunt follower (I choose not to participate in a sport which involves the slaughter of dogs). But that is personal choice rather than knowledge of what the heck you think happens to hounds that makes them unable to live in houses later.

I know those who have dogs from puppy farms do have some success in house training etc... what other issues are there that are unique to hounds?


----------



## Maesfen (5 February 2017)

GirlFriday said:



			I know those who have dogs from puppy farms do have some success in house training etc... what other issues are there that are unique to hounds?
		
Click to expand...

It usually comes down to quality of life and their safety.  If you can't guarantee that then it's a no brainer and no way would a hunt want their reputation called into question when the hound started wandering as it would undoubtedly do.

It would be totally unfair to ask a foxhound to remain on a lead the whole time which would be totally alien and restrictive to what it will have known in the pack.  Few people have enough surrounding land (very well and highly fenced so no chance of escape) of their own to allow free access and few people would have the neighbours that would encourage a hound free roaming over their property while not knowing where it would end up possibly miles away or make its way back to kennels where it belonged in the first place.

Far better a safe end after a happy hunting life IMHO.


----------



## hackneylass2 (6 February 2017)

' Bearing in mind many Countrymen and women went to fight a war in 1939, because they were angry that Hitler shot all the Hounds in Nazi Germany in 1936 and abolished hunting.'

Judgemental,  you are clearly the latter part of your screen name.


----------



## Dry Rot (6 February 2017)

But if some believe the Nazis shot all the hounds, maybe they need to do some research on Hermann Wilhelm Göring!

There was a gundog kennel not far from my previous farm that allegedly had 750 dogs in the 1930s - 40s. At the outbreak of war, 450 dogs were shot on one day on the orders of the government "to conserve food supplies". I have no doubt at all that many packs of hounds, and pet dogs, got the same treatment. I got this by word of mouth from one of the former kennel boys, then in his 80s, about 40 years ago.

Back in the 1950's, when I worked with hounds, we had an old kennel huntsman who had been through the First World War. He told me that during the Depression, they'd had to save every penny to keep the packs going. Every dead beast that was brought in to feed the hounds was carefully skinned, the fat was skimmed off the boiler, the bones were collected and bagged -- all to be sold on to the Steptoes of the time. And, yes, culled hounds were also skinned and fed back to the pack. But that doesn't happen these days and farmers have to pay to get the hunt to take away fallen stock.

A man came up to me at a show and asked, "Would you eat horse meat?". I looked him straight in the eye, then said, "If I was hungry enough, I'd eat YOU!", and I meant it. None reading this now know what they would do if times were hard enough. Hopefully, they will never happen again, but it is a pretty forelorn hope.

Yes, old hounds are humanely destroyed. Due to becoming soft in my old age, I have let a couple of pet dogs linger on and die naturally. But I won't be doing that again because it is not usually a nice end and I don't think I did them any favours. Nor will I be subjecting them to a one way trip in the car and the stress of the unfamiliar vets' surgery. They'll be accompanying me for a rabbit hunt around the fields and end their time, as we used to do with the hounds, when they were excited by a scent and totally unaware of what was about to happen. I just wish I could rely on someone doing as much for me! Hey, wait a minute! I suspect there is already a long queue of volunteers!


----------



## Clodagh (6 February 2017)

We have had retired hounds here. The first was a harrier who hated pack life and had a sort of canine nervous breakdown in the kennels, we got her at a year old and she made a cracking pet, loved the sofa, easy to house train and a beautiful character. She had zero recall once her head went down and hunting was her raison d'etre, luckily we live on a farm and she could do that.
We then retired a brood bitch who I had formerly had here for whelping, she coped but lived out and got very territorial, she was alright with us but would go for my MIL so had to go.
We then retired an old dog hound who we had walked as a pup, he just would not eat, we tried feeding him flesh, we tried feeding him with the other dogs but he just pined and pined and had to go too.
So, on the hole I think it is a no, bar exceptions.

DR - good to see you back, I have been worried about you.

MF - just read your post too, our harrier did not go off our land (or rarely!) but when she ganged up with my lurcher they wandered far and wide and after they got a fallow buck at bay in the middle of next doors field they had to be seperated.


----------



## Alec Swan (6 February 2017)

Clodagh said:



			..

DR - good to see you back, I have been worried about you.

.. .
		
Click to expand...

Agreed,  and D_R's post raised a smile as I kicked over the dust of Memory Lane.

Alec.

As an edit;  Of course there are the odd exceptions,  but even when they go to those who are experienced with Hounds,  the animal is rarely happy in it's new role.  It's a shame because we might imagine that they have a great deal to offer.


----------



## Fiagai (6 February 2017)

GirlFriday said:



			Not a question of right/wrong, I already know I have different views on hound (dog) welfare than the average hunt follower (I choose not to participate in a sport which involves the slaughter of dogs). But that is personal choice rather than knowledge of what the heck you think happens to hounds that makes them unable to live in houses later.

I know those who have dogs from puppy farms do have some success in house training etc... what other issues are there that are unique to hounds?
		
Click to expand...


It is interesting to note that you say you have 'different views' and chose not to participate in a sport which involves the 'slaughter' of dogs(?) rather than retiring them to 'living in houses' ...

I believe there have already been several posts in this thread detailing the major issues regarding quality of life for hounds reared as part of a pack and the use of euthanasia. As you appear to have ignored those posts you may be interested to learn that as a horse rider - you have chosen to participate in a sport that involves the apparent 'slaughter' (as you termed it) of horses. Is this selective bias on your part?

According to the World Horse Welfare group "research from Advancing Equine Scientific Excellence (AESE) showed that *only 9 per cent of horses die of natural causes*, which means in the other 91 per cent of cases the decision to euthanase will have to be made either electively or in an emergency.

The WHW go on to detail that ...




			"In the case of any death, regardless of whether it is due to euthanasia or natural causes, there are matters that need to be considered and this is far easier to do in advance of any problem.

Considering your horse&#8217;s quality of life is imperative when thinking about euthanasia and whilst it is not an easy decision to make, the implications in delaying it can have a much greater impact on their welfare and on your peace of mind."
		
Click to expand...

I would advise you to take a more indepth and complete investigation of this whole issue before dismissing the current practices of hound management in ensuring the quality of life for the horses companion - the hound.


See: http://www.worldhorsewelfare.org/Just-in-Case


----------



## Alec Swan (6 February 2017)

Fiagai,  I suspect that the band of those who suggest theory,  and who correct those who are in possession of that rare commodity,  experience,  is growing and pointing out that when the world says that you are wrong and that the world may well be right,  seems to make not a jot of difference! 

It's all to do with welfare and responsibility,  a question which is rarely addressed or understood by the growing band.

Alec.


----------



## Fiagai (6 February 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			Fiagai,  I suspect that the band of those who suggest theory,  and who correct those who are in possession of that rare commodity,  experience,  is growing and pointing out that when the world says that you are wrong and that the world may well be right,  seems to make not a jot of difference! 

It's all to do with welfare and responsibility,  a question which is rarely addressed or understood by the growing band.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...


I can only agree on this point and we'll said. Where there is theory - it at least needs to be applied universally.  As an old gentleman once used said to me - the problem with common sense is that it's really not common at all...


----------



## GirlFriday (6 February 2017)

Fiagai said:



			Is this selective bias on your part?
		
Click to expand...

Nope. The share horse I had that reached the end of working life was roughed off to live out in a herd, not slaughtered/euthanased humanely or otherwise simply becasue no longer working.

And to the poster above who mentioned the car ride to the vets - entirely agree that if whatever animal isn't a great traveller and needs to be PTS for health reasons I would (and have) paid for a vet to do home visits.

I don't have my own horse because I couldn't afford everything I'd wish to in terms of welfare for something on that scale. It means I miss out on some stuff. But it also means I'll never be in a position to have to decide to PTS on financial grounds.

(In case we get super-picky about being fluffy with all species, yes, I am... bought synthetic tack where relevant, don't consume/wear slaughter-related products myself etc... I'm pretty internally consistent. It doesn't mean I think everyone else should make the same choices though.)

It does seem a shame that more effort isn't/couldn't be made to make sure hounds leaving hunting can have another life though (vaguely imagining more training in a domestic setting after weaning and before they join the main pack but not sure how feasible that would be?). Sort of like those who ride bitless making sure a horse has been bitted so that if it has to be sold it has more options open later... Because I do think there is a moral (if not, in some lights practical) difference between PTS/slaughtering something that could live healthily for many more years and something that is in unavoidable physical suffering.

I guess the clue about recall of hounds is in the language though... it isn't that they are choosing to be near the hunt the hunt 'follow the hounds' which clearly isn't practical when you could end up trespassing as a private individual.


----------



## Fiagai (6 February 2017)

GirlFriday said:



			Nope. The share horse I had that reached the end of working life was roughed off to live out in a herd, not slaughtered/euthanased humanely or otherwise simply becasue no longer working.
...
		
Click to expand...

My previous reply was based around the statement that you wouldn't participate in a sport that involved the 'slaughter' of dogs. Your personal views on rehoming are commendable however it remains that within the horse industry only 9 % of horses die naturally.  The rest are euthanised or using your own terminology 'slaughted'. And yet despite this you have chosen to participate in the sport of horse riding. This I believe is selective bias.

It is important not to elevate our own emotions over welfare issues. Like horses there are real and valid reasons why horses and hounds are euthanised. 

There was a recent H&H article on rehoming horses that you may have read. This is a short quote from the article




			Rebecca Evans, re-homing manager at Horses4Homes, said if owners cannot justify the expense of looking after a horse that can no longer be ridden, the best option may be to put it down.

&#8220;Euthanasia of any animal is difficult, but owners must have the courage to put their much- loved, unrideable horses to sleep rather than run the risk of that horse being sent to an inappropriate home where its welfare needs may not be met,&#8221; she told H&H.

Ms Evans, who worked for The Horse Trust before setting up Horses4Homes last year, also warned owners not to offer companion horses for loan on social media sites, as she has had reports of horses being misrepresented.

&#8220;For horses that can be ridden there are new homes out there, but for those that are difficult to handle and can&#8217;t be ridden it&#8217;s practically impossible,&#8221; she added.

Read more at http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/news/homes-companion-horses-limited-453613#DOPVTpKPG5zdBCgI.9

Click to expand...

This issue of rehoming horses in my opinion is comparable to that of other working animals including hounds in that responsibility, welfare and quality of life must ultimately dictate such decisions.


----------



## Clodagh (6 February 2017)

GirlFriday said:



			It does seem a shame that more effort isn't/couldn't be made to make sure hounds leaving hunting can have another life though (vaguely imagining more training in a domestic setting after weaning and before they join the main pack but not sure how feasible that would be?). Sort of like those who ride bitless making sure a horse has been bitted so that if it has to be sold it has more options open later... Because I do think there is a moral (if not, in some lights practical) difference between PTS/slaughtering something that could live healthily for many more years and something that is in unavoidable physical suffering.
al.
		
Click to expand...

They do go out to domestic homes on weaning, and live there for as long as the 'walker' can cope. They are usually no trouble until they are 7 months old or so, until then they live as a normal dog. Ours did sleep out in kennels but in the day they just behaved like any large breed boisterous puppy. They do go out in pairs or more. Once the call of the wild kicks in they get set back to kennels to enter the pack.


----------



## GirlFriday (6 February 2017)

Clodagh said:



			They do go out to domestic homes on weaning, and live there for as long as the 'walker' can cope. They are usually no trouble until they are 7 months old or so, until then they live as a normal dog. Ours did sleep out in kennels but in the day they just behaved like any large breed boisterous puppy. They do go out in pairs or more. Once the call of the wild kicks in they get set back to kennels to enter the pack.
		
Click to expand...

I had understood they spent some time with walkers... Was speculating as to whether there was, in theory, scope to maintain that for long enough to instil repeatable habits post-retirement. But you found that at around 7months they were no longer trainable in the way another dog/even a hound bred for showing or similar would be?


----------



## GirlFriday (6 February 2017)

Fiagai said:



			Your personal views on rehoming are commendable however it remains that within the horse industry only 9 % of horses die naturally.  The rest are euthanised or using your own terminology 'slaughted'. And yet despite this you have chosen to participate in the sport of horse riding. This I believe is selective bias.
		
Click to expand...

Well, I do *not* choose to participate in racing (including not betting on it) or much else horsey-wise where retirement isn't an option.

So, whilst it might be 91% overall what I personally fund is a very much lower percentage (probably a few from riding schools etc but currently 0% of regularly ridden horses). Whereas if I hunted it would be close to 100% of hounds.

I would actually rather see many, many fewer horses bred and kept (and enjoyed, yes, I'd be comfortable with them basically being for the wealthy because I don't think being human gives one a right to enjoy animals one can't afford to keep in all reasonably likely eventualities) and far fewer being PTS/slaughtered becasue they couldn't afford to be kept.

But also, that 91% of horses will include many that I'd choose to PTS myself becasue most animals very close to the end of their lives suffer a bit and it is preferable to prevent that. So, in theory, keeping a retired horse for 15 years and then ending its life becasue it was no longer enjoying it would be in your 91%. And I believe that ending a healthy hound's life at a much earlier stage in life is a fundamentally different moral choice to be making. And one I'd be funding if I hunted, in the same way that I'd be funding e.g. a lot of what happens to TBs if I gambled on racing and so forth.


----------



## ester (6 February 2017)

I'm not sure it is fair to deem the whole of horse riding one sport when the different factions and the life for the horses in each are so very different.


----------



## Beausmate (6 February 2017)

I'll freely admit that I know b***er all about hounds, but it appears to me that a hound is an amiable beast, with a deeply ingrained teamwork ethic and delusions of wolfiness.  Trying to make a hound live without hunting, would be like trying to stop a collie rounding things up, or a Lab carrying stuff about.  It's not going to happen without making the animal miserable.

There was an experiment (probably more than one) carried out involving raising wolves as domestic pets.  It all went well, with the wolf cubs behaving pretty much like boisterous puppies until they reached about six months old, then they started to revert to type and were turned out to live like wolves should.  Hounds strike me as being like this, the instinct to be hounds is so strong in almost all cases, that to take that away from them would be like clipping the wings of an eagle.


----------



## smja (7 February 2017)

GirlFriday said:



			...most animals very close to the end of their lives suffer a bit and it is preferable to prevent that. So, in theory, keeping a retired horse for 15 years and then ending its life becasue it was no longer enjoying it would be in your 91%. And I believe that ending a healthy hound's life at a much earlier stage in life is a fundamentally different moral choice to be making.
		
Click to expand...

But this is the crux of the argument. The old hound away from the pack suffers more mentally than physically - and personally I would rather any animal I cared for, be they horse or dog, didn't linger on unhappily because they were healthy in body.

Every huntsman I've ever met has cared deeply for his hounds and knows them all as individuals. If they think a hound would do well in a pet home, then it would be given serious consideration. If a hound isn't suitable for rehoming, then humane PTS is the only responsible thing for them to do, and it wouldn't be a decision made lightly.


----------



## Clodagh (8 February 2017)

Beausmate said:



			I'll freely admit that I know b***er all about hounds, but it appears to me that a hound is an amiable beast, with a deeply ingrained teamwork ethic and delusions of wolfiness.  Trying to make a hound live without hunting, would be like trying to stop a collie rounding things up, or a Lab carrying stuff about.  It's not going to happen without making the animal miserable.
		
Click to expand...

That is brilliantly put, and somethnig that Alec Swan and I are constantly banging on about, you cannot breed something for generations to exhibit a particular type of behaviour, and then expect to alter it in a year or two. I remember when I got my lurcher (from the pound, dumped by coursers) weeping in frustration as I had never had such a pig headed, strong willed, untrainable dog. With hindsight she was doing exactly what it said on the tin.


----------

