# Hunting Act Repeal, Yes or No?



## Rake (17 June 2010)

Hi. Just joined the forum and I would like to get a feel for the people posting. So, Should the ban on hunting with dogs be repealed? I, by the way, was a staunch supporter of hunting prior to the ban. I now think that if you want to kill a fox, then you should shoot it.


----------



## rosie fronfelen (17 June 2010)

being hunting folk we're all for repeal- not for sport but for the sake of our livestock.


----------



## LauraWheeler (17 June 2010)

Having found a dead Fox on our land in my old job that had been shot. (we didn't alow them to be shot on our land as i was a HUNT groom) I am against shooting as that Fox must have suffered it wasn't killed streight away like most people claim it would if it was shot. 
I don't agree with poisoning as my dog nearly died last year as out on a walk he ate some poison.
And where i now work our cat came home very ill the other week he had bad rub marks on his neck and he had a large abcess. The vet was prity shore he had been caught in a snare and for alot longer than 24 HOURS. He was so weak and thin and he still isn't right poor boy.
So yes i think the hunting act should be Repealed.


----------



## bahumbug (17 June 2010)

Rake said:



			I now think that if you want to kill a fox, then you should shoot it.
		
Click to expand...

Why? On what basis have you changed your view?


----------



## YorksG (17 June 2010)

Well the repeal of the act would not prevent the OP from shooting foxes, should he/she so wish.
 I do believe that the act should be repealed.


----------



## chessy (18 June 2010)

I have to admit that fox hunting is not for me (and would rather not get into a debate about it), so I personally would not support a repeal of the ban - Though I have doubts about how effective the ban really is.


----------



## combat_claire (18 June 2010)

I am very much in favour of a repeal of the Hunting Ban. 

A convincing case for banning hunting has never been made. I also whip in to a pack of hounds and it is a sobering thought that despite doing my utmost to comply with the law I could be the subject of a spurious prosecution by LACS and dragged through the courts as so many others already have been.


----------



## Little_Miss_1 (18 June 2010)

You come on Horse and HOUND forum and ask if we want a repeal to the hunting ban... really? Does it not tell you the answer in the name? Yes, I want a repeal on the ban...


----------



## zefragile (18 June 2010)

studentvet said:



			You come on Horse and HOUND forum and ask if we want a repeal to the hunting ban... really? Does it not tell you the answer in the name? Yes, I want a repeal on the ban...
		
Click to expand...

Well, I think it's pretty obvious that there are plenty of different opinions on hunting on this forum, the name doesn't mean much. Not everyone reading H&H is in favour of hunting!


----------



## LauraWheeler (18 June 2010)

zefragile said:



			Well, I think it's pretty obvious that there are plenty of different opinions on hunting on this forum, the name doesn't mean much. Not everyone reading H&H is in favour of hunting!
		
Click to expand...

Yes but they posted in the hunting section of the forum where the vast majority will be pro hunting.


----------



## zefragile (18 June 2010)

LauraWheeler said:



			Yes but they posted in the hunting section of the forum where the vast majority will be pro hunting. 

Click to expand...

There has been plenty of discussion in this section of the forum. The vast majority may well be pro hunting but they do not speak for everybody.


----------



## Little_Miss_1 (18 June 2010)

zefragile said:



			There has been plenty of discussion in this section of the forum. The vast majority may well be pro hunting but they do not speak for everybody.
		
Click to expand...

I know not everyone is pro but... come on, to come and post in the hunting section? Hardly a representative sample...


----------



## zefragile (18 June 2010)

studentvet said:



			I know not everyone is pro but... come on, to come and post in the hunting section? Hardly a representative sample...
		
Click to expand...

Fair point


----------



## rosie fronfelen (18 June 2010)

there are certain people that come on the hunting forum who are very anti,one or 2 come on to just stir things up- funny- they have gone to ground i think--


----------



## chessy (18 June 2010)

studentvet said:



			I know not everyone is pro but... come on, to come and post in the hunting section? Hardly a representative sample...
		
Click to expand...

I'm sure they posted in this section as they found it relevant, the topic is after all about the Hunting Act, where better to post it than in the Hunting section?


----------



## Mrs B (18 June 2010)

I think this law should be repealed for a number of reasons:

1) From a legal standpoint, it is a bad, unworkable law because it is not properly defined and impossible to police.

2) I believe it came about through spite and as a 'bone' to throw to disaffected, left-of-left-of-centre backbenchers - but that's just my view!

3) Shooting a fox is not a certain way to kill it - foxes hunted by dogs are either caught and killed or get away - shooting causes painful, slow death unless it's a clean kill, but even if it is, it isn't necessarily the right approach (see point four below). 

4) Hunting should be as much about conservation as about controlling a population. Hunting with dogs ensures that the sick and the weak are culled, thus leaving a reduced population of healthy gene-stock to conserve the remaining members of the species.

Of course, all the regular hunters on here know this.... and I don't want to teach Granny to do naughty things with eggs but the question was posted, so....


----------



## joe_carby (18 June 2010)

All i can see is hounds please and the next time i hear that when we can go out and hunt legally will be the best feeling ever


----------



## badgerdog (19 June 2010)

Chessy said:



			I have to admit that fox hunting is not for me (and would rather not get into a debate about it), so I personally would not support a repeal of the ban - Though I have doubts about how effective the ban really is.
		
Click to expand...

I agree with this.


----------



## Blacklist (19 June 2010)

The main thing to suffer as a direct result of the hunting ban in the FOX, indiscriminate shooting wounding by poor shots, snaring and poisoning - at least with hunting the fox was either caught (despatched in seconds) or it got away, it didnt die a lingering death with half a leg missing or being maggot struck etc.

REPEAL THE BAN


----------



## rosie fronfelen (19 June 2010)

if the ban is repealed there will be alot of regulations and licences, hunting will not be the same as before.


----------



## Blacklist (19 June 2010)

rosiefronfelen said:



			if the ban is repealed there will be alot of regulations and licences, hunting will not be the same as before.
		
Click to expand...

Good point - maybe let sleeping dogs lie. The less foxhunting is in the news the better - to contradict myself.


----------



## oakash (19 June 2010)

I am rather startled to see that we have people on the Hunting pages who are in fact not pro-hunting! Of course the Act should be repealed in the interests of both justice and animal welfare. Those of us living in agricultural and the more remote areas of this country know that there is far more indiscriminate and 'cruel' fox control now than ever before. I was amused recently to hear that an old farmer had called out the hounds to come and find and kill a fox which was taking lammbs. He was politely told that this couldn't now be done, whereupon he became most abusive and considered it was disgraceful that hounds wouldnt be brought to his farm to deal with the problem! Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this ban must be repealed!


----------



## rosie fronfelen (19 June 2010)

we would have taken our hounds, sod the ban---


----------



## EAST KENT (20 June 2010)

joe_carby said:



			All i can see is hounds please and the next time i hear that when we can go out and hunt legally will be the best feeling ever
		
Click to expand...

Roll  on the day , no more pointless trolling about after a sock !


----------



## combat_claire (20 June 2010)

Blacklist said:



			Good point - maybe let sleeping dogs lie. The less foxhunting is in the news the better - to contradict myself.
		
Click to expand...

With respect (and assuming you are just a member of the field) it isn't your head in the noose every time hounds go out. The pressure that hunt staff and masters are under to ensure the Act is being complied with is immense, and even when you think you are obeying the law you can still find yourself dragged through the courts as Tony Wright was. I am firmly with Oakash, as an Amateur Whipper In to a foot pack, this Act must be repealed.


----------



## Blacklist (20 June 2010)

combat_claire said:



			With respect (and assuming you are just a member of the field) it isn't your head in the noose every time hounds go out. The pressure that hunt staff and masters are under to ensure the Act is being complied with is immense, and even when you think you are obeying the law you can still find yourself dragged through the courts as Tony Wright was. I am firmly with Oakash, as an Amateur Whipper In to a foot pack, this Act must be repealed.
		
Click to expand...

Apologies combat_claire - Foolishly I was actually testing the water and I'm amazed that it has taken this long to be brought to task. As wth all hunts mounted or on foot we hunt within the law and yes the ban must be repealed. The fox would be the biggest winner if it were.


----------



## chessy (21 June 2010)

oakash said:



			I am rather startled to see that we have people on the Hunting pages who are in fact not pro-hunting!
		
Click to expand...

I lurk mainly to broaden my knowledge, no harm in it.


----------



## AengusOg (21 June 2010)

I'm for repeal.

I believe in conservation, in the rights of individuals to follow tradition country pursuits without being dictated to by ill-educated (on the subject of foxhunting), hysteria-led bigots, and in the commitment of those men and women who breed and hunt hounds.


----------



## endymion (21 June 2010)

LauraWheeler said:



			Yes but they posted in the hunting section of the forum where the vast majority will be pro hunting. 

Click to expand...


This forum was originally the 'Hunting Debate' forum. It was changed (as far as I know) to a general hunting chat room so that people could both talk about hunting in general and also still debate.


----------



## Rake (21 June 2010)

OK. Firstly, let me say that I`m not a towny. I`m a farm manager and manage a small mixed livestock educational multiplying unit. We farm cattle, pigs, sheep, goats, chickens, geese, ducks, turkeys and rabbits. All of our livestock is farmed extensively and since the ban I have actually noticed a reduction in the numbers of stock lost to predation. Primarily, I suspect, due to the decline in "fox farming", and the fact that our foxes are now being left in peace to go about their natural lives on the open forest and are not being pushed from pillar to post and on to my land by regular hunting.

Secondly, since the ban, hunting as a sport has boomed. It is more popular than ever, with some hunts having to turn down prospective members or start waiting lists for membership. How many of these newbies do you think would continue to hunt if they had to be blooded, and do you think this new membership would stand for the reconstruction of their sport. Indeed, why should they? Hunting has changed, diversified and is thriving because of it.

regards.


----------



## Rake (21 June 2010)

Sorry guys, just a country bumpkin and can`t seem to get the hang of the interweb.


----------



## Rake (21 June 2010)

studentvet said:



			You come on Horse and HOUND forum and ask if we want a repeal to the hunting ban... really? Does it not tell you the answer in the name? Yes, I want a repeal on the ban...
		
Click to expand...

Why so confrontational? Not everyone agrees with you.

regards.


----------



## Rake (21 June 2010)

Kate Sturgess said:



			I think this law should be repealed for a number of reasons:

1) From a legal standpoint, it is a bad, unworkable law because it is not properly defined and impossible to police.

1) It is working. Foxes are not being legally hunted. It is self policing. The decent, law abiding, hard working, hunt staff bend over backwards to ensure the law is followed to the letter. Those that don`t are just common criminals.

3) Shooting a fox is not a certain way to kill it - foxes hunted by dogs are either caught and killed or get away - shooting causes painful, slow death unless it's a clean kill, but even if it is, it isn't necessarily the right approach (see point four below).

3)Foxes hunted by dogs hardly ever are left to get away. They are run to ground dug out and either shot and thrown to terriers or hounds or simply thrown to terriers or hounds. Don`t tell me different i was a terrier man for 18 years. Last year, I shot 27 foxes. 27 went into the incinerator



4) Hunting should be as much about conservation as about controlling a population. Hunting with dogs ensures that the sick and the weak are culled, thus leaving a reduced population of healthy gene-stock to conserve the remaining members of the species.

4)If I employed a pest controller to kill my rats and he only killed the sick and lame ones and left me all the fit healthy ones to deal with I`d sack him. Come on... fox hunting as pest control? Laughable.

Of course, all the regular hunters on here know this.... and I don't want to teach Granny to do naughty things with eggs but the question was posted, so....
		
Click to expand...

1) It is working. Foxes are not being legally hunted. It is self policing. The decent, law abiding, hard working, hunt staff bend over backwards to ensure the law is followed to the letter. Those that don`t are just common criminals.

3)Foxes hunted by dogs hardly ever are left to get away. They are run to ground dug out and either shot and thrown to terriers or hounds or simply thrown to terriers or hounds. Don`t tell me different i was a terrier man for 18 years. Last year, I shot 27 foxes. 27 went into the incinerator

4)If I employed a pest controller to kill my rats and he only killed the sick and lame ones and left me all the fit healthy ones to deal with I`d sack him. Come on... fox hunting as pest control? Laughable.

Regards


----------



## JessandCharlie (21 June 2010)

I don't think it should have been banned, but wonder what point there would be in repealing the ban, people still hunt if they want to, ban or no ban


----------



## Judgemental (21 June 2010)

There is one very good reason why the Hunting Act 2004 should be repealed and that is; the statutes that were enacted by the last governement were no better than that of Hitler's ban in Nazi Germany in July 1934.

Furthermore when Hitler banned hunting he had all the hounds shot and and any Hunt Servants who argued were similarly dealt with.

Sections 8 & 9 of the 2004 Act are in many ways little better because it is the only legislation that provides for a Police Office to enter premises, property or land without a warrant.  

However sentiment in relation to the Nazi ban and Hilter that of Blair and the socialists are as one.


----------



## zefragile (21 June 2010)

Godwin's Law in action!


----------



## Judgemental (21 June 2010)

It is also worth remembering that when men went to war in 1939 they did so because they objected to Hitler's ban.

Take for example the battle of El Alamein spearheaded by 3rd Armoured Brigade on 23 October 1924. Made up of the 3rd Hussars, The Royal Wiltshire Yeomanry (affiliated to the Household Cavalry) and the Royal Warwickshires.

The Colonel of the 3rd Hussars - The late Sir Peter Farquhar Master of the Tedworth, later The Portman.

The Colonel of the Royal Wiltshire Yeomanry - The Late Peter Gibb - Secretary of the Beaufort

The Colonel of the Warwickshires - The Late Colonel Jackson - Master of the Exmoor, later the Atherston.

When General Montgomery decided he was going to sort out Field Marshall Rommell at El Alamein, he, Montgomery specifically wanted those three regiments to spearhead the charge (they were cavalrymen so they charged in their tanks not attacked) because the colonels were all hunting men and so were their men.

Montgomery said "it is the exprit de corps and kindred spirit of Foxhunting that will bind all those men and regiments together".

How right he was, because El Alamein was the turning point in the fortunes of the Allies, when the Nazi armour was comprehensively defeated and destroyed. So much so Winston Churchill ordered that the all the church bells in the land be rung.

Good men gave their lives and good hunting men gave their lives in that battle and that should never be forgotton, men who were all territorials, who could not stomach Hitler's Hunting Ban.

We should remember them and repeal the ban imposed by the last Labour administrative scum.


----------



## Judgemental (21 June 2010)

Slight error in my previous post should read 23 October 1942 not 1924


----------



## chancing (22 June 2010)

laurawheeler said:



			having found a dead fox on our land in my old job that had been shot. (we didn't alow them to be shot on our land as i was a hunt groom) i am against shooting as that fox must have suffered it wasn't killed streight away like most people claim it would if it was shot. 
I don't agree with poisoning as my dog nearly died last year as out on a walk he ate some poison.
And where i now work our cat came home very ill the other week he had bad rub marks on his neck and he had a large abcess. The vet was prity shore he had been caught in a snare and for alot longer than 24 hours. He was so weak and thin and he still isn't right poor boy.
so yes i think the hunting act should be repealed.

Click to expand...

hear hear!! Very well said!!


----------



## combat_claire (23 June 2010)

Rake said:



			1) It is working. Foxes are not being legally hunted. It is self policing. The decent, law abiding, hard working, hunt staff bend over backwards to ensure the law is followed to the letter. Those that don`t are just common criminals.

3)Foxes hunted by dogs hardly ever are left to get away. They are run to ground dug out and either shot and thrown to terriers or hounds or simply thrown to terriers or hounds. Don`t tell me different i was a terrier man for 18 years. Last year, I shot 27 foxes. 27 went into the incinerator

4)If I employed a pest controller to kill my rats and he only killed the sick and lame ones and left me all the fit healthy ones to deal with I`d sack him. Come on... fox hunting as pest control? Laughable.

Regards
		
Click to expand...

1. No matter how law abiding we are being, we are still open to spurious allegation and prosecution. Tony Wright had his court case hanging over him for two years until it was overturned on appeal, the master of the Devon & Somerset Staghounds went to his local police station to sort out a traffic offence and was banged up for hours for a hunting offence that was again thrown out, whilst the master and staff of the Isle of Wight were subjected to a dawn raid on allegations of illegal hunting and held for 24 hours before this case too was thrown out. This is not an acceptable situation. As Amatuer hunt staff it is my firm belief that this Act must be repealed. 

2. Terrier work as you well know is controlled by a strict code of conduct and licensing. You say fox hunting can't be pest control, then when we discuss terrier work you are against the landowner making the decision as to whether a fox that has gone to ground is dispatched or left. A little bit of consistency wouldn't go amiss. 

3. Rats are somewhat different to foxes - weaker foxes are well documented as being those most likely to seek an easy meal amongst penned livestock. Therefore taking out the weaker of the species is the best form of pest control. Some foxes in the countryside are a good thing - they eat rabbits, slugs and so forth that all become agricultural pests. However too many is a bad thing. A fit population at a sustainable level is the answer and for me hunting will always be the answer. 

I would also be interested to hear your comments regarding some aspects of welfare under the Hunting Act. 

Do you think it is acceptable that wounded deer (in particular in the West Country) may only be tracked with 2 hounds, when more hounds would find the injured deer quicker and allow it to be dispatched.

Do you think it is acceptable that non-native species that threaten native species are protected under the act (thinking mainly of the American mink)

Do you think it is right that rats and rabbits are deemed to have less protection than a fox or a stag.


----------



## oakash (23 June 2010)

'Rake's' postings make me doubtful of his true status as to his  claim of being an 'ex-terrier man'. His concept of what happened on digs seems to me a bit out of touch with the reality of 'proper hunting of only five or six years ago. What hunt were you with, Rake? Sure you ain't an 'animal rights' fanatic in disguise?


----------



## EAST KENT (23 June 2010)

Actually Rake, chucking a live fox is absolutely against MFH rules,anyone caught doing that would be sacked ,pronto. Rules are,if digging,to either bolt the fox..hounds being some distance away,or dug down to to enable a brain shot. Very often the pack is taken off to draw elsewhere if it looks like a lengthy dig,and maybe will return later to "break up" the fox carcasse.  I believe it is also a rule that if hounds put a fox to ground,and on digging out more than  one is found,only ONE may be despatched. Now that rule I have seen broken now and again.


----------



## rosie fronfelen (23 June 2010)

oakash said:



			'Rake's' postings make me doubtful of his true status as to his  claim of being an 'ex-terrier man'. His concept of what happened on digs seems to me a bit out of touch with the reality of 'proper hunting of only five or six years ago. What hunt were you with, Rake? Sure you ain't an 'animal rights' fanatic in disguise?
		
Click to expand...

do you think he/she has been on here before under a different id?


----------



## Xlthlx (24 June 2010)

I've talked to a fair few anti hunting people about the law.  It seems to me that many of them acknowledge that it is full of flaws.  When Labour was in power there was a certain amount of pressure for the law to be revisited because of these flaws.

This seems to have now changed with the coalition government getting into power and people are far far less likely to acknowledge that the law is flawed.  I can't see this as a particularly honest position.

It strikes me that if the law is flawed then it should be revisited if there is a free vote then MPs should also be given the opportunity to vote on proposed amendments.  If it were tabled thus I cannot see any MPs except those who think the law is flaw free or those that simply don't care either way opposing a debate and a vote.


----------



## Judgemental (24 June 2010)

The Status of Rake.

In my Judgement he/she is a plant by the League or a Saboteur Association


----------



## AengusOg (26 June 2010)

Rake said:



			How many of these newbies do you think would continue to hunt if they had to be blooded,
		
Click to expand...

Nobody has to be blooded.




Rake said:



			and do you think this new membership would stand for the reconstruction of their sport. Indeed, why should they?.
		
Click to expand...

Presumably (given a repeal) they would have to 'stand for it' in the same way as those who hunted foxes had to when the law changed, and for the same reasons. Why shouldn't they?


----------



## Mrs B (26 June 2010)

Judgemental said:



			The Status of Rake.

In my Judgement he/she is a plant by the League or a Saboteur Association
		
Click to expand...

 Which is why I haven't bothered wasting energy to type a reply to someone who has a (not very) hidden agenda....


----------



## somethingorother (27 June 2010)

Kate Sturgess said:



			I think this law should be repealed for a number of reasons:

1) From a legal standpoint, it is a bad, unworkable law because it is not properly defined and impossible to police.
It could be policed, if they could be bothered. No law is a 'bad law'. It says do not hunt foxes with Dogs. What's hard to understand about that?
2) I believe it came about through spite and as a 'bone' to throw to disaffected, left-of-left-of-centre backbenchers - but that's just my view!
It came about because it's an outdated practice which has no real use

3) Shooting a fox is not a certain way to kill it - foxes hunted by dogs are either caught and killed or get away - shooting causes painful, slow death unless it's a clean kill, but even if it is, it isn't necessarily the right approach (see point four below). If you shoot a fox and maim it, you should usually be able to go and get a second shot and kill it pretty quickly. At least it's not been chased for hours before hand

4) Hunting should be as much about conservation as about controlling a population. Hunting with dogs ensures that the sick and the weak are culled, thus leaving a reduced population of healthy gene-stock to conserve the remaining members of the species.
Hunting doesn't kill enough foxes to have an effect on the population. It's an inefficient method

Of course, all the regular hunters on here know this.... and I don't want to teach Granny to do naughty things with eggs but the question was posted, so....
		
Click to expand...

I guess my stance is clear. But i do think the OP might have been causing trouble. Just wanted to add some ballance. Although this is probably the wrong place for it, with brain washed people spouting the same useless arguments over and over.


----------



## Mrs B (27 June 2010)

Somethingorother. I guess your stance is clear, yes. You're an anti. That is your prerogative as being pro is mine.

But I refute your arguments for the following reasons:

1) It is impossible to police as it is so badly written in terms of what hunting with dogs actually IS that the courts have great difficulty interpreting it, so how are the police meant to? To have spent 700 parliamentary hours forcing such a bill through was a colossal waste of time and money when better laws for better causes could have been negotiated.

2) It has a very real use. See my original point 4) by which I stand.

3) So how come there are so many reports of foxes found where it's obvious they have died a slow death from gun wounds? To say that it is easy to follow a shot fox is ludicrous! If a chased fox gets away, it gets away. It is not going suffer by  worrying for hours afterwards about the chase and to infer it does is simply being anthropomorphic. A shot and wounded fox, however is going to suffer. Terribly. THAT is cruel.

4)  Maybe you advocate wiping out the entire population?

I think the 'ballance' (sp) you say you are trying to add is not thought through at all well. As such, as an argument, it is in itself pretty useless and suggests more brain washing has occurred in your direction than in mine.


----------



## Judgemental (1 July 2010)

What a splendid fellow Nick Clegg is, one of the best and I quote from today's - 1 July 2010 main headline in The Daily Telegraph and in other papers:

"Nick Clegg calls on public to help scrap bad laws
Members of the public will be given the right to nominate unpopular laws they want scrapped, Nick Clegg has announced the Your Freedom initiative intended to begin a shift of power away from the state to the people".

There you have it Your Royal Highnesses, Your Graces, My Lords and Ladies, Ladies and Gentleman, Girls and Boys. 

Simples


----------



## irish_only (1 July 2010)

Rake said:



			1) It is working. Foxes are not being legally hunted. It is self policing. The decent, law abiding, hard working, hunt staff bend over backwards to ensure the law is followed to the letter. Those that don`t are just common criminals.

3)Foxes hunted by dogs hardly ever are left to get away. They are run to ground dug out and either shot and thrown to terriers or hounds or simply thrown to terriers or hounds. Don`t tell me different i was a terrier man for 18 years. Last year, I shot 27 foxes. 27 went into the incinerator.

4)If I employed a pest controller to kill my rats and he only killed the sick and lame ones and left me all the fit healthy ones to deal with I`d sack him. Come on... fox hunting as pest control? Laughable.
Regards
		
Click to expand...

1 And what about when hounds pick up the scent of a fox and start hunting it. Good staff obviously do their best to call off hounds and generally succeed, but all it needs is some self righteous anti to video this and cause law abiding people to have to defend themselves when perfectly innocent. 
 3 I have frequently seen foxes left when going to ground. The decision is the landowners and dependent on whether there is a particular fox problem. By they way, well done on successfully shooting 27 foxes. Better than the one I was asked to photograph in a farm yard that had crawled under the tractor to die following having one if its hind legs shot off. Not everyone is a good shot or conscientious.
4 You can't compare hunting foxes with rats. Rats eat anything and everything around the farm and are not what you would call independent. They rely on human waste to survive.
Fox hunting has always been about conservation, not pest control. The whole ethos is about control and managing the population. No-one would want to see the fox population exterminated. Nothing wrong with a healthy fox going about his business and catching the local wildlife. The problem is with the sick, injured and old who then prey on livestock, and these are generally the ones caught by hounds. 
My view is if he gets away then fine, he is healthy and deserves to. The only time I would change my view on this is if it was a rogue fox causing problems, and then hounds could be briought in, he could be found and despatched.


----------



## Judgemental (2 July 2010)

So, how many of you have visited http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/ and told Nick Clegg what your views are on the Hunting Act 2004 

Simples

But it aint so simples is it..........


----------



## rosie fronfelen (2 July 2010)

Judgemental said:



			So, how many of you have visited http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/ and told Nick Clegg what your views are on the Hunting Act 2004 

Simples

But it aint so simples is it..........
		
Click to expand...

----and yet you are prepared to hunt in France rather than fight the cause here- bit of a double edged sword wouldn't you say?


----------



## Judgemental (4 July 2010)

Excuse me Rosiefronfluen or whatever your non-generic name is?

Wishing to visit Normandy for a day or week or two's hunting is hardly not supporting hunting in the UK.

Furthermore when I wrote that piece I had Boar hunting in mind!

Dear oh dear talk about Farm Gate Myopia


----------



## bumblebee.1989 (7 July 2010)

hunting is cruel and should stay banned!


----------



## combat_claire (7 July 2010)

bumblebee.1989 said:



			hunting is cruel and should stay banned!
		
Click to expand...

Can you justify that statement with any evidence rather than raw emotion??


----------



## Judgemental (7 July 2010)

Bumblebee I don't suppose you realise the only other country to ever ban hunting was Germany - Adolf Hitler's Nazi party banned hunting in July 1934.

Then went on to gas millions of Jews during WWII - so do tell us, why it is cruel to hunt, a view held by Hitler and therefore it was not cruel to exterminate millions of Jews, Gypsies and the Disabled? 

All you people who run around, wimpering that hunting is cruel fail to appreciate that Hitler instructed his henchmen - later called the Gestapo to enter all Hunt Kennels in July 1934 and have all the hounds shot. Any hunt employees who objected were summilarly shot as well!

I assume all those who oppose hunting welcome being associated with those attrocities?


----------



## rosie fronfelen (7 July 2010)

Judgemental said:



			Excuse me Rosiefronfluen or whatever your non-generic name is?

Wishing to visit Normandy for a day or week or two's hunting is hardly not supporting hunting in the UK.

Furthermore when I wrote that piece I had Boar hunting in mind!

Dear oh dear talk about Farm Gate Myopia
		
Click to expand...

i do not appreciate your rudeness thank you- you should have said about the boar hunting!my generic name isnt so hard- rosiefronfelen- and reference to the farm gate is what may i ask????


----------



## sally2 (9 July 2010)

Didnt have a problem with hunting prior to the ban but am not in favour of using up parlimentry time on issues like this at the moment. The whole of europe is in a mess and our economy is one of the worst i really dont want politicians wasting time on past issues while the nation needs fixing. Plus it would not do the pro hunters cause any favours if politicians got involved in this issue when millions are about to lose their jobs, it would send out all the wrong signals about hunting and the people who enjoy it. You have to pick fights when the time is right and when you know you will win and i dont think that right now is the time and i dont think the support is there.


----------



## Judgemental (11 July 2010)

rosiefronfelen said:



			i do not appreciate your rudeness thank you- you should have said about the boar hunting!my generic name isnt so hard- rosiefronfelen- and reference to the farm gate is what may i ask????
		
Click to expand...

Well now ROSIEFRONFELEN - assume that has some Welsh connotation?

Had you actually read eactly what I said which was, "So Normandy is the new 'IN' place to hunt bearing in mind Willie Poole is moving there from Lille.

He reckons the hunting in Normandy is fantastic.

So could some kind soul list the various hunts in Normandy and how one goes about approaching the secretary for a day or two?"

You will note, hopefully from the Welsh Hills that I said "APPROACHING THE SECRETARY FOR A DAY OR TWO".

Therefore I was hardly going to decamp to Normandy on a permanent basis nor does it imply the same, does it not?

Are you saying that because Willie Poole that great bard of the hunting pen, has moved to France, more or less permanently, he is somehow leaving the ship to seek greener hunting pastures? Because that is what you are implying. After all you said, "----and yet you are prepared to hunt in France rather than fight the cause here- bit of a double edged sword wouldn't you say?"

Does that latter statement presumably applies generally to all who care to have, shall we say a flutter with the French?  

In answer to your many questions: Farm Gate Myopia, well if you could not see I was proposing only a day or two then that is indicative of Myopia, as defined by the Oxford Dictionary "lack of imagination". Anybody who goes hunting in France should seek to 'Serve the Boar' at least once. 

I only wanted a day or two too....sob....wimper.....feel sorry for one's little self - somebody cheer me up..............

Rudeness, one would have thought that one was the model of restraint, kindness, patient courtesy and the utmost graciousness in a simply being evocative of the greater glory of the sport.


----------



## rosie fronfelen (11 July 2010)

wher



Judgemental said:



			Well now ROSIEFRONFELEN - assume that has some Welsh connotation?

Had you actually read eactly what I said which was, "So Normandy is the new 'IN' place to hunt bearing in mind Willie Poole is moving there from Lille.

He reckons the hunting in Normandy is fantastic.

So could some kind soul list the various hunts in Normandy and how one goes about approaching the secretary for a day or two?"

You will note, hopefully from the Welsh Hills that I said "APPROACHING THE SECRETARY FOR A DAY OR TWO".

Therefore I was hardly going to decamp to Normandy on a permanent basis nor does it imply the same, does it not?

Are you saying that because Willie Poole that great bard of the hunting pen, has moved to France, more or less permanently, he is somehow leaving the ship to seek greener hunting pastures? Because that is what you are implying. After all you said, "----and yet you are prepared to hunt in France rather than fight the cause here- bit of a double edged sword wouldn't you say?"

Does that latter statement presumably applies generally to all who care to have, shall we say a flutter with the French?  

In answer to your many questions: Farm Gate Myopia, well if you could not see I was proposing only a day or two then that is indicative of Myopia, as defined by the Oxford Dictionary "lack of imagination". Anybody who goes hunting in France should seek to 'Serve the Boar' at least once. 

I only wanted a day or two too....sob....wimper.....feel sorry for one's little self - somebody cheer me up..............

Rudeness, one would have thought that one was the model of restraint, kindness, patient courtesy and the utmost graciousness in a simply being evocative of the greater glory of the sport.
		
Click to expand...

where have you been, i have moved on and have no desire to correspond, so you can find your info. from somewhere else where your patronising will be more welcome.


----------



## Sanolly (11 July 2010)

Kate Sturgess said:



			I think this law should be repealed for a number of reasons:

1) From a legal standpoint, it is a bad, unworkable law because it is not properly defined and impossible to police.

2) I believe it came about through spite and as a 'bone' to throw to disaffected, left-of-left-of-centre backbenchers - but that's just my view!

3) Shooting a fox is not a certain way to kill it - foxes hunted by dogs are either caught and killed or get away - shooting causes painful, slow death unless it's a clean kill, but even if it is, it isn't necessarily the right approach (see point four below). 

4) Hunting should be as much about conservation as about controlling a population. Hunting with dogs ensures that the sick and the weak are culled, thus leaving a reduced population of healthy gene-stock to conserve the remaining members of the species.

Of course, all the regular hunters on here know this.... and I don't want to teach Granny to do naughty things with eggs but the question was posted, so....
		
Click to expand...

You could add a couple more points:

5) The fact that the law is difficult to police mean that the gates are now open for the extremist vigilantes to take matters into their own hands.

6) At the risk of sounding like someone who has been taken in by the conspiracy theorists, did they not spend more time deliberating the hunting act than the Iraq war? I get the feeling that the Hunting Act was not propositioned for the sake of the foxes...


----------



## vallin (11 July 2010)

sally2 said:



			Didnt have a problem with hunting prior to the ban but am not in favour of using up parlimentry time on issues like this at the moment. The whole of europe is in a mess and our economy is one of the worst i really dont want politicians wasting time on past issues while the nation needs fixing. Plus it would not do the pro hunters cause any favours if politicians got involved in this issue when millions are about to lose their jobs, it would send out all the wrong signals about hunting and the people who enjoy it. You have to pick fights when the time is right and when you know you will win and i dont think that right now is the time and i dont think the support is there.
		
Click to expand...

This is more or less my thoughts on the issue. I was also upset by people choosing who to vote for based soley on the parties stand on hunting. As much as i didn't agree with the hunting ban, I also don't think now is the right time to be devoting more parliamentary time to changing it.


----------



## EAST KENT (11 July 2010)

Repeal..OF COURSE!! Meanwhile ,I`m off to Eire for a few days "fix" on real hunting and coursing..not cantering along behind a b--- sock.Have`nt been out since the ban,and won`t till the repeal.A b...... sock does`nt test hounds working ability,and watching houndwork is what it is all about.


----------



## Judgemental (11 July 2010)

rosiefronfelen said:



			wher
where have you been, i have moved on and have no desire to correspond, so you can find your info. from somewhere else where your patronising will be more welcome.
		
Click to expand...

Where have I been? Certainly not for my two days hunting in France. Only two ...... sob sob..... is it fair to deny a chap a couple of days hunting in France and almost brand him a member of the league.

Actually I have been putting the fly hat on one of my mares.

I mean to say folks, all I am wanting is a couple of days in France leaving these islands and not standing up for hunting, hardly?

Now this good lady Rosiefronfelen from the Welsh Hills says I am patronising but firstly she said I was rude.

Me patronising or rude, to a lady from the Welsh Hills, perish the thought!

All I wanted was a day or two's hunting in France and you would think I was ...... well I don't know what, but it was something they don't appreciate up in the Welsh Hills. 

Perhaps it's the French thing, I know the Americans have a thing about the French, but I was unaware they had a thing about the French up in the Welsh Hills. May be France thrashed Wales in the six nations rugby?

So there you have it Chaps and Chapesses what ever you do, if you are lucky enough to have a day or two two two emphasis on two, in the Welsh Hills, or perhaps with a Fell pack don't mention you are hankering after a day or two with a French pack in France.


----------



## combat_claire (12 July 2010)

EAST KENT said:



			Repeal..OF COURSE!! Meanwhile ,I`m off to Eire for a few days "fix" on real hunting and coursing..not cantering along behind a b--- sock.Have`nt been out since the ban,and won`t till the repeal.A b...... sock does`nt test hounds working ability,and watching houndwork is what it is all about.
		
Click to expand...

I'm quite curious about your comments. I appreciate that hunting is vastly different from pre-ban, but I find it odd that someone that is so passionate about hunting appears to have made the decision not to renew their subscription. My feeling was that my pack would need all the support it could get to see it through the temporary situation and as a humble bike follower I didn't think twice about renewing my subs.


----------

