# Thoughts on ITV report - foxes being fed by hunt caught on video



## marianne1981 (5 November 2014)

http://www.itv.com/news/2014-11-04/footage-shows-foxes-being-fed-in-area-where-hunting-takes-place/

This makes an absolute mockery of the "pest control" claims, and the MFA are so far refusing to make comment. Opinions?


----------



## MerrySherryRider (5 November 2014)

The North Cotswold Hunt and the MHA refuse to comment because they are above the law. They have utter contempt for the laws of the land. Little has changed since the hunting ban, time and time again, hunts are filmed acting illegally but until the crown prosecution service bothers to do anything about it, this nasty practice will continue.


----------



## Dry Rot (5 November 2014)

marianne1981 said:



http://www.itv.com/news/2014-11-04/footage-shows-foxes-being-fed-in-area-where-hunting-takes-place/

This makes an absolute mockery of the "pest control" claims, and the MFA are so far refusing to make comment. Opinions?
		
Click to expand...

Not a mockery if you know anything about dogs and dog training. I wonder how someone would go about training a gundog without game?


----------



## twiggy2 (5 November 2014)

Dry Rot said:



			Not a mockery if you know anything about dogs and dog training. I wonder how someone would go about training a gundog without game?
		
Click to expand...

training a gun dog is very far removed from 'training' a dog to stay with its pack and hunt and kill what they have been bred for generations to do-in fact I am not sure I would describe it as training


----------



## Alec Swan (5 November 2014)

So a Pack are criticised if they hunt a fox,  and they're also condemned if they feed them.  When will the loony HSA and their disciples polarise their thinking and arguments and so form a degree of logic,  I wonder?

Alec.


----------



## Sandstone1 (5 November 2014)

If foxes are vermin and such a pest to farmers that they need to be controlled by the hunt,why on earth feed them and encourage them if not just to provide  sport?
 Just a honest question as it seems mad to me.


----------



## Maesfen (5 November 2014)

Elliesmemory1 said:



			If foxes are vermin and such a pest to farmers that they need to be controlled by the hunt,why on earth feed them and encourage them if not just to provide  sport?
 Just a honest question as it seems mad to me.
		
Click to expand...

We are very pro hunting BUT we are also very pro conservation too; we (meaning my family, not the hunt) always give fox his supper, sometimes he brings his friend and they are a delight to see but we do have an ulterior motive too.  If we didn't encourage them to feed in this area (which luckily for us, is a no shooting area - at least if it's done, it's done by poachers without permission, not the locals) then it makes sense to encourage them 'over the border' where they are safer rather than them risk being shot.  We do not do it for the sport but every area needs a healthy fox population and sometimes they need help.
Now ask me about badgers and I'd gladly shoot the lot of them, they are a real pest which has no natural predator and that cause far more damage to both property and other wildlife; they are the real farmer's pest, far more than any fox even if they have sheep and hens.


----------



## dogatemysalad (5 November 2014)

Alec Swan said:



			So a Pack are criticised if they hunt a fox,  and they're also condemned if they feed them.  When will the loony HSA and their disciples polarise their thinking and arguments and so form a degree of logic,  I wonder?

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Come, come Alec, lets not insult everyone's intelligence. It is well documented that hunts not only feed foxes but they have a long established practice of using artificial earths to encourage the fox population for better hunting. It's not a secret.


----------



## cptrayes (5 November 2014)

dogatemysalad said:



			Come, come Alec, lets not insult everyone's intelligence. It is well documented that hunts not only feed foxes but they have a long established practice of using artificial earths to encourage the fox population for better hunting. It's not a secret.
		
Click to expand...


You won't get through to Alec, he also agrees with feeding birds so people can shoot them only half dead out of the sky.


----------



## cptrayes (5 November 2014)

Maesfen said:



			We are very pro hunting BUT we are also very pro conservation too; we (meaning my family, not the hunt) always give fox his supper, sometimes he brings his friend and they are a delight to see but we do have an ulterior motive too.  If we didn't encourage them to feed in this area (which luckily for us, is a no shooting area - at least if it's done, it's done by poachers without permission, not the locals) then it makes sense to encourage them 'over the border' where they are safer rather than them risk being shot.  We do not do it for the sport but every area needs a healthy fox population and sometimes they need help.
		
Click to expand...


Maesfen are you keeping them safe from shooters by enticing them into an area with a mounted hunt?


----------



## Maesfen (5 November 2014)

When you hunt within the law that doesn't make a blind bit of difference.  It's the same with the local wild duck.  We do have a lot of local shoots that will blast anything and all that it can out of extinction if they could which is why we feed the local wild duck population on our local pits, simply because we like to see them, it gives them a chance of not ending up on a plate.  I don't mind shooting as a sport for the pot, it's simply when they never know when to leave alone; they just don't accept that if they wipe them out they won't see them again.


----------



## Goldenstar (5 November 2014)

I admit we always throw dead rabbits into the wood for whatever's passing to eat .


----------



## Dry Rot (5 November 2014)

twiggy2 said:



			training a gun dog is very far removed from 'training' a dog to stay with its pack and hunt and kill what they have been bred for generations to do-in fact I am not sure I would describe it as training
		
Click to expand...

So you've trained a few gundogs then, have you? And hunted a pack of hounds?


----------



## cptrayes (5 November 2014)

Maesfen said:



			When you hunt within the law that doesn't make a blind bit of difference.  It's the same with  local wild duck.  We do have a lot of local shoots that will blast anything and all that it can out of extinction if they could which is why we feed the local wild duck population on our local pits, simply because we like to see them, it gives them a chance of not ending up on a plate.  I don't mind shooting as a sport for the pot, it's simply when they never know when to leave alone; they just don't accept that if they wipe them out they won't see them again.
		
Click to expand...

No, if you are hunting within the law it doesn't. The problem is that not one of the hunts which are in reach of me, and  several others I know of outside my area, are not hunting within the law. 

I  do not like any form of shooting flying birds where death is routinely delayed until after the bird has been shot out of the sky.  At the moment it is legal. I don't think that will always be the case, we do not allow any other animals to be killed to eat in such an inhumane fashion, never mind for fun.


----------



## MerrySherryRider (5 November 2014)

Goldenstar said:



			I admit we always throw dead rabbits into the wood for whatever's passing to eat .
		
Click to expand...

Do you also create artificial earths and then return with hounds where you leave the rabbits ?  Lets not be silly about this. I've fed an injured vixen for a few days until she was back on four legs. She lives in a hunt free zone.


----------



## cptrayes (5 November 2014)

Dry Rot said:



			So you've trained a few gundogs then, have you? And hunted a pack of hounds?

Click to expand...


I am puzzled, Dry Rot.


Why would you need to have done either to be able to say that training a dog to fetch a grounded bird and bring it to you is a wildly different training exercise than putting some young dogs with some older dogs and taking them hunting, or ringing a wood with people making noises to keep the fox cubs inside the wood and then putting young hounds in to chase and kill them?

I don't know how to fly a jumbo jet, helicopter or a microlight, but I feel fully competent to state that the training required for each is very different


----------



## ester (5 November 2014)

Elliesmemory1 said:



			If foxes are vermin and such a pest to farmers that they need to be controlled by the hunt,why on earth feed them and encourage them if not just to provide  sport?
 Just a honest question as it seems mad to me.
		
Click to expand...

Conversely they are presumably much less of a pest to farmers (chickens/lambs etc) if they are being fed elsewhere perhaps?


----------



## Maesfen (5 November 2014)

cptrayes said:



			we do not allow any other animals to be killed to eat in such an inhumane fashion, never mind for fun.
		
Click to expand...


Oh come on, do you forget about Halal but that's OK, it's all done for a religion that doesn't even belong to this country I suppose let alone the fact that the majority of British people find it the most inhumane way to slaughter for meat.  I know farmers that travel many miles to a suitable abattoir rather than use the one nearest them because it's gone over to being Halal only.  People expect farmers to have the highest standards of welfare, there's hue and cry when they don't but nobody bats an eye at the cruelty of Halal at the end of the line because that hits their pocket instead of the farmer's.

Sorry, off soap box now.


----------



## Alec Swan (5 November 2014)

cptrayes said:



			I am puzzled, Dry Rot.


Why would you need to have done either to be able to say that training a dog to fetch a grounded bird and bring it to you is a wildly different training exercise than putting some young dogs with some older dogs and taking them hunting, or ringing a wood with people making noises to keep the fox cubs inside the wood and then putting young hounds in to chase and kill them?

I don't know how to fly a jumbo jet, helicopter or a microlight, but I feel fully competent to state that the training required for each is very different 

Click to expand...

Para 1;  I'm not,  it made perfect sense.

Para 2;  I can't accept that,  and even though I don't and have never ridden to hounds,  it has always been my understanding that 'Cubbing' is about entering young hounds and educating both the young entry and cubs and to suggest that a covert would be surrounded by the mounted field to prevent the escape of cubs would and SHOULD be unthinkable.  There are times when foxes need to be held up and Cubbing is not such a time.

Para 3;  Your knowledge of hunting is as pertinent as your experience of piloting any aircraft.  I understand that your views are born of inexperience,  but stating fact when you are so clearly wrong,  does little to further your claims.

This isn't an attack aimed at you cpt,  but your rather skewed propositions.

Alec.


----------



## cptrayes (5 November 2014)

Alec Swan said:



			Para 1;  I'm not,  it made perfect sense.

Para 2;  I can't accept that,  and even though I don't and have never ridden to hounds,  it has always been my understanding that 'Cubbing' is about entering young hounds and educating both the young entry and cubs and to suggest that a covert would be surrounded by the mounted field to prevent the escape of cubs would and SHOULD be unthinkable.  There are times when foxes need to be held up and Cubbing is not such a time.

Para 3;  Your knowledge of hunting is as pertinent as your experience of piloting any aircraft.  I understand that your views are born of inexperience,  but stating fact when you are so clearly wrong,  does little to further your claims.

This isn't an attack aimed at you cpt,  but your rather skewed propositions.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...


I have been cubbing with the Berkely and that is EXACTLY how it was done!


----------



## cptrayes (5 November 2014)

Maesfen said:



			Oh come on, do you forget about Halal but that's OK, it's all done for a religion that doesn't even belong to this country I suppose let alone the fact that the majority of British people find it the most inhumane way to slaughter for meat.  I know farmers that travel many miles to a suitable abattoir rather than use the one nearest them because it's gone over to being Halal only.  People expect farmers to have the highest standards of welfare, there's hue and cry when they don't but nobody bats an eye at the cruelty of Halal at the end of the line because that hits their pocket instead of the farmer's.

Sorry, off soap box now.
		
Click to expand...

I believe that most Halal meat is now pre stunned and there is an ongoing campaign to have all halal meat pre stunned.

Even then, I  don't personally think you can compare it with bringing a bird out of the sky half dead to flap about on the ground before a dog picks it up and carries it to a human to have its neck wrung, especially not when done for fun.


----------



## twiggy2 (5 November 2014)

Dry Rot said:



			So you've trained a few gundogs then, have you? And hunted a pack of hounds?

Click to expand...

many dogs yes including gun dogs although not training them to the gun, I have taught/teach retrieve, search, sent work, tracking, puppies and obedience, dabbled with agility but that really dd nothing for me. I have terriers and a lurcher and have been out with experienced lurcher men and their dogs. letting a young dog learn its trade from the pack and following its instinct is not to my mind training-ie chuck a new terrier puppy in the pack is very different to trining a dog to go alone sent/find and retrieve. I have also been out with the mink hounds and the master is a relation so I am aware of what goes inoto getting them out working and from what the master says they just add one or two young dogs to the pack on a public hunt and they learn from the rest and follow the pack.

so no I have not hunted a pack of hounds but have many times accompanied a working pack be it terriers, mink hounds or lurchers and terriers working together. I also beat and have friends that have pheasant and duck shoots so am more than aware what it takes to train a gun dog as I have taught the dogs away from the gun with the view to progressing to the gun and when the progression has been made with a gun dog trainer I have often attended to further my knowledge and out of interest.


----------



## twiggy2 (5 November 2014)

Alec Swan said:



			it has always been my understanding that 'Cubbing' is about entering young hounds and educating both the young entry and cubs 
Alec.
		
Click to expand...

the education for the young hounds is to encourage drive by giving them easier prey and a positive experience by the fact that the kill is fairly easy if they catch-they are more likely to catch and fitness is increased along the way, cubbing is mainly for fitness and bonding the pack, I don't think the cubs learn anything other than to fear the sound of the hunt if they are lucky enough to survive the day.


----------



## Dry Rot (5 November 2014)

cptrayes said:



			I am puzzled, Dry Rot.


Why would you need to have done either to be able to say that training a dog to fetch a grounded bird and bring it to you is a wildly different training exercise than putting some young dogs with some older dogs and taking them hunting, or ringing a wood with people making noises to keep the fox cubs inside the wood and then putting young hounds in to chase and kill them?

I don't know how to fly a jumbo jet, helicopter or a microlight, but I feel fully competent to state that the training required for each is very different 

Click to expand...

My post was not directed to you, CPT, as I know you have superior intelligence to most of us here. I recall your post some time ago on a hunting thread stating that you knew all about cub hunting because you'd been!

You say, "I don't know how to fly a jumbo jet, helicopter or a microlight, but I feel fully competent to state that the training required for each is very different ". Of course you do, dear. And I haven't a single doubt that you could do all three after just reading the brochure!


----------



## Orangehorse (5 November 2014)

"I believe that most Halal meat is now pre stunned and there is an ongoing campaign to have all halal meat pre stunned."

Mm, doubtful, knowing all the background.

Feeding the foxes.  Well they are not filmed hunting the foxes, so nothing wrong has been done.  As for why, who knows?


----------



## cptrayes (5 November 2014)

Dry Rot said:



			My post was not directed to you, CPT, as I know you have superior intelligence to most of us here. I recall your post some time ago on a hunting thread stating that you knew all about cub hunting because you'd been!

You say, "I don't know how to fly a jumbo jet, helicopter or a microlight, but I feel fully competent to state that the training required for each is very different ". Of course you do, dear. And I haven't a single doubt that you could do all three after just reading the brochure!
		
Click to expand...

Are you always this patronising to women who can argue you under the table sweetheart  ?


----------



## marianne1981 (5 November 2014)

When defending fox hunting, the answer is ALWAYS something along the lines of the fact that they "need" to be controlled. They either need controlling or they dont... the evidence in this video is stacked up against you and yet not one pro has condemned the actions, even when the evidence is staring you in the face. I would have more respect for your argument if you said hey - this is wrong!!!


----------



## AdorableAlice (5 November 2014)

Yet again a vast amount of rubbish being spouted by people who have no knowledge of the countryside, farming, land and wildlife management.

Frightening ignorance.


----------



## cptrayes (5 November 2014)

AdorableAlice said:



			Yet again a vast amount of rubbish being spouted by people who have no knowledge of the countryside, farming, land and wildlife management.

Frightening ignorance.
		
Click to expand...

Could you explain what anyone has posted which is incorrect Alice? And correct their ignorance.


----------



## AdorableAlice (5 November 2014)

cptrayes said:



			Could you explain what anyone has posted which is incorrect Alice? And correct their ignorance.
		
Click to expand...

Not worth the effort, all it will turn into is town v countryside.


----------



## cptrayes (5 November 2014)

AdorableAlice said:



			Not worth the effort, all it will turn into is town v countryside.
		
Click to expand...


I find that argument both trite and patronising. There are plenty of country people who do not agree with hunting with hounds or shooting birds.


----------



## Alec Swan (5 November 2014)

AdorableAlice said:



			Yet again a vast amount of rubbish being spouted by people who have no knowledge of the countryside, farming, land and wildlife management.

Frightening ignorance.
		
Click to expand...

I'd add to that;  Now that Hunting as it was previously carried out,  is banned,  there are those who fail to understand that it's the Fox which has suffered.  When there were preserves and when Hunting was considered to be an honourable system of management,  there was tolerance and harmony.  Now the hand of every oick with a FAC has turned his hand against the Fox,  and as a species,  the animal no longer enjoys his privileged and exalted position.

It's the Fox as an animal who has suffered the most from this ridiculous and Class based bigotry.

Alec.


----------



## cptrayes (5 November 2014)

Alec Swan said:



			I'd add to that;  Now that Hunting as it was previously carried out,  is banned,  there are those who fail to understand that it's the Fox which has suffered.  When there were preserves and when Hunting was considered to be an honourable system of management,  there was tolerance and harmony.  Now the hand of every oick with a FAC has turned his hand against the Fox,  and as a species,  the animal no longer enjoys his privileged and exalted position.

It's the Fox as an animal who has suffered the most from this ridiculous and Class based bigotry.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Good grief Alec, do you read Mills and Boon too?


There were plenty of areas like mine that were never fox hunted by hounds you know!


----------



## Alec Swan (5 November 2014)

cptrayes said:



			&#8230;&#8230;..


There were plenty of areas like mine that were never fox hunted by hounds you know!
		
Click to expand...

I feel quite sure that if you do your research,  you'll find that once upon a time there was a resident pack in Wapping.  It must have been Wapping as that's where most of your poorly researched and claimed knowledge seems to originate from. 

Alec.


----------



## cptrayes (5 November 2014)

Alec Swan said:



			I feel quite sure that if you do your research,  you'll find that once upon a time there was a resident pack in Wapping.  It must have been Wapping as that's where most of your poorly researched and claimed knowledge seems to originate from. 

Alec.
		
Click to expand...


What knowledge that I have expressed in this thread are you saying is incorrect?


----------



## marianne1981 (5 November 2014)

The level of ignorance displayed by some pro hunt people on here is shocking!! Is Alec for real or just a consistent troll on here, belittling/mocking anyone who does not share his opinion!


----------



## AdorableAlice (5 November 2014)

Hunting provides employment to many and makes money for many.  People produce hunters that sell for a lot of money.  I vaguely remember seeing your signature picture on an advert recently with the horse being targeted at the market for huntsman or whip's horse, about a week ago I think.

A repeal is much needed, bovine tb needs addressing with a countrywide cull of badgers, milk payments need reviewing.  The countryside and it's associated activities is an industry and deserves far more understanding and respect.


----------



## twiggy2 (5 November 2014)

AdorableAlice said:



			Hunting provides employment to many and makes money for many.
		
Click to expand...

so does dog fighting, it does not make it right Alice.




AdorableAlice said:



			bovine tb needs addressing with a countrywide cull of badgers, milk payments need reviewing. The countryside and it's associated activities is an industry and deserves far more understanding and respect.




			what does this have to do with this thread topic?
		
Click to expand...



Click to expand...


----------



## AdorableAlice (5 November 2014)

twiggy2 said:



			so does dog fighting, it does not make it right Alice.




AdorableAlice said:



			bovine tb needs addressing with a countrywide cull of badgers, milk payments need reviewing. The countryside and it's associated activities is an industry and deserves far more understanding and respect.




			what does this have to do with this thread topic?
		
Click to expand...

I give in.
		
Click to expand...



Click to expand...


----------



## cptrayes (6 November 2014)

AdorableAlice said:



			Hunting provides employment to many and makes money for many.  People produce hunters that sell for a lot of money.  I vaguely remember seeing your signature picture on an advert recently with the horse being targeted at the market for huntsman or whip's horse, about a week ago I think.

.
		
Click to expand...


Yes Alice, when I sold him six months ago he was an awesome DRAG Hunter.  It is not me selling him now, it is the man who bought him.


----------



## cptrayes (6 November 2014)

AdorableAlice said:



			Hunting provides employment to many and makes money for many.
		
Click to expand...

And in spite of dire warnings about unemployed farriers and livery owners etc, by the Countryside Alliance, in the first years of the ban, when it was widely adhered to, numbers of people hunting INCREASED.


----------



## Alec Swan (6 November 2014)

cptrayes said:



			And in spite of dire warnings about unemployed farriers and livery owners etc, by the Countryside Alliance, in the first years of the ban, when it was widely adhered to, numbers of people hunting INCREASED.
		
Click to expand...

So what would that tell us?  Either that the criminal and/or rebellious aspect of those who live a truly rural existence,  is on the increase,  or-(and possibly)-and,  that those who live within and embrace the countryside,  are sick of those who with neither understanding nor care,  would tell them that they 'mustn't'.  Either way the neauvou-arrives,  would be better advised to either return from whence they came,  or embrace the rural lifestyle which most seem to find acceptable.

Alec.


----------



## cptrayes (6 November 2014)

Alec Swan said:



			So what would that tell us?  Either that the criminal and/or rebellious aspect of those who live a truly rural existence,  is on the increase,  or-(and possibly)-and,  that those who live within and embrace the countryside,  are sick of those who with neither understanding nor care,  would tell them that they 'mustn't'.  Either way the neauvou-arrives,  would be better advised to either return from whence they came,  or embrace the rural lifestyle which most seem to find acceptable.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...


Well actually, Alec, it told me that there was a large latent and unfulfilled demand for drag hunting.

It will be interesting to see if numbers fall again now that there is widespread hunting of fox again.

Honestly Alec, the way you write,  You would think there wasn't a countryside worker in the whole of the UK who didn't support hunting foxes with hounds and blasting birds out of the sky half dead.


----------



## Bernster (6 November 2014)

Alec Swan said:



			So what would that tell us?  Either that the criminal and/or rebellious aspect of those who live a truly rural existence,  is on the increase,  or-(and possibly)-and,  that those who live within and embrace the countryside,  are sick of those who with neither understanding nor care,  would tell them that they 'mustn't'.  Either way the neauvou-arrives,  would be better advised to either return from whence they came,  or embrace the rural lifestyle which most seem to find acceptable.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Uhm, slightly nervous of entering into this debate but I do think it's worth at least being open to the possibility that some people have joined hunting post-ban because they weren't in support of hunting foxes, and do support post-ban hunting.  Equally I suspect you have a point, that others have joined to show their support and are against the ban.


----------



## MerrySherryRider (6 November 2014)

AdorableAlice said:



			Hunting provides employment to many and makes money for many.
		
Click to expand...

So does child porn. Fortunately, like hunting, its illegal no matter how much money it makes.


----------



## Orangehorse (6 November 2014)

Bernster said:



			Uhm, slightly nervous of entering into this debate but I do think it's worth at least being open to the possibility that some people have joined hunting post-ban because they weren't in support of hunting foxes, and do support post-ban hunting.  Equally I suspect you have a point, that others have joined to show their support and are against the ban.
		
Click to expand...

This absolutely!  My OH (farmer) wasn't every too happy about the hunt coming across as we are on heavy clay and they do make a mess.  However, since "the ban" he welcomes them with open arms.

Also, I do agree that people didn't support the hunting of foxes have joined in.

What I think we can all agree with is that the legistlation was a complete mess and there all hunts declare that they "hunt within the law" but there seems to be a huge difference in how they go about it.  There is one local hunt that goes trail hunting, since it is on the urban fringe I think they probably have a more relaxed day.  Other hunts race around with a bird of prey in a box, and will dig out and shoot foxes and the field seems to have a nice enough day with galloping around and jumping.


----------



## sandi_84 (6 November 2014)

This will probably sound rude and I don't mean it to be, I know it's not directly on topic but with regards to those that have issues with bird shoots and I think "shooting them half dead out of the sky" was said. I'm just interested to know how else it could be done, as I have taken part (non shooting, just collecting) in a local duck shoot.

I'm not sure how it's done elsewhere but everyone who shot took home a portion of the shot ducks. The ones who were shot but not killed instantly were dispatched as soon as possible - and it was pretty quick I promise! - I know this as I was part of the collect and dispatch team although tbh I only dispatched one myself as I'd never done it before. I even got 2 ducks to take home for taking part even though I never fired a shot and plucked and de-breasted them myself. They made for a very lovely treat for dinner. I'm against animal cruelty but nothing on the shoot that I witnessed was cruel IMO.

I can't comment on fox hunting as I have 0 experience or knowledge.


----------



## Maesfen (6 November 2014)

Not rude at all Sandi and that is exactly how it's been and should be done on a professional shoot; very unlike the sensationalist comment of shooting them half dead out of the sky, but hey ho, everyone likes a bit of sensationalism in here; you just have to learn not to bite!


----------



## cptrayes (6 November 2014)

sandi_84 said:



			This will probably sound rude and I don't mean it to be, I know it's not directly on topic but with regards to those that have issues with bird shoots and I think "shooting them half dead out of the sky" was said. I'm just interested to know how else it could be done, as I have taken part (non shooting, just collecting) in a local duck shoot.

I'm not sure how it's done elsewhere but everyone who shot took home a portion of the shot ducks. The ones who were shot but not killed instantly were dispatched as soon as possible - and it was pretty quick I promise! - I know this as I was part of the collect and dispatch team although tbh I only dispatched one myself as I'd never done it before. I even got 2 ducks to take home for taking part even though I never fired a shot and plucked and de-breasted them myself. They made for a very lovely treat for dinner. I'm against animal cruelty but nothing on the shoot that I witnessed was cruel IMO.

I can't comment on fox hunting as I have 0 experience or knowledge.
		
Click to expand...


You don't think it's cruel to deliberately cause a bird to fall out of the sky hurt but not dead,  and be picked up by a dog?    For fun?

I am open to the persuasion that it is the most humane way of culling bird poulations which must be culled,  but around here they are breeding birds simply so that people can have the fun of shooting them.


----------



## minesadouble (6 November 2014)

I'd rather have the life of a pheasant 'shot half dead out of the sky' than that of a mass produced chicken destined for the supermarket shelf. I know which I think is more inhumane!


----------



## sandi_84 (6 November 2014)

cptrayes said:



			You don't think it's cruel to deliberately cause a bird to fall out of the sky hurt but not dead,  and be picked up by a dog?    For fun?

I am open to the persuasion that it is the most humane way of culling bird poulations which must be culled,  but around here they are breeding birds simply so that people can have the fun of shooting them.
		
Click to expand...

Personally I don't like the thought of shooting for just "kicks" but I do very much agree with shooting for the pot, I'm not a vegetarian and I am quite interested in self sufficiency food wise - for example eventually OH and I would ideally have land enough to have a decent sized veg patch and would keep chickens/pigs with the view to eventually eating them.

Unfortunately sometimes it's not the ideal clean instant kill which would obviously be the most desirable outcome but with everything being humanly done to make any suffering as short as possible. Personally I think the ducks were too stunned to suffer much in the short interim before being properly dispatched i.e there was no distressed noises or struggling when they were retrieved.

The one dog who retrieved a duck was very gentle with it and did not worry it and again I really honestly think the duck was too stunned to notice.

All in all no I don't think it was cruel, nor do I find the process of killing other animals for the table cruel (barring halal which sounds pretty horrific).

I do understand that some people shoot for fun which as I previously said is not for me, I enjoyed the shoot and would participate again for the fact that a) it was a very interesting and educational experience for me especially being done the way it was. I'm proud of myself that I learned two new skills even if it's unlikely I'll use them often. And b) that it was for getting some food out of it, something I don't eat except once in a blue moon at a restaurant which I find to be very tasty and would eat more of given the opportunity.

The local shoot organiser(? don't know the technical term) breeds ducks to be shot just as people breed cows/pigs etc etc to be dispatched and eaten. No duck was wasted as everyone who took part took ducks home to eat. It was a small shoot (not sure what the average is being my first) where there were about 10 shooters + ground team.

I also fish to eat and I understand that it can't be pleasant for the fish to be hooked, reeled in, taken out of it's environment and then bopped on the head (not that it probably feels the bop when it comes to that, it's instantly gone if you do it properly) and don't feel guilty or cruel for that either. I enjoy the feeling that I can provide for and feed myself, it speaks to my primal hunter gatherer instinct I guess 

Maesfen, glad to hear that my experience was the norm, all the locals were a very nice, friendly lot and I felt that it was a positive experience


----------



## cptrayes (6 November 2014)

minesadouble said:



			I'd rather have the life of a pheasant 'shot half dead out of the sky' than that of a mass produced chicken destined for the supermarket shelf. I know which I think is more inhumane!
		
Click to expand...


When did two wrongs make a right?


----------



## sandi_84 (6 November 2014)

minesadouble said:



			I'd rather have the life of a pheasant 'shot half dead out of the sky' than that of a mass produced chicken destined for the supermarket shelf. I know which I think is more inhumane!
		
Click to expand...

Also this ^ at least I know the ducks were properly properly free range and well cared for as fact rather than "free range" chickens that have a foot square space or poor battery chickens both of whom must live a thoroughly miserable existence. I also buy local eggs where I can.


----------



## minesadouble (6 November 2014)

cptrayes said:



			When did two wrongs make a right?
		
Click to expand...

Two wrongs never make a right. However I sincerely hope that those who are so vehemently opposed to hunting/shooting/fishing take as much care as I do when sourcing meat/animal products and don't just pick the cheap meat from the supermarket shelves without a thought for the life that animal has led and the death it has met.


----------



## Alec Swan (6 November 2014)

Bernster said:



			Uhm, slightly nervous of entering into this debate but I do think it's worth at least being open to the possibility that some people have joined hunting post-ban because they weren't in support of hunting foxes, and do support post-ban hunting.  Equally I suspect you have a point, that others have joined to show their support and are against the ban.
		
Click to expand...

Don't be nervous,  your opinion is as valid as that of anyone else!!  Whilst short of a Mori survey (and it would be interesting),  I'm wondering how we decide just why people hunt.  Was it Jorrocks who said "Some people Hunt to get away from their wives,  and some to meet other people's.  Some Hunt to follow 'ounds"?!  It was something like that.

I suspect that Hunting is a social pastime and as such that's why others gather to ride to Hounds.  It was interesting that following on from the Ban,  that the Boxing Day Meets,  the Country over,  were never better attended.  I also suspect that the rural community,  even those who didn't previously Hunt were a little peeved at being told that they 'couldn't'!  Further,  there may well be a continuing rebellion at the urban dictates which are being handed down,  by those who neither know nor care about those of us who live in the long grass!!

Alec.


----------



## dogatemysalad (6 November 2014)

minesadouble said:



			Two wrongs never make a right. However I sincerely hope that those who are so vehemently opposed to hunting/shooting/fishing take as much care as I do when sourcing meat/animal products and don't just pick the cheap meat from the supermarket shelves without a thought for the life that animal has led and the death it has met.
		
Click to expand...

Surely that decision is best left to each person's own ethical code ? Personally, chasing and killing a wild animal just for fun isn't something I'd find acceptable. Catching a fish, or shooting a pheasant to be eaten at dinner, is. 

I do not buy cheap meat from unknown origin at supermarkets, but if I only had the choice of buying cheap food or my children going hungry, I would. Being ethical is about getting priorities right. 
Would you be eating the foxes killed by the hunt ?


----------



## cptrayes (6 November 2014)

Alec Swan said:



			the urban dictates which are being handed down,  by those who neither know nor care about those of us who live in the long grass!!

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

I do wish you'd stop pretending that every long term country dweller and/or worker in the country supports your view of fox hunting and bird shooting.

Oh and I do wish that you would drop the refrain of 'we are misunderstood'  and accept that the truth is that you are simply disagreed with.


----------



## minesadouble (6 November 2014)

I 



dogatemysalad said:



			Surely that decision is best left to each person's own ethical code ? Personally, chasing and killing a wild animal just for fun isn't something I'd find acceptable. Catching a fish, or shooting a pheasant to be eaten at dinner, is. 

I do not buy cheap meat from unknown origin at supermarkets, but if I only had the choice of buying cheap food or my children going hungry, I would. Being ethical is about getting priorities right. 
Would you be eating the foxes killed by the hunt ?
		
Click to expand...

Nope, I sure wouldn't, but there is an argument that we eat meat for pleasure rather than out of necessity too.
I am pro hunting shooting and fishing but I would not eat meat from an animal that led a miserable life - not to my knowledge anyway. If I couldn't afford to buy meat of provenance I was confident of I would simply eat meat less often and so would my children. Those are my ethics and I am comfortable with my beliefs.


----------



## Alec Swan (6 November 2014)

minesadouble said:



			&#8230;&#8230;..

&#8230;&#8230;... I would not eat meat from an animal that led a miserable life - not to my knowledge anyway. If I couldn't afford to buy meat of provenance I was confident of I would simply eat meat less often and so would my children. Those are my ethics and I am comfortable with my beliefs.
		
Click to expand...

That raises an interesting and ethical point.  

What is a 'Miserable life"?  Every animal which is predated upon,  consider for the point of the argument,  The Hare,  lives a life of permanent fear.  The Fox,  and he's also a hunted animal,  also lives a life of fear.  Neither the Fox nor the Hare ever have any security of tenure upon life.  No animal has.  The Mouse,  Burn's Wee Timorous Beastie,  is the staple diet of Owls and as such lives a precarious existence.  Would we consider any animal which lives a life of permanent fear,  to be miserable?

As you and others,  I suppose that we maintain,  and possibly change,  our own levels of acceptable behaviour.  I also suppose that we have to be at ease with ourselves.  Ethical behaviour is an interesting and sometimes perplexing subject.

Alec.


----------



## Orangehorse (7 November 2014)

Some people are going to disagree with field sports no matter what, so it is a waste of time arguing.  

Many people disagree with fox hunting, thinking that every time a fox is hunted it is killed.  Actually, we know that it is MUCH harder than that.  I have come across people who used to be anti - toffs on horses, going hunting to see animals killed  - have got involved and discovered that it isn't like that at all.

Then there are the shooting thousands of birds and injuring them.  Well shooting thousands of birds happened in the Edwardian era.  Modern game shooting is very mindful of its public image.  Any injured birds are retrived as quickly as possible - that is why people have Retriever dogs, and it is important that the birds are carried softly and not damaged by the dog.  If it is alive it is killed immediately, but most game birds fall dead from the sky.  This is my experience anyway, but then maybe the little shooting I am involved with is done by skilled shooters.


----------



## cptrayes (7 November 2014)

Orangehorse said:



			Some people are going to disagree with field sports no matter what, so it is a waste of time arguing.  

Many people disagree with fox hunting, thinking that every time a fox is hunted it is killed.  Actually, we know that it is MUCH harder than that.  I have come across people who used to be anti - toffs on horses, going hunting to see animals killed  - have got involved and discovered that it isn't like that at all.

Then there are the shooting thousands of birds and injuring them.  Well shooting thousands of birds happened in the Edwardian era.  Modern game shooting is very mindful of its public image.  Any injured birds are retrived as quickly as possible - that is why people have Retriever dogs, and it is important that the birds are carried softly and not daresTmaged by the dog.  If it is alive it is killed immediately, but most game birds fall dead from the sky.  This is my experience anyway, but then maybe the little shooting I am involved with is done by skilled shooters.
		
Click to expand...



I have no problem with killing foxes and neither do most people who are against breaking the law and hunting them with a pack of dogs.

I have every problem with shooting even one bird out of the sky for fun, doubly so when you cannot guarantee that the bird will die instantly from the shot. If a schoolboy did it with his catapult, he'd be punished, but somehow it's ok for a group of grown adults to do it with guns? As a * game*?


----------



## L&M (7 November 2014)

Agreed Cptrayes - especially as the majority of game is reared purely to be shot a few mnths later&#8230;.


----------



## marianne1981 (7 November 2014)

I also totally agree CP Trayes. That is a very good point re the schoolboy. Isnt it bizarre how some things are "acceptable" and the same thing, done by someone else isnt. It makes me wonder - have most pro hunters on here grown up with hunting, as a way of life - if so it must be so engrained into them that they cannot/will not change or consider it from another point of view. On the subject again of the video, doesnt it say it all how not one pro condemned it - all just excused it! It's pathetic how their own can do no wrong and are rarely held accountable, no "sport" should be run like this.


----------



## RunToEarth (7 November 2014)

cptrayes said:



			You don't think it's cruel to deliberately cause a bird to fall out of the sky hurt but not dead,  and be picked up by a dog?    For fun?

I am open to the persuasion that it is the most humane way of culling bird poulations which must be culled,  but around here they are breeding birds simply so that people can have the fun of shooting them.
		
Click to expand...

Well yes, shooting is an industry - if it were reliant on the wild bird population of this country it would not only diminish numbers but not be sustainable going forwards. 

It isn't a small industry either - shooting contributes £2billion a year to the UK economy and those figures are inclusive of businesses specialising in rearing birds for the season. 

I hate a chicken shoot, it isn't sporting and bringing down half dead birds is not cricket, but there are bad shots in shooting just as there are bad riders in the field - it doesn't make us all awful - I fail to see how you can base your opinion of an entire sport on that, it simply isn't accurate. 

Yes, birds are shot out shooting, most shoots will be working between 40-60% ratio which isn't bad, and considering they are a commodity born and bred for a sporting purpose I think they are raised a hell of a lot better than many commodities in this country.


----------



## cptrayes (7 November 2014)

RunToEarth said:



			Well yes, shooting is an industry - if it were reliant on the wild bird population of this country it would not only diminish numbers but not be sustainable going forwards. 

It isn't a small industry either - shooting contributes £2billion a year to the UK economy and those figures are inclusive of businesses specialising in rearing birds for the season. 

I hate a chicken shoot, it isn't sporting and bringing down half dead birds is not cricket, but there are bad shots in shooting just as there are bad riders in the field - it doesn't make us all awful - I fail to see how you can base your opinion of an entire sport on that, it simply isn't accurate. 

Yes, birds are shot out shooting, most shoots will be working between 40-60% ratio which isn't bad, and considering they are a commodity born and bred for a sporting purpose I think they are raised a hell of a lot better than many commodities in this country.
		
Click to expand...

You kill an animal, for fun, when you cannot guarantee a clean death for anywhere near 100% of them. 

It makes jobs and money so we must keep it?  Major amounts of that are made from corporate hospitality and the kind of bankers and business consultants who do it are there to be seen in the right place. I've met a ton of them in the course of my work, telling me proudly that they pay eight hundred a day to shoot birds and expecting me to think that's clever. Trust me, they'll still spend that money on corporate hospitality, just somewhere else.

I'm sure goldfish breeders found another way to earn a living when we decided that the millions of goldfish being bred to be given away at fairs in plastic bags was not acceptable.


----------



## VoR (8 November 2014)

Interesting video. It is a pity the North Cots have not replied, however, we don't know why that is, maybe they have been told not to by lawyers, who knows? If this is such damning evidence then HSA would have taken it to the Police to procure a prosecution rather than the TV for publicity wouldn't they? Maybe even the HSA aren't 100% convinced? Could it be a ploy to deflect publicity from some recent prosecutions of anti hunt protestors?
As with any propoganda, be it pro or anti anything not just hunting, the spin doctors will do their work and make things appear to support their view, don't believe everything you see or read folks.


----------



## RunToEarth (8 November 2014)

cptrayes said:



			You kill an animal, for fun, when you cannot guarantee a clean death for anywhere near 100% of them.
		
Click to expand...

My 40-60% shot ratio relates to birds shot in relation to birds released, not birds killed outright. I'm sure winged birds do happen, but they aren't commonplace. 

I just don't see the welfare issue that you see tbh.


----------



## cptrayes (8 November 2014)

RunToEarth said:



			My 40-60% shot ratio relates to birds shot in relation to birds released, not birds killed outright. I'm sure winged birds do happen, *but they aren't commonplace.* 

I just don't see the welfare issue that you see tbh.
		
Click to expand...

Oh pull the other one


----------



## sandi_84 (8 November 2014)

Cptrayes, you keep saying shooting for fun but what of those that hunt and fish for the table? Are you still against it?


----------



## cptrayes (8 November 2014)

sandi_84 said:



			Cptrayes, you keep saying shooting for fun but what of those that hunt and fish for the table? Are you still against it?
		
Click to expand...

I'm not against any animal being legally killed to eat or reduce vermin or cull overpopulation, where it is done cleanly. I can't understand why snares are legal, they seem to me to be the work of devil.


----------



## Tern (8 November 2014)

Okay.. don't really want to get too far into this debate but i'll share my opinion.

I am a vegetarian, just to clarify. I however have no problem with game being shot to be eaten, after all, what is going to happen to the bird, I highly doubt someone with a gun license is going to go shoot game and then bin it.. They will use it for SOMETHING even if it is feeding their cats for example. I also don't have a problem with fox hunting, foxes do not mean any harm to anyone however they can be a threat to livestock etc. Foxes are very majestic animals. Maybe if fox hunting was still done but the fox was killed more 'humanely' would people be happier?

What I am struggling to understand is why this thread is getting bitchy. Everyone is entitled to an opinion however that doesn't mean act like you're three years of age, have a debate in an adult manner. RESPECT is a brilliant word. You do not know anything however your opinion is yours and it should be respected as you should respect others.


----------



## Alec Swan (8 November 2014)

Tern said:



			&#8230;&#8230;..

What I am struggling to understand is why this thread is getting bitchy. Everyone is entitled to an opinion however that doesn't mean act like you're three years of age, have a debate in an adult manner. RESPECT is a brilliant word. You do not know anything however your opinion is yours and it should be respected as you should respect others.
		
Click to expand...

I agree with you,  and I once voiced the same opinion.  It was pointed out to me that this forum is read by those,  who whilst not forming opinions are perhaps open minded and if those who support Hunting sit by and say nothing by way of defending ethical and time honoured rural sports,  then those with open minds will only read of one set of opinions.  

In my defence,  though on occasion I've become a little exahsperated,  I don't believe that I've ever stooped to offering aimed insults or to being bitchy.  Generally,  I've attempted to counter the claims which could mislead those who are even less well informed than the claimants.  

Alec.


----------



## A1fie (8 November 2014)

Tern said:



			Okay.. don't really want to get too far into this debate but i'll share my opinion.

I am a vegetarian, just to clarify. I however have no problem with game being shot to be eaten, after all, what is going to happen to the bird, I highly doubt someone with a gun license is going to go shoot game and then bin it.. They will use it for SOMETHING even if it is feeding their cats for example. I also don't have a problem with fox hunting, foxes do not mean any harm to anyone however they can be a threat to livestock etc. Foxes are very majestic animals. Maybe if fox hunting was still done but the fox was killed more 'humanely' would people be happier?

What I am struggling to understand is why this thread is getting bitchy. Everyone is entitled to an opinion however that doesn't mean act like you're three years of age, have a debate in an adult manner. RESPECT is a brilliant word. You do not know anything however your opinion is yours and it should be respected as you should respect others.
		
Click to expand...

What a lovely post. I agree absolutely. I love hunting and racing and I support shooting but I have no problem with those that don't.  I can't bear it when debates get unpleasant and personal.


----------



## Tern (8 November 2014)

Alec Swan said:



			In my defence,  though on occasion I've become a little exahsperated,  I don't believe that I've ever stooped to offering aimed insults or to being bitchy.  Generally,  I've attempted to counter the claims which could mislead those who are even less well informed than the claimants.
		
Click to expand...

Apologies Alec if you thought my last paragraph was aimed at you - it wasn't!  



A1fie said:



			What a lovely post. I agree absolutely. I love hunting and racing and I support shooting but I have no problem with those that don't.  I can't bear it when debates get unpleasant and personal.
		
Click to expand...

I try!  I also love racing for the thrill and the relationships the jockeys have however that is a whole different subject that will also get very heated!


----------



## Maesfen (9 November 2014)

A1fie said:



			What a lovely post. I agree absolutely. I love hunting and racing and I support shooting but I have no problem with those that don't.  I can't bear it when debates get unpleasant and personal.
		
Click to expand...

Totally agree with you.  Life's too short to be spent with grouches just because you like something they don't and vice versa.


----------



## Herne (12 November 2014)

Getting back to the original topic, there is nothing illegal about feeding foxes - so there is no reason for anyone to condemn anyone else for doing it.

There are many gamekeepers who deliberately feed foxes, because a fit, healthy well-fed fox will hold a large territory and keep other foxes out - which, if you live near a large reservoir of foxes, such as a city or a big unkeepered area, is easier than continually having to shoot them, and then shoot the replacements and then shoot the replacements' replacements, etc

However, the anti-hunt outrage that such activities cause is based on a straw-man fallacy. _&#8221;The fact that you encourage foxes in some areas proves that you aren&#8217;t trying to kill them all, therefore you are lying when you say you are, therefore hunting is wrong. QED!&#8221;_

All very well and good &#8211; except for the fact that fox control has NEVER been about trying to kill all the foxes. Foxes have a useful place in our countryside ecosystems. The majority of what foxes eat &#8211; slugs, snails, small mammals &#8211; are pests to farmers and therefore having some foxes about is of benefit.

However, if there are too many foxes in an area, then there won&#8217;t be enough small prey to go around and the fox population will therefore be forced to eat too many of the things that farmers don&#8217;t want them to eat &#8211; such as gamebirds and livestock.

So, too few foxes = bad thing (not enough slugs and voles eaten); too many foxes = bad thing (too many pheasants and hens eaten). Right number = good thing (lots of slugs and rats eaten, not too many pheasants). It&#8217;s perfectly logical.

It&#8217;s all about managing a viable population. And yes, managing a viable population does mean helping it to increase when it is too small as much as it does reducing it when it is too big.

But, even a small population which you are trying to increase still needs an amount of culling (to kill injured or diseased specimens and to take older adults out of the breeding cycles so that they are not interbreeding with their own progeny &#8211; this is why they even have to do some culling of endangered species in game parks in places like Africa.

And, before someone trots out the old cliché, no, fox populations will NOT be self-controlled &#8220;by the natural availability of food&#8221;. That is pseudo-scientific claptrap when applied to an unnatural, man-managed environments like the British Countryside. It only applies in true wilderness &#8211; of which there is none in the UK.

The massive leap of complete illogic taken by the proponents of this theory is that control by the availability of food will somehow magically cut in at exactly the same population level that farmers consider to be optimum, thus negating the need for culling.

The reality, of course, is that this suggestion is preposterous. Control by the natural availability of food &#8211; which occurs when hunger forces vixens to reabsorb foetuses before they are born &#8211; only cuts in when ALL available foodstuffs run short, which includes the things farmers don&#8217;t want the foxes to have eaten as well as the things that they do.

To think that this might work would require the vixen, having eaten the last slug or vole, to think _&#8220;Oh, no, I mustn&#8217;t eat that nice, juicy chicken, because the farmer wants to keep that. I&#8217;d better go hungry and reabsorb my foetuses.&#8221;_ It is an absurd proposition.

So, the population level at which &#8220;natural control&#8221; would cut in is MUCH higher than the population that is viable for the purposes of agricultural and environmental management.

Which is why landowners will always be wanting to increase fox numbers when they are too low and decrease them when they are too high. It is by definition a permanently ongoing process.


----------



## Orangehorse (12 November 2014)

What a sensible answer.  I also said that there is nothing illegal about feeding foxes.


----------



## Maesfen (12 November 2014)

Very sensible, well put answer Herne which is totally logical to those who know about and are involved with the management of the fox population.


----------



## FairyLights (13 November 2014)

What exactly is the law on fox hunting? As I see it the terrier men on the quads rush to where hounds find a fox and shoot it. So its actually shooting rather than hunting. There are mounted and foot followers and our local hunt , most seem to spend the day either chatting to each other or cantering around jumping fences after the hounds who dont seem to be particularly after a fox but just looking for a scent. As stated earlier the quads and terrier men arrive with guns when a fox is found. Is this hunting within the law? is digging out of earths allowed? are hounds allowed to chase foxes at all? I dont know it would help if someone clarified the matter .


----------



## Herne (13 November 2014)

A dog may be used to flush a mammal from underground in order for it to be shot - but only for the protection of game birds.

So, if hounds that are trail hunting mark an occupied earth, terriermen may go and dispatch the fox if the landowner has asked the hunt to help protect their game birds in that way.

This particular exemption highlights the absurdity of this law. If a fox comes out of a hole and eats a pheasant, the land owner may use a terrier to flush it and shoot it. However, if the same fox comes out of the same hole and eats a chicken or a lamb, then to do so would be illegal. Crazy.


----------



## wench (17 November 2014)

I often find that the people that clamour and complain the most have no idea of what they are talking about


----------



## Alec Swan (17 November 2014)

Herne said:



			A dog may be used to flush a mammal from underground in order for it to be shot - but only for the protection of game birds.

So, if hounds that are trail hunting mark an occupied earth, terriermen may go and dispatch the fox if the landowner has asked the hunt to help protect their game birds in that way.

This particular exemption highlights the absurdity of this law. If a fox comes out of a hole and eats a pheasant, the land owner may use a terrier to flush it and shoot it. However, if the same fox comes out of the same hole and eats a chicken or a lamb, then to do so would be illegal. Crazy.
		
Click to expand...

The problem,  of course,  is that the new Laws were crafted and formed by those with not the faintest idea of what they were either,  trying to achieve,  or how their wonderful (sic) deliberations could be monitored or enforced.  

We now live in a world where we are being governed and directed by idiots.  We have Ministers who direct Agriculture who wouldn't know a sheep from a cow,  we have a Minister of Education who it seems to me,  is barely literate,  we have a Ministry of Defence and there's not a soldier amongst them  and a Minister of Transport who can't drive,  but who's managed to get his head around his expenses claims.  As you say Herne,  it's a Crazy world!

Alec.


----------

