# Shooting and hunting



## Clodagh (15 November 2015)

Those of you who shoot, or have a shoot. Do you allow the hunt to come during the shooting season?
If so, how often and to what extent - as in they can run through your coverts or actually draw them (for a line, of course)?


----------



## Alec Swan (15 November 2015)

I was, once upon a time, a 'keeper at Cornbury Park.  My employer,  the delightful Lord Rotherwick was a joint Master.  The meet was at the House.  I'd fed my birds in a wood with in excess of 1000 birds on the feed ride at about 09:30 in the morning.  The fox took hounds through 'my' wood,  about an hour after I'd fed and there were no more than a dozen birds which took flight because of the disturbance.  The very next morning,  the feed ride held just as many birds.

Managed with care,  Hunting,  despite those who would say otherwise,  rarely impacts upon shooting.

Alec.


----------



## popsdosh (15 November 2015)

Totally agree with you Alec , I have always maintained they actually help on a sporting shoot to sharpen things up a bit. We dont all want to shoot chickens that can barely fly ,however that seems to be how the commercial boys want it.


----------



## Alec Swan (15 November 2015)

popsdosh said:



			&#8230;&#8230;.. . We dont all want to shoot chickens that can barely fly ,however that seems to be how the commercial boys want it.
		
Click to expand...

Most of the commercial shoots cater for those who can't shoot,  and a 150 bird day of decent birds doesn't bring in the revenue of a 300 bird day of birds that could be killed with a clothes-prop.  On the rare occasions when I shoot 'commercial' I generally wonder why,  at the end of each and every day.

Alec.


----------



## popsdosh (15 November 2015)

Alec Swan said:



			Most of the commercial shoots cater for those who can't shoot,  and a 150 bird day of decent birds doesn't bring in the revenue of a 300 bird day of birds that could be killed with a clothes-prop.  On the rare occasions when I shoot 'commercial' I generally wonder why,  at the end of each and every day.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Thats why I have all but given up !  The last time I went commercial the partridge were coughing as they came by! picked my gun up twice all day. Have the odd day on wild birds here on the fens but still enjoy picking up at the right venue.


----------



## Judgemental (15 November 2015)

Alec Swan said:



			I was, once upon a time, a 'keeper at Cornbury Park.  My employer,  the delightful Lord Rotherwick was a joint Master.  The meet was at the House.  I'd fed my birds in a wood with in excess of 1000 birds on the feed ride at about 09:30 in the morning.  The fox took hounds through 'my' wood,  about an hour after I'd fed and there were no more than a dozen birds which took flight because of the disturbance.  The very next morning,  the feed ride held just as many birds.

Managed with care,  Hunting,  despite those who would say otherwise,  rarely impacts upon shooting.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Alec how interesting, because Lord Rotherwick was a director of Lord Shaftesbury's estates in Dorset, where shooting in the 10th earl's day was outstanding in every respect.

The Portman hounds would often traverse what is known as the Belt, i.e a circular wood  or covert about 200 yard wide that surrounds Wimborne St Giles. It is easily viewed via Google Earth.

The keepers feed in rides cut across the belt at intervals, similarly the guns stand at intervals.

No matter how often hounds hunt through the Belt, the pheasant population remains constant.

I am half expecting you say you are familiar with the location because Lord Rotherwick regularly shot with the Shaftesbury's.


----------



## Clodagh (15 November 2015)

That is a positive view. Good to know. 
We don't have the hunt here until after 1st Feb as from our POV the hunt offer nothing to us (except mess and generally they are nice people) yet our guns pay for their sport. Last year we did have a meet here in January and the pheasants were definately very disturbed. We don't, of course, have coverts to rival the size of Lord Rotherwick. It may make no difference over all but the perception, to the guns, was that someone had free sport and endangered their paid for day. 
When I mentioned that to a long term hunting friend of mine she said 'But we do pay for our sport' and took it badly when I pointed out none went to the landowner.
We hunted for years but now that we don't, and shoot and pick up instead, we prefer to keep our farm for our own entertainment.


----------



## PorkChop (15 November 2015)

I don't have my own shoot, but a shoot that I used to work the dogs at, regularly had the hunt through and it never seemed to affect the birds coming back as usual - the hounds obviously didn't go through the pens though


----------



## Alec Swan (15 November 2015)

Clodagh said:



			&#8230;&#8230;..

We hunted for years but now that we don't, and shoot and pick up instead, we prefer to keep our farm for our own entertainment.
		
Click to expand...

Reading between the lines and considering your previous posts,  I suspect that your disenchantment is influenced more by those who Hunt today,  rather than with Hunting itself.  In that you would have my support.  There are far too many and not all of them are the neuveau-chasse who consider that as guests they have no need to show any courtesy.  What a pleasure it is though to hold open a gate and to be thanked as sometimes happens.  

I once had some sheep 'out',  and as the field rode through them,  two ladies of advancing years stopped to ask if they could help to return them.  They seemed most concerned,  until I pointed out that the sheep had been 'out' all day,  not because of hounds and that I had a dog!   A brief few minutes,  and I liked those two,  just a little more!

It behoves those who Hunt to be a little more courteous and considerate and consider that they are there by grace and favour,  and not the other way around.

Alec.


----------



## Countryman (16 November 2015)

I understand the point some keepers may make, that guns have paid for their day to the landowner, but I do find it very sad that this attitude is becoming more common. After all, the number of people who enjoy themselves on a shooting day is what- 8 guns and a dozen beaters/picker-ups, whereas letting the local hunt in would give pleasure to 50-100 riders and a couple of hundred of hunt followers.


----------



## Herne (16 November 2015)

Hunting and shooting can get on together quite well. I know some very commercial shoots that have hounds through on a regular basis right the way through the season with no problems. Obviously you don't want them immediately before a day, but given a few days rest, everything will be back to normal.

Hounds running - or even drawing - through a covert will cause infinitely less disturbance than beaters and dogs do on a shooting day and yet many shoots manage to survive that process umpteen times throughout a season.

Your point about the guns worrying about getting what they pay for is fair. Another valid concern is that of keepers, who work all year round but only get judged on the results of a few shoot days. There are already plenty of factors that can make a day poorer - including the accuracy of the guns themselves - that they would just rather do without any avoidable distractions, such as the hunt. It is not unknown for a team of guns who could not collectively hit a barn door from the inside try to blame the keeper (and/or the hunt) for the fact that they did not make their bag.

I remember the head keeper of a very commercial shoot, which let hounds on once a month throughout the season, saying to me "Any keeper can show pheasants to the guns and any keeper can show foxes to the hunt - but only a good keeper can do both at the same time." Sadly, a lot of modern shoots cannot afford the time or the money for "good keepering". Even more sadly, a lot of modern keepers just don't have the inclination. For them, it's just easier not to take the risk - small though it may be.



Clodagh said:



			We hunted for years but now that we don't, and shoot and pick up instead, we prefer to keep our farm for our own entertainment.
		
Click to expand...

Wasn't it lucky that all the non-hunting farmers over whose land you enjoyed yourselves for all those years didn't feel the same way...


----------



## Alec Swan (16 November 2015)

Countryman said:



			I understand the point some keepers may make, that guns have paid for their day to the landowner, but I do find it very sad that this attitude is becoming more common. After all, the number of people who enjoy themselves on a shooting day is what- 8 guns and a dozen beaters/picker-ups, whereas letting the local hunt in would give pleasure to 50-100 riders and a couple of hundred of hunt followers.
		
Click to expand...

The difference is that those 8 guns are paying for their shooting and the 50-100 riders are on a freebie.  The problem isn't really to do with how competent the guns are,  but what's presented to them.  Few who shoot would be happy,  if the excuse for a poor show of birds offered was that Hounds had been through the day before,  and though I don't believe that Hounds materially influence the birds shown,  Hunting will generally be offered as the 'excuse' for a poor show of birds.

Alec.


----------



## Herne (16 November 2015)

Countryman said:



			I understand the point some keepers may make, that guns have paid for their day to the landowner, but I do find it very sad that this attitude is becoming more common. After all, the number of people who enjoy themselves on a shooting day is what- 8 guns and a dozen beaters/picker-ups, whereas letting the local hunt in would give pleasure to 50-100 riders and a couple of hundred of hunt followers.
		
Click to expand...

Of course the farmers have to prioritise the shoot. The shoot forms part of the farm income, whereas the hunt is only there under sufferance.

What I agree is rather sad is the increasing number of people who only care about their own sport to the exclusion of all others - but it's up to the hunts to do the PR work to encourage others to give them consideration.


----------



## FelineGroovy (16 November 2015)

This is the most interesting thread for a while.  We have a small shoot on our farm, and (up to now) have tried to avoid having the hunt until the end of the shooting season.  It's not, in our case, that we feel our guns would complain (the shoot is run mostly for friends and family with a few rough days to recoup costs), but that we want to be fair to our hard working & loyal keeper, and not create extra work or stress for him.  I feel that so long as the hunt has somewhere else to go during the season, then the least we can do is to make life easier for him.


----------



## Alec Swan (16 November 2015)

Another point,  and particularly one where Hunting would have a likely impact upon shooting,  would be that the modern and commercial shoot will be attempting to show game for quite probably,  30+ days per year,  and many will rear accordingly.  When I was in Oxfordshire,  we had 7000 acres,  5 separate beats,  6 'keepers,  and we released somewhere in the region of 15000 pheasants.  We had four days on each of the 5 beats per annum.  Today,  there are many shoots of 2000 acres and less,  releasing 20000+ pheasants,  with one 'keeper and he is expected to provide game over 30+ days.

Thinking about it further,  I'm coming to the conclusion that the commercial shoots simply cannot 'afford' (the right word),  or won't,  run the risk of having Hounds visit them.  Very few shoots today run on a purely private basis,  with most being managed and run by the landowner or the local game farmer who will provide the game as poults,  pay the wages of staff and then let each day's shooting to,  generally,  a fresh team of guns.  Those who are attempting to earn a living from shooting,  and they were few and far between in the '70s,  have colossal pressures placed on them,  and very few of them Hunt!

I haven't changed my stance,  I'm simply considering that in the last 40 years,  our world has changed!

Alec.


----------



## Clodagh (16 November 2015)

Herne said:



			Wasn't it lucky that all the non-hunting farmers over whose land you enjoyed yourselves for all those years didn't feel the same way...
		
Click to expand...

I think that is a little harsh - when we hunted we gave 3 meets a year, 1 cubbing, 2 lawn and were full on supporters of everything to do with hunt life. I would never say you can't come on my land and expect to go on anyone elses. I also jknew the difference between drill, mown grass and rough meadow, a distinction that many newcomers to hunting around here appear to not have mastered. As Alec spotted earlier in the thread, I have more issues with the hunt than the fact that we shoot.


----------



## Clodagh (16 November 2015)

Alec Swan said:



			The difference is that those 8 guns are paying for their shooting and the 50-100 riders are on a freebie.  The problem isn't really to do with how competent the guns are,  but what's presented to them.  Few who shoot would be happy,  if the excuse for a poor show of birds offered was that Hounds had been through the day before,  and though I don't believe that Hounds materially influence the birds shown,  Hunting will generally be offered as the 'excuse' for a poor show of birds.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

And the 8 guns don't leave a quagmire of impassable tracks behind them. (Well, ours don't, as they have to walk between drives!).


----------



## Gin O'Clock (17 November 2015)

We have a family shoot and not a penny of income from it. Just expenses on a gamekeeper. We do not own good hunting country so there is little demand on us to provide a meet.
That said, we happily let the hunt run through our land (little/nothing to draw) outside of the shooting season. The fear is that the hounds will push the birds onto the neighbours' farms and they won't return. 
I feel this is an unfounded fear since rarely when I'm hunting, do I see birds pushed out and away. They tend to hunker down and sit tight when hounds run over them, even when being just cast  into a gamecover, I don't remember swathes of pheasants/partirdges being knocked out and away. Yet, I'm unable to convince The Family (!) otherwise and it remains that the hunt are welcome (anywhere) after 1st Feb and welcome (in certain areas) pre 1st October. Estate owners who have that many acres that any birds knocked out will land back on the same Estate, do not feel this fear like most standard-sized farm owners do!

I live in country where shooting comes 1st, 2nd and 3rd! Hunting is not even rated by landowners, such is the gulf between the hunting and shooting community. Latterly, the shooting community is made up of non-horsey farmers or frankly, just non-horsey, non-country people, who rate a good day's shooting by the bag size without a care for the quality of the bird flying over them. This, I feel, is the biggest threat to hunting in our little corner of England: the growing gulf between landowners (and thus shooting families) and the hunting community. It's relaitvely cheap and easy to take up shooting as hobby versus hunting [on horses] such that the numbers who shoot grow exponentially and the numbers who hunt, fall in a converse fashion. Very sad.

I feel that the shooting as a sport is becoming far removed from what it started out as. Commercial shooting is really just pheasant farming and is quite grotesque: the numbers of birds farmed for "wild release", only to be mass-fed and mass-driven onto paying guns who have never beated a day in their lives, have no idea what a keeper has to do and would never dream of taking a brace home to pluck, gut and eat themselves. They eschew eating game full stop. It's revolting their ignorant attitude to it all.
I think large scale pheasant rearing should be abolished. Perhaps without so much investment in reared birds, there would be less fear of hounds doing so much damage to coverts when drawing/running through them. Who knows? I wish something could change to improve the harmony between the two sports.


----------



## Herne (17 November 2015)

Clodagh said:



			I think that is a little harsh - when we hunted we gave 3 meets a year, 1 cubbing, 2 lawn and were full on supporters of everything to do with hunt life. I would never say you can't come on my land and expect to go on anyone elses. I also jknew the difference between drill, mown grass and rough meadow, a distinction that many newcomers to hunting around here appear to not have mastered. As Alec spotted earlier in the thread, I have more issues with the hunt than the fact that we shoot.
		
Click to expand...

Harsh? Oh no, believe me, that wasn't harsh - that was me being incredibly, incredibly diplomatic. 

As is the fact that I have deleted three versions of a much longer and more detailed reply to this.

Suffice it to say that I still think you should consider yourself extremely lucky that all those *non-hunting* farmers over whose land you enjoyed yourselves for all those years didn't treat you the way you, *a hunter* (albeit retired), now treat other hunting people...


----------



## popsdosh (17 November 2015)

Herne said:



			Harsh? Oh no, believe me, that wasn't harsh - that was me being incredibly, incredibly diplomatic. 

As is the fact that I have deleted three versions of a much longer and more detailed reply to this.

Suffice it to say that I still think you should consider yourself extremely lucky that all those *non-hunting* farmers over whose land you enjoyed yourselves for all those years didn't treat you the way you, *a hunter* (albeit retired), now treat other hunting people...
		
Click to expand...

That is a bit OTT in my opinion for what its worth . The op clearly still allows hunting.

The cheekiest thing I ever saw was the wife of a very large estate owner who told the hunt they could not meet due to heavy rain and did not want their rides damaged! I am talking hours before and not days. A very hastily rearranged meet was organised. I think you can all guess who turned up for her day out following hounds and then complained that people werent very chatty.


----------



## Clodagh (17 November 2015)

Thank you Popsdosh. I normally avoid this part of the forum but then I think that surely an adult debate should be possible and blunder back in. Only to remember that it is not and to go away again!


----------



## Clodagh (17 November 2015)

But one more thing! (sorry)...
I don't take part in a lot of sports, but for example are we mean not allowing Speedway on our land? Or motorcross? What is the difference, why is hunting so priveledged?

Herne, your attitude is a lot of the reason why modern hunting people just aren't welcome everywhere.


----------



## Judgemental (17 November 2015)

Clodagh said:



			Herne, your attitude is a lot of the reason why modern hunting people just aren't welcome everywhere.
		
Click to expand...

There's some food for thought.


----------



## Alec Swan (17 November 2015)

I've aired the opinion before and I think that it'll bear repeating;  Just why the antis go to the lengths that they do,  surprises me,  because there are now (or still) those who Hunt who are alienating themselves from country people by considering they they have rights which simply don't exist.  If Field Masters don't truly understand their role,  then they should step aside and make way for those who do.  Perhaps it's that those who hunt consider the myth to be true that they're providing a service by the removal of vermin,  when we all know that's complete poppycock.  

The bulk of those today who ride to hounds haven't the faintest idea of what Hunting's about,  and care even less.  What was it that Jorrocks said?  'Some Hunt to get away from their wives,  some to meet other men's and a few to follow Hounds'.  It was something like that! 

Alec.


----------



## Herne (18 November 2015)

Clodagh said:



			Herne, your attitude is a lot of the reason why modern hunting people just aren't welcome everywhere.
		
Click to expand...

Clodagh, you know very little about my attitude.

I have been an MFH, and I came out of more than a decade of mastership with the hunt welcome on more land, more frequently than it was when I went in. Unlike most people on this forum, my attitude has been tried and tested in real life.

What I did was hold up a mirror to your own statement. What you went on the defensive over was something that you yourself had said.

Don't try to blame me for that...


----------



## popsdosh (18 November 2015)

Herne said:



			Clodagh, you know very little about my attitude.

I have been an MFH, and I came out of more than a decade of mastership with the hunt welcome on more land, more frequently than it was when I went in. Unlike most people on this forum, my attitude has been tried and tested in real life.

What I did was hold up a mirror to your own statement. What you went on the defensive over was something that you yourself had said.

Don't try to blame me for that...
		
Click to expand...

You are making very huge assumptions about other peoples experience and knowledge without knowing who they are.


----------



## Judgemental (18 November 2015)

Herne said:



			Clodagh, you know very little about my attitude.

I have been an MFH, and I came out of more than a decade of mastership with the hunt welcome on more land, more frequently than it was when I went in. Unlike most people on this forum, my attitude has been tried and tested in real life.

What I did was hold up a mirror to your own statement. What you went on the defensive over was something that you yourself had said.

Don't try to blame me for that...
		
Click to expand...

Yes but plainly you have not done enough to prevent the Hunting Act 2004 or to facilitate repeal. I bet you have never campaigned in urban areas?

I lay the blame for the Hunting Act and lack of repeal with the bucolic parochialism of the majority of masters of hounds.


----------



## Clodagh (18 November 2015)

Clodagh said:



			But one more thing! (sorry)...
I don't take part in a lot of sports, but for example are we mean not allowing Speedway on our land? Or motorcross? What is the difference, why is hunting so priveledged?
.
		
Click to expand...

Herne, did you see this bit? We have the space for all sports to take place here (well ones that don't need more than a couple of hundred acres). Why should we not allow hare coursing, if you would prefer the comparison to be with another field sport?


----------



## unicornystar (18 November 2015)

Clodagh said:



			Those of you who shoot, or have a shoot. Do you allow the hunt to come during the shooting season?
If so, how often and to what extent - as in they can run through your coverts or actually draw them (for a line, of course)?
		
Click to expand...

yes our estate allows them anytime during shoot season they go where they go.....


----------



## Herne (18 November 2015)

Clodagh said:



			Herne, did you see this bit? We have the space for all sports to take place here (well ones that don't need more than a couple of hundred acres). Why should we not allow hare coursing, if you would prefer the comparison to be with another field sport?
		
Click to expand...

Yep, I saw it.

Look, I have absolutely no issues with your rights as a landowner to do or not do whatever you want with your land. It's your land. I think it is very obliging of any farmer to welcome the hunt and I fully understand the shooting issue, as I have made clear elsewhere on this thread.

My comments to which you objected are NOT directed as from a hunting person to a farmer. They are directed from one retired hunter to another retired hunter (ie: you) - and that is a massively significant difference.

You stated that you hunted for years. I presume that this wasn't solely within the confines of your own farm. That is what makes it different. You are not just any old land-owner - you are someone who accepted the generosity of other landowners who allowed you to hunt over their land, many if not the majority of whom will have never hunted themselves.

You say that you accepted their hospitality "for years", but then when the boot is on the other foot, you "prefer to keep your own land for your own entertainment". 

It's that latter bit that I just can't understand - and yes, if you had been happily accepting other people's hospitality to go hare coursing, or speedwaying or bobble-hat-knitting, then I would be equally shocked if you then did not extend other bobble-hat-knitters, speedwayers and coursers the same kindness that those land-owners had extended to you. I believe that there is a moral obligation to pay these things forward...

The way you wrote what you wrote, it portrayed an attitude of "Yes, well, when I wanted something in return, then, yes I did allow the hunt to come on, but now that there's nothing in it for me, I no longer need bother"

I appreciate that you do still allow the hunt on after the shooting season - and that is kind, and of course you are not obliged to in any legal sense - but I believe that those of us who have accepted the hospitality of others should bend over backwards to make life as easy for the hunt as we possibly can.

I think that to do otherwise shows disrespect for what other non-hunting land-owners have given to us, when there was nothing in it for them...


----------



## Herne (18 November 2015)

Judgemental said:



			Yes but plainly you have not done enough to prevent the Hunting Act 2004 or to facilitate repeal. I bet you have never campaigned in urban areas?
		
Click to expand...

I do hope you'd like to put a large sum of money on that bet? Very, very large...




			I lay the blame for the Hunting Act and lack of repeal with the bucolic parochialism of the majority of masters of hounds.
		
Click to expand...

Sadly, I think there is a lot of truth in that.


----------



## Herne (18 November 2015)

popsdosh said:



			You are making very huge assumptions about other peoples experience and knowledge without knowing who they are.
		
Click to expand...

You think that more then 50% of the people on this forum have been Masters of hounds? Really? You amaze me...

(and frighten me)


----------



## Alec Swan (18 November 2015)

Herne,  having read Clodagh's previous posts on this subject,  it's been my understanding that her resistance to those who would hunt on her land,  isn't as you appear to suggest,  that as she no longer hunts so she isn't going to permit others to do so,  but all to do with the fact that previously and so presumably now,  those who would enter her land seem to do so with no level of consideration for growing crops,  in the main,  and the level of disruption as a secondary lack of consideration.

We all understand that when a mounted field enter on to the property of others,  there is bound to be some 'residue' by way of their attendance,  but and I'm reading between the lines,  with an apparent and total disregard for the fact that crop damage is costly,  so the lady and her husband have understandably said 'Enough'.  

We no longer have the 'fallow' system which we had 40-50 years ago,  when land was left as stubble and ready for Spring drilling,  and generally Winter drill goes in as soon as harvest finishes,  just about.  A mounted field of 50-100 riders thundering about on new drill is going to cause realistic and unacceptable damage.  If I'm right in my assumption,  then Clodagh has a valid point.

It's high time that those who Hunt showed a little more consideration and understood that costly damage simply can't be tolerated.

Alec.


----------



## Alec Swan (18 November 2015)

Herne said:



			You think that more then 50% of the people on this forum have been Masters of hounds? Really? You amaze me...

(and frighten me)
		
Click to expand...

Is the MoH the only person who has an understanding of Hunting?

Alec.


----------



## Herne (18 November 2015)

Alec Swan said:



			Herne,  having read Clodagh's previous posts on this subject,  it's been my understanding that her resistance to those who would hunt on her land,  isn't as you appear to suggest,  that as she no longer hunts so she isn't going to permit others to do so,  but all to do with the fact that previously and so presumably now,  those who would enter her land seem to do so with no level of consideration for growing crops,  in the main,  and the level of disruption as a secondary lack of consideration.
		
Click to expand...

Alec, that's fair enough. If the hunt and/or it's followers have blotted their copy-book, then that's a different kettle of fish - although, I would still hope that an ex-hunter would be infinitely more tolerant than someone who hadn't - but everyone has a breaking point and lack of consideration is inexcusable.

I was replying exclusively to the quote as quoted. I was not aware of the back-story.

If a hunt doesn't behave as it should, then it can only expect to be barred whoever owns the land...


----------



## Herne (18 November 2015)

Alec Swan said:



			Is the MoH the only person who has an understanding of Hunting?
		
Click to expand...

Nope - but the quote was about hunting people's (and, specifically, my) attitude to Farmers = and in that regard, MoH's attitudes are tested under fire in a way that other people's are not.

Those that have a bad attitude to their farmers do not last very long at all - or, at least, one has to hope for the sake of their hunt that they don't...


----------



## Clodagh (18 November 2015)

I appreciate your defence, Alec, but the ignorance of the 'new hunters' isn't really what made me ask the question although they have certainly coloured our views. It was mainly a friend saying to me that people who hunt DID pay for their sport, just as much as shooting people do, and not seeing the difference.
The hunt met next door today. They came on our land, as we said they could, to go across the road from our main coverts. They also knew if the line led this way they could follow it, but not cast for one in the coverts in the first instant. A fair compromise between two sports I think. I got my horses in, opened all my gates, took the wire off the hunt jumps, shut my chickens in and rounded up my senile old dog, there wasn't a lot more we were prepared to do.

I think the person who said it is mainly not to put any more pressure on the game keeper (who in our case is a friend and does the whole thing for nothing) got it spot on.


----------



## twiggy2 (18 November 2015)

Herne in your opinion do the hunt give anything in return for what they get when they are allowed to hunt over someones land? if so what?


----------



## Herne (19 November 2015)

Clodagh said:



			The hunt met next door today. They came on our land, as we said they could, to go across the road from our main coverts. They also knew if the line led this way they could follow it, but not cast for one in the coverts in the first instant. A fair compromise between two sports I think. I got my horses in, opened all my gates, took the wire off the hunt jumps, shut my chickens in and rounded up my senile old dog, there wasn't a lot more we were prepared to do.
		
Click to expand...

Well, if you did all that, then you are certainly doing your bit. You were fibbing when you said you keep it all to yourself...




			I appreciate your defence, Alec, but the ignorance of the 'new hunters' isn't really what made me ask the question although they have certainly coloured our views. It was mainly a friend saying to me that people who hunt DID pay for their sport, just as much as shooting people do, and not seeing the difference.
		
Click to expand...

Ignorance is a sad thing. Hunters do pay a lot of money for their hobby - but they don't pay the farmers for their hospitality, and it's a bit sad that people don't understand the difference.




			I think the person who said it is mainly not to put any more pressure on the game keeper (who in our case is a friend and does the whole thing for nothing) got it spot on.
		
Click to expand...

Ironically enough, that was me...


----------



## Herne (19 November 2015)

twiggy2 said:



			Herne in your opinion do the hunt give anything in return for what they get when they are allowed to hunt over someones land? if so what?
		
Click to expand...

Good question. In a word, no (apart from the fallen stock service, where relevant, but that is by no means universal).

Most farmers who continue to welcome the hunt would probably scratch their heads a bit if you asked them to say why. I think for most of them it's probably a mixture of not wanting to kill the tradition and a general belief that hunting with hounds does have its place within the countryside - plus, these days, a certain amount of belligerence in feeling that if other people are telling them that they can't have hunting on their land, then they're damned well going to have hunting on their land because it's their land and they'll decide what happens on it, thank you very much.

And that is one of the wonderful things about hunting - there is nothing in this world quite like a British hunt. An average hunt may cover 2,000 square miles of country; have around 100 subscribers; around 400 supporters club members and over 500 and landowners and could cost around a hundred grand a year to run.

That's over a thousand people all working together in a community, raising tens of thousands of pounds, organising anything up to a hundred days of activity over 2000 square miles of country - and its all because people generally believe that it is a good thing. No one is making any money out of it. It costs everyone involved and yet they all still keep doing it because they believe that it "should be done".

And that is one of the reasons why you can tell that the anti-hunters are mistaken. If the motives behind hunting were foul and impure as they believe, it simply would not work. That level of altruistic cooperation just couldn't hold together.

Personally, I am not one of those apologists who shy away from the welfare and conservation arguments either. I believe that hunting with hounds has a definite and beneficial role to play in the management of the British countryside - and that it happens over a larger than single-farm scale - but that is probably a topic for a different thread if people want to revisit it.


----------



## Clodagh (19 November 2015)

It was out of a sense of obligation, and liking the master concerned more than anything.


----------

