|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Boxing Day Hunt; Is this a good thing?
|
Chapelhead*
Ship’s Photographer
# 1143
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ptarmigan:
It is the ritual aspect which is so objectionable.
So it would be better if it didn't involve people on horses wearing hunting clothes?
quote:
Originally posted by ptarmigan:
It is one thing to have slaughterhouses to create meat;
Animals die to give humans pleasure in all sorts of ways, sometimes to provided nice clothes, sometimes a ride out and sometimes for the taste of meat. Eating meat is an option, we can quite well live without it (and would probably be better off if we did so). To object to hunting while continuing to eat meat is to allow the death of an animal to give one pleasure while denying others a similar benefit.
quote:
Originally posted by ptarmigan:
but shouldn't our celebrations focus on the more wholesome aspects of life, rather than activities which are at best regrettable necessities?
Eating meat is not a necessity, and there seems to be much less enthusiasm for opposing the "unwholesome" consumption of a dead animal at Christmas and Thanksgiving than for opposing hunting, despite the fuss and ceremony of the great turkey-fests.
--------------------
Benedikt Gott Geschickt!
Posts: 7082 | From: Turbolift Control. | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sine Nomine*
Ship's backstabbing bastard
# 3631
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by A Lurker in a Pear Tree:
Quite a lot, Sine, it is hard to handle a gun properly with paws.
Obviously then the solution isn't to ban hunting, but rather to give the foxes better training. ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
Posts: 10696 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lurker McLurker™
Ship's stowaway
# 1384
|
Posted
O.K.
Serious answer time. According to Advocates for Animals submission to the Committee of Inquiry into Hunting with Dogs in England and Wales (you can read it here, the site contains submissions from several organisations, both pro and anti), around 20,000 foxes are killed by hunting with dogs each year. This is about a tenth of the total mortality, so hunting does not have that much of an effect on the population.
--------------------
Just War Theory- a perversion of morality?
Posts: 5661 | From: Raxacoricofallapatorius | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chapelhead*
Ship’s Photographer
# 1143
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sine Nomine:
Just curious, but does anyone know approximately how many foxes are killed each year hunting?
The Burns report gave a figure of between 21,000 and 25,000 each year in the UK.
--------------------
Benedikt Gott Geschickt!
Posts: 7082 | From: Turbolift Control. | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chapelhead*
Ship’s Photographer
# 1143
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by A Lurker in a Pear Tree:
around 20,000 foxes are killed by hunting with dogs each year. This is about a tenth of the total mortality,
The Burns report also suggested a total fox populaation of around 217,000 before the breeding season so unless foxes have a life-expectency of only a year hunting being responsible for only a tenth of total mortality seems a low estimate.
--------------------
Benedikt Gott Geschickt!
Posts: 7082 | From: Turbolift Control. | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psyduck
Ship's vacant look
# 2270
|
Posted
Chapelhead: quote:
Eating meat is not a necessity, and there seems to be much less enthusiasm for opposing the "unwholesome" consumption of a dead animal at Christmas and Thanksgiving than for opposing hunting, despite the fuss and ceremony of the great turkey-fests.
You make a good point. I have often, on being asked to say grace publicly over a huge deceased fowl, been tempted to start "In the midst of life we are in death..." My son and I shared a very modest turkey leg joint from ASDA this year, and my wife and daughter had a home-made nut loaf, which we also shared. I did find myself reflecting that the ceremonial presence of the kind of multi-kilogramme gravitational anomaly of turkey-meat that makes the moon wobble in its orbit overhead is something I don't miss from our Christmases. We do have meat, but the Flaunting of the Meat always struck me as an egregious part of the ritual.
(Since we married and until last year, our Christmas dinner was a turkey breast roast from M&S,and four chicken drumsticks from Iceland, arranged deconstructively on the one plate in the middle of the table, for convenience not show. Our children grew up thinking that turkeys were four-legged and had rectangular bodies. Maybe that's why our daughter is a vegetarian. And my son likes construction kits...)
--------------------
The opposite of faith is not doubt. The opposite of faith is certainty.
"Lle rhyfedd i falchedd fod/Yw teiau ar y tywod." (Ieuan Brydydd Hir)
Posts: 5433 | From: pOsTmOdErN dYsToPiA | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chapelhead*
Ship’s Photographer
# 1143
|
Posted
--------------------
Benedikt Gott Geschickt!
Posts: 7082 | From: Turbolift Control. | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lurker McLurker™
Ship's stowaway
# 1384
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chapelhead:
quote:
Originally posted by A Lurker in a Pear Tree:
around 20,000 foxes are killed by hunting with dogs each year. This is about a tenth of the total mortality,
The Burns report also suggested a total fox populaation of around 217,000 before the breeding season so unless foxes have a life-expectency of only a year hunting being responsible for only a tenth of total mortality seems a low estimate.
Yes, but the fox population is at its peak after the breeding season, not before, for an obvious reason.
According to the submission I read quote:
It is estimated that at its peak in the spring, the fox population of the United Kingdom may be over 500,000. By the winter, when mating takes place, some 300,000 foxes will have died. Much of this mortality will be due to natural selection ie the deaths of the weakest cubs. It is estimated that around 20,000 foxes are killed by hunting with dogs.
I couldn't find the source for this, but their figure of around 200,000 foxes being alive at the start of the mating season is similar to the Burns report. I misread this as 200,000 dying, so my statent that hunting is responsible for the death of 10% is an overestimation, according to these figures.
--------------------
Just War Theory- a perversion of morality?
Posts: 5661 | From: Raxacoricofallapatorius | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
'but shouldn't our celebrations focus on the more wholesome aspects of life?'
My general feeling is that however desirable this is, it's not going to happen for all kinds of reasons. One of them is that a lot of ritual behaviour doesn't have to do with the celebration of wholesomeness, but with letting off steam. IMO, the hunt protest has become a form of ritual behaviour of this very kind.
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sine Nomine*
Ship's backstabbing bastard
# 3631
|
Posted
Thanks for the link to the Burns Report.
One thing I have noticed is that farmers and country people tend to be not the least sentimental about animals as city people frequently are.
(Another oddity is that in the US hunting is perceived more as a reckneck, lower class activity. Of course over here we're not talking about horses and dogs as a rule.)
Posts: 10696 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chapelhead*
Ship’s Photographer
# 1143
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sine Nomine:
One thing I have noticed is that farmers and country people tend to be not the least sentimental about animals as city people frequently are.
Partly a result, I suspect, of the Disneyfication of animals - but that may be more of a Hellacious subject.
A proposal to ban all portrayals of animals as little people behaving in a human way - but nice and cuddly and never hurting each other - would be a fine thing.
![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
Benedikt Gott Geschickt!
Posts: 7082 | From: Turbolift Control. | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
Lots of hunting dogs in the States, Sine, though fewer horses. Just think of all the different kinds of hound the American south can brag of: Redbone Coonhounds, Black-and-Tan Coonhounds, Treeing Walker Coonhounds, Plott Hounds (bred for bear), English Foxhounds, American Foxhounds, Bloodhounds, Beagles, Harriers....still ubiquitous. Interestingly, there are Societies devoted to finding homes as pets for abandoned coonhounds (there are a lot of 'em).
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sine Nomine*
Ship's backstabbing bastard
# 3631
|
Posted
True. I guess I was being parochial. Around here it's mostly sitting up in a tree waiting for a deer or a turkey to wander by.
Come to think of it, one of my great-grandfathers was reputed to breed and train the best bird dogs in the state. After he lost both his legs to diabetes he would still be carried out into the fields in his wheel chair to shoot.
As a farm owner, I doubt he would have had much concern for the suffering of the fox. He was more concerned for his tenants.
Posts: 10696 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
To your grandfather, the fox would be a varmint. At least you can eat a possum or a coon. (Do you remember the article in the New Yorker a few years back about an East Coast doctor who believed that he'd found Kreutzfeldt-Jacob Disease among people in the mountains of, I think, West Virginia, people for whom squirrel brains were a particular delicacy?)
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sine Nomine*
Ship's backstabbing bastard
# 3631
|
Posted
Amos, please don't give the Coot ideas for his Iron Chef cook-off.
Posts: 10696 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Poppy
Ship's dancing cat
# 2000
|
Posted
This is the most civilized hunting debate I have ever seen. I wasn’t keen to put any view on the web as I’ve seen how nasty it can get but so far so good.
Personally I don’t like hunting types. They can be arrogant and obsessive about their sport. I don’t see the problem with transferring over to drag hunting and if I went hunting it would be with a bloodhound pack which meets near a friends father’s farm. They hunt people and go much slower than foxhounds. However Hatless said:
‘I don't much mind if people hunt foxes. Many more die on roads than because of hunts. What angers me is the lies told by people who support hunting.’ That will be me then. Thanks Hatless.
‘Hounds will have to be put down? All fox hounds are put down anyway. They don't make suitable pets. There is no retirement for them. When they can no longer keep up they are shot. And probably fed to the pack.’ Yup that’s right. After a full and well cared for life they are put down. Farmers and hunts people are not sentimental about their animals. There is a thriving scam in retirement horses at the moment. People who are too chicken to make the decision to put down and old and sick horses send them off to farms in Wales to be cared for. They disappear into the food chain pdq. If you own an animal then you need to make the decision about it’s death. It is the only humane thing to do.
‘Lost employment? Hunts don't actually produce any marketable good beyond a leisure activity. It's just about money going round. It will go round in other ways.’ So the kennel men, whippers in, grooms etc just loose their homes and move into the town to sign on? That’s ok then. Labour’s revenge for all the miners who lost their jobs during the 1980’s is how it looks to the countryside groups.
‘Fox hunting is not about keeping fox numbers down. Hunting country is full of little woodlands. You can see them on a map, often called coverts. They are there in order to provide habitat for foxes so the hunt has something to do. Hunts need foxes.’ Absolutely right. Much of the countryside is maintained in its present condition by the hunting and shooting industry. When they are banned then there is no reason to keep unprofitable woodlands and coverts. They can be grubbed up or concreted over and turned into housing for townies who want to live in the countryside. Trouble is that there is no money in farming and there will be no money in country sports. Who is going to look after the countryside if the farmers don’t? We could nationalise it and truly become theme park Britain.
‘Calling foxes vermin and saying how much damage they do is just a way of emotionally justifying hunting. It has nothing to do with the realities of farming.’ Sorry, foxes are vermin. So are rats, so are squirrels. Squirrels and foxes are prettier. It doesn’t stop the damage they do. The most beautiful pests are mink. They are really nasty. Just think of foxes as rats in a glam fur coat. That’s what they are. It makes you less sentimental about them.
It is so hard to keep emotion out of this. The nineteenth century romantic movement has a lot to answer for. We invest a lot of emotion into the big green spaces of our country. We find God in mountain tops and rugged places, in glades and riversides but the countryside is also an industry and a way of life to the people that live there. So many people from the towns see it as a place to escape the pressures of city life. It is. But someone owns those woods that you like to walk in to commune with nature. Someone owns the fields that are bounded by hedgerows. They have to pick up the rubbish left by townies when walking on the footpaths. They have to deal with broken gates and sheep mauled by townies’ dogs. Perhaps hunting is the the final straw to the countryside groups. Maybe that is why it has been blown up out of all proportion.
Don’t know if any of this makes sense.
I do know that riding a big horse makes some people very nasty towards me. Hey I’m the hired help. But be nice, my horse kicks and he bites!
[ 27. December 2003, 16:59: Message edited by: Poppy ]
--------------------
At the still point of the turning world - there the dance is...
Posts: 1406 | From: mostly on the edge | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amphibalus
Cloak of anonymity
# 5351
|
Posted
Could I add a brief-as-possible, and maybe slightly tangential, thought to the debate. I, perhaps, need to say that I have no great and passionate feelings about hunting, though my natural instinct (before any application of logic or reason) is anti-hunting - but then I am a townie who came out into the countryside to work after ordination, and have been here ever since.
A good friend and former colleague of mine, now incumbent of a parish even further out into the sticks, went on a recent Countryside Alliance march in London to raise awareness about the real and urgent issues which face rural communities these days: rural isolation and poverty, the need for agricultural diversification, and the problems of farming in an area which has been devastated by foot and mouth and where much farming is on marginal land which is increasingly uneconomic.
She and her husband, both of them children of farming families, were appalled by the fact that the march was then presented by a vociferous minority as being solely and entirely about the right to hunt. In interviews with both local and national media, she was asked only about her attitude to hunting, and was given no opportunity to raise the other, far more important, issues that she had come to march about.
It does seem to me that much of the debate about hunting is actually the creation of an incredibly well-oiled lobbying organisation which seeks to preserve its own lifestyle at the expense of other, more pressing, matters. I am well aware of many cogent arguments which are pro-hunting, but on balance I cannot help but think that - as has been suggested earlier - this is not about foxes, nor is it about hounds or horses, but about a much more basic confrontation between an overly-privileged (but now outdated) way of life and a righteous (but too-piously militant) opposition - and the only thing which will suffer is a sensible and properly thought-out approach to a much-needed programme of rural reconstruction.
But I am more than happy to have my own prejudices and misunderstandings challenged and corrected.....
--------------------
I saw a werewolf with a Chinese menu in his hand
Walking through the streets of Soho in the rain
He was looking for the place called Lee Ho Fook’s
Going to get a big dish of beef chow mein. (Warren Zevon)
Posts: 1471 | From: Home of Ronnie Radford's boot | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sine Nomine*
Ship's backstabbing bastard
# 3631
|
Posted
As a disinterested foreign party, but one who does check out the Guardian, Telegraph, and BBC (I try to be impartial ) regularly, I must say that the stench of class warfare and, frankly, jealousy seems to hover over the entire controversy.
Otherwise, 20,000 foxes hardly seems worth the energy.
Maybe the solution is to take underprivileged children from the inner-city and send them to fox hunting camps. Then all classes will have the chance to be the unspeakable in pursuit of the uneatable.
Posts: 10696 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
What a good idea, Sine. I understand something similar is already being done over here by the angling fraternity, and, up north, there are sportsmen teaching Underprivileged Youth to do fun things with ferrets.
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amphibalus
Cloak of anonymity
# 5351
|
Posted
quote:
Then all classes will have the chance to be the unspeakable in pursuit of the uneatable.
I chickened out of quoting Oscar Wilde - but I'm glad someone has! ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
[Edited for UBB in quote.]
[ 27. December 2003, 18:03: Message edited by: Tortuf ]
--------------------
I saw a werewolf with a Chinese menu in his hand
Walking through the streets of Soho in the rain
He was looking for the place called Lee Ho Fook’s
Going to get a big dish of beef chow mein. (Warren Zevon)
Posts: 1471 | From: Home of Ronnie Radford's boot | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
ptarmigan
Shipmate
# 138
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chapelhead:
quote:
Originally posted by ptarmigan:
It is the ritual aspect which is so objectionable.
So it would be better if it didn't involve people on horses wearing hunting clothes?
Yes. It's the celebratory aspect which is most distasteful and probably damaging to the participants. If it was done in a less visible way as a regrettable necessity, this might be acceptable (but for the fact that it is ineffective method of control). Celebrating the slaughter of lesser creatures is in my view spiritually unhealthy.
quote:
Originally posted by Chapelhead:
quote:
Originally posted by ptarmigan:
It is one thing to have slaughterhouses to create meat;
Animals die to give humans pleasure in all sorts of ways, sometimes to provided nice clothes, sometimes a ride out and sometimes for the taste of meat. Eating meat is an option, we can quite well live without it (and would probably be better off if we did so). To object to hunting while continuing to eat meat is to allow the death of an animal to give one pleasure while denying others a similar benefit.
No, quite different. In one case it is the death which gives pleasure, in the other the eating. And I would say that the pleasure of eating is God-given. In any case there is a slightly perverse line of argument going on here, as foxes are considered vermin mainly because they attack animals destined for the plate.
quote:
Originally posted by Chapelhead:
quote:
Originally posted by ptarmigan:
but shouldn't our celebrations focus on the more wholesome aspects of life, rather than activities which are at best regrettable necessities?
Eating meat is not a necessity, and there seems to be much less enthusiasm for opposing the "unwholesome" consumption of a dead animal at Christmas and Thanksgiving than for opposing hunting, despite the fuss and ceremony of the great turkey-fests.
Because we are celebrating thanksgiving or Christmas, and this involves eating, and some of us eat meat. We are not celebrating slaughter; we are not even focussing on it. We know it happens, but that is not the focus of our celebration.
--------------------
All shall be well. And all shall be well. And all manner of things shall be well. (Julian of Norwich)
Posts: 1080 | From: UK - Midlands | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sine Nomine*
Ship's backstabbing bastard
# 3631
|
Posted
Gee, I would have thought that "celebrating slaughter" would be The Glorious 12th.
Posts: 10696 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ptarmigan
Shipmate
# 138
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Poppy:
This is the most civilized hunting debate I have ever seen. I wasn’t keen to put any view on the web as I’ve seen how nasty it can get but so far so good.
Are you thinking of the Church Times web site a couple if years ago? IIRC a person called "Theo" was raising the temperture, and of course the site was unmoderated and had nothing much in the way or rules and guidelines.
quote:
... quote:
Hounds will have to be put down?
All fox hounds are put down anyway. They don't make suitable pets. There is no retirement for them. When they can no longer keep up they are shot. And probably fed to the pack.’ Yup that’s right. After a full and well cared for life they are put down. Farmers and hunts people are not sentimental about their animals. There is a thriving scam in retirement horses at the moment. People who are too chicken to make the decision to put down and old and sick horses send them off to farms in Wales to be cared for. They disappear into the food chain pdq. If you own an animal then you need to make the decision about it’s death. It is the only humane thing to do.
Possibly true but irrelevant to the point, which was that since foxhounds are always put down, the argument that a ban would cause them to be put down is largely negated.
quote:
quote:
Lost employment? Hunts don't actually produce any marketable good beyond a leisure activity. It's just about money going round. It will go round in other ways.
So the kennel men, whippers in, grooms etc just loose their homes and move into the town to sign on? That’s ok then. Labour’s revenge for all the miners who lost their jobs during the 1980’s is how it looks to the countryside groups.
If Blair wanted revenge on the countryside groups he wouldn't have been so supportive - at taxpayers' expense - during recent BSE and Foot & Mouth crises. The figures spent on subsidising the farming "industry" were staggering. And remember they had recently participated in an attempt to bring down Blair by creating a petrol ("gasoline" in USA) crisis ... even though they the farming community have a huge subsidy on fuel anyway.
quote:
quote:
Fox hunting is not about keeping fox numbers down. Hunting country is full of little woodlands. You can see them on a map, often called coverts. They are there in order to provide habitat for foxes so the hunt has something to do. Hunts need foxes.
Absolutely right. Much of the countryside is maintained in its present condition by the hunting and shooting industry. When they are banned then there is no reason to keep unprofitable woodlands and coverts. They can be grubbed up or concreted over and turned into housing for townies who want to live in the countryside. Trouble is that there is no money in farming and there will be no money in country sports. Who is going to look after the countryside if the farmers don’t? We could nationalise it and truly become theme park Britain.
Problem is, it already is to some extent a theme park, in some cases spoilt by the large agri-businesses. Most farming in the UK is heavily subsidised and if it weren's it would stop happening. If as taxpayers we are expected to subsidise this unprofitable activity, then it is only reasonable that we should have some say in the way it is conducted. Some of the most pleasant farm areas for recreation are run by the National Trust. And I know a small family farmer who looks after hedgerows, woodland, ponds, wildlife, footpaths and even provides a place for scouts to camp and hosts community activities, while at the same time trying to make a living. But leave it to some of the larger farmers and they destroy public rights of way, put up ugly buildings (and acres of concrete) without having to seek planning permission, root up ancient (sometimes 600 year old) hedgerows etc.
quote:
quote:
Calling foxes vermin and saying how much damage they do is just a way of emotionally justifying hunting. It has nothing to do with the realities of farming.
Sorry, foxes are vermin. So are rats, so are squirrels. Squirrels and foxes are prettier. It doesn’t stop the damage they do. The most beautiful pests are mink. They are really nasty. Just think of foxes as rats in a glam fur coat. That’s what they are. It makes you less sentimental about them.
Agree with you there.
quote:
It is so hard to keep emotion out of this. The nineteenth century romantic movement has a lot to answer for. We invest a lot of emotion into the big green spaces of our country. We find God in mountain tops and rugged places, in glades and riversides but the countryside is also an industry and a way of life to the people that live there. So many people from the towns see it as a place to escape the pressures of city life. It is. But someone owns those woods that you like to walk in to commune with nature. Someone owns the fields that are bounded by hedgerows. They have to pick up the rubbish left by townies when walking on the footpaths. They have to deal with broken gates and sheep mauled by townies’ dogs.
Not guilty. I go out walking in the countryside in areas with public access and I try to behave responsibly. And I don't have a dog. Incidentally how do you know it's "townies" who drop litter?
[ 27. December 2003, 20:26: Message edited by: ptarmigan ]
--------------------
All shall be well. And all shall be well. And all manner of things shall be well. (Julian of Norwich)
Posts: 1080 | From: UK - Midlands | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amphibalus
Cloak of anonymity
# 5351
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ptarmigan:
If Blair wanted revenge on the countryside groups he wouldn't have been so supportive - at taxpayers' expense - during recent BSE and Foot & Mouth crises.
Agreed absolutely. My neck of the woods has benefitted greatly from just that - although you wouldn't know it to read the local papers (one Tory and one Lib Dem).
Isn't part of the problem, politically, that there are currently more rural constituencies represented by Labour MPs (traditionally urban and industrial based) than by Conservatives (supposedly the 'natural' rural party); the leading Labour member of the Upper House is pro-hunting - and yet, historically, Labour policy has been to seek a ban on all hunting? I know it's a free vote in both Houses, but there just isn't a clear enough consensus to make headway one way or another without committing political suicide (whichever way it goes).
--------------------
I saw a werewolf with a Chinese menu in his hand
Walking through the streets of Soho in the rain
He was looking for the place called Lee Ho Fook’s
Going to get a big dish of beef chow mein. (Warren Zevon)
Posts: 1471 | From: Home of Ronnie Radford's boot | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chapelhead*
Ship’s Photographer
# 1143
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ptarmigan:
If it was done in a less visible way as a regrettable necessity, this might be acceptable
That slaughterhouses are more acceptable because people don't have to see what provides the food for their plate is, to me, a dubious argument.
quote:
Originally posted by ptarmigan:
In one case it is the death which gives pleasure, in the other the eating.
Not so at all. The death of the fox is not what gives pleasure to most people hunting. Most of the people won't even se the death on any paricular occasion, and if no fox is caught then they will still derive much pleasure from the day out. The suggestion that people hunting derive pleasure from death is a misleading aspersion.
When eating meat, however, only the death of an animal can lead to the pleasure sought.
--------------------
Benedikt Gott Geschickt!
Posts: 7082 | From: Turbolift Control. | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chapelhead*
Ship’s Photographer
# 1143
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ptarmigan:
Possibly true but irrelevant to the point, which was that since foxhounds are always put down, the argument that a ban would cause them to be put down is largely negated.
Surely if the early death of a foxhound is irrelevant then so is the early death of a fox.
--------------------
Benedikt Gott Geschickt!
Posts: 7082 | From: Turbolift Control. | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sine Nomine*
Ship's backstabbing bastard
# 3631
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chapelhead:
The death of the fox is not what gives pleasure to most people hunting. Most of the people won't even se the death on any paricular occasion, and if no fox is caught then they will still derive much pleasure from the day out.
From what I have read, if you like that sort of thing, it's absolutely wonderful. And from everything I've ever read, catching the fox is indeed secondary to the pleasure of the day.
On the other hand, pictures of Mrs. Parker-Bowles on her horse, with a cigarette hanging out of her mouth, don't exactly help the cause. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Posts: 10696 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
M.
Ship's Spare Part
# 3291
|
Posted
- tangent - If the problem is enjoying hunting, or using it as a sport, why does there appear to be no great movement to ban fishing for sport? - end of tangent
Re Caro's comment about hostility to non-hunting riders, I can back that up. I don't hunt, but used to hack around the countryside a bit, which meant crossing roads sometimes. Many people speed up when they see you, toot their horns or pretend to steer towards you - even lorries. Trying to control a ton of frightened horseflesh is no joke.
The whole thing to do with riding horses seems to be fraught with perceptions of class. Perhaps it is partly to do with the fact that one person is higher - literally - than the other?
Posts: 2303 | From: Lurking in Surrey | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ptarmigan
Shipmate
# 138
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chapelhead:
quote:
Originally posted by ptarmigan:
Possibly true but irrelevant to the point, which was that since foxhounds are always put down, the argument that a ban would cause them to be put down is largely negated.
Surely if the early death of a foxhound is irrelevant then so is the early death of a fox.
I am no fox lover. They wreak havoc in my urban garden. (= backyard in USA?) Foxhounds are bred for hunting and killed early when no longer of value. An outright ban on foxhunting with dogs might result in even earlier killing for the existing foxhounds, but it would avoid the ongoing breedeing and killing program.
But neither of these points is central to my argument. I don't mind lower animals being killed in some circumstances. What I dislike is that the death of the fox is celebrated as the centrepiece and focal point of a large public event.
In the past in Britain, people would flock to public execution of criminals. When executions became private affairs, this was - in my view - a step forward. Simlarly, if we culled foxes in some low visibility humane way, I might be happy with that.
[ 28. December 2003, 09:26: Message edited by: ptarmigan ]
--------------------
All shall be well. And all shall be well. And all manner of things shall be well. (Julian of Norwich)
Posts: 1080 | From: UK - Midlands | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bonzo
Shipmate
# 2481
|
Posted
quote:
Not so at all. The death of the fox is not what gives pleasure to most people hunting. Most of the people won't even se the death on any paricular occasion, and if no fox is caught then they will still derive much pleasure from the day out. The suggestion that people hunting derive pleasure from death is a misleading aspersion.
If this was indeed the case then drag hunts would be just as good and as popular as fox hunts. So the countryside activity of the hunt could continue unabated, no-one would loose their jobs and the cruelty would be avoided.
In fact, I believe this to be pretty much true, and I can't see why fox hunts are necessary or desirable when the alternative of a drag hunt is available. I don't believe that 'hunts' would become less popular if they didn't hunt foxes, I think they would become more popular.
--------------------
Love wastefully
Posts: 1150 | From: Stockport | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Caro
Shipmate
# 4122
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by M.
Many people speed up when they see you, toot their horns or pretend to steer towards you
Hi M, Welcome to the boards. Sorry for the slight tangent here, but I found that this problem improved loads when I started riding Western. Same horse, same rider, but people are generally much friendlier. I suppose Western riding has a "Lone Ranger" good-guy image rather than a "Princess Anne" image!
quote:
originally posted by Bonzo:
I don't believe that 'hunts' would become less popular if they didn't hunt foxes, I think they would become more popular.
Yes, I agree. People would feel more relaxed about going along, knowing that they were not entering into any controversy. In addition, if farmers would allow drag hunting on their land (perhaps as a way of making money?), maybe they could be persuaded to let individuals ride the same routes the rest of the time. (i.e. people like me who prefer to ride on their own rather than in a group.)
--------------------
Dear God, be good to me. The sea is so wide and my boat is so small.
Posts: 225 | From: Ignoreland | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chapelhead*
Ship’s Photographer
# 1143
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bonzo:
If this was indeed the case then drag hunts would be just as good and as popular as fox hunts. So the countryside activity of the hunt could continue unabated, no-one would loose their jobs and the cruelty would be avoided.
Once again, hunts can hunt only if land-owners allow themto (and the land-owners might or might not hunt). A wholesale move from fox-hunting to drag hunting might well entail many landowners deciding that as they are not going to benefit from control of fox numbers then they will no longer allow the disruption to their livlihoods that hunting causes them.
"Switch all hunting to draghunting" sounds good, but in practice would be unfeasible.
--------------------
Benedikt Gott Geschickt!
Posts: 7082 | From: Turbolift Control. | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ptarmigan
Shipmate
# 138
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chapelhead:
quote:
Originally posted by Bonzo:
If this was indeed the case then drag hunts would be just as good and as popular as fox hunts. So the countryside activity of the hunt could continue unabated, no-one would loose their jobs and the cruelty would be avoided.
Once again, hunts can hunt only if land-owners allow themto (and the land-owners might or might not hunt). A wholesale move from fox-hunting to drag hunting might well entail many landowners deciding that as they are not going to benefit from control of fox numbers then they will no longer allow the disruption to their livlihoods that hunting causes them.
"Switch all hunting to draghunting" sounds good, but in practice would be unfeasible.
First point - Not always true. There have been a number of disputes between landowners and hunts who have trespassed on their property and caused damage. In the heat of the chaase, if a fox runs through a hedge, the hunt tends to follow without pausing to consulting maps etc.
Second point - most people here seem to be agreeing that fox hunting with dogs has a minimal effect on the UK fox population numbers.
--------------------
All shall be well. And all shall be well. And all manner of things shall be well. (Julian of Norwich)
Posts: 1080 | From: UK - Midlands | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trisagion
Shipmate
# 5235
|
Posted
Just a three small points:
(i) Drag hunting is simply very, very dull.
(ii) The bossy tendency is much in evidence here. It is not for those who hunt to make the case for whether or not it is effective, humane or anything else. If people want to ban it they had better have a pretty good argument for so doing - one that relies on the sort of evidence that they failed to put up before the Burns Enquiry.
(iii) Can anyone seriously imaging our Lord going hunting. The WWJD approach has many drawbacks (see SoF threads passim) but it stopped me hunting. My own choice is not the same as desiring legislation to force the same decision on others.
--------------------
ceterum autem censeo tabula delenda esse
Posts: 3923 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chapelhead*
Ship’s Photographer
# 1143
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ptarmigan:
First point - Not always true. There have been a number of disputes between landowners and hunts who have trespassed on their property and caused damage. In the heat of the chaase, if a fox runs through a hedge, the hunt tends to follow without pausing to consulting maps etc.
Yes, we live in an imperfect world. In principle, however, hunts operate with the permission of landowners and that is the significant point in the "switch to drag-hunting" argument.
quote:
Originally posted by ptarmigan:
Second point - most people here seem to be agreeing that fox hunting with dogs has a minimal effect on the UK fox population numbers.
Whether people here believe that hunting has a significant effect on national fox population is irrelevant. What is important is whether farmers think it affects fox population on their land, otherwise we just have one group of people tying to tell others (who probably know far more about the situation) what's best for them.
--------------------
Benedikt Gott Geschickt!
Posts: 7082 | From: Turbolift Control. | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chapelhead*
Ship’s Photographer
# 1143
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Trisagion:
Can anyone seriously imaging our Lord going hunting. The WWJD approach has many drawbacks (see SoF threads passim) but it stopped me hunting. My own choice is not the same as desiring legislation to force the same decision on others.
I can't imagine Him having a 9 to 5 job either, but I don't think I'll be giving mine up just yet.
--------------------
Benedikt Gott Geschickt!
Posts: 7082 | From: Turbolift Control. | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Poppy
Ship's dancing cat
# 2000
|
Posted
ptmargin, I'm sure you don't drop litter but you see how easy it is for me as a sort of country person to start into the them and us mentality. I just work in the countryside (the family farm was lost to compulsory purchase a couple of generations back) but there is a staggering ammount of ignorance about how the countryside works by the majority of people who live in the towns. There seems to be so much romanticism and wistfulness about the countryside yet it can be a very unhappy place to live. Suicide rates amoung farmers are at an all time high. But every day on the TV there are programmes about people wanting to escape to the country. There are the same problems in the country as in the towns but just spread out a bit.
I can understand the frustration of the countryside lobby even if I don't always agree with how they are dealing with it.
[ 28. December 2003, 19:54: Message edited by: Poppy ]
--------------------
At the still point of the turning world - there the dance is...
Posts: 1406 | From: mostly on the edge | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Poppy
Ship's dancing cat
# 2000
|
Posted
I might even spell your name right ptarmigan if I wan't trying to do two things at the same time. Whoops.
--------------------
At the still point of the turning world - there the dance is...
Posts: 1406 | From: mostly on the edge | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crotalus
Shipmate
# 4959
|
Posted
quote:
M. asked:
If the problem is enjoying hunting, or using it as a sport, why does there appear to be no great movement to ban fishing for sport?
The reason for this is that a large number of fishermen are Labour voters whom the government would not wish to alienate.
quote:
Trisagion:
Can anyone seriously imaging our Lord going hunting.
No, but the Apostles went fishing.
Posts: 713 | From: near the knacker's yard | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lurker McLurker™
Ship's stowaway
# 1384
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Intégriste:
quote:
Trisagion:
Can anyone seriously imaging our Lord going hunting.
No, but the Apostles went fishing.
Not for sport. They didn't live in an environment that allowed them the luxury of killing for fun.
--------------------
Just War Theory- a perversion of morality?
Posts: 5661 | From: Raxacoricofallapatorius | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ptarmigan
Shipmate
# 138
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chapelhead:
quote:
Originally posted by ptarmigan:
Second point - most people here seem to be agreeing that fox hunting with dogs has a minimal effect on the UK fox population numbers.
Whether people here believe that hunting has a significant effect on national fox population is irrelevant. What is important is whether farmers think it affects fox population on their land, otherwise we just have one group of people tying to tell others (who probably know far more about the situation) what's best for them.
I think that since the Burns report, pretty well all reasonable people accept that hunting with dogs is an ineffective method of controlling the fox population, including those farmers who are prepared to be respond rationally rather than emotionally. And I presume you aren't suggesting hunts should negotiate access rights based on some farmers' misconceptions?
--------------------
All shall be well. And all shall be well. And all manner of things shall be well. (Julian of Norwich)
Posts: 1080 | From: UK - Midlands | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ptarmigan
Shipmate
# 138
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Intégriste:
quote:
M. asked:
If the problem is enjoying hunting, or using it as a sport, why does there appear to be no great movement to ban fishing for sport?
The reason for this is that a large number of fishermen are Labour voters whom the government would not wish to alienate.
Very unfair to the Labour party (and unprovable). Angling is the biggest participation sport (if we call it a sport) in the UK, and attracts all classes. The conservative party wouldn't dream of outlawing it as it would upset their own " huntin' / shootin' / fishin' " lobby.
Also "sport angling" doesn't involve killing fish, it involves catching them, though undoubtedly causing them some damage and pain - and then releasing them. And thirdly, in an order of priorities for changing legislation, I think you have to start with the higher life forms, which means mammals before fish.
And in the deep green movement, there are those who would ban fishing for any purpose other than food.
Incidentally, in case it isn't obvious from my previous contributions here, my answer to the question in the title of this thread is "No, not in its current form".
--------------------
All shall be well. And all shall be well. And all manner of things shall be well. (Julian of Norwich)
Posts: 1080 | From: UK - Midlands | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bonzo
Shipmate
# 2481
|
Posted
quote:
Drag hunting is simply very, very dull.
But the North East Cheshire Drag Hunt has prospered over the years.
I simply don't see the argument for fox hunting. It doesn't control the numbers of foxes, in fact habitats are provided to make sure there are more foxes.
It doesn't give any more pleasure than a drag hunt, unless the cruel chase and death is important to you, it puts off many others.
It provides no employment which wouldn't be provided by a drag hunt.
Landowners would make money from the prospering hunts so the quantity of available routes would increase.
So why is it so important to carry on hunting foxes?
--------------------
Love wastefully
Posts: 1150 | From: Stockport | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lurker McLurker™
Ship's stowaway
# 1384
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Trisagion:
(i) Drag hunting is simply very, very dull.
Well, the fox-hunting lobby are always saying "it's not about the kill", so drag hunting would presumably be as much fun for them as the real thing.
--------------------
Just War Theory- a perversion of morality?
Posts: 5661 | From: Raxacoricofallapatorius | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Caro
Shipmate
# 4122
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lurker in a Pear Tree:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Trisagion:
(i) Drag hunting is simply very, very dull.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, the fox-hunting lobby are always saying "it's not about the kill", so drag hunting would presumably be as much fun for them as the real thing.
I think what Trisagion means is that drag hunting is a set route with no unpredictability - you go round the trail and then... go round it again, maybe. It would take a limited amount of time.
This might be dull for some people, but there are plenty who would find it fun - many riders already take part in sponsored rides where you go round a set route and have a great time. I personally could never find riding dull - even on a short plod round the block there is always something new to learn or to see, but then maybe I'm just not very exciting.
--------------------
Dear God, be good to me. The sea is so wide and my boat is so small.
Posts: 225 | From: Ignoreland | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trisagion
Shipmate
# 5235
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bonzo:
I simply don't see the argument for fox hunting....So why is it so important to carry on hunting foxes?
Bonzo, you're missing the point.
Fox hunting is already legal. It is for those who wish to change the status quo to make the argument. The principle in English Law is, and has been for over 700 years that all things are lawful unless they are against the law. Those in favour of hunting have to no more prove the argument for hunting than you do your right to live free under the law. It is for those who wish to curtail that right to prove their argument. They were conspicuously unable to do so before Burns and still, it seems to me, rely on prejudice.
--------------------
ceterum autem censeo tabula delenda esse
Posts: 3923 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
ptarmigan
Shipmate
# 138
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Trisagion:
... Fox hunting is already legal. It is for those who wish to change the status quo to make the argument. The principle in English Law is, and has been for over 700 years that all things are lawful unless they are against the law. Those in favour of hunting have to no more prove the argument for hunting than you do your right to live free under the law. It is for those who wish to curtail that right to prove their argument. They were conspicuously unable to do so before Burns and still, it seems to me, rely on prejudice.
Completely wrong there I'm afraid Trisagion. Do I detect a "the best form of defence is attack" methodology?
The UK has progressively outlawed so called field sports which changing sensibilties have deemed unacceptable. E.g Bear baiting, cock fighting, badger baiting etc. At this stage in our history, for the majority of the UK population and the majority of MPs, fox hunting is now regarded as unacceptable. The Burns report demolished some key claims of the pro-hunting lobby, in particular the claim that it is an effective method of pest control. It isn't. The pro-hunting lobby have all but lost the argument, at both the popular and intellectual levels, and if they don't want to be consigned to history very soon, they need to turn the tide in a pretty dramatic way. The burden of proof has shifted. The pro-hunting lobby are on the back foot.
--------------------
All shall be well. And all shall be well. And all manner of things shall be well. (Julian of Norwich)
Posts: 1080 | From: UK - Midlands | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trisagion
Shipmate
# 5235
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ptarmigan:
The burden of proof has shifted. The pro-hunting lobby are on the back foot.
To take the second point first. I really don't detect the defensiveness to which you refer. I know many hunting people and, whilst 12 months ago they were pretty pessimistic, very few of them think that the issue is still a live one. The Government have shied away and don't look like they'll be back any time soon.
The first point is equally unsustainable. One of the joys of living under the English legal system is the presumption of liberty. Unlike our friends in Napoleonic Code countries, we don't need to prove our rights in law to do anything. It doesn't suit the bossy tendency but it happens to be. So Ptarmigan, the aristotelian principle still applies: he who asserts must prove.
--------------------
ceterum autem censeo tabula delenda esse
Posts: 3923 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Genie
Shipmate
# 3282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Caro:
quote:
Originally posted by Lurker in a Pear Tree:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Trisagion:
(i) Drag hunting is simply very, very dull.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, the fox-hunting lobby are always saying "it's not about the kill", so drag hunting would presumably be as much fun for them as the real thing.
I think what Trisagion means is that drag hunting is a set route with no unpredictability - you go round the trail and then... go round it again, maybe. It would take a limited amount of time.
This might be dull for some people, but there are plenty who would find it fun - many riders already take part in sponsored rides where you go round a set route and have a great time. I personally could never find riding dull - even on a short plod round the block there is always something new to learn or to see, but then maybe I'm just not very exciting.
I've always thought that one way to make drag hunting more interesting would be to give responsibility for organising the route to the anti-hunt protestors. Provided it stayed within the bounds of land where the hunt had permission, it could be made a different route every time. After all, the anti-hunt protestors have a vested interest in making the dragged trail interesting and exciting for the hunters, as by doing so they're preventing the hunt from going after a fox. And since it's not anyone taking part in the hunt who had any hand in designing the dragged trail, no-one has their enjoyment spoiled by prior knowledge of where the trail will lead them.
--------------------
Alleluia, Christ is risen!
Posts: 762 | From: Cambridge | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chapelhead*
Ship’s Photographer
# 1143
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ptarmigan:
quote:
Originally posted by Trisagion:
... Fox hunting is already legal. It is for those who wish to change the status quo to make the argument. The principle in English Law is, and has been for over 700 years that all things are lawful unless they are against the law. Those in favour of hunting have to no more prove the argument for hunting than you do your right to live free under the law. It is for those who wish to curtail that right to prove their argument. They were conspicuously unable to do so before Burns and still, it seems to me, rely on prejudice.
Completely wrong there I'm afraid Trisagion. Do I detect a "the best form of defence is attack" methodology?
The UK has progressively outlawed so called field sports which changing sensibilties have deemed unacceptable. E.g Bear baiting, cock fighting, badger baiting etc. At this stage in our history, for the majority of the UK population and the majority of MPs, fox hunting is now regarded as unacceptable. The Burns report demolished some key claims of the pro-hunting lobby, in particular the claim that it is an effective method of pest control. It isn't. The pro-hunting lobby have all but lost the argument, at both the popular and intellectual levels, and if they don't want to be consigned to history very soon, they need to turn the tide in a pretty dramatic way. The burden of proof has shifted. The pro-hunting lobby are on the back foot.
I certainly detect a "best form of defece is attack" methodology, but it is in ptarmigan's post which quite fails to address the point in Trisagion's post, that it is for those who wish to make something illegal to prove there is a good reason to make it illegal - something that has not, in my view, been achieved in this thread.
The raising of the straw man of bear-baiting and cock-fighting - quite dissimilar activites - shows an argument based on emotionalism with the anti-hunting lobby having lost the argument on rational grounds.
--------------------
Benedikt Gott Geschickt!
Posts: 7082 | From: Turbolift Control. | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
