[Magic]

What are your opinions on Fox Hunting?
Is it cruel? Or is it beneficial in controlling fox numbers?

A few years ago a new law meant that fox hunts could take a limited amount of hounds with them when hunting, and now must shoot any foxes caught, rather than set the hounds on them.

Is this law right? Or should the traditional way's of fox hunting be once again brought in to practise?

[dupin]

If it was all about managing fox numbers, they could do it in a slightly less vicious way. I'm really against it, it's fairly inhumane...

[MarkWaldorf]

It really angers me that there's actually laws for killing animals in such an inhumane way. I don't think fox hunting should take place at all.

[Magic]

Ban the Ban

Point One - Increase in disease

I reguarly go fox hunting, but I can understand why many people are against the ban.

Over the last few mornings when riding out, a fox in the corner of a field has been watching me. Over the holiday's I have rode right up to the fox, and it hasn't moved. The fox just sit's thier, watching. Through this oppurtunity I have seen that foxes are rather innocent, but I can also see that they suffer from many health problems.

The pack of foxes that this fox (A cub to be precise) all have fox mange, and are very skinny. Back in November we found a fox that had died due to some illness, and about a month later another fox was found.

Since the ban was put in to place many foxes's have died in my area through disease. Although many think that fox hunting is cruel, it does help maintain a species. Fox hunting has been happening for over 400 years, and still their are many foxes around. I have found, at least in my area that since the ban was put in to place more foxes have died through disease.

Therefore, I have seen, that the ban has not really beniffited the foxe's, as a increase in numbers to start with led to a spread in disease, later causing increased death.

Fox Mange, a disease which infects their skin also spreads to domestic pets.

[dupin]

Originally posted by Magic
Ban the Ban

Point One - Increase in disease

I reguarly go fox hunting, but I can understand why many people are against the ban.

Over the last few mornings when riding out, a fox in the corner of a field has been watching me. Over the holiday's I have rode right up to the fox, and it hasn't moved. The fox just sit's thier, watching. Through this oppurtunity I have seen that foxes are rather innocent, but I can also see that they suffer from many health problems.

The pack of foxes that this fox (A cub to be precise) all have fox mange, and are very skinny. Back in November we found a fox that had died due to some illness, and about a month later another fox was found.

Since the ban was put in to place many foxes's have died in my area through disease. Although many think that fox hunting is cruel, it does help maintain a species. Fox hunting has been happening for over 400 years, and still their are many foxes around. I have found, at least in my area that since the ban was put in to place more foxes have died through disease.

Therefore, I have seen, that the ban has not really beniffited the foxe's, as a increase in numbers to start with led to a spread in disease, later causing increased death.

Fox Mange, a disease which infects their skin also spreads to domestic pets.

It's a joke to claim that fox hunting is a good way of helping foxes. It's unlikely I'll be happy that a fox doesn't have to suffer from Fox Mange because there's an alternative which involves being wripped to shreds by dogs.

[Magic]

Point Two - Is the new law fairer?

When hunted by hounds, due to their nature, most of the stronger foxes escaped being caught, and the weaker foxes were culled. This meant that the general fox population was healthier. Now, however, any fox can be shot, and this is meaning that more healthy foxes are being killed.

Despite this, I still think the new law put in to place IS more humane, as the foxes are undergoing less pain.

[dupin]

I don't know why you're arguing if one is more inhumane than the other - they're both inhumane and wrong.

[MarkWaldorf]

Isn't there medical care for these animals then? If I saw a hurt animal or an animal in suffering I would immediately take it to care, not shoot it. It's inhumane. It's nasty. It's cruel.

[Spike]

Fox hunting is cruel and nasty, there is no need for it at all.

[Magic]

Originally posted by dupin
I don't know why you're arguing if one is more inhumane than the other - they're both inhumane and wrong.

So you suggest that their is no control put on their numbers?
And they die of starvation?

---
My view is that the new law should be kept, as it is in most area's keeping the fox population controlled, and disease down.

[molecular]

ye should be banned. ban the ban on the ban

[dupin]

Originally posted by Magic

So you suggest that their is no control put on their numbers?
And they die of starvation?

---
My view is that the new law should be kept, as it is in most area's keeping the fox population controlled, and disease down.

No, but you're acting as if the primary objective of fox hunting is to help control the number of foxes, which it isn't. Most people who fox hunt want it to be legal because they consider it tradition to go and slaughter animals for fun.

[Matt10k]

Originally posted by Magic

So you suggest that their is no control put on their numbers?
And they die of starvation?

---
My view is that the new law should be kept, as it is in most area's keeping the fox population controlled, and disease down.

What makes you think they would starve to death if you didn't go out and shoot them? Is this a service you provide to all animals or just foxes!?

It's like me saying I should be allowed to go out and shoot squirrels because they will overpopulate and starve if I don't. Load of crap...

[Jake!]

Any animalkilling is cruel, fur trade, fox hunting, others, they all really annoy me and I think it shouldn't be happening. Only killing animals for food is human, because its the food chain, but other than that I hate animal cruelty.

[Sunny_01]

I dont like the end product of a fox hunt, I hate the thought that a pack of dogs rips a fox to pieces. There are far more humane ways to cull animals. In York Park the squirrel population is regularly "culled" to stop numbers getting out of control but they dont send a pack of dogs after them.

I think that hunters can get the buzz of the chase out of following a scent trail.

The problem with the ban is noone seems able to enforce it, the police are not interested in enforcing it and the hunters are determined to carry on.

[Stu]

Originally posted by NightMare
Any animalkilling is cruel, fur trade, fox hunting, others, they all really annoy me and I think it shouldn't be happening. Only killing animals for food is human, because its the food chain, but other than that I hate animal cruelty.

Lets have a game of spot the contradiction!

Any animalkilling is cruel

Uh-Huh.

Only killing animals for food is human

Wait a minuet. Why? Because meat is tasty?

[Matt10k]

I think nightmare was pointing out that killing animals for food is more natural. Other animals do it, it’s part of the food chain. Early man killed animals for food to survive. It might not be necessary to survive now but it still seems to make more sense (to me) to only kill an animal for food than it is just for the fun of it.

Even the fur trade has at least some purpose and again this goes back to when animals were killed because we needed their fur. Now we don't but the tradition remains.

Killing an animal purely for sport is completely unnecessary.

[Magic]

Originally posted by dupin

No, but you're acting as if the primary objective of fox hunting is to help control the number of foxes, which it isn't. Most people who fox hunt want it to be legal because they consider it tradition to go and slaughter animals for fun.

I go hunting, but I dont really see the fun in the 'killing'. I think for many, hunting acts as a social occasion, and for farmers as a way to protect their livestock.

Half the people that post here proberly eat at McDonalds, KFC, or eat other processed foods, and the animals go through much more suffering their, than being shot.

[Magic]

Originally posted by Matt10k
I think nightmare was pointing out that killing animals for food is more natural. Other animals do it, it’s part of the food chain. Early man killed animals for food to survive. It might not be necessary to survive now but it still seems to make more sense (to me) to only kill an animal for food than it is just for the fun of it.

Even the fur trade has at least some purpose and again this goes back to when animals were killed because we needed their fur. Now we don't but the tradition remains.

Killing an animal purely for sport is completely unnecessary.

But for many they hunt in order to stop the spread of disease, and in order to protect their livestock.

[dupin]

Originally posted by Magic

I go hunting, but I dont really see the fun in the 'killing'. I think for many, hunting acts as a social occasion, and for farmers as a way to protect their livestock.

Half the people that post here proberly eat at McDonalds, KFC, or eat other processed foods, and the animals go through much more suffering their, than being shot.

I suppose. I very rarely eat processed food, or eat at places like McDonalds so I disagree with the way animals are treated, if what you're saying is true (I don't know much about it so I can't form a valid opinion at the moment.) But does it make what you're doing anymore right because McDonalds kill animals too?

[Stu]

Originally posted by Matt10k
I think nightmare was pointing out that killing animals for food is more natural. Other animals do it, it’s part of the food chain. Early man killed animals for food to survive. It might not be necessary to survive now but it still seems to make more sense (to me) to only kill an animal for food than it is just for the fun of it.

Even the fur trade has at least some purpose and again this goes back to when animals were killed because we needed their fur. Now we don't but the tradition remains.

Killing an animal purely for sport is completely unnecessary.

I agree completely. He probably just expressed the point wrongly I feel. Yes , their is more of a point to it. Heck , im not a veggie obsesser - I eat meat myself.

[Matt10k]

Magic, the point about McDonalds is the best point you've made. People don't seem to care where their meat comes from but then get all elitist when someone wants to hunt foxes. I do understand your points, I just don't think 'social gathering' is a good enough reason to go out and kill foxes!

Sure, farmers have to shoot the occasional fox that's sniffing around their chicken pens but lets be honest here... the upper class men on horses do it for the thrill of the hunt and because it's tradition and they believe it's their 'right'. It's like americans thinking they have the 'right' to handguns. It's archaic and unnessessary and I'm glad it was banned.

[Jake!]

Originally posted by Matt10k
I think nightmare was pointing out that killing animals for food is more natural. Other animals do it, it’s part of the food chain. Early man killed animals for food to survive. It might not be necessary to survive now but it still seems to make more sense (to me) to only kill an animal for food than it is just for the fun of it.

Even the fur trade has at least some purpose and again this goes back to when animals were killed because we needed their fur. Now we don't but the tradition remains.

Killing an animal purely for sport is completely unnecessary.

Yeah, my keyboard is dodgy. Right killing animals fro food is humane, if you were swimming in the sea and up come along a shark who hasn't eaten, its bye. Its thefood-chain, it won't stop.

However, other reasons for killing animals are wrong. Gone are the days were we slip a coat made from a fox because we had to. We are not in the days of Tarzan, there are many more fabrics now, and just today scientists discovered a new one that can mend itself. However, an animal doesn't have alternative, you can't take its fur and say "Oh go to Oxford Street and get a new coat."

And tell me, what does anyone get out killing an animal, of a buying product that consists of it or does animal testing?! Animal testing is ok for medicenes since it goes back to how we've survived today. But who care's if you can get L'Oreal Mascara because it hasn't been "animal tested" to see if it can kill the animal. There are plenty of people who don't ind being testers, and they are not forced into it...

My point proved...

[Matt08]

I totally hate fox hunting, it's very inhumane and fox's shouldn't have to go through a dog tearing them to pieces. How would you like it if a dog came and tore you to pieces?
The stuff about McDonald's and other fast food outlets, i've never heard of them getting wripped apart by dogs.
Also, if the farmer's are concerned about fox's eating their lifestock, then they should ensure that their animals are secured in their compounds/pens safely.

[Jake!]

Originally posted by dupin

I suppose. I very rarely eat processed food, or eat at places like McDonalds so I disagree with the way animals are treated, if what you're saying is true (I don't know much about it so I can't form a valid opinion at the moment.) But does it make what you're doing anymore right because McDonalds kill animals too?

Yes, but at least they don't get shot for "fun", its in order for us to survive. I've seen how meat is killed and it could be done in a better way. But whilst peoplle just kill animals for fun and style, it possibly the most humane way possible in this day and age. What would rather a pig shocked then throat slit (dies instantly), or skinned to suffer long and pain full death?! I know which one I'd rather...