Gosh, where are you Animad? I was expecting a riposte, or at least a reasoned response! Hunting is a long-proven, effective way of controlling fox numbers, whatever the views of the ignorant Labour lefties ...
Meanwhile, I've got a rabbit or two to deal with tonight!
In view of no response to my earlier posts I take it that I can now assume that RYL members are universally in favour of a repeal of the Hunting Bill. I shall report so to No 10 when the moment is most appropriate ...
However, anyone not actually in favour might instead care to express their reasons/rationale on this debating thread (though the subject was not actually brought up originally by me).
When I was sitting my GCSEs the hunting ban was a big thing, so we studied it in English; I could argue both sites of the ban pretty well, and I don't have a strong opinion either way, except 'what's done is done'.
Nonetheless; the foxes weren't used for food; I find hunting not-for-food to be terribly wasteful.
It doesn't matter where you come from; it matters where you go.
No-one gets remembered for the things they didn't do.
We won't all be here this time next year,
so while you can take a picture of us.
We're definitely going to hell,
but we'll have all the best stories to tell.
But although foxes are not eaten the things that they will eat if not controlled are eaten by us. Hence the need for control. And hunting is the least cruel way of achieving this.
One of the worst aspects of the Bill was the way in which it set town against country and, even now, many country people still seethe at what they regard as ignorant urbanites dictating what they cannot do. Any such divisiveness is a bad thing and I can foresee parallels in the forthcoming referendum on Scottish independence - whichever side wins there'll be serious resentment on the part of the losers ...
From what I remember, there were posters up in my area saying that 59% of people opposed the hunting ban...
And a lot of car stickers on land rovers saying 'Keep your bullshit in Westminster, we'll keep ours in the country' which I found highly amusing.
As Tony said, we don't eat them, but they will eat everything that we eat! We used to breed chickens and had over 20 of them at one point. Fox got past the electric fence, into the shed they were kept in at night and got ALL of the chickens. All of them and it didn't even take most of them! It killed them for the sake of killing them. Total chicken massacre!
Rich, no one kills foxes 'because it's trying to survive'. People kill foxes because they are a threat to their livestock. Hunting is just another way of doing it.
I'm fine! Totally fine. I don't know why it's coming out all loud and squeaky, 'cause really, I'm fine!
Whether or not a rift was intended Epic, it certainly created one - that has still not been forgotten. Of course there are many more townspeople than country people in UK, but in an intelligent democracy the majority don't just steamroller over minorities. I entirely accept that to perhaps most of the urban population the idea of a fox being torn to bits by hounds must seem abhorrent, but for gawd's sake don't ban things until you understand the realities of life in the country. No doubt shooting will come under pressure in due course, but try talking to a farmer whose winter wheat or oilseed rape is under attack from a thousand or more woodpigeons. And without the efforts of gamekeepers the number of crows, magpies, jays and other destructive vermin would mean even fewer songbirds would survive (the RSPB, a wealthy organisation, would actually do more for bird life in UK if it employed keepers for the same purpose; but I bet it never will).
I have heard rumours that in parts of London there are young men conducting a form of urban foxhunting at night with rotties, staffies and the like. If so, what irony!
I don't know many people that are that against the ban, and I grew up in the country. Most people, here at least, shoot if hunting; I don't think fox-hunting is popular here, even though people shoot-for-food all the time. Perhaps it's because a lot of people here are so good at it.
I don't really understand fox hunting personally because it's not efficient; a good hunter could quickly and efficiently cull a lot more, quickly and cleanly.
On a related note, where we live we have a rather terrifying blackbird that attacks animals. It sounds ridiculous, but our cat is too frightened to go outside on her own and mum has spent hundreds on vet bills to patch up her injuries from the bird, and she's so frightened she's lost weight and is pulling her own fur out. It's crazy and dad is too frightened to shoot it in case the neighbours complain (we're in a small town).
It doesn't matter where you come from; it matters where you go.
No-one gets remembered for the things they didn't do.
We won't all be here this time next year,
so while you can take a picture of us.
We're definitely going to hell,
but we'll have all the best stories to tell.
we all got to eat... fair enough to kill a fox that is coming at your livestock at the time, but hunting it is just retarded, I would hate to see foxes extinct, they are such beautiful creatures. if you don't plan on eating something after you shoot it then it is murder. hmm I wonder if that would stand up in a court of law "it's okay your honor I ate 'em after I killed 'em"
To whom I may offend,
hahahahaha
Yours faithfully the monkeys arse
Your blackbird sounds interesting Talaiporia. If I had the problem I would feed it (small bits of bread would do) until it was confident. Meanwhile I'd have an ordinary garden sieve lying innocently on the grass where it feeds. When it is regularly feeding around the sieve I'd then put an 8 inch stick under one edge of the sieve with a length of cord attached to it. With a small amount of food around the sieve and more under it I'd watch from the house and when it went under the sieve a quick pull on the cord should trap it. Remove it carefully with gloves, put it in a bag and take it into the country several miles away and release it.
Male blackbirds are very territorial and defend their particular patch fiercely - hence so many killed on the roads chasing off intruders and not taking enough notice of the traffic.
You can of course make a larger or more subtle net, but I've used the sieve successfully years ago. Let us know how you get on ...
I eat meat. When I have more money though, I want to be, what I call, "an ethically conscious meat eater" - so sourcing local farms and their meats and paying that difference. Or getting it from the butcher who sources local smaller farms. (free range) Or the market up my road have about 3 wild rabbit each week for sale, and that is all they have rabbit wise. (they're an organic farm or something) Obviously I hope they don't damage the population of rabbits, but if it was wild it was hopping free and doing what a rabbit should be doing.
At the moment, I just try to be conscious. I also don't eat anywhere that is halal or kosher because I don't agree with the slaughter method. I know some places slaughtering kosher or halal do stun their animals, there is no guarantee.
As for hunting without the intention of eating and using it all - there is no need and it's barbaric in my opinion. Like fox hunting. I think, if you want to shoot, make a target board, or those clay pigeons you throw in the air.
I also always want to know what I'm eating and make that decision myself. A lot of restaurants have been selling meats as one and it's actually another. So selling imported cat as duck or something (this has happened somewhere I ate once and they got shut down). Just because I am a meat eater doesn't mean I don't have my reservations on some animals, or my own cultural differences. So I don't like places assuming that if you eat meat you eat any meat. No. I want to make fully informed decisions about what I'm eating.
I used to be veggie. Sometimes I think about going back to it, but it makes me sad to miss out on most of my favourite foods, like pie, and bacon, and sausages etc.
The morality of killing something if you're not going to eat it takes us into a whole new subject. If, in urban areas, there were giant rabbits which hid out by day but emerged at night to dig huge holes in people's gardens, I bet there'd soon be an outcry and demands that something be done about it. It's possible that giant rabbits might be edible but even so, no doubt some dreadful EU Regulation would prevent their sale. But if the damage they were causing justified it, they would nevertheless eventually be culled whether or not they were to be eaten. It's actually called pest control ...
I could go out tonight on my quad bike with a powerful lamp and a .22 rifle and trim out a dozen rabbits on the local golf course between 1 and 2 a.m. I couldn't eat them on my own, the local mini-supermarket doesn't want to sell them for me (because of said EU Regs) and I'd probably end up eating just a couple, pegging a couple out on the sands for the Greater Blackbacked Gulls which prey on eider ducklings (and I'd trim one or two of them out as well, for the sake of the ducklings) and I just might be tempted, as I've done in the past, to leave a few of the carcasses in the putting green holes with their heads sticking out, just to remind the golfers that someone sympathises with their attempts to maintain a decent golf course.
But whatever I do, be sure the rabbits will continue and will need culling, just as foxes will, whether or not they're eaten. The whole thing is trying, at least for a time and in a particular area, to exercise some sort of control over pests whose activities conflict with man's. I personally don't find that immoral, but there may be many urban dwellers who don't actually suffer pests who disagree ...
The blackbird lost two litters to a neighbours cat a few years ago and has been savage ever since. My parents have invested in a supersoaker, I think setting a trap would be too much hard work. :p
Tony - there are pests in urban areas, mostly foxes and rats. Some people think there are more rats than people in some cities. It isn't so different.
It doesn't matter where you come from; it matters where you go.
No-one gets remembered for the things they didn't do.
We won't all be here this time next year,
so while you can take a picture of us.
We're definitely going to hell,
but we'll have all the best stories to tell.
Domestic cats probably cause more casualties among urban songbirds than anything else. But, being realistic, how often is the urban cat-owner going to admit to this, still less allow any sort of effective measures to be taken against their dear little moggies?
I'm not for a moment suggesting that we should start trimming out domestic cats, but the problem does illustrate one of the dichotomys(sp) of urban life. In the country, if a cat starts to kill chicks or goslings round the farm, it's very soon going to be dead. Real life in the farm can't tolerate anomalies like that - it's too concerned with coping with the current, everyday threat. Like foxes!
