simple Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 The fox hunting debate is extremely emotive at the best of times and from my point of view as a hunt supporter I'm certain that this is the wrong place for a debate about it but here goes my side. At the end of the day the government has ignored (as with many other subjects not least the war in Iraq) the advice of their own appointed representatives, who recommended that hunting with hounds be strictly regulated not banned in its entirety. They would have been able to pass that as law if their bank benchers had not decided to amend the original motion. There is no doubt that a certain element of regulation is inevitable and a compromise would be beneficial for both parties I think. It is an arguement that can never be resolved in terms of whether it is right or wrong as different people have different opinions and are entitled to exactly that, their opinions. A ban on fox hunting certainly would not be beneficial to the fox population because whether you like it or not as soon as foxes lose the people who like to hunt them they lose their greatest protectors. Make no mistake, coming from a farming family as I do, foxes remain vermin and will be treated as such. You will find that foxes will be shot, poisoned or snared instead and I for one do not wish to see poison or snares out in the countryside, they are far more indiscriminate killers. I don't expect people to agree with me but I would like you to respect my opinions as I respect yours and please bear in mind the consequences of a ban not just for the men and women, horses and hounds that would be instantly redundant but also the detrimental affect the ban would have on the overall well being of the countryside that we all enjoy while driving. All the best Richard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldman Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Yep....Rooney for President.The rest is just too serious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Elworthy Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 does that include car-diac problems?? lets get to the heart of the matter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 My vote goes to the bring back hanging and Burt Jones's diary party! Here here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzz Billsberry Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 Yep....Rooney for President.The rest is just too serious So that will be another muppet running the country Buzz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilwillis Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 I hate to say this, but the hunt lobby were the ones who refused point blank to discuss the possibility of regulations, and a compromise. FWIW, I am against cruelty in any form, and I agree, there must be a middle way (are we back to the monster raving loonies here again?) Trouble is, the vast majority of the nation ARE against hunting, and no amount of protesting by the young farmers/countryside lobby/pro hunt campaign will change public opinion. Hunting is cruel, and no matter how you dress it up, also completely irrelevant in modern society. I once played at human quarry for a pack of bloodhounds in Germany, what is the problem with switching to that form of hunting here? The hunters get to hunt, and some geezer who likes running around gets to run around! goodness me, even an Irish parliament could reach an agreement on something so simple! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzz Billsberry Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 Vote for Stella Artois. That will bring the country to it's knees Vote Stella Buzz Vote Stella you know it makes sense ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilwillis Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 But what's the Stella party's policy on free beer for WSCC members? Come to think of it, they'd end up bankrupt in a year! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrightster Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 I don't expect people to agree with me but I would like you to respect my opinions as I respect yours and please bear in mind the consequences of a ban not just for the men and women, horses and hounds that would be instantly redundant but also the detrimental affect the ban would have on the overall well being of the countryside that we all enjoy while driving points taken in some respects and i also agree that this is probably not the place to debate this subject but i do feel very strongly about it, what i dont understand is the people who are pro hunting go on about the hounds and the horses being redundant and the possibility of some of them having to be destroyed but why is a foxs life less valuable than the hounds or the horses ? personally i think all animals have an equal right to life as with humans and no i am not a vegetarian so maybe i am a hypocrite but thats my opinion - no offence intended to anyone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Stanton Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 Thing is with foxes whether you're for hunting or against - they do and always will have their population kept in check - they are shot, trapped, gassed with dens dug out and destroyed in order to avoid a fox population explosion - they're one of the few animals that have benefitted over recent years from mans improved farming methods and own population increase Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilwillis Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 Quite so, they're a big enough pest in urban areas too now, but I cannot for the life of me see how hunting can ever be considered a viable way of culling the population. Does it really take a pack of hounds, and an equally rabid pack of hunters to chase them down? I'd be less cynical about the whole debate if they came up with proper reasons, and not lame duck excuses to justify what they do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Elworthy Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 Hoorah! Ban Hippies too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidersurfer Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 Fox hunting is complete 8oLL0x! I have lived in rural areas for years and it's a well known fact they even catch foxes only to release them before the 'hunt' (misnomer) so that the nunneys have got something to chase. If they need to be culled then cull them. That's what happens to rabbits, badgers etc. It doesn't need a bunch of overdressed idiots on horseback to chase them miles across the countryside with a pack of dogs, scare it to half to death and then either let the dogs have it or club it. If you believe that the countryside will lose X thousand jobs because a fox can't be chased then I'm afraid that you haven't thought this one through. Why is the fox needed at all? Rant over and I won't be 'baited' into further conversation on this topic! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 Trouble is, the vast majority of the nation ARE against hunting, and no amount of protesting by the young farmers/countryside lobby/pro hunt campaign will change public opinion. Hunting is cruel, and no matter how you dress it up, also completely irrelevant in modern society. I think its interesting how most of the people who are aginst it live in towns or city's and not the country!! Why should people who live in the counrty be told how to live there lives by townies? Im neither for huntig or against it but I do think its a shame that yet another part of our english heratige will be lost forever. I get p******** off with this multi ethnic society crap what ever happend to this country these days if your a white cocasion native to this country your in the minority and I wish some one would stand up and say enough is enough!! As far as the hunting is concerend does it really matter? I mean more foxes are killed on our roads every year than in hunts, seems to me its been blown out of all proportion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilwillis Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 Like it or not, the UK is ONE country, there is no such thing as a townie, or should we only spend taxes raised in the countryside on the bumpkins, and the rest of us city dwellers simply exlcude you from our urban facilities? I dare say dangler fighting, and bare knuckle boxing were also part of our long lost heritage too? Like it or not, you live in a democracy (well ok, maybe it's a one party state) and hunting was part of the last election manifesto. Those few people who bothered to vote gave the government their mandate, and they have voted to ban hunting on at least 3 occasions, face facts, it's history! Frankly this bull$hit about them and us is contemptible. No one says you can't hunt, as long as you don't stand and gloat as a terrified, exhausted animal that has been run to ground by a pack of dogs is ripped to shreds. Maybe it doesn't happen every time, but tell me why that aspect of hunting is necessary? It's barbaric, and this is the 21st century, not the 19th. I suppose badger baiting is a necessary way of keeping the dairy herd free of TB? And the way the bird poulation is being decimated by modern farming methods is just progress too? And another thing that makes me sick is the way game keepers persist in killing birds of prey, some species on the verge of losing their toe hold in the UK altogether. Isn't rooting up hundreds of miles of ancient hedgerow, changing the shape of the countryside forever depriving the nation of part of it's heritage too? You country folk sure know how to manage your affairs - not! From the very beginning, the hunts had the opportunity to clean up their act and behave in a responsible mature way. If they'd taken the chance to self regulate, this situation would never have arisen, so please stop bleating about how your civil liberties are being eroded by us interfereing city folk who don't understand the coutry way of life and it's traditions. Just how many people here have actually been hunting? What's the real difference between a hunt and a point to point? The fact is you don't NEED to kill anything to enjoy a day in the company of like-minded folk. The fact that you wouldn't accept that is why there will apparently be a total ban instead of a compromise. Get's off soapbox, and grabs fishing rod, shotgun, and barbour jacket. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.