Minister calls to scrap hunting ban (From Daily Echo)
When news happens, text SDE and your photos or videos to 80360. Or contact us by email and phone.
Minister calls to scrap hunting ban
7:20am Monday 26th December 2011 in News
Minister calls to scrap hunting ban
A GOVERNMENT minister today marked the biggest day in the hunting season by calling for the ban on the bloodsport to be scrapped.
Hunting minister Jim Paice spoke out as an estimated 250,000 people prepared to attend meets staged by hunts across the UK, including the New Forest Hounds.
Today is the seventh Boxing Day since hunting with dogs was outlawed by the previous Labour government in 2005.
Hunting in Hampshire has continued, with groups training their dogs to follow a scent laid down by hand.
But Mr Paice, Minister of State for Agriculture and Food with responsibility for hunting, is calling for the ban to be lifted.
The Tory MP for South East Cambridgeshire said: “The current law simply doesn’t work.
“I’m favour of hunting with dogs and the Coalition Agreement clearly states that we’ll have a free vote on whether to repeal the Act.”
The Countryside Alliance said Mr Paice recently visited kennels in Peterborough to highlight what it described as the Government’s support for hunting.
Alice Barnard, the Alliance’s chief executive said: “It’s a point of pride for rural communities across Britain that despite the prejudice and ignorance of some, hunting remains as strong as ever.”
Two months ago it was revealed that no-one was prosecuted in Hampshire last year under the anti-foxhunting legislation.
Campaigners branded the Bill “a massive waste of police time” after it emerged that just 33 fines and 11 cautions were handed out across the UK in 2010.
But the RSPCA today said the ban was working well, with 73 per cent of prosecutions ending in convictions.
An RSPCA spokesman said a recent YouGov poll showed that nearly 80 per cent of the public believed hunting with dogs was outdated.
She added: “Despite dire predictions before it was introduced, many hunts have successfully adjusted to the Act, keeping their hounds and preserving rural jobs.
“Many will today be enjoying the traditional Boxing Day hunt in a legal, humane way without the barbaric chasing and killing of wild animals for sport.”
The New Forest Hounds are meeting at the Balmer Lawn Hotel in Brockenhurst at 10.30am today.
Comments(53)
Stillness
says...
8:49am Mon 26 Dec 11
News Fanatic
says...
9:04am Mon 26 Dec 11
Condor Man
says...
9:11am Mon 26 Dec 11
Condor Man
says...
9:11am Mon 26 Dec 11
Stillness
says...
9:22am Mon 26 Dec 11
Condor Man wrote:Very true, some call it sport. But then again some people call bull fighting sport and some would call dog fighting a sport. I even heard someone say that Portsmouth playing football a sport. I think that's taking things a bit too far.
As with most things Tony Blair did the idea sounded good but the implementation was appalling. Hunting is divisive because it's more than just killing foxes.
Burton Saint
says...
9:28am Mon 26 Dec 11
Hmm - obviously a genuine groundswell of opinion to repeal the Act then.
As Condor Man says, Good idea - appalling implementation. This Act must not be repealed and we must never go back to allowing animals to be abused and killed in the name of sport.
See you at St. Mary's.
espanuel
says...
10:02am Mon 26 Dec 11
Matt Probert
says...
10:18am Mon 26 Dec 11
Matt
Matt Probert
says...
10:22am Mon 26 Dec 11
One should have thought that even local paper journalists had a basic command of the English language.
Sigh
Matt
Boatman
says...
10:26am Mon 26 Dec 11
"I am happy to tell the Committee that the new Government and the new team of Ministers at DEFRA feel very strongly about engagement in Europe. Both the Secretary of State and myself have had previous roles outside politics that involve working in Brussels. We have an element of experience and knowledge, and I have previously been a Minister. We are both committed to engagement as the best way of achieving what is in the British national interest rather than sitting on the sidelines."
and
"Part of our policy is clearly established: we wish to proceed with, to correctly use your word, very substantial disposal of public forest estate, which could go to the extent of all of it."
A man with the best interests of the countryside at heart then!
Linesman
says...
10:48am Mon 26 Dec 11
People are elected to parliament to, where possible, carry out the wishes of the electorate, and the vast majority of the electorate are against blood sports, which includes fox hunting.
Instead of scrapping the law, it should be strengthened. For a start, when they are out with hounds, the dogs should be on leads when on public footpaths and roads.
Stillness
says...
11:38am Mon 26 Dec 11
espanuel wrote:First of all in case anyone is unsure I totally oppose any relaxation in the hunting ban. Bullfighting is still practiced in many parts of spain, along with throwing animals from towers in the name of God. The main reason Catalonia has banned bull fighting was to say "up you" to central spanish government in an attempt to demonstrate there disdain for being thought of as spanish. It's a bit like scotland banning healthy eating to prove that they are not english. usefull try and
Stillness. they have stopped bullfighting in many areas of Spain. The Catalan goverment were the first and it has since carried on in several parts os Spain. Killing animals in pursuit of pleasure is disgusting and inhumane. If this MP wants it brought back let him be chased by the hounds. Sick Barsteward.
voiceinthecrowd
says...
12:05pm Mon 26 Dec 11
IF I DRIVE34 MPH I GET FINED AND POINTS IF I DROP LITTER I GET FINED BUT THE HURRAY HENRYS WITH THEIR BLOOD **** GET NOTHING BECAUSE THE POLICE WONT ACT AND MAGISTRATES ARE BIAST.
SEND OLD PEOPLE TO JAIL FOR NOT PAYING COUNCIL TAX BUT NOT THESE SO CALLED COUNTRY LOVERS GET NOTHING.
IF THIS MINISTER WANTS HUNTING THEN YES COAT HIM IN FOX SMELL AND RELEASE HIM IN THE NEW FOREST TO BE HUNTED AND SEE HOW HE LIKES IT.
WAKE UP MINISTER YOU ARE THERE TO FOLLOW THE LAW AND THE PEOPLE NOT YOUR OVER WEIGHT BUDDIES.
voiceinthecrowd
says...
12:05pm Mon 26 Dec 11
IF I DRIVE34 MPH I GET FINED AND POINTS IF I DROP LITTER I GET FINED BUT THE HURRAY HENRYS WITH THEIR BLOOD **** GET NOTHING BECAUSE THE POLICE WONT ACT AND MAGISTRATES ARE BIAST.
SEND OLD PEOPLE TO JAIL FOR NOT PAYING COUNCIL TAX BUT NOT THESE SO CALLED COUNTRY LOVERS GET NOTHING.
IF THIS MINISTER WANTS HUNTING THEN YES COAT HIM IN FOX SMELL AND RELEASE HIM IN THE NEW FOREST TO BE HUNTED AND SEE HOW HE LIKES IT.
WAKE UP MINISTER YOU ARE THERE TO FOLLOW THE LAW AND THE PEOPLE NOT YOUR OVER WEIGHT BUDDIES.
Stillness
says...
12:16pm Mon 26 Dec 11
voiceinthecrowd wrote:Could you speak up please? lol.
I HAVE VOTED TORY FOR THE LAST 30 YEARS BUT IF THEY REPEAL THIS LAW THEN THEY LOOSE MY VOTE FOR EVER.
IF I DRIVE34 MPH I GET FINED AND POINTS IF I DROP LITTER I GET FINED BUT THE HURRAY HENRYS WITH THEIR BLOOD **** GET NOTHING BECAUSE THE POLICE WONT ACT AND MAGISTRATES ARE BIAST.
SEND OLD PEOPLE TO JAIL FOR NOT PAYING COUNCIL TAX BUT NOT THESE SO CALLED COUNTRY LOVERS GET NOTHING.
IF THIS MINISTER WANTS HUNTING THEN YES COAT HIM IN FOX SMELL AND RELEASE HIM IN THE NEW FOREST TO BE HUNTED AND SEE HOW HE LIKES IT.
WAKE UP MINISTER YOU ARE THERE TO FOLLOW THE LAW AND THE PEOPLE NOT YOUR OVER WEIGHT BUDDIES.
soobear
says...
12:25pm Mon 26 Dec 11
the prejudiced & ignorant being those in favour of hunting obviously.
I have just finished reading 'Snuff', the lastest Discworld novel by Sir Terry Pratchett. It addresses this very issue, in a manner of speaking.
Sir Terry is a profoundly wise man, I suggest all those in favour of hunting read this book.
soobear
says...
12:29pm Mon 26 Dec 11
Scrutinizer
says...
12:34pm Mon 26 Dec 11
hulla baloo
says...
1:42pm Mon 26 Dec 11
Instinct of animals has not changed, is just the word of 'sport' that has been introduced to make it sound barbaric.
No doubt many of you watch nature programmes with lions ripping to shreds a gazelle.
Not a great deal of difference.
Stillness
says...
1:54pm Mon 26 Dec 11
hulla baloo wrote:Yeah, and the fact that the lions are kept in kennels and that they are followed by the members of the hunt on horseback dressed in their finest makes it exactly the same doesn't it? I think if you look a little closer, or at least open your eyes you will see the lions in your example are hunting to survive and not so that some numpty on a horse can wipe fox blood on his children's faces.
Seems we have a majority against fox hunting. If we go back many years, natural instinct would dictate that pack dogs running wild would chase and kill a fox to survive.
Instinct of animals has not changed, is just the word of 'sport' that has been introduced to make it sound barbaric.
No doubt many of you watch nature programmes with lions ripping to shreds a gazelle.
Not a great deal of difference.
hulla baloo
says...
2:16pm Mon 26 Dec 11
Stillness wrote:The point I am trying to make is that they are only doing what instinctively comes natural to them. Survival.
hulla baloo wrote: Seems we have a majority against fox hunting. If we go back many years, natural instinct would dictate that pack dogs running wild would chase and kill a fox to survive. Instinct of animals has not changed, is just the word of 'sport' that has been introduced to make it sound barbaric. No doubt many of you watch nature programmes with lions ripping to shreds a gazelle. Not a great deal of difference.Yeah, and the fact that the lions are kept in kennels and that they are followed by the members of the hunt on horseback dressed in their finest makes it exactly the same doesn't it? I think if you look a little closer, or at least open your eyes you will see the lions in your example are hunting to survive and not so that some numpty on a horse can wipe fox blood on his children's faces.
Only difference being the hounds are followed by horsemen.
No doubt if these same people went on safari they would enjoy the spectacle of the lions kill.
Lone Ranger.
says...
2:21pm Mon 26 Dec 11
.
He obviously doesnt feel that there is nothing else in this world worth worrying about apart from his **** for blood from a ripped up LIVE animal
IrisPeter
says...
3:06pm Mon 26 Dec 11
IrisPeter
says...
3:07pm Mon 26 Dec 11
geoff51
says...
4:18pm Mon 26 Dec 11
It is all to do with the politics of it, Labour banned it as it was percieved to be a toffs sport and did not fit in with their utopian dream of a socialist government controlled state.
If they had extended the ban to fishing it would have proved that it was a non political act against cruelty, but of course fishing is a working mans/labour voters sport and that would have lost them support from their grass roots voters.
Repeal this unworkable law and allow hunting to return to the control of those who understand the countryside and its vermin control policies, not use it as a political football as it is at present.
Stillness
says...
4:48pm Mon 26 Dec 11
geoff51 wrote:Why is it unworkable? If you say that hunting will carry on regardless of being illegal you may as well make all other crimes legal as well as despite being illegal crime still happens. Why should society stop prosecuting some criminals just because they can ride a horse?
The ban on hunting has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it is or is not a cruel sport.
It is all to do with the politics of it, Labour banned it as it was percieved to be a toffs sport and did not fit in with their utopian dream of a socialist government controlled state.
If they had extended the ban to fishing it would have proved that it was a non political act against cruelty, but of course fishing is a working mans/labour voters sport and that would have lost them support from their grass roots voters.
Repeal this unworkable law and allow hunting to return to the control of those who understand the countryside and its vermin control policies, not use it as a political football as it is at present.
freefinker
says...
4:55pm Mon 26 Dec 11
geoff51 wrote:.. geoff51, I find myself, quite unexpectedly, in agreement with your initial analysis.
The ban on hunting has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it is or is not a cruel sport.
It is all to do with the politics of it, Labour banned it as it was percieved to be a toffs sport and did not fit in with their utopian dream of a socialist government controlled state.
If they had extended the ban to fishing it would have proved that it was a non political act against cruelty, but of course fishing is a working mans/labour voters sport and that would have lost them support from their grass roots voters.
Repeal this unworkable law and allow hunting to return to the control of those who understand the countryside and its vermin control policies, not use it as a political football as it is at present.
However I thoroughly disagree with your conclusion. Angling should join the list of cruel and barbaric bloodsports. Ban it and the sooner the better.
freefinker
says...
4:59pm Mon 26 Dec 11
geoff51 wrote:.. and what a horrid photo.
The ban on hunting has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it is or is not a cruel sport.
It is all to do with the politics of it, Labour banned it as it was percieved to be a toffs sport and did not fit in with their utopian dream of a socialist government controlled state.
If they had extended the ban to fishing it would have proved that it was a non political act against cruelty, but of course fishing is a working mans/labour voters sport and that would have lost them support from their grass roots voters.
Repeal this unworkable law and allow hunting to return to the control of those who understand the countryside and its vermin control policies, not use it as a political football as it is at present.
.. but then, I suppose, it's appropriate for a person with such horrid beliefs.
Stillness
says...
5:12pm Mon 26 Dec 11
freefinker wrote:That's his face? I thought it was a picture of his horses backside. I once saw a Boxer dog that looked like that but then he was chewing a wasp at the time.
geoff51 wrote:.. and what a horrid photo.
The ban on hunting has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it is or is not a cruel sport.
It is all to do with the politics of it, Labour banned it as it was percieved to be a toffs sport and did not fit in with their utopian dream of a socialist government controlled state.
If they had extended the ban to fishing it would have proved that it was a non political act against cruelty, but of course fishing is a working mans/labour voters sport and that would have lost them support from their grass roots voters.
Repeal this unworkable law and allow hunting to return to the control of those who understand the countryside and its vermin control policies, not use it as a political football as it is at present.
.. but then, I suppose, it's appropriate for a person with such horrid beliefs.
TimTam
says...
5:21pm Mon 26 Dec 11
Looking on the bright side, at least Prince Philip wasn't up to shooting any pheasants today although Kate has been taking shooting lessons!
dockboy
says...
5:25pm Mon 26 Dec 11
freefinker wrote:The difference being that fish, if they are not taken home to be eaten are thrown back, for the most part relatively unharmed.
geoff51 wrote: The ban on hunting has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it is or is not a cruel sport. It is all to do with the politics of it, Labour banned it as it was percieved to be a toffs sport and did not fit in with their utopian dream of a socialist government controlled state. If they had extended the ban to fishing it would have proved that it was a non political act against cruelty, but of course fishing is a working mans/labour voters sport and that would have lost them support from their grass roots voters. Repeal this unworkable law and allow hunting to return to the control of those who understand the countryside and its vermin control policies, not use it as a political football as it is at present... geoff51, I find myself, quite unexpectedly, in agreement with your initial analysis. However I thoroughly disagree with your conclusion. Angling should join the list of cruel and barbaric bloodsports. Ban it and the sooner the better.
Whereas a pack of dogs will rip a fox to pieces for the pleasure of some toffey nosed sickos with no second chance.
geoff51
says...
5:26pm Mon 26 Dec 11
Stillness wrote:The reason I say it is unworkable is that police time is better spent on catching thieves muggers and crooks than wasting time investigating complaints made by sabatuers with an axe to grind.
geoff51 wrote:Why is it unworkable? If you say that hunting will carry on regardless of being illegal you may as well make all other crimes legal as well as despite being illegal crime still happens. Why should society stop prosecuting some criminals just because they can ride a horse?
The ban on hunting has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it is or is not a cruel sport.
It is all to do with the politics of it, Labour banned it as it was percieved to be a toffs sport and did not fit in with their utopian dream of a socialist government controlled state.
If they had extended the ban to fishing it would have proved that it was a non political act against cruelty, but of course fishing is a working mans/labour voters sport and that would have lost them support from their grass roots voters.
Repeal this unworkable law and allow hunting to return to the control of those who understand the countryside and its vermin control policies, not use it as a political football as it is at present.
geoff51
says...
5:28pm Mon 26 Dec 11
dockboy wrote:Sorry did you ask the fish if they minded being hooked in the mouth and thrown back on a regular basis?
freefinker wrote:The difference being that fish, if they are not taken home to be eaten are thrown back, for the most part relatively unharmed.
geoff51 wrote: The ban on hunting has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it is or is not a cruel sport. It is all to do with the politics of it, Labour banned it as it was percieved to be a toffs sport and did not fit in with their utopian dream of a socialist government controlled state. If they had extended the ban to fishing it would have proved that it was a non political act against cruelty, but of course fishing is a working mans/labour voters sport and that would have lost them support from their grass roots voters. Repeal this unworkable law and allow hunting to return to the control of those who understand the countryside and its vermin control policies, not use it as a political football as it is at present... geoff51, I find myself, quite unexpectedly, in agreement with your initial analysis. However I thoroughly disagree with your conclusion. Angling should join the list of cruel and barbaric bloodsports. Ban it and the sooner the better.
Whereas a pack of dogs will rip a fox to pieces for the pleasure of some toffey nosed sickos with no second chance.
dockboy
says...
5:35pm Mon 26 Dec 11
hulla baloo wrote:Why would a pack of dogs need to chase a fox in order to survive. The instincts of these dogs has changed, as with many breeds of domestic animals they have been bred for a specific purpose.
Seems we have a majority against fox hunting. If we go back many years, natural instinct would dictate that pack dogs running wild would chase and kill a fox to survive. Instinct of animals has not changed, is just the word of 'sport' that has been introduced to make it sound barbaric. No doubt many of you watch nature programmes with lions ripping to shreds a gazelle. Not a great deal of difference.
To compare this "sport" with survival in the wild shows you really don't have much of a clue about the animal kingdom.
Linesman
says...
5:44pm Mon 26 Dec 11
geoff51 wrote:For a start, most fish that are caught are either eaten or returned to the water ALIVE!.
The ban on hunting has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it is or is not a cruel sport.
It is all to do with the politics of it, Labour banned it as it was percieved to be a toffs sport and did not fit in with their utopian dream of a socialist government controlled state.
If they had extended the ban to fishing it would have proved that it was a non political act against cruelty, but of course fishing is a working mans/labour voters sport and that would have lost them support from their grass roots voters.
Repeal this unworkable law and allow hunting to return to the control of those who understand the countryside and its vermin control policies, not use it as a political football as it is at present.
So you think that fishing is a 'working man's sport.' How, exactly, do you define 'a working man'? I very much doubt that you will find many roadsweepers, farm labourers or hospital orderlies that will be found fishing on a stretch of the Test. Hythe Pier, maybe, The Test, most unlikely.
If you and they are so keen on vermin control, why don't they, and you, get a job as a rat catcher?
dockboy
says...
5:48pm Mon 26 Dec 11
geoff51 wrote:Don't be so silly, fish can't talk, so you'd never get a straight answer.
dockboy wrote:Sorry did you ask the fish if they minded being hooked in the mouth and thrown back on a regular basis?freefinker wrote:The difference being that fish, if they are not taken home to be eaten are thrown back, for the most part relatively unharmed. Whereas a pack of dogs will rip a fox to pieces for the pleasure of some toffey nosed sickos with no second chance.geoff51 wrote: The ban on hunting has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it is or is not a cruel sport. It is all to do with the politics of it, Labour banned it as it was percieved to be a toffs sport and did not fit in with their utopian dream of a socialist government controlled state. If they had extended the ban to fishing it would have proved that it was a non political act against cruelty, but of course fishing is a working mans/labour voters sport and that would have lost them support from their grass roots voters. Repeal this unworkable law and allow hunting to return to the control of those who understand the countryside and its vermin control policies, not use it as a political football as it is at present... geoff51, I find myself, quite unexpectedly, in agreement with your initial analysis. However I thoroughly disagree with your conclusion. Angling should join the list of cruel and barbaric bloodsports. Ban it and the sooner the better.
Stillness
says...
6:09pm Mon 26 Dec 11
Linesman
says...
6:50pm Mon 26 Dec 11
Stillness wrote:Drown?
My thoughts are with all the worms that drown when people go fishing.
They are being taught to swim so that they don't drown!
X Old Bill
says...
7:05pm Mon 26 Dec 11
That demonstrates that the speaker (or writer) knows all about hunting from films, books and the tabloid press.
If they had actually been out in the field when legal hunting was practised then they would have seen with their own eyes that both supporters and opponents came from all social classes.
It is just perceived as a 'class thing' because the mounted field, which was just one part of the process, need/ed money to keep horses, and take odd days off work. The actual hunt staff, who run the whole thing, are just ordinary working class people, as were large numbers of foot followers.
.
The main reasons that the Act is claimed to be unworkable are:
Schedule 1 - Exempt Hunting,
and
Part 1 Section 4 , which gives an actual statutory defence.
.
Foxes are still being flushed and killed, quite legally, Pursuit is no longer allowed but 'accidentally' picking up a scent which engaged in trail or drag hunting may give the impression that illegal hunting is taking place - That might be so, but it would be nearly impossible prove in a Court under the existing wording of the Act.
geoff51
says...
7:36pm Mon 26 Dec 11
dockboy wrote:No maybe they cant but then neither is the Fox a fluffy wuffy creature that the antis make out he is. A Fox is vermin and a wanton killer and should be controlled by hunting
geoff51 wrote:Don't be so silly, fish can't talk, so you'd never get a straight answer.
dockboy wrote:Sorry did you ask the fish if they minded being hooked in the mouth and thrown back on a regular basis?freefinker wrote:The difference being that fish, if they are not taken home to be eaten are thrown back, for the most part relatively unharmed. Whereas a pack of dogs will rip a fox to pieces for the pleasure of some toffey nosed sickos with no second chance.geoff51 wrote: The ban on hunting has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it is or is not a cruel sport. It is all to do with the politics of it, Labour banned it as it was percieved to be a toffs sport and did not fit in with their utopian dream of a socialist government controlled state. If they had extended the ban to fishing it would have proved that it was a non political act against cruelty, but of course fishing is a working mans/labour voters sport and that would have lost them support from their grass roots voters. Repeal this unworkable law and allow hunting to return to the control of those who understand the countryside and its vermin control policies, not use it as a political football as it is at present... geoff51, I find myself, quite unexpectedly, in agreement with your initial analysis. However I thoroughly disagree with your conclusion. Angling should join the list of cruel and barbaric bloodsports. Ban it and the sooner the better.
geoff51
says...
7:36pm Mon 26 Dec 11
dockboy wrote:No maybe they cant but then neither is the Fox a fluffy wuffy creature that the antis make out he is. A Fox is vermin and a wanton killer and should be controlled by hunting
geoff51 wrote:Don't be so silly, fish can't talk, so you'd never get a straight answer.
dockboy wrote:Sorry did you ask the fish if they minded being hooked in the mouth and thrown back on a regular basis?freefinker wrote:The difference being that fish, if they are not taken home to be eaten are thrown back, for the most part relatively unharmed. Whereas a pack of dogs will rip a fox to pieces for the pleasure of some toffey nosed sickos with no second chance.geoff51 wrote: The ban on hunting has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it is or is not a cruel sport. It is all to do with the politics of it, Labour banned it as it was percieved to be a toffs sport and did not fit in with their utopian dream of a socialist government controlled state. If they had extended the ban to fishing it would have proved that it was a non political act against cruelty, but of course fishing is a working mans/labour voters sport and that would have lost them support from their grass roots voters. Repeal this unworkable law and allow hunting to return to the control of those who understand the countryside and its vermin control policies, not use it as a political football as it is at present... geoff51, I find myself, quite unexpectedly, in agreement with your initial analysis. However I thoroughly disagree with your conclusion. Angling should join the list of cruel and barbaric bloodsports. Ban it and the sooner the better.
Stillness
says...
8:16pm Mon 26 Dec 11
Linesman wrote:OK fishing with worms can continue as long as all worms are provided with life jackets.
Stillness wrote:Drown?
My thoughts are with all the worms that drown when people go fishing.
They are being taught to swim so that they don't drown!
freefinker
says...
8:22pm Mon 26 Dec 11
geoff51 wrote:.. no, a fox is just one of many species that make up diversity of nature.
dockboy wrote:No maybe they cant but then neither is the Fox a fluffy wuffy creature that the antis make out he is. A Fox is vermin and a wanton killer and should be controlled by hunting
geoff51 wrote:Don't be so silly, fish can't talk, so you'd never get a straight answer.
dockboy wrote:Sorry did you ask the fish if they minded being hooked in the mouth and thrown back on a regular basis?freefinker wrote:The difference being that fish, if they are not taken home to be eaten are thrown back, for the most part relatively unharmed. Whereas a pack of dogs will rip a fox to pieces for the pleasure of some toffey nosed sickos with no second chance.geoff51 wrote: The ban on hunting has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it is or is not a cruel sport. It is all to do with the politics of it, Labour banned it as it was percieved to be a toffs sport and did not fit in with their utopian dream of a socialist government controlled state. If they had extended the ban to fishing it would have proved that it was a non political act against cruelty, but of course fishing is a working mans/labour voters sport and that would have lost them support from their grass roots voters. Repeal this unworkable law and allow hunting to return to the control of those who understand the countryside and its vermin control policies, not use it as a political football as it is at present... geoff51, I find myself, quite unexpectedly, in agreement with your initial analysis. However I thoroughly disagree with your conclusion. Angling should join the list of cruel and barbaric bloodsports. Ban it and the sooner the better.
Yes it will kill to survive, as do almost all omnivores and carnivores. If left to their own devices their population levels adjust to the available food supply - as with all wild species.
The worse 'wanton killer' in both this country and globally is our own species. In the UK alone we deliberately kill over 700 million animals a year and inadvertently kill many more millions.
What's more, it is again our own species that is by far the biggest and most destructive pest on this planet. We are in the middle of an exponential growth in numbers that has taken the worlds population from 2.5 billion to 7 billion in my lifetime.
We are already exceeding the planet's ability to recycle the wastes we create and our alteration of the planetary climate will have dire consequences for the long-tern survival of our children and grandchildren.
And you have a go at the fox!!! A species of almost pure innocence compared to Homo sapiens.
Stillness
says...
8:24pm Mon 26 Dec 11
freefinker wrote:I'll second all of that.
geoff51 wrote:.. no, a fox is just one of many species that make up diversity of nature.
dockboy wrote:No maybe they cant but then neither is the Fox a fluffy wuffy creature that the antis make out he is. A Fox is vermin and a wanton killer and should be controlled by hunting
geoff51 wrote:Don't be so silly, fish can't talk, so you'd never get a straight answer.
dockboy wrote:Sorry did you ask the fish if they minded being hooked in the mouth and thrown back on a regular basis?freefinker wrote:The difference being that fish, if they are not taken home to be eaten are thrown back, for the most part relatively unharmed. Whereas a pack of dogs will rip a fox to pieces for the pleasure of some toffey nosed sickos with no second chance.geoff51 wrote: The ban on hunting has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it is or is not a cruel sport. It is all to do with the politics of it, Labour banned it as it was percieved to be a toffs sport and did not fit in with their utopian dream of a socialist government controlled state. If they had extended the ban to fishing it would have proved that it was a non political act against cruelty, but of course fishing is a working mans/labour voters sport and that would have lost them support from their grass roots voters. Repeal this unworkable law and allow hunting to return to the control of those who understand the countryside and its vermin control policies, not use it as a political football as it is at present... geoff51, I find myself, quite unexpectedly, in agreement with your initial analysis. However I thoroughly disagree with your conclusion. Angling should join the list of cruel and barbaric bloodsports. Ban it and the sooner the better.
Yes it will kill to survive, as do almost all omnivores and carnivores. If left to their own devices their population levels adjust to the available food supply - as with all wild species.
The worse 'wanton killer' in both this country and globally is our own species. In the UK alone we deliberately kill over 700 million animals a year and inadvertently kill many more millions.
What's more, it is again our own species that is by far the biggest and most destructive pest on this planet. We are in the middle of an exponential growth in numbers that has taken the worlds population from 2.5 billion to 7 billion in my lifetime.
We are already exceeding the planet's ability to recycle the wastes we create and our alteration of the planetary climate will have dire consequences for the long-tern survival of our children and grandchildren.
And you have a go at the fox!!! A species of almost pure innocence compared to Homo sapiens.
J.P.M
says...
10:06pm Mon 26 Dec 11
The biggest problem I have with the hunt of foxes, is the perverted extravaganza, of toffs on horses. Don't get me wrong, I am a landowner in more than one country, and I earn 4 times the average wage: but, the perversion of "asserting" middle class right to hunt makes me sick. I know many of the hampshire hunting set, and they are stuck in another world, that died out 60 years ago.
Keep the ban, and let them get their perverted assertions in some other way - they used to meet in simons Wine Bar and swap car keys 10 years ago - let that continue, but keep them away from the natural habitat of the country.
Linesman
says...
9:16am Tue 27 Dec 11
Stillness wrote:Pointless in adding bouyancy when they are diving, with a safety line attached.
Linesman wrote:OK fishing with worms can continue as long as all worms are provided with life jackets.
Stillness wrote:Drown?
My thoughts are with all the worms that drown when people go fishing.
They are being taught to swim so that they don't drown!
You really are a Silly Billy!
Stillness
says...
9:38am Tue 27 Dec 11
Linesman wrote:Please do not divulge my real name on here again.
Stillness wrote:Pointless in adding bouyancy when they are diving, with a safety line attached.
Linesman wrote:OK fishing with worms can continue as long as all worms are provided with life jackets.
Stillness wrote:Drown?
My thoughts are with all the worms that drown when people go fishing.
They are being taught to swim so that they don't drown!
You really are a Silly Billy!
X Old Bill
says...
11:55am Tue 27 Dec 11
Linesman wrote:There could be a niche market in worm SCUBA kit, unless you think they would be OK 'free diving' with just a snorkel and mask. - Fins might be a problem though.
Stillness wrote:Pointless in adding bouyancy when they are diving, with a safety line attached.
Linesman wrote:OK fishing with worms can continue as long as all worms are provided with life jackets.
Stillness wrote:Drown?
My thoughts are with all the worms that drown when people go fishing.
They are being taught to swim so that they don't drown!
You really are a Silly Billy!
bobbyboy
says...
12:11pm Tue 27 Dec 11
Stillness
says...
2:25pm Tue 27 Dec 11
bobbyboy wrote:Ive got to agree. It's about time we tried working with nature rather than trying to bend nature to our will. Nature is far bigger than us. We will be the loser's.
For many nights this year and last night i have videod foxes on my lawn with the nieghbourhood cats sat watching (despells the fear that they kill cats) they the foxes have sat along side hedgehogs feeding happily together. this is on my front lawn that is open plan on an estate in southampton they cuase no problems what so ever they did not tear open the binbags during the strike unlike some moronic hoodies who thought it would be funny. Now the piont of all this dribble is us humans should learn to live along side the wildlife we have no need what so ever to kill it either for culling or spotty faced sport. Live and let live we have little wildlife left in this country dispite the words of those with a guns and dogs they are itching to use for there gratification poor souls they should stick with titbits that they grew up with or the page three hidden in the times. Lets keep hunting banned and badger culling they did not bring cows into there field the farmers did think on.
DiscoPig (dj)
says...
10:54pm Mon 9 Jan 12
geoff51 wrote:When you say vermin do you mean the fox or the fox-hunter??In my humble opinion Animals on horse back chasing another predator just for fun probably have less real intelligence than the chickens hunted by the latter!!!Oh but then you don't see many foxes engaging
dockboy wrote:No maybe they cant but then neither is the Fox a fluffy wuffy creature that the antis make out he is. A Fox is vermin and a wanton killer and should be controlled by hunting
geoff51 wrote:Don't be so silly, fish can't talk, so you'd never get a straight answer.
dockboy wrote:Sorry did you ask the fish if they minded being hooked in the mouth and thrown back on a regular basis?freefinker wrote:The difference being that fish, if they are not taken home to be eaten are thrown back, for the most part relatively unharmed. Whereas a pack of dogs will rip a fox to pieces for the pleasure of some toffey nosed sickos with no second chance.geoff51 wrote: The ban on hunting has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it is or is not a cruel sport. It is all to do with the politics of it, Labour banned it as it was percieved to be a toffs sport and did not fit in with their utopian dream of a socialist government controlled state. If they had extended the ban to fishing it would have proved that it was a non political act against cruelty, but of course fishing is a working mans/labour voters sport and that would have lost them support from their grass roots voters. Repeal this unworkable law and allow hunting to return to the control of those who understand the countryside and its vermin control policies, not use it as a political football as it is at present... geoff51, I find myself, quite unexpectedly, in agreement with your initial analysis. However I thoroughly disagree with your conclusion. Angling should join the list of cruel and barbaric bloodsports. Ban it and the sooner the better.
in 'blood-sports'i believe they kill to eat and survive,get a grip all you foolish bloodthirsty (nearly human)beings if you must engage in mindless cruelty purchase a games console (the technology today is quite something you know)Hunting games a plenty on the wii console i am sure and plenty of other kill-fest ideas to pass the time-and guess what this is socially except able in all walks of life.
DiscoPig (dj)
says...
11:04pm Mon 9 Jan 12
!!
hulla baloo says...
7:42am Mon 26 Dec 11
Let the hounds run.
Tally ho.