FOX HUNTING IS CALLED THE SPORT OF KINGS
WE HOPE THE NEXT KING DOESN'T DO THIS
PRINCE CHARLES STATED THAT HE WOULD LEAVE THE COUNTRY
IF HE COULDN'T HAVE HIS BLOOD SPORTS
Dee Finney's blog
start date July 20, 2011
Today's date April 9, 2012
updated 10-3-14
page 193
TOPIC: FOX HUNTING VOTE COMING UP IN PARLIAMENT THIS FALL - 2012
BLOODSPORTS IS RETURNING TO GREAT BRITAIN.
EVIDENTLY - THE RICH GUYS IN THE UK DON'T CARE ABOUT ANIMALS. HOW THE
HOUNDS ARE RAISED IS DESPICABLE. NOBODY SHOULD PUT UP WITH THIS. NOBODY!
AS IF THERE ISN'T ENOUGH KILLING IN THE WORLD, GREAT BRITAIN IS BRINGING BACK
BLOOD SPORTS.
The current generation of the royals are just as passionate about bloodsports as
their ancestors.
Prince Charles and Princes William and Harry are keen shotsmen and stalkers and
members of the royal family are said to have been deeply “disappointed” when the
hunting ban was introduced.
Great Britain Won’t Accept That People Are Against Fox Hunting With Dogs
While thousands gathered for the traditional Boxing Day hunt, animal advocacy
groups released the results of a poll showing
that the majority of the public in Great Britain opposes hunting foxes with
dogs.
Hunting fox, deer, mink and hare with packs of dogs was made illegal under the
Hunting Act in 2004, but the rural tradition has persisted thanks to some
strange loopholes in the law and people who choose to blatantly ignore it
entirely. There has been some success in catching lawbreakers; 48 people were
found guilty of violating the law in 2012 alone.
Both the Coalition Government’s promise in 2010 to reconsider the ban and allow
a free vote on the issue and Prime Minister David Cameron sympathizing with a
pro-hunting crowd in October have raised hopes among the pro-hunting lobby that
the law will be repealed.
Now animal advocacy groups are challenging the Prime Minister to let it go to a
vote because they believe the public will stand behind the ban. An Ipsos Mori
poll, which was commissioned by the League
Against Cruel Sports, the Royal
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and
the International
Fund for Animal Welfare found
that 80 percent of the public believes fox hunting with dogs should stay
illegal.
“If they had the vote now there’d be two losers – the government and the hunters
– they would lose the vote… if they want a vote we say bring it on,” Joe
Duckworth, the League’s chief executive, told the
Independent.
It’s not surprising that the public supports the ban; animal advocates have long
argued that this is a cruel tradition that belongs in the past. Regardless of
how it’s promoted as a means of “pest control” or romanticized, it’s about
nothing more than chasing and brutally killing an animal for entertainment.
While the pro-hunting crowd continues to argue that this issue has been one that
pits city and rural residents against each other, the poll showed people living
in rural areas and urban areas were equally opposed, according to the League.
Despite clear opposition, the pro-hunting lobby and organizations including the
Countryside Alliance continue to push to undo the ban.
Barney White-Spunner, executive chairman of the alliance, called the law
“illiberal, unjust and divisive,” telling the
West Briton that proposals to amend the Act were backed in science and that
doing nothing to repeal it was unacceptable.
Even if their numbers did need to be controlled, sending a pack of dogs to tear
them apart is not an acceptable solution. The science that’s touted by the
pro-hunting lobby in favor of expanding exemptions included in the Act and
allowing hunting with more dogs as a form of pest control has also been debunked.
The number of foxes has not increased since the ban was enacted and foxes, like
other wild animals, are known to control their own populations.
“Voting for repeal would be political suicide. We need to move forward as a
nation, not backwards on matters of animal welfare, which is why we recently
launched our national ‘No Joke’ online and cinema campaign to remind people of
the sheer horror and animal cruelty hiding behind the ‘traditional spectacle,’” said Duckworth.
Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/great-britain-wont-accept-that-people-are-against-fox-hunting-with-dogs.html#ixzz3F5nIzQJR
Foxhunting season expected to attract hundreds of first-timers
Facebook used to recruit novices, with rural alliance estimating number of
hunters up a quarter since ban on hunting with dogs.
the expansion of the hunting scene has included all social classes,
according to huntsmen on the eve of the new season, which starts on
Saturday. Photograph: Matt Cardy/Getty Images
Hundreds of foxhunting novices are expected to saddle up today for the first
"Tally ho" of the new hunting season
– but in a departure from the traditional "blooding" on the first day's
hunting, many of them have been drawn into the pack by the lure of social
media.
Facebook has become the huntsman's friend when it comes to recruitment, with
many hunts reporting a doubling of interest from first-time hunters compared
with last year, after using new media to publicise their activities.
Scores of British hunts have been taking to Facebook to advertise newcomer
days this week, culminating at the traditional start of the season today.
Most of more than 20 groups contacted by the Guardian reported dozens of new
recruits, with children as young as four and six riding to hounds for the
first time.
"Facebook has made a huge difference," said Mark Ferguson, of the Woodland
Pytchley Hunt, in Northamptonshire. "It is so much easier, we can get to
more and more people."
A spokeswoman for the Surrey Union Hunt said more than 100 people had turned
up for the organisation's first meet, of whom about three-quarters were
newcomers: "It's been unbelievably successful. We had notices locally, but
mostly it was through social media." Rachael Morley, of the Meynell and
South Staffordshire Hunt, said more than 20 newcomers had turned out at
their pre-meet, and Sue Simmons of the Holcombe Harriers in Lancashire
reported more than 60 people, up from around 20.
The Countryside Alliance confirmed the resurgence in the number of hunters,
estimating that at least 45,000 people are likely to take to the lanes and
fields of England this year to pursue "drags" or "trails" – usually made by
dipping rags in fox urine, sometimes imported from the US, and dragging them
along on long poles. That number is up by about a quarter since before the
hunting ban on hunting with dogs.
An
urban fox. Of the 332 individuals prosecuted under the Hunting Act between
2005 and 2011, 239 were found guilty. Photograph: Barcroft Media/Getty
Images
Young recruits have been particularly in evidence, huntsmen report, though
some new hunters have been as old as 80. At the Woodland Pytchley Hunt, an
experienced nanny will be on hand to accompany small children today, and at
the Surrey Union a prize of £20 was offered for the "best turned out under
16 year old". Many hunts are offering novices an easier route around their
drag or trail-hunting course, in order to avoid hard jumps, and most relax
their rules on "hunting pink" to allow newcomers to ride in any gear that is
"comfortable, warm, clean and tidy". The resurgence of interest in hunting
comes as some Tories have called for a softening of the ban on hunting with
hounds, buoyed by supportive words from David Cameron. A full repeal is
still possible, but an alternative is that the ban could be weakened by
allowing more than two hounds – the current maximum – to flush out foxes,
either to kill them or for them to be shot.
Between 2005 and 2011, a total of 332 individuals were prosecuted under the
Hunting Act. Of these, 239 were found guilty.
Hunters want a full repeal, allowing them to freely hunt foxes and otherwildlife with
dogs again. Tim Bonner, director of campaigns at the Countryside Alliance,
said: "We are now going into the ninth hunting season under the Hunting Act
– an act that is not working for hunts, antis, the courts or the wildlife it
claims to safeguard. The government has made some positive noises about a
common sense amendment to the act [that], while a small amendment, would
send a significant message to the countryside."
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs said: "The coalition
government pledged to put forward a motion to allow a free vote on the
Hunting Act. This will take place at an appropriate time and if parliament
were to vote in favour of repeal, the government would introduce a repeal
bill in the house of parliament in due course."
Anti-hunting campaigners warned that some hunts were likely to use illegal
means to try to get round the law. Joe Duckworth, chief executive of the
League Against Cruel Sports, said: "Hunters found to be flouting the law
need to watch out. Our team of investigators and the Hunting Act are here to
stay."
The expansion of the hunting scene has included all social classes,
according to huntsmen. One said: "It has become more socially acceptable –
people who before might not have wanted to say to their peers in the pub
that they hunted are now able to [because the pursuit no longer involves
killing an animal]."
Most of the people helping to organise the hunts through social media are
volunteers, and their own enthusiasm is evident. One woman was still in
hospital, at a spinal injury unit, having fallen from her horse a few weeks
ago but said: "I have to thank the hunt masters, who saved my life. But I'm
delighted to see so many new people come along. I hope I will be able to
hunt again before the end of the season."
Some remnants of old attitudes seem to remain, however. One huntsman who
boasted of the openness and social inclusion of his hunt said the ban was
"all the result of some trouble with the great unwashed".
Several types of hound are bred to hunt the fox in this country and around the
world, though at the moment, sad to relate, they cannot serve their purpose
here. Fashion has had a hand, to a degree, in the lines people have followed and
this has not always been good for the hound itself. Fortunately, certain
breeders have stuck to the type that suits them, their country and their hunt.
This must be encouraged, not derided, especially when such hounds are needed as
an outcross, for example with the Old English foxhound. In England only a
handful of purebred Old English foxhound packs remain, and a similar number in
Ireland. Likewise, in the United States and Canada the demise of the American
foxhound and the English foxhound to make way for the crossbred and the Penn-Marydel-type,
caused by the spread of the coyote, may create problems in the future, as the
use of the two original types is reduced.
Some people today consider the Peterborough influence to be rather too great,
and they may have a point, especially with so many packs using the same stallion
hounds. Recently, one stallion was used 99 times. While this may reduce the gene
pool, it is not detrimental to the packs that use such blood, as it should
improve their stock. It is worth noting that some of these influential
“Peterborough” packs have also been the leaders in finding and using fresh
outcrosses.
One of the problems with outcrossing is that to give it a fair chance at least
two litters should be attempted. The danger of neither litter working could
leave a depleted and un-balanced pack in the third season, when they are most
influential. An additional conundrum for breeders is the optimum time to go back
to a successful outcross before it becomes too diluted, without changing one’s
own pack’s type or losing quality.
Some of the best outcrosses have been due to “nicking in” as well as the
brilliance of both the sire and the dam. Sometimes the first outcross can be
brilliant and then those hounds’ offspring are not quite so outstanding. Apart
from deciding when to go back for the next refresher of the outcross, some
breeders have found a double outcross beneficial. An example of a double
outcross is when a sire with a Welsh outcross may be put on to an outcross with
American blood or hill hound mixed with American; both of these, incidentally,
have proved to be successful.
An outcross introduced by a female line can take longer to conform to the kennel
type, and thus unbalance the pack. The idea of a balanced pack is to have the
hounds all arrive at the moment critique together rather than be spread out like
a washing-line.
Around a hundred years ago English foxhounds were bred to a fashion known as the
“Peterborough type” and I hope that we will not fall into such a trap again.
This type be-came extremely heavy, with masses of bone and in some cases
knuckling over at the knee as depicted in the picture of South Staffs Denmark
22. This fashion also developed the colour known as “Belvoir tan”.
For many years I kept a painting of one of these thugs to remind me not to breed
such heavy hounds. My great-uncle, CT Scott, had his favourite hounds painted.
One, North Cotswold Pilgrim 05, was the Peterborough champion bitch in 1908 but
looked more like a doghound than a quality bitch of the type we see at the North
Cotswold and elsewhere today.
Fortunately, a number of packs disregarded fashion and maintained their good
hunting hounds. Some of the MFHs and huntsmen at that time wanted hounds that
could hunt and catch their foxes in good style, and the popular heavyweight
brigade found this difficult. Not only did they struggle to turn with their fox
but they lacked a certain amount of nose and voice, too.
At the same time, on the edge of Wales, Sir Edward Curre had been breeding
hounds that went back to the best of the English type and best of the old Welsh
hound, and had blended himself a wonderful pack of white hounds famous for their
cry. An American called Ikey Bell became the leader of a revolution to get away
from the heavyweight hound and carried forward what Sir Edward Curre had
started. However, these revolutionaries, including Sir Peter Farquhar, Sir Ian
Amory and my father Bill Scott, were extremely un-popular with some of the old
guard before the Second World War, and were accused of ruining the English
foxhound.
The constant aim of the breeder should be to have a hound that will hunt the
quarry farthest, fastest and longest, and therefore the balance of pace points
and stamina points needs to be taken into account and a happy medium maintained.
Sometimes a great working stallion with a fantastic voice and nose might be
slightly too heavy for the speed merchants but those who use such a dog will be
rewarded. These two attributes, along with power, are often passed down through
the blue mottle genes of Carmarthenshire Nimrod 24. Portman Grossman 52 and his
grandson Old Berkshire Grammer 61 are examples.
Different hunting qualities are required in different hunt countries. Heavier
types of hound would not succeed in the fells, while the fell hound might not
cope quite so well in a heavy plough country. A large hound would find it hard
to get through, over and across the stiffly banked and hedged Westcountry; the
native Westcountry harrier can do it far quicker. Voice is vital in heavily
wooded countries, while nose is essential on brash and highly cultivated land.
On taking over a pack it is best to try and maintain those lines that have
hunted its country successfully. The introduction of new lines may not be
regarded favourably. If the new blood has a broken coat or different colour it
is easy, even for those without any knowledge of hounds, to notice a change and
happily criticise the effort if a day’s sport is not up to their wishes. When I
was out with a pack that had recently introduced an American outcross, one
rather loud-mouthed and opinionated individual proclaimed how much he disliked
the American blood. I asked him in an equally loud voice which American type he
did not like; the Walker or Trigg strain or those from Virginia or Georgia with
the July strain.
I then asked him, as the pack hunted with great drive and cry over a ride in
front of us, which of the leading hounds he did not like, considering they were
all American.
While some of the Welsh packs were eligible for entry in the Foxhound Kennel
Stud Book (FKSB), a number of other desirable outcrosses were not. It was under
the MFHA chairmanship of Sir Peter Farquhar that further outcrosses became
possible. He opened the book to any hound whose sire and dam could be proved to
have hunted the fox for six generations in 1955. Since then, a number of hounds
with fell hound, French and American blood have been entered in the FKSB, as
well as harriers. So it is worth looking at the usefulness and merits of these
outcrosses.
The Welsh hound is probably the most ancient breed, having come over from France
with the Normans, if not before. It is known for its long, woolly or broken
coat, superior nose and wonderful voice. The Welsh type tends to produce larger
doghounds than bitches. This trait has been passed on through outcrosses,
therefore stamina may become a concern. Welsh hounds need a degree of
independence to hunt the Welsh hills and so have acquired excellent brains.
Longevity is an-other characteristic found in the Welsh hound and also in the
fell hound.
Fell hounds descend from the northern hound rather than the heavier southern
hound, and hunt the fells and land close to the Lake District. Here the steep
ground demands that they be independent, as their huntsman is on foot and cannot
be with them that much. Their “hare” feet allow them cope with the steep hills
and mountainous screes that abound in that part of the world.
Hill hounds are part fell and part modern English, and are mostly hunted by a
mounted huntsman. One of the best-known hill packs
is the College Valley/North Northumberland and recent outcrosses from this pack
have not proved too independent when introduced to the modern English packs, and
have brought with them voice, nose and drive as well as great keenness to hunt.
The Old English are almost purebred and have avoided the infusion of Welsh or
any other outcross. While they have been careful not to breed too close over the
years, their gene pool has become smaller and smaller as they have been limited
in where they can go. While a little “tainted” blooded has crept in, they have
maintained their wonderful type and colour. However, at the puppy show of one of
the premier Old English packs last summer, one of the winners was certainly tri-coloured
and must be a throw-back to a distant ancestor, in the days when colour was not
regarded as so important.
Read more at
http://www.thefield.co.uk/hunting/modern-foxhound-breeding-21646#4R0UR3BsdSLZsHG2.99
Fox-hunting resumes after ban
More than 250 countryside enthusiasts turned out to support the first meeting in
10 months of the Prince of Wales's favourite hunt as the hunting season, which
usually begins in September, finally opened today.
Around 150 foot followers joined more than 70 mounted riders at the Swangrove
Estate near Badminton, South Gloucestershire, for the first gathering of the
Beaufort Hunt since the ban on hunting was imposed at the start of the
foot-and-mouth crisis earlier this year.
Up to 30 of Britain's 300 hunts have been granted licences, and hunts were also
resuming today in counties including north Wales and Northamptonshire, according
to the Countryside Alliance's Campaign for Hunting Northumberland - counties
among the worst hit by foot-and-mouth.
The Beaufort Hunt, which is regularly attended by members of the royal family
including Prince William and his father, Charles, was enthusiastically supported
by local farmers and business owners who rely on hunting to survive.
The joint master of the Beaufort Hunt, Ian Farquhar, said he was "delighted"
that hunting was finally underway again.
"It is good to get going again," he said. "A whole industry has been at a
standstill during this ban. It has been a glimpse of the hardship that would be
faced if hunting was outlawed permanently.
"Hunting and farming go hand-in-hand and the support of the community for the
resumption of hunting has been tremendous."
Alex Connors, who runs a business making hunting boots in the nearby town of
Chippenham, said she was relieved that the ban on hunting had been lifted.
"My business was getting to a critical point with foot-and-mouth disease having
already curtailed the end of the last hunting season and the beginning of this,"
she said.
"We were close to going out of business, but as soon as the news came through
that hunting was going to start again the phone has not stopped ringing."
Nicky Driver from the Countryside Alliance said today's meeting of the Beaufort
Hunt was not a celebration but a "cautious and sensible" resumption of the
sport.
She said that everybody attending the meeting had signed a certificate of
compliance designed to ensure that all participants could be traced in the
unlikely event of another foot-and-mouth outbreak.
But she stressed that the rural community had been clamouring for hunting to
resume.
"Foot-and-mouth disease has devastated our countryside," she said. "It has been
a very difficult time and it can only be good news that hunting is starting
again."
Ms Driver said the 10-month ban on hunting had demonstrated just how seriously
the rural community would be affected by a permanent ban on the sport and she
added it had strengthened the case of the pro-hunting lobby.
Although today's meeting of the Beaufort Hunt was its first since February, no
members of the royal family were in attendance.
It is still outlawed in "infected" or "at-risk" areas, including Cumbria
and North
Yorkshire
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY
Shocking Fox Hunt Picture Shows Three Men Slaughtering An Animal In Front Of
Children (GRAPHIC IMAGE)
This disturbing image shows three young children looking on as a fox is dragged
from a hole before being brutally killed. Released by anti-fox hunt campaigners,
the picture shows the sickening attack on the helpless vixen by three men and
their dog during a hunt by the Devon-based Modbury Harriers.
The disturbing killings happened on a recent hunt by the Modbury Harriers
After the incident was reported to the League
Against Cruel Sports, the RSPCA was called in to investigate whether there
were grounds for a prosecution under the 2004 Hunting Act.
In a sickening ritual, the fox was trapped in a badger sett along with another
cowering animal before the men flushed both out with guns, killing the petrified
creatures as the children watched on.
One of the lifeless foxes is chewed on by a terrier
A local farmer who witnessed the incident told
the Western Morning News: "I sat there in disbelief - how could those guys
think any of what had played out was fit for young children to witness?
"In fact, in the eyes of even my most pro-hunt neighbour, what those men showed
those kids that afternoon crossed an unacceptable line. The saddest sight for me
was those lifeless bodies more resembling orange rags being dragged up the hill
at the end."
Before being trapped, the fox had been spotted by the farmer running across a
nearby field. "I watched in horror as a whole pack of hounds poured into our
neighbour’s field then piled into our meadow," he said.
The dead foxes are dragged away by one of the men
"They made that hideous blood-curdling squealing – known as ‘speaking’ – which
means they are on the scent of a fox. I saw a beautiful vixen flash across the
meadow and disappear into an old badger sett on my neighbour’s farm. At the top
of the hill I saw a couple of guys carrying spades and a terrier on a lead. They
were going to dig her out and kill her right then and there."
"The men came down and filled in the exit holes to stop the fox escaping and
then called the children over to watch as they dug out and killed the young
vixen – and a second fox found cowering inside the hole."
Despite the grisly scene, Tim Bonner, a spokesperson for the
Countryside Alliance described the slaughter as legal, and even as
"professional and humane", adding that nobody associated with the
Modbury Harriers was embarrassed by the pictures.
Joe Duckworth, chief executive of the League Against Cruel Sports,
said: "This horrific incident of animal cruelty shows not only a
total disregard for the dogs and foxes but also for the welfare of
the children. Terrier work is abhorrently cruel.
Prince Charles : I'll leave Britain over fox hunt ban
Prince Charles has sparked an explosive clash between the monarchy and the
government after launching an outspoken attack on the Prime Minister over plans
to ban fox hunting.
On the eve of today’s Countryside Alliance march in London, it was revealed that
the heir to the throne wrote to Tony Blair expressing anger at the government
for pursuing plans to outlaw the bloodsport in England.
It is understood the Prince, a passionate hunt supporter, told Blair that he
"would not dare attack an ethnic minority in the way that supporters of fox
hunting were being persecuted."
In an outburst overheard by a senior politician, the Prince is also alleged to
have said: "If Labour bans hunting I’ll leave Britain and spend the rest of my
life skiing".
The politician was left in no doubt that Charles was serious. "It certainly
wasn’t said in jest - he gave the impression that he meant it," the politician
said.
The Prince’s comparison of the treatment of fox hunters to minorities such as
black and Asian communities has caused uproar in senior government circles.
Blair’s anger was spelled out last night when Downing Street made it clear that
Charles has no right to lecture him on how to run the country.
The PM’s official spokesman said in a terse statement: "We would never comment
on any correspondence or communication between the Prime Minister and a member
of the Royal Family. The government continues to govern for the whole country,
urban and rural alike."
In effect, the reply told the Prince to keep out of party politics and not abuse
the long-held constitutional principle that the monarchy should not interfere in
government legislation.
The dispute is a dramatic illustration of Charles’s deeply-held views on the
issue. He and his partner, Camilla Parker Bowles, have defied criticism from
field sport opponents by continuing to ride regularly with the Duke of
Beaufort’s Hunt, which meets a few miles from his Highgrove home in
Gloucestershire. Princes William and Harry have hunted too.
Ministers expressed outrage at the Prince’s letter. "Charles has got a bloody
cheek writing to the PM in such inflammatory tones" said one. "To compare fox
hunting to ethnic minorities defies belief. The man has lost all sense of
proportion."
But allies of Charles defended his action. "Charles has spent his entire life
standing up for rural communities. He feels that they have been treated very
badly by successive governments. He is proud to defend fox hunting.
It is a class issue of attacking people who dress up in red jackets. Any other
minority would have their rights respected."
A spokesperson for Prince Charles said: "The Prince may well have written to the
Prime Minister about fox hunting."
Asked about the Prince’s remarks making a comparison between the treatment of
fox hunters and other minorities she said "I have never heard him use those
words. The Prince often corresponds with the Prime Minister privately."
Meanwhile, animal rights campaigners have drawn up detailed plans to monitor fox
hunts in Scotland following new evidence that hounds are still being allowed to
kill their prey.
Hunting foxes with hounds was supposed to have been outlawed by MSPs last
February after one of the most contentious votes in the Scottish parliament’s
history.
Although Scotland’s 10 hunts are still allowed to legally operate, foxes flushed
out by dogs should now be shot by marksmen instead of being savaged to death by
the pack.
But both the Buccleuch hunt and the Jedforest hunts in the Borders have admitted
allowing their packs to kill foxes since hunting resumed last month.
Huntsmen have claimed they are allowed to do so under certain provisions of Lord
Watson’s Protection of Wild Mammals Bill.
www.mfha.co.uk/
The Masters of
Foxhounds Association (MFHA)
represents 174 packs of foxhounds that hunt in
England and
Wales and a further 10 in Scotland. ... how to join the HSBS, or how
to support the HSBS through various Fund Raising initiatives.
Fox hunting is an activity involving the tracking, chase, and
sometimes killing of a fox, traditionally a
red fox, by
trained
foxhounds or other
scent
hounds, and a group of unarmed followers led by a master of foxhounds,
who follow the hounds on foot or on horseback.[1]
Fox hunting originated in the form practised until recently in the
United Kingdom in the 16th century, but is practised all over the world,
including in
Australia,
Canada,
France,
Ireland,
Italy,
Russia, and the
United States.[2][3]
In Australia, the term also refers to the hunting of foxes with
firearms
similar to
spotlighting or
deer
hunting. In much of the world
hunting in
general is understood to relate to any game animals or weapons (e.g., deer
hunting with bow and arrow); in Britain, "hunting" without qualification implies
fox hunting (or
beagling, stag hunting and mink hunting) as described here.
The sport is controversial. In the UK it was banned in Scotland in 2002, and
in England and Wales in November 2004 (law enforced from February 2005).[4]
Shooting foxes as
vermin remained legal. Proponents see it as an important part of
rural
culture and useful for reasons of
conservation and
pest
control,[5][6][7]
while opponents argue that it is
cruel and unnecessary.[8]
THIS PAINTING DOES NOT SHOW THE VISCIOUSNESS OF THE DOGS
NOR THE ENDING OF THE FOX
It took animal–lovers 80 years and 700 hours of parliamentary debate to bring
the Hunting Act into force in 2004, by democratic process, in accordance with
the will of at least 75% of the population. This law currently makes it illegal
to hunt to the death with packs of dogs, not only foxes, but stags, hares, and
other wild creatures in Britain’s countryside.
With the Conservative/LibDem government now in power, it is likely that there
will soon be an attempt to bring in a bill to REPEAL the Hunting Act. Repeal
would mean that currently banned blood sports – fox-hunting, stag hunting, hare
coursing, etc – would again become legal.
Since the current set of newly elected MP's includes many who are linked to
the Hunts and the Countryside Alliance, it is quite possible that the bill will
succeed, destroying the protective Act. This would be a tragedy for our native
wild animals, and a huge step backwards into barbarity. Do you know how YOUR
MP will vote ?
We believe that the British public needs to be clearly told the truth. The
vast majority of decent people believe that it is wrong to cause needless
suffering to animals. We cannot stand by and allow Britain to be bullied by a
small minority – a minority that cannot let go of its desire to torture innocent
animals.
Be aware of this situation, tell everyone you know, and make sure your MP
knows that you expect him/her to vote to KEEP THE HUNTING ACT IN PLACE, and work
to make it more effective.
As a quick initial step, visit the
League Against Cruel Sports
(LACS) website right now, and use their excellent system to send an email to
your MP. It only takes a few moments.
Apparently, the vote is coming up in October in the House of Lords:
There are facebook pages on this issue that might be useful
Is there a petition site against fox hunting that could be used?
=SINCE RIDING TO THE HOUNDS IS THE SPORT OF KINGS, WHY IS THIS HAPENING IN THE
UNITED STATES?
DO WE WANT OR NEED KINGS HRE? NO!!!!
united States
In America, fox hunting is also called 'fox chasing,' as the purpose is not
to actually kill the animal but to enjoy the thrill of the chase.[16]
A hunt may go without a kill for several years, despite chasing two or more
foxes in a single day's hunting.[34]
As a rule, foxes are not pursued once they have 'gone to ground.' American fox
hunters undertake stewardship of the land, and endeavor to maintain fox
populations and habitats as much as possible.[34]
In 2007, the Masters of Foxhounds Association of North America listed 171
registered packs in the U.S. and Canada.[35]
This number does not include the nonregistered (also known as 'farmer' or
'outlaw') packs.[34]
In some arid parts of the
Western United States, where foxes in general are more difficult to locate,
hunts track
coyotes[36]
and, in some cases,
bobcats.[37]
how are the foxes used?
Red fox
The red fox
(Vulpes vulpes) is the normal prey animal of a fox hunt in the U.S. and
Europe. A small
omnivorous
predator,[39]
the fox lives in underground burrows called earths,[40]
and is predominantly active around twilight (making it a
crepuscular animal).[41]
Adult foxes tend to range around an area of between 5 and
15 square kilometers (2–6 square miles) in
good terrain, although in poor terrain, their range can be as much as 20 square
kilometres (7.7 sq mi).[41]
The red fox can run at up to 48 km/h (30 mph).[41]
The fox is also variously known as a Tod (old English word for fox),[42]
Reynard
(the name of an
anthropomorphic character in European literature from the twelfth century),[43]
or Charlie (named for the
Whig politician
Charles James Fox).[44]
American red foxes tend to be larger than European forms, but according to
hunter's accounts, they have lesser cunning, vigour and endurance in the chase
compared to the European foxes.[45]
THIS IS FROM ASK
ABOUT.COM
Fox hunting is all about running your horse around the countryside
with a
pack of dogs.
Unless you have a 40+ acre area, don't even think about it.
Owning a horse would help too..
You don't need a live fox to train your dogs to track them. Many
outdoor sport stores like
REI and
Gander
Mountain sell the necessary equipment needed to train a dog
to follow scent. Also, the fox is traditionally not killed in a fox
hunt. Hunters will either chase it to it's hole and let it go, or,
if it had been released from a cage, captured and retained.
NOTE: WHOEVER ANSWERED THIS QUESTION ON
ASKABOUT.COM OBVIOUSLY KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT HOW DOGS AND FOXES.
A REAL ANIMA L LOVER RESPONDED:
That is the most cruel and vicious thing I've ever heard! Just
don't do that. That is nothing but animal abuse. Do not do this.
Hunting is cruel. It is nothing less than murder! Just because
they are animals doesn't mean they can't feel pain or suffer.
Wild animals can feel just as much pain and suffering as your
own dog or cat can. They can feel pain and suffering jus the way
you can. Hunting is animal cruelty.
GERE ARE SOME REASONS WHY FOX HUNTING SHOULD NOT BE TAKING PLACE
HUNTING - Issues and Arguments
If you're going to take any part in the campaign against
bloodsports it's
useful to know the relative arguments as thoroughly as possible. Arguing with
hunters is rarely productive, but as a sab you will want to explain to other
people exactly why hunting should be stopped.
Foxhunting is primarily dealt with here, but I have mentioned other
bloodsports briefly, as it is dangerous to assume the same arguments apply. A
good booklet to read is "Wildlife Protection - The Case for the Abolition of
Hunting and Snaring", available by mail order from the League Against Cruel
Sports.
Killing animals is wrong
Why? To you and me this may seem obvious, but it isn't to others. In short
(a) the animal is deprived of all the pleasures it would have enjoyed in the
future: food, play, sunshine, sex etc, and (b) the animal undergoes mental and
physical suffering when hunted. Hunters will sometimes try and deny this, but
Zoologists agree that other animals feel pain. Don't forget about mental
suffering either.
For a general argument against 'speciesm' see Chapter 1 of 'Animal
Liberation' by Peter Singer (now in an updated 2nd edition).
The hunted animal can be chased for long distances by hunts, maybe for ten or
more miles. Foxes are not suited for long distance running, and are built for
speed not stamina. The opposite is true for hounds who are deliberately bred
this way, so that the hunt can have a long chase. Hunters will claim that the
fox dies from a 'quick nip in the back of the neck', but those who have seen
kills (and sometimes recorded them on video), can tell you that the truth is
somewhat different.
Some foxes 'go to ground'. In this situation, terriers are put into the hole,
either to flush the fox out, to provide a longer chase, or to fight it until the
terriermen dig down to it. A terrier is a formidable opponent for a fox. In one
case in 1989, a cornered fox was so desperate to dig its way out of a hole in
which it was being attacked by a terrier that it died with its lungs filled with
earth. An underground fight like this can easily last for half an hour, and may
even go on for two to three hours on occasions. All the time, the fox is
fighting for its life. When the terriermen reach it, if it is one of the lucky
ones it will be killed quickly by a bullet or by a spade.
Is hunting pest control?
This is the major myth that hunters use to excuse their activities.
The fox is not nearly the incredible menace to rural society it is sometimes
made out to be. The MAFF (Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and Food) regard
the threat from a fox as 'negligible'. Scientific studies have shown that a fox
may take dead or dying sheep, but a healthy sheep is easily a match for a fox.
Sometimes foxes may get into sheds and take chickens, but if the shed was made
reasonably secure this would not happen - and most chickens are kept in factory
farms anyway. In the end, you are left with the farcical image of a fox with a
crowbar.
Scientists such as Steven Harris and David Macdonald have disproved this. In
studies carried out in Scotland, an absence of fox 'control' had no effect on
the population, or on lamb mortality. From information gained during rabies
control in Europe, it is known that to have anything other than a very short
term effect on population, 70% of foxes need to killed. The reason for this is
that fox populations are very stable, and adapt to the available food supply. As
the death rate varies, more or less vixens will breed, maintaining the
population at the level appropriate to the food supply.
Hunts tend to kill 2.5% of the local fox population a year. These are BFSS
(British Field Sports Society) figures, so if anything are exaggerated. Plainly,
hunts do not control foxes, even if there was the necessity.
Furthermore, this tiny drop is generally more than compensated for by the
efforts hunts make to increase numbers: creating artificial earths, discouraging
shooting and snaring, and importing foxes (e.g. Isle of Wight and Australia).
Sheep carcasses have been know to have been left outside earths.
As far as hare hunting is concerned, hares are on the decline due to changes
in modern farming methods. In East Anglia, the population level is possibly
stable, but is no where near what it was. Hares are not pests anyway - and hare
hunters will rarely, if ever, attempt to use this as argument.
Mink are not native to this country, but again, there is no evidence to
suggest it is a pest. Remember that the people who go mink hunting are those who
hunted the otter to the brink of extinction, and when otter hunting was banned
turned to mink to satisfy their bloodlust. Mink hunts are also often condemned
for vandalism to the river bank and the otter's habitat.
The situation with deer is more controversial, in the absence of any
conclusive scientific studies. One thing is certain however, a well trained
marksman can kill a deer instantly, whereas a deer hunted with hounds undergoes
extreme suffering - a hound pack is unlikely to kill a deer unaided, usually
there is a wait for the kill, while someone finds a gun. In Scotland, shooting
is the only legal way to kill a deer, although untrained 'sportsman' pay some
Highland estates for the pleasure of shooting deer in the annual cull. Another
point of view, is that as man caused the mess that results in the so called
'overpopulation' of deer (and this is only 'overpopulation' by man's
definition), man cannot be trusted to solve it, and so the killing of any deer
should be banned. The species on the planet with the biggest overpopulation
problem is not being culled after all.
The inefficiency of Hunting
Hunting with hounds is deliberately inefficient as a method of killing,
because it is about a perverted definition of 'good sport', not pest control.
Hunts would use cubhunting tactics all season if they wanted to maximise kills;
they don't.
Hunts often bolt foxes that have gone to earth - digging would be much more
likely to end in a kill. Hounds are bred to be slow - and so may often lose
their quarry. If hunts were serious about maximising kills they would use dogs
fast enough to bring the hunted animal down quickly.
"Hunting is less cruel than other methods of fox control"
Another old chestnut from the bloodsport fraternity. Hunted foxes suffer a
lot, and most significantly, hunting is not control anyway.
Fox conservation
The opposite of the control argument; some hunters maintain that the fox
would be extremely rare or extinct without hunting. While hunts may encourage
foxes, the fox population would survive perfectly well without them - the fox is
very adaptable. Humans are unlikely to have a terminal effect on the species,
but they do inflict great suffering on individual animals: that is where we come
in.
"We don't kill many"
"The kill is not the important part of the hunt"
"Hunting is the only way to get an exciting ride"
These whines are heard from the kind of rider who isn't really into the
killing side, and may even feel vaguely guilty about it.
- 11 000 - 12 000 foxes are killed each season. That's up to 12 000
premature deaths.
- These riders still contribute, through subscriptions that keep the hunt
going, to the deaths.
"The fox has a sporting chance"
The fox has no chance to decide not to participate in this 'sport'.
"Hunting is an integral part of country life"
"Hunting is traditional"
Foxhunting has been going on since the 18th century, when there were no more
wild boar to hunt, and a lot less deer. Hare hunting has been going for longer.
None of this however has any bearing on the rights and wrongs of hunting. Wars
have been taking place for long enough - would the hunters say that wars are
good things to have once in a while?
Foxhunting can be very disruptive to rural life, as hunts rampage through
villages, gardens and farmyards. Hounds may 'riot' going after any animal that
has the misfortune to get in their way - for example hares, deer, pets and
sheep.
"Antis are townies who misunderstand the ways of the country"
Anti-hunts campaigners have to know a lot about hunting to campaign against
it effectively. Hunt saboteurs need to know how a hunt works to sab effectively.
And many live in the country.
The last time I heard this, it turned out that the only experience and
knowledge of hunting of the person concerned was standing in the village on
Boxing Day watching the hunters gather for their mince pies etc. I knew far more
than he did, and so do you, having read thus far.
Treatment of hounds
Hunters are fond of accusing sabs of mistreating hounds. In fact hounds
suffer greatly at the hands of hunters. They are harshly disciplined; they will
be whipped if they are really disobedient.
Very few foxhounds die of old age. A very small number may become minkhounds
or draghounds in old age, and a very few probably become family pets; however,
most are killed as soon as they become a little to slow for the pack, generally
at 5-7 years of age.
Any really disobedient hound will be killed at any stage of its 'career'.
Some hunting authorities, notably the Duke of Beaufort (see 'Foxhunting', by the
said Duke), recommend breeding a large number of puppies and then killing all
but those who prove to be the best hunting material.
Hunting very often involves taking hounds into danger. During the chase they
are likely to be involved in road or rail accidents, or injure themselves in
quarry or barbed wire fences. Many such incidents are reported every year, and
have been recorded on film.
Hunters say that if hunting were abolished, the hounds would have to be put
down. There would be no actual need for this; the ex-hunters would be wealthy
enough to maintain the hounds for the rest of their natural lifetimes. If they
killed them, it would be out of callous indifference, and not no choice.
Hopefully anti-hunting legislation will include a requirement for hunts to make
arrangements for their hounds before disbanding.
A similar argument is put forward in relation to horses - but people will
still continue riding, whether they can go hunting or not.
Violence to animals and violence to people
It is no coincidence that those who arrange the nasty and premature deaths of
foxes inflict harm on sabs.Hunting and the law
Hunting has tradition and the support of very powerful people on its side.
The influence of these people meant that hunting has been left untouched by
legislation - the Protection of Animals Act only covers captive and
domestic animals.
It is likely that the police would regard hunting as unlawful if it were a
new activity. Surely, letting an excited pack of carnivorous animals career
about the countryside, across roads and through villages, only partially under
anyone's control, amounts to a breach of the peace?
"Hunting provides employment"
Hunting in Britain provides full-time employment for no more than 750 people,
probably less (source -LACS - I think this figure refers to all hound sports).
Spread over the whole country, this would hardly be a huge blow to the rural
employment situation were hunting to be abolished, especially as (a) at least
some hunts would become draghunts, and (b) all those riders who didn't want to
draghunt would suddenly have a lot of disposable income with which to create new
jobs elsewhere in the leisure sector of the economy.
Often the BFSS quote much larger figures than 750, but they include jobs
which will still exist when hunting is abolished (people will still be riding
horses, and require the associated services and equipment).
In any case, employment is never enough to justify immoral practices.
"Hunting is natural"
Would-be BFSS intellectual, Ian Coghill, claims that we are biologically
equipped to be hunters, with all the necessary teeth, enzymes, and instincts -
BUT not everything we are mentally and physically equipped to do is a morally
acceptable pastime.
Hunters also speak of the inevitability of death and suffering in the
biological world. This is never though to be an excuse for murder and rape
(humans are a part of the biological world too), so why should it apply to
hunting? Neither can hunting be seen as a natural activity for hounds. Hounds
are painstakingly bred and trained to hunt.
Furthermore, no pack animal will chase an animal the size of a fox for the
length of time a hound pack chases a fox. It simply would not provide anywhere
near enough food for the pack.
The environment
Landowners derive no income from hunting with hounds which could be
channelled into conservation, and so would be no less financially capable of
doing it in the absence of hunting.
Sometimes they will say that landowners retain woodland for hunting. A survey
by Cobham Resources Consultants, commissioned and published in 1983 by a
pro-bloodsports group stated that creating fox coverts was the "least
significant motive" for landowners retaining or planting woodland.
Also, the 'guardians of our countryside' have made a poor job of it. Look at
the bare expanses of fields with their lack of hedgerows, around East Anglia, as
one example. Another example is that about half of the ancient
natural/semi-natural woodland Britain has disappeared since the 1940s.
It is often argued in the case of the grouse moors, that the fees paid by
shooters maintain the grouse moorland. However it is worth pointing out that (a)
tourism has a far greater economic significance in these areas, and (b) the
grouse moors are not a true natural environment, and would largely disappear if
nature was simply left alone for a change.
The influence of the hunters has failed to stop development in the
countryside - e.g. roads, urban sprawl. Hunts are relatively weedy to take on
powerful economic forces such as these. The obvious solution is genuine
conservation measures, now.
Hunting with hounds has few significant detrimental environmental effects,
however it is worth mentioning the disturbance of badger setts through earth
stopping and digging out, and the obvious impact of a convoy of hunt vehicles
polluting its way through the countryside. Most coverts are drawn to
infrequently to have a significant effect on the wildlife there; however
wildlife trusts may make sure of this by banning hunting on their land.
Hunters' hypocrisy
You will have noticed that a common thread of hypocrisy runs through many of
the pronouncements of the hunting community. They mistreat their hounds, while
posing as animal lovers and accusing sabs of hurting their animals. The are
violent, but claim to be the victims of intimidation and assault; and so on ad
nauseam.
"Meat eaters should not oppose hunting"
Hunters like to criticise the hypocrisy of anti-hunting people who eat meat,
wear leather or whatever (though I have still to meet a non-vegetarian
saboteur). There is an element of truth in this, however it is still no defence
of hunting to point out the cruelty and suffering other animals go through.
"Anti-bloodsports campaigners are motivated by class hatred"
Bloodsports are not the prerogative of the wealthy. Hare coursing still
exists, and is to a large extent, a working class sport. Even a foxhunt consists
of a wide spectrum of people. You have to be rich to be able to afford to ride
with the hunt, but not to be a terrierman, a foot follower or a supporter. These
people are not just the puppets of the aristocrats: they are enthusiastic
participants in the hunts.
People opposed to hunting come from all backgrounds.
"Cubhunting usefully disperses the foxes in autumn"
A rare and rather desperate defence of cubbing. Cubbing does indeed scare
young foxes away from their birthplace, leaving the fox population more evenly
distributed across the countryside. However, the foxes would move of their own
accord, a couple of months later. Cubbing does nothing of lasting significance
in this respect. The fox population is quite capable of spreading itself across
the countryside on its own. Cubbing must, however, traumatise the adolescent
foxes which are forced away from home before they are ready to leave.
Spreading of disease
Disease may be picked up by hounds, and spread wherever they go. Also,
killing a fox means that another fox may move into that area to replace it. This
means that there is more mobility in the population than there would otherwise
be, and therefore a greater potential for the spreading of disease.
Hunting and individual choice
"So you don't believe in personal freedom" said the same guy who had accused
me of being an 'ignorant townie'. This argument is fundamentally flawed - who
would suggest we have the freedom to take the lives of other humans? Who would
say we have the freedom to mutilate a pet dog? Similarly, all animals should be
regarded as sensitive living beings who deserve respect and consideration.
This document was cobbled together by Tim Spencer, and bears an uncanny
resemblance to a previous document that the author got when he started in this
anti-bloodsports business. Please circulate - this is strictly anti-copyright!
from"
http://www.chaos.org.uk/~maureen/issues.html
BUY THIS BOOK:
JACK PYKE HORN.fox hunting horse baiting gallop
tracking beating cubbing walking
The ban on hunting is routinely flouted and the way to prevent foxes being
killed is to be present at the hunt, monitor and also sab if the hounds are
chasing a fox. Securing convictions will ensure that those who do continue to
kill foxes are fined (which is also negative publicity for the hunt, as it shows
the public that they are still hunting despite it being against the law).
During the hunting season members of Brighton Animal Action are out most
Saturdays monitoring the hunts to ensure the hunting ban is enforced.
The New Law
Under the new law the hunt can still meet and lay a trail for the hounds to
follow. They are not allowed to kill a fox using hounds but can use the hounds
to flush out a fox which can then legally be killed by a bird of prey or shot.
However the birds of prey they have been seen with, such as an eagle owl, would
not take a fox, only a small cub. It is now law that the hunt stewards must have
paperwork from the land owners giving them permission to prevent monitors from
trespassing onto their land. The stewards have to show the paperwork to the
police before the hunt.
Policing
What we are finding is that the police are not informed of the new law,
little or no briefing is given on the day and no paperwork is produced by the
landowners stating that the hunt can use their land (which is now law).
Conversely this means it is likely that the land owners have not requested that
the stewards attend the hunt to prevent monitors trespassing. An absence of
paperwork suggests that the hunt is also trespassing.
Unfortunately it is also apparent that the police are biased towards to the
hunt and regularly turn a blind eye to the law being broken or fa
il to follow monitors into potentially dangerous situations. The police state
that they are not present to police the hunt only to prevent a breach of the
peace.
Monitoring (from the
Hunt saboteurs association(HSA) website)
Monitoring a hunt involves following the hunt and capturing any law breaking
on video. Quite often our mere presence is enough to make them behave but it is
not always the case. We use technology such as video cameras, GPS (global
positioning system) devices which accurately pinpoint locations. We also use
maps to navigate the terrain and vehicles to position people quickly in the
correct place.
If you ever spot anything dodgy, make a note of what happened, where and
when, and note down any registration numbers or descriptions of people involved.
I want to come out monitoring/sabbing, what do I need to bring?
- video camera – if you have one spare batteries and second tape
- that days newspaper to prove the date for the tape
- maps
- clothes that keep the weather out
- shoes or boots suitable for running across muddy fields
- something to eat and drink (we are usually out until it gets dark)
- transport or money towards fuel
Glossary
Copse: a small wood
Cubbing: The killing of fox cubs by new hounds in training for the main fox
hunting season. Fox cubs are easier prey and allow the hounds to develop blood
lust. This usually take place very early in the morning between the late August
and mid October. This has always been illegal but due to a lack of public
information goes un policed.
Digging out: Digging a fox out of its den after trapping it using a terrier, or
blocking of the entrance and exits of a den before digging out the fox. This is
now illegal and has always been illegal in cubbing season.
Drag hunt: a moving trail of scent for the hounds to follow, usually laid by
someone on horse back or quad bike
(hounds) in cry: the hounds have found the scent of a fox and give chase. You
can hear when this has happened as the dogs whimper and whine.
Hunting horn: used to encourage the dogs to give chase and to steer them in the
right direction (has also been used when sabbing to confuse the hounds.
Hunt monitoring: filming the hunt so that illegal hunting can be documented and
used as evidence in court to bring about a prosecution.
Hunt sabbing: sabotaging the hunt to prevent foxes being killed.
Pointing: when the hunt surround a copse which has a fox in it so that whichever
way it runs it will be caught.
Steward: Hunt stewards are monitors in favour of the hunt and are there to
prevent sabs from trespassing and try to ensure the hunt can continue (legally).
Terrier man: Man who trains terriers to flush foxes out of their dens.
Trail hunt: a pre laid trail for the hounds to follow
What you can do
Come and help us monitor the hunt. This is really important we go out most
Saturdays and can arrange to pick you up. Get in touch if you want to come
Contact the Hunt Saboteurs Association
www.huntsabs.org.uk
Check out
www.crueltyexposed.co.uk
other facebook groups if you can help
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Clubbing-Urban-Fox-Hunters/141693279186958
http://www.facebook.com/groups/144376852243081/
THIS BLOG
CONTINUES ON PAGE 194