Hare Coursing

[Brocakat]

Originally Posted by Gelert

For me there's something in this debate about what kind of knowledge is valued and what kind isn't. Generally speaking, people opposed to coursing on this thread seem to prize research evidence produced by scientists very highly.
I've used research findings often, admittedly in a different field (criminology, psychology etc) and have found that some research which is widely quoted is based on very small research populations (in one case 17 people) and over short timescales.
In addition, the implication in this debate is that research data is somehow 'true', unbiased or neutral but surely we all know that research can be influenced by the values and unconsciously held beliefs of researchers, not to mention the impact that the act of observing can have on the observed.
So personally, I'm inclined to see the opinion of (for instance) a seasoned professional with years of experience over a range of situations as at least as valuable as research evidence which may not be impartial and may be based on limited information interpreted by people who are not even particularly expert in the field. The research evidence doesn't necessarily trump the knowledge and experience of men and women on the ground.

I was looking above for the words 'independent' or 'unbiased ' here , but didn't find them.

I'd sugggest that in the World of Hare Coursing you would quite validly find, or be able to place - the phrase / pair of words 'seasoned professional' - simply becuase of the long history of the sport . Which must go back decades.

Conversely, due to the lack of interest ( until relativly recently, it would seem ) from the world of Academia to the World of Hare Coursing, there hasn't been the research done into Hare Populations.

Does that mean that the research is likely to be less biased? Or is there nil bias from Academia in the first instance ? ( Of course, there should be nil bias !)

I'd suggest (what else can one do but suggest ?) that the interest that came eventually from the Academic World was due to a realisation that that the overall population of the Brown Hare is declining - becuase if the Hare population was as 'healthy' as the rabbits, - why would they bother?

And also , if these Academics don't receive an income from the world of HareCousing, that they would be much more inclined to be unbiased oneway or the other.

Is the use of the phrase 'seasoned professional' as above -someone who earns their wages by being involved ( indirectly or directly ) in the rural betting industry ? I'm not condemming them if they are/were -- but I could understand any bias they should naturally have in being denied the continuation of their labours/rewards, much as I would understand a pit-miner being biased against the shutting of the colliery where he grafted.

[Jonathan]

Originally Posted by Brocakat

I was looking above for the words 'independent' or 'unbiased ' here , but didn't find them.

I'd sugggest that in the World of Hare Coursing you would quite validly find, or be able to place - the phrase / pair of words 'seasoned professional' - simply becuase of the long history of the sport . Which must go back decades.

Try centuries. The Waterloo Cup was run from 1836-2005. Coursing meets have been held in one form or another for hundreds of years.

I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say in your posts, but if you're suggesting that organised cousing was detrimental to the brown hare population, then you're probably wrong. Just as red grouse are protected on grouse moors, so brown hares were preserved on coursing grounds. Stubbles were left, predators were controlled, pesticides were cut to a minimum, cover was created to shelter them in hard weather, and soughs were placed in bankings, etc. for them to hide in when pursued. The grounds were also actively protected from illegal coursers by gamekeepers (a friend of mine was a keeper on Altcar, the venue for the Waterloo Cup, for several years).

I wasn't sad when organised coursing was outlawed, I'd stopped attending meetings some years before the ban, but the Coursing Club probably helped to preserve hares as much as any organisation. Very few hares were killed, even at the three day Waterloo Cup I'd be surprised if numbers often passed 10-15 hares a day. Compare this to organised hare drives where it was commonplace to shoot 2-300 hares a day. There is no 'natural selection' whatsoever on a hare drive, in fact it's possible that weaker hares will sit tighter than healthy ones, allowing the beaters or guns to walk over them, therefore more healthy hares get shot. When a hare is pitted against a greyhound, only the healthy ones will escape.

This isn't a plea for a return of hare coursing, I'm simply stating things the way I see them. If coursing returned tomorrow I wouldn't attend.

Cheers
Jonathan

[The Woodman]

I totally agree with what Jonathan says. There's no possibility now of seeing animals of an ancient breed at the peak of their fitness doing what they do naturally in this country legally.

[Gelert]

Originally Posted by Brocakat

( my caps )

I'm sure you're right, but why contribute to its potential demise by supporting an ( albeit not exclusive) factor in that decline?

Especially when you are aware of its decline.

It could easily be compared to the act of Egg-Selling of exotic species, or smuggling exotic species for pets :- on there own it won't be as "bad " as the wholesale habitat destruction by loggers with Chainsaws.
"Oh, but it's only the odd dozen or so "

That point of view does sound a tad disingenious.

As I said earlier, I'm no expert on Hares or hunting them but I agree that I wouldn't want to hunt a species which was in serious decline or risk of extinction. However, reading this and other threads it appears that when coursing is LEGAL it goes hand in hand with maintaining the hares' habitat and securing the population, so legal hunting may contribute to the species survival rather than otherwise.
Also, I know many people, including hunters, think locally and there's no doubt there are areas of the country that are lifting with hares. Last winter I was ferreting for rabbits in Lincolnshire and the day was complicated by putting up hares in every field we entered. The game keeper there, who was with us, said he was seeing more than ever. I'm not claiming this is anything more than anecdotal, but the anecdotal reporting of people who know their land intimately does have credibility for me. So numbers may be going down in some places and up in others. I admit I'm not good at statistics so will probably get shot down in flames here!

Fen hares are regarded as the ultimate game - extremely testing of the dog. On that day we were unable to prevent half a dozen accidental courses and NONE of the hares were caught - we had good rabbiting dogs with us, not coursing dogs and they didn't have it in them. On one hand, I'm glad the dogs didn't catch a hare - not only because it's illegal to do so, either - but on the other, if one of my dogs had succeeded I would also have felt immense pride in the condition and commitment of my dog.