Fox hunting 'more popular' according to CA

[RKB]

Originally Posted by Picidae

and yet:

In the market town of Corbridge, Northumberland, the joint master of the Tynedale Hunt, Frank Houghton-Brown, was fulminating as he set out yesterday. The target of his ire, the 2005 legislation, which outlawed hunting with hounds.

Mr Houghton-Brown explained: "The ban has not saved any foxes' lives and it has wasted 700 hours of Parliament time. It is simply not working, and is causing the police a massive headache. We now hunt an artificial trail but we still kill just as many foxes as we did before the ban, by legal means, because the farmers want them killing so they don't kill the lambs."

Tally ho! Hunt supporters turn out in force - Home News, UK - The Independent

Not sure what the point is, but I wouldn't trust the utterances of Mr Houghton Brown, Master of Hounds, further than I could throw him.

(isn't Northumbs quite hilly?)

[RKB]

Originally Posted by eeyore

if we are talking about redrafting the HwD act their is a much easier way to close the loop hole - the same way that crow 2000 closed the developer loop hole in WCA 1981

ie : Under the WCA is was an offence to deliberately harm protected species, their nests or roosts etc - however there was a major loophole which led to developers for example bulldozing old buildings in which their were bat roosts and then saying in their defence " Sorry geezer , we didnt know they were there." and it was very difficult to prove that they did.

CROW closed that loophole by extending the legislation making it an offence to deliberately, recklessly or negligently harm or destroy etc

and that is all that is required here a HwD act 2010 (amdt) which makes it an offence to deliberately, recklessly , or negligently hunt a fox with a pack of more than 2 dogs - at a stroke this would remove the defence that "well your honour they just got away from us" as not keeping propper control of your hounds would clearly be both negligent and reckless.

I agree, that would stop it alright, but the cynic would suggest that it was purposefully drafted to leave it out, to enable to loophole. Also, you'd never get an amendment like that through Parliament. There'll be a Conservative majority after the next election, and all parties will be chasing every vote for the next local elections. At the moment, I think more people care more about repeal than they do about maintaining. Support for the ban was weakening before its introduction, and a few polls since have looked marginal (iirc). Finally, such an amendment would effectively outlaw the exercising of hounds, so it would be seen as unreasonable. There's nowhere you could take 50 dogs where they wouldn't sniff a fox.

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by RKB

I agree, that would stop it alright, but the cynic would suggest that it was purposefully drafted to leave it out, to enable to loophole. Also, you'd never get an amendment like that through Parliament. There'll be a Conservative majority after the next election, and all parties will be chasing every vote for the next local elections. At the moment, I think more people care more about repeal than they do about maintaining. Support for the ban was weakening before its introduction, and a few polls since have looked marginal (iirc). Finally, such an amendment would effectively outlaw the exercising of hounds, so it would be seen as unreasonable. There's nowhere you could take 50 dogs where they wouldn't sniff a fox.

true - i know it would never pass, though on the exercising thing theirs nowhere round here that my dog wont smell a sheep, but she doesnt chase them or try to round them up (shes a collie) because i have trained her to be obedient.

bottom line though is that I really think there are bigger issues for the govt/parliment to focus its attention on than foxhunting, even in a countryside/environment context.

[Picidae]

Originally Posted by RKB

Not sure what the point is, but I wouldn't trust the utterances of Mr Houghton Brown, Master of Hounds, further than I could throw him.

(isn't Northumbs quite hilly?)

Originally Posted by Jason

but isn't this why farmers allow hunts on their land, to control the numbers of a species they say goes for lambs

No, it is nothing to do with control...as hunting is primarily a social sporting network a bit like a golf club

Mr Houghton Brown says otherwise, that was my point.

We now hunt an artificial trail but we still kill just as many foxes as we did before the ban, by legal means, because the farmers want them killing so they don't kill the lambs."

Despite what you told Jason, someone actually involved in a Hunt was disagreeing with you.

However, you sound by your comment you know him personally, so perhaps you have cause to think he is lying?

I can see why a Master of Hounds would 'lie' or at least try and dress up their bloodthirst by suggesting they were doing the farmers a favor but I would have thought the farmers would have contested such a public statement if untrue?

[Jason Green]

Originally Posted by RKB

I agree, that would stop it alright, but the cynic would suggest that it was purposefully drafted to leave it out, to enable to loophole.

A correct suggestion in my opinion.

Originally Posted by RKB

Also, you'd never get an amendment like that through Parliament. There'll be a Conservative majority after the next election, and all parties will be chasing every vote for the next local elections.

I'd suggest starting up a petition on this, to get a good view of public support - and then present it to them. If the conservatives repeal the existing Act should they get in, then could it be re-launched as a new piece of legislation - and not an amendment since it wouldn't exist prior to being presented? That could work...

Originally Posted by RKB

Finally, such an amendment would effectively outlaw the exercising of hounds, so it would be seen as unreasonable. There's nowhere you could take 50 dogs where they wouldn't sniff a fox.

OK, true enough - but I still think it's very unreasonable to let this number of dogs off the leash, when it would be agreed by most of us that we'd be averse to seeing pet dogs in the same situation in a nature reserve, or other area still rich in wildlife - especially larger breeds. Subsequently, if kills were made, then owners could still be fined, and then I'm sure the owners would make other arrangements

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by Picidae

Mr Houghton Brown says otherwise, that was my point.

We now hunt an artificial trail but we still kill just as many foxes as we did before the ban, by legal means, because the farmers want them killing so they don't kill the lambs."

Despite what you told Jason, someone actually involved in a Hunt was disagreeing with you.

However, you sound by your comment you know him personally, so perhaps you have cause to think he is lying?

actually if you read that quote carefully he isnt disagreeing at all , he says that they still kill just as many foxes now , by legal means (ie lamping , shooting, and snaring) as they ever did because the farmers want them controlled - ergo the hunt has no impact on fox numbers and banning the hunt hasnt saved any foxes lives

how is that inconsistent with RKB et al saying that the hunt doesnt control fox numbers and effective control is carried out via fireams.

also you seem to have been so caught up in arguing with RKB that you have moved your position, as you are now saying that the hunt does control fox numbers wheras earlier you were saying it was purely about sport.

[RKB]

Good grief!

Please read closely, and you will see no contradiction in what I said to Jason. Read very closely what I said, and what Mr Houghton-Brown said. If you wish, you can PM me with any contradictions you think you find, and I will explain them away for you without perpetuating your sport on the thread.

Old Houghton-Brown proposed me for the masons and broke in my footman, obviously.


farmers wouldn't contradict it if H-B was their landlord, employed by their landlord, they supported him, no farmers were actually asked, no farmers saw his quote, or their only son was his footman.

[Picidae]

Oh I give up.

I simply quoted someone who said they were killing foxes because the farmers wanted them to.

Jason said it was about control. You said it wasn't, it was purely about Sport.

The 'confession' seemed to contradict that which is why I pointed it out and thought you might like to address it with a little more info than simply slagging off the guy that said it..

The words ''and yet'' doesn't mean a position either way on what you said, it simply means ''and yet'' someone is claiming different.

Everyone else has declared their interests regarding foxhunting on this thread , perhaps you could do the same and it might clarify some of your statements for me - the position someone takes on a particular issue goes a long way in assisting with interpreting the intention behind their words on the internet. If of course, you are just sitting on the fence and have no opinion either way, one might be forgiven for thinking you just enjoy a good argument Feel free to PM me if you don't want to make your position on this public.

[jazz_11]

Well hello all i havent been on here for months, some of you may remember me but i doubt it. well quick intro im 17, going in the marines, love the country side, very active and into shooting, got 2 dogs a whippet and spaniel and s license and a miroku o/u 12 gauge shotgun some of you may think xexexe being 17 and owning one, i have done now for nearly a year and i no some lads who are younger than me who got them and theyre not easy to get
i havent read the whole thread beacause its late and i want to get to sleep but i will in the morning...
i am for all kinds of hunting and shooting my father used to shoot and thats where i get my passion from, the fun aspect comes from your filedcraft not just pulling the trigger, i had my first opportunity to shoot pheasant last week which is sport not pest control, that was good fun...
foxes well...
i have seen the damage they cause i was at a farm before with the poor farmer in tears because she lost all of her chickens in one night... foxes kill for the sake of it, they will kill the chicken and bury the heads, the shoot i work my spaniel on has had around 200 foxes in the last 2 years... yes you can put up electric fences which they do, but they are still a problem.
i am not for or against the hunt, i realise its more than a bunch of posh totties going around on horse back, its more of a way of life, i know of some people who are in the hunt and it may aswell not be in place because they still go out and hunt regardless. the other one is guys with big lurchers who lamp foxes, this i am slightly against the foxes face much less chance as with the hunt a healthy fox will get away time and time again but lamping, the dogs are much faster and with 2 good dogs the fox doesnt stand a chance. but i dont see the point in the ban and it needs to be lifted, someone who lives in the city and lives on the computer has no real connection with the country side and until they do theyre views wont change. i shoot foxes purely for vermin control, along with all other species that are on the vermin register. grey squirrels, crows, wood pigeon rabbits etc etc..
the ban needs to be lifted in my opinion but if it doesnt im not going to argue because i will keep them off the the land...
i would like to hear your views
thanks for reading
jazz

[DunkeryMunkery]

Originally Posted by Vectisbirder

Been away from WAB for a bit and missed this.

Don't presume to tell me how to spend my money. If I wanted to donate to 'helping the hungry and the ill' (a stock argument from those who are opposed to animal welfare or anti-hunting charities, I find) I would. However, my (limited) money goes to animal charities. Don't like it? Fine, but don't tell me what to do. And it's up to me to decide whether it's a waste of my money or not, and not you - and as I would assume from your username you are a hunter I could tell you where to shove your suggestion.

The ban needs tightening, not overturning. If hunters are breaking the law they should face the consequences not effectively getting away with it.

I hate hunting and no amount of argument from the 'pros' will change my mind about it - and, for the record, I have lived for most of my life in the country.

Hello.

I am (was) Deerhunter, but I couldn't sign on as that anymore for some reason. Probably been banned for being direct.

I think you need to read again.

In no way to I presume to tell you how to spend your money. You can do what you like with. It was purely advice. I know it is a waste as we are still hunting and there is no way it is going to stop.

I believe, although I could be wrong, that if you give some money that goes directly to Haiti for example, there is a high chance it will do some good.

Money sent to LACS just helps to compromise animal welfare.

Read up on Baronsdown for example.

They don't care about animals. Most of their leadership has left over the years because it is nothing to do with animal welfare.