no s'ok
my boyfriend works from home and I work flexi hours so theres always somebody at home to play :)

are you asking me?
I work from home!

Not read these for a few days ... lots of interesting views and considerations on this one. Just a few more thoughts ...

Hunting is Natural for dogs ... I think we forget sometimes how unnatural our dogs are!!! We have after all bred them out of all recognition via unnatural selection! I am not saying here that we should extinguish these breeds ... there are other alternatives to animal hunting they could partake in ... just wished to make the point really.

The difference between hunting in nature and hunting by pack ... well in true nature a wolf would hunt to feed ...a jackel would scavange ... but there are no natural environments in which one species would bring together another species, climb on the back of another species ... and chase yet another species across land till in exhaustion it was caught and ripped apart , its blood then smeared on younger and newer members of this natural activity!!! Hmm ... natural ... I think not.

Keeping the numbers down ... well like I said before since hunts people often tell me that they kill only a very few ... they defeat their own arguement. However, I am not an unrealistic person ... of course numbers have to be kept down ... after all in a very unnatural way human kind has wiped out the natural predators for these beautiful creatures. But if we wished to efficiently keep the numbers down ... we would never set a pack of dogs, a pack of humans and horses against one fox!!!! Be realistic at least in your arguements!

There is a huge difference ... and if huntspeople would just admit they do this for their own pleasure and nothing else ... I would have more respect to be honest. I would still vehemently oppose this activity but I would at least respect their honesty.

All the dogs would have to be put to sleep ... well that seems a bit harsh from people who claim to love their dogs ... they would surely do as well drag hunting ... where is the lack of pleasure in that since many hunts people are forever telling me that mostly they go for the ride ...

Also what happens to dogs too old to keep up with the hunt? Do they all live in happy retirement !! I guess you know the answer to that one. I once rescued 5 beagles from a laboratory (I didn't steal them they were passed to me from person or persons unknown) ... they were pups. The local hunt (for I have friends who hunt) offered them a home ... said it would not be a long one ... they would die when too old to hunt .. but it would be a happy one for the dogs in that time! I laughed ... I think my friend knew the answer before she offered the solution.

I tire of the endless pointless debate in this ... I think the answer is really quite simple ... can a humane society justify torture of any form? No ... end of arguement really....

But I am sure you disagree ... :)

I was beginning to think i was the only anti fox hunting person in this thread lol
i have to say i agree with every point you made and think you worded it very nicely :)

the point about admitting that it is for pleasure is a very important one for people who do enjoy fox hunting - maybe they feel threatened into having a 'good reason' for doing it by people who may think they are sadistic for enjoying it. I would have more respect for it if people did it because they wanted to rather than saying that it was for the good of the environment, maybe it would be better to improve the way fox hunting is done and arrange supervised hunts were protesters to it would know it was being carried out in a suitable way - then there would be no need for this argument as animal cruelty wouldnt be an issue.

When most people who hunt posted they mentioned keeping the fox numbers down but maybe that isnt the real reason? somebody mentioned that watching the dogs do what came natural to them was the enjoyable part - which would make more sense than controlling the fox population.

A few points to raise:
Can Caitlin explain to me how she would convert a pack of foxhounds to hunt drag, is she going to sit down with a behaviourist and explain the difference to them?
What about the people who hunt to ride,, as opposed to those who ride to hunt? Drag hunting is fast and dangerous.....i know I wouldn't want to do it! Also, where would she go drag hunting. The local hunt here, goes on land by invitation of the farmers who want certain foxes removed. (Either killed or just shifted on a bit) No- one wants foxes exterminated by the way, well not true country folk anyway. Can't imagine our farm welcoming 30 horses galloping across the grass for no apparent reason or benefit to the farm! As for the old fashioneed act of blooding children, well I have hunted for 30 years & its been out of practise all that time....just an old time myth that people drag up when it suits them.
Caitlin wants honesty....well here it is...... I ride purely to hunt. Without hunting I would not keep a horse. I love watching hounds work and seeing beautiful foxes. So there you are.
I am also born & bred country girl, living on farms that have seen fox damage year in & year out. You seem to have a problem with people riding horses Caitlin, so do you approve of fell hunting and mink hunting then? (on foot)
You seem to think that hunting 1 fox with a pack of hounds is unfair in terms of numbers, but do not offer an alternative. Maybe you think one to one, such as poisoning or shooting is fairer?
I cannot comment on the 5 beagles, I find it too strange, as I know that lab beagles are different dogs to hunting beagles and cannot imagine who on earth would try and integrate them into a pack which has breeding lines going back many generations and have been carefully bred over the years. Maybe you could tell us which pack this was, I would love to know.
Hope my observations are helpful.

I've been following this thread with interest and amusement, like I did with the last one we had. I would like to ask a question to those who support fox hunting. In one way or another I know you are animal lovers, why else would you have dogs and horses, do you think that the way the fox is hunted and killed is cruel? Some people say that by the time the fox is torn apart it is already dead, is that 100% certain? Also do you know what happen's to the foxes that get away, do they die from exhaustion or do they carry on living as normal?

In my mind there is no right or wrong answer to my questions, it is not a test, I just really am interested in your views. Although I say I have followed this thread with amusement I do take this discussion seriously as I own gundogs, have ridden horses for years and although I have never taken part in a hunt I did take part in a mock hunt once (no dogs involved though just horses) and thoroughly enjoyed galloping over the fields, jumping the fences etc. with a trail of horses behind me so I know the buzz you can get out of it.

A question I would like to pose to people against hunting is surely because the fox hunts he too expects to be hunted and therefore knows exactly what he is doing when being chased by the hounds? Is it not natural for all animals to be hunted and killed whether it be by other animals or humans? Some people say the fox doesn't hunt he just scavanges, this is a statement I can't understand as surely when the fox goes out to kill chickens, sheep, lambs etc. he is doing it out of hunger and instinct?? If that's not true please explain the statement to me.

Again no right or wrong answers I'm just simply looking for your views to my questions.

Pleased to see that this debate is a friendly and healthy one.

Kind regards.

Hi Claire

I was one who mentioned foxes scavenging - this was mainly in reference to urban foxes as opposed to country foxes who have no choice but to hunt, or they die of starvation. But by following their natural instincts, then they get hunted to be killed but not for food - and that is the main difference as I see it. They are hunted by us because we can, rather than for our need to survive. Most animal hunters hunt for food to survive. We hunt animals for pleasure, not only to enjoy killing but the most abhorrent bit for me - but to then wear their furs. I wonder how we would feel to then be hunted oursleves and for our skins to be paraded around.

"Wild" animals hunt to survive, hounds do not hunt to survive - they are fed by the owners, they hunt because they have been trained to hunt, and that is our doing. Horses do not hunt from instinct, they hunt because they have people on their backs driving them on. I'm sure they get a real buzz out of the exercise and jumps etc - but I truly doubt they have any idea what they are doing. The point here is that we cannot have it both ways - we cannot keep claiming that it is instinct for the dogs when they do not live in a world or environment that allows them to live by instinct. We have tampered with them so much by breeding and domestication, that we have to take responsibililty for how hounds behave and that is to hunt because we want them to and we have bred and trained them to.

In the "natural" environment, they would not just hunt foxes, oh and that's right they don't do they - they sometimes get cats or other animals, but never mind, that's just an acceptable hazzard of living in a country where a pack of humans drive a pack of horses and a pack of dogs through miles of countryside to tear apart one fox. They would not then tear it to pieces so that no dog got a decent meal. From what I have seen seem, there does not seem to be any of this pack animal instinct, that we as dog owners are constantly reminded of, being displayed when they catch the fox - they just rip it to shreds. Instinct would mean that they prioritised within the pack who should get the food - how does this happen when that food has been destroyed?

It has just been said that surely the fox expects to be hunted. I'm sorry but I don't think animals have that level of intelligence. They search for food to survive. That may mean a kill or a scavenged meal if they are lucky. They will know when they are being hunted and will try to escape to survive - but to suggest they "expect" to be hunted I think is wrong. Surely if they expected it - they would not run away as it would be considered an inevitability of life.

There have been some very well placed agrugments for both sides of the argument here and it is good to see it has remained civil. Good for us:-)

Can I just say something - hounds do not need to be trained to hunt because it is in their breeding. It is instinct. I live with 2 hounds and they have not been bred for hunting nor have they been trained but if they were let off the lead, they would go and hunt and chase after things and wouldn't come back. It's bad enough in the spring/summer when all the birds and their babies come into the garden. Albert runs up & down the garden barking and howling at them, just like hounds do when chasing foxes.

I think everyone would agree that a GSD was never bred for hunting, so would someone please tell my GSD who has reverted to pack instinct when in the company of two other GSDs and so far bought down 2 deer, luckily we have called him out before any further damge was done, and the deer has got up and run away, is this instinct or breeding in the dogs.
Would someone also like to tell a friend of mine who keeps free range chicken that foxes only hunt for food, after they got up one morning and found every chicken in the henhouse either dead or badly injured by a fox the night before.
Training current foxhounds for drag hunting would always be risky as there is always the chance that one dog would take the pack off after a more interesting scent, so a new generation of hounds would have to be started in this way for 100% certainty.
Foxhounds are not pets, they are working dogs whose ancestry can be traced back hundreds of years, and surely when there working life is over it is better for them to be humanely destroyed then put in to some rescue or left shut up in
confinement for the rest of their lives.
I have never hunted in my life but many years a go used to work with the local hounds, they are truly magnificent dogs.

People’s views were requested, here’s mine…..

I don't ride; so don't go 'fox hunting'.
I do shoot game birds and rabbit. Yes most of what I shoot is eaten, (I say most, because we do not just shoot healthy game).
I also shoot clays and very occasionally targets.
I have never shot a fox yet, but have been out when foxes have been shot. (We saw 11 foxes on 1 farm in less than 2 hours!)

I listen to the arguments from both the pro and anti fox hunt lobbies and have never been impressed by any of them.

What I have noticed most, is that so very often the anti hunt lobbyist will come out with something along the lines of ‘well they should do this ….’ Or ‘ why don’t they just do that…’ Often the this’s and that’s meaning that someone “else” has to pay for something to happen, (like employing someone to shoot foxes?).

Yes foxes can and are killed by other methods, some kinder, some more cruel than chasing them down with horse and hounds.

Yes I am sure that pets have been killed by packs of hounds, however I suggest that other peoples pets kill more. But I hope we are not going to ban people from keeping cats and dogs.
I lost 2 kittens to a pet dog that was not kept under control.
I know people who have also lost pets to other peoples’ pets, ( cats and dogs), and indeed to foxes, both in the country and in town.

It is a fact that foxes kill more than they need to eat, and having seen the result of one of these kill frenzies, I can understand the anger felt by the farmer.

Likewise I can understand why people get so angry about animals kept in cages to be skinned and used for coats or whatever.

Farmers are not another species; they are just like you and me. Some are 'nicer' than others admittedly, but then that can be said of any group, even the members of this board;)

In my humble opinion, we shouldn't be shouting and screaming about what should or should not be banned, we should take a realistic and, most importantly, a balanced view of the implications for either course of action.

Would banning fox hunting reduce the ACTUAL amount of instances where a fox was treated cruelly?
I suggest that not only would it not reduce, but that there would be MORE foxes that suffer.
Banning fox hunting will not stop foxes being killed. However there are lots of farmers who do not allow foxes to be killed on their land, other than by the hunt.
No hunt, no reason not to kill them.
If they are going to be killed, the most businesslike/cost effective/easiest option is to poison them. Poison is not nice and doesn't care whether it's a fox, bird of prey or pet dog etc. that it kills.

I can almost hear people thinking that’s OK, just ban poison as well.
I think that would be as successful as the banning of illegal firearms has been, just a whole lot harder to enforce.

If fox hunting is banned, what will the anti hunt lobby do?
Can you see them sitting at home reading the paper! I suspect that they will move onto banning shooting, fishing, hunting with birds of prey.

And when that is done?

Could we not also consider that keeping a rabbit in a cage is cruel?
How about keeping birds in cages?
or even keeping dogs in ordinary homes,
not to mention the 'unnatural' behaviour of show dogs? ( I know, but it wouldn’t be difficult to argue the point!).
And then of course, there are the Magpies, who kill young songbirds and leave them.
And not forgetting the fox…. Foxes can also be cruel, so shouldn’t they be hunted down and killed?

Of course that couldn’t happen could it? It’s about as likely as a nation of intelligent people allowing their government to commit genocide.

Shooting game birds is my interest, so what would happen if that were banned?
( As is very likely to be the next target if fox hunting is banned).

I, and all those like me, will stop buying, raising and releasing game birds.
All the birds taken by foxes and birds of prey, all the birds killed by cars will not be replaced.
So what happens to the foxes and the birds of prey that rely on game birds for a large proportion of their food?

Is having foxes and birds of prey starve to death and populations decline again, really a fair price for ending fox hunting etc.?

I am not at all keen on fox hunting, but on balance the alternatives are far, far worse!!

Sometimes the price is just too high.

at last, a neutral with common sense!;)

I couldn't agree more!

John

Well said Alan and put so nicely too. I asked for people's different opinions and that's what I got and I am pleased to say everyone remained calm and collected when doing so :-)

I for one was finding it difficult to decide what I do/don't agree with because I can see both sides of the argument and the thought of any kind of animal cruelty always sparks off anger, however after just reading Alan's posting I think, well for me anyway, he has hit the nail on the head. Okay fox hunting may not be the most ideal way of controlling the fox population but it is definately better than the other alternatives both legal and illegal that may arise if hunting were to be banned.

Thanks.

Sam, like I said I did not expect everyone to agree with me. Where you have the idea that I have a problem with people riding horses leaves me astounded .. I reread my letter/posting and nowhere in there does it say ... People should not ride horses.

You say in your somewhat curt response that you ride to hunt ... the honesty I asked for ... you enjoy the hunt ... presumably the kill of these beautiful foxes ... that is the point at which we disagree ... I love the hounds ... as I have said I have many friends who hunt and with whom I can have this conversation without being accused of being anti everything in the world related to the country!, they have hounds .. which are phenomenal creatrues .. beautiful in every respect, I would never wish to see them ripped apart for fun ..

Horses and horse riding is an amazing pass time ... there are many many ways in which people can enjoy this sport on its own ... you said I had forgotten those who simply hunt to ride .. what would happen to them. Well many many of my friends do not need to hunt to ride ... they go out together and ride for the pleasure in itself. Good for them .. some also go on the hunt ... and I am sure enjoy the terrain ... but they always justify it by saying "It is good for the countryside" .... like I said be honest ... you do it because you enjoy it, just like you were Sam.

Being country born and bred also, I know that the views among farmers also differs on this sport ... not all farmers want a pack of hounds and riders tearing up their fields and will refuse them entry to their land.

I did not offer an alternative to one to one hunting ... Sam you are right ... Do I approve Mink Hunting ... do I approve fell hunting. As a country person I am always appalled by the animal liberationists who release mink into our countryside and am aware of the damage this can do ... pretty much in the way I am aware that we have the fox problem because human kind destroyed much of the natural environment which allowed predators of the fox to live. Pretty much like I am aware of the same problem which arises in the Scottish Highlands with a plethora of deer due to the lack of predators which balanced nature. I am honest I do not entirely know the best way to keep the numbers down ... I find it difficult to look on any beautiful creature and then choose to kill it ... I can justify death for the purposes of eating ... Fox are not vegitarians ... and will hunt or scavange ... and will go on a frenzy of kill if in an enclosed space with a lot of fluster around ... but we don't eat the fox. What then ... well some anti hunt people say shooting is kinder , and if it is instant yes I guess I would agree, but it is difficult to guarantee that instantaneous death in that way. Trapping and putting to sleep would cause stress beyond acceptability, contraception ... well it has been tried with some success in deer herds ... fed through food ... but no in honesty I don't have the definitive answer.

My views are based purely on my own morality ... I cannot abide unwarranted cruelty .. working in animal welfare I see too much neglect ... to many unwanted animals (a bit like the old hound too old to hunt) ... I have to humanely watch animals put to sleep because they have been made ill/agressive by human contact .. and I am sick of death caused by humans for reasons other than sustaining life. I know nature can be cruel ... and there are some who would say that human hunting is just an extension of this ... maybe it is. But I am entitled to my view, I live in a democracy and in time I live in hope that hunting will be banned ... I am entitled to believe that ... and I accept that my arguements are no more 100% water tight than those of the hunters.

I am glad however that Sam concurred with my view that the natural instinct of the dogs is an inbred thing and that you could not get just any dog or animal to behave in the way the hound does. As she knows I too thought it too strange when the offer was made .... We were at the time in possession of these 5 beautiful hounds for whom I would have laid down my life to ensure never experienced cruelty again, by the way thanks to Beagle rescue who aided in their final rehoming.

The old myth about blooding ... remember that happening in one of the royal hunts and being on the news ... oh not 30 years ago!! But I accept that the hunt have largely dropped that, or I hope they have ...

Anyway like I said an emotive and difficult subject ... and one on which our own gut feelings will win out over ... and I am sure the debate will rage on for years to come.

Incidentally .... I no more approve of anti hunt sabs who hurt or threaten hunters than I do the hunters ... before that accusation is made as it often is!! :)

Hi Caitlin

Very well put. Another voice of reason.

I too detest these anti hunt extremists who cause harm to the innocent dogs and horses involved and also the anti vivisectionists and anti fur farmers who just release the animals leaving them to fend for themselves and/or not being aware of the damage those animals can have on the balance of nature.

I do not support vivisection, other than for certain medical advancements and only where the animals get proper care and attention and have their suffering minimised. Vivisection for make-up and cleaners is in my mind totally unwarranted - surely we have enough of those products by now!

As for fur farming, hunting, I think that is the utmost arrogance that man shows. But just releasing all those mink into one concentrated spot was sheer lunacy.

As for the definitive answer on fox hunting - if there was one, we would have found it by now and we wouldn't be having this debate I guess. But it does make me wonder when we look at the medical and technological advancements that we have made over the past few decades - is chasing across the countryside really the only way to control foxes and other unwanted "pests".

We can now determine the sex of baby a couple will have and even allow them to choose. We can give previously infertile couples, same sex couples etc the joy of having a baby. We can stop those who don't want babies from having them. You would think that we could come up with some form of birth control over foxes.

We can send a man to the moon, keep people alive who if nature had taken course would have died from injuries. We can blow up all of the world if we so desired - yet we can't develop a humane way of trapping and putting to sleep these troublesome foxes. People involved in animal studies seem to manage to trap animals and make their study of them and then release them without casuing them any harm - so why can't we catch them in the same way?

I'm sorry - I cannot believe that there isn't some way of catching these animals and destroying them humanely.

I am sorry, but as a hunting person(retired) I cannot tell you what you want to hear, that I followed hounds for the enjoyment of seeing a fox killed. It was a job of work, the Hunt Staff worked, the hounds worked, and the followers whos job it was to assist the hunt, worked. It is not a group of blood thirsty humans, galloping across fields and hedges with lust to kill on their minds! Yes, there is a social eliment to it, as with any meeting of a group of likeminded people. Fox hunting is not to kill each and every fox, I could go on, but you do not want to hear about all the work 'huntspeople' do re conservation, so I'm not goint to waste my time typing. All you want to hear is that hunting folk love to see a fox pulled to pieces. Well, its untrue, and you will not hear that.
As to 'blooding' youngsters.Yes, this did happen years ago, it was something that disappeared during later years, but I imagine if a parent wants their child blooded it would be done.Personally, this is something I have never liked, I was to have been 'blooded' when a child, and showed my parents up something awful by totally refusing to have it done! I think it would be quite traumatic for a child to have the blood of a dead creature sploged on its face, not to mention the hygenic reasons against it.
As to antis hurting/injuring animals and horses, I can state they did in the past. I was there. They have also entered private property to threaten people doing their daily work. It was reported recently they put a bomb under someones car. (Can't remember the full details) So, don't tell me they are totally animal loving and totally innocent.
Pammy
Couldn't help but agree with most of your post, and your very level way of suggesting an alternative to fox hunting. Of course it should be possible to humainly trap them, put them in a container and then 'put them to sleep'. Would they suffer less trauma this way than by being hunted and killed? Can't answer that. But I can see your point.

Pammy,

Yes there are ways of killing animals without them suffering.
Yes there is the technology to locate them etc.
Yes there is a way to control the amount of vixens that give birth.

However as I mentioned earlier it is all about balance.
So often, and almost always with something as emotional as fox hunting, we tend to take a narrow view, regardless of the 'side' we are on.
We also tend to view things from just 1 direction.

It's only when we look at the 'bigger picture', that we can make a reasoned decision.

I spent years thinking that those who weren't on the same 'side' as me* were ignorent idiots! I now know better, because some time ago I made the effort to research and discuss the issues.

The real breakthrough was when I realised that those that are for AND those against were both equally right. It takes some getting your head around, doesn't it?

Let me put this to you, imagine that the ultimate decision is yours, however there is ONLY 2 choices:
Ban fox hunting and condemn 3 species of birds of prey to extinction;
OR
Keep the birds alive and flourishing by allowing fox hunting to continue.

Difficult decision isn't it?

Well no not really, I'd rather keep the birds and foxes !!

The actual choice though is infinately more complex.

I walked my dog yesterday morning through fields that had a light summer mist clinging to them, the trees and hedges floating above in silhoette. It was really beautiful.

But why were those trees and hedges there when it is easier, more productive and cheaper for the farmer to have just 1 single field?

If those hedges dissappeared, where would all the creatures who live in them go? ( in these particular fields, that includes at least 2 families of foxes and 1 badger family).

If the ONLY issue was whether to allow fox hunting, I wouldn't mind it being banned. However it will invlove much, much more. More importantly, I really cannot see how it will benifit foxes as a species.

*Incidently, I used to be against ANY form of hunting.

Hi Alan

Sorry - but I think I do take a "wider view" otherwise I would be one of those animal liberationists who would not understand or accept at all the need to curb the number of foxes. I also don't think I have ever called or considered anyone with a different view an "ignorant idiot". I accept that they have a different view. the reason for this debate is to allow people to share their views and we all have to accept that we have different views.

So, for balance etc, I understand about the balance - but isn't this what this is about. I also recognise that it would take some considerable time for those involved, however remotely, in hunting to adjust to life if the law was changed. But that has been the same for many other people who's industry has collapsed or who have been affected by changes in the law. But if things never changed - women would still not have the vote or a voice for starters. Life is all about change, some good some not so good but like it or not change exists.

I am not and never have said that foxes should be allowed to go un-controlled. If you read my earlier postings you will see that I already mentioned the loss of hedgerows etc upsetting the balance. But who caused that - the farmers so that they did have just one big field to plough, sow and reap. In doing so, removing much of the foxes and badgers natural food and causing extinction of certain animals and near extinction of many others.

Hunting as we recognise it for this discussion, Hunting Pinks, Horses, dogs guns etc, was openly recognised as a sport, just like the hunting of all those wonderful animals in Africa and India and the such like - purely so the wealthy could hang trophy's on their walls. But that didn't make it right. It's only since there have been moves to ban it that the control of pests argument has really been used and given as the cause for fox hunting. And yes - I do realise that there are many involved with hunting who are not rich etc - but rely on it for emplyment. that applies to so many things in this world though.

As for your choice of who should survive, ie foxes or birds, I'm not sure what you are getting at. All I am saying is that the blood hunting of foxes and deer in the way that it is done is cruel. These animals can be controlled by other means without upsetting the balance. If the balance of nature was so upset by controlling foxes then hunting would have killed the countryside off many years ago. After all, that is what the hunters say they are doing. All we are discussing here is the method by which foxes are controlled.

I'm not totally sure I understand what you are urguing for. I have never said that foxes must never be killed, but that the way it is done should be more humane. You say you used to be anti hunting - must say I'm not sure what you are now. Are you pro or anti hunting or pro fox control or anti fox control?

I am not sure what the reality of this is, but as I understand it the fox is a territorial creature. Therefore shouldn't the amount of foxes in a certain area be self-limiting?

If this is the case and they are indeed territorial, then as soon as one fox is killed then will not another eventually, sooner or later, take its place? I'm intrigued by this debate especially as it has remained so civil, I know there are strong passions on both sides and it's great that there's not been any slanging matches yet!!!

Lyndsay, people assume that the fox population is small. Their numbers can be huge in a very small area. Hence, why they cause such a problem to livestock and game and land. On one of our shoots 300 foxes were dealt with in one season alone. That was the total for that particular estate . The estate next door equalled that total plus more. And I have spoken to people in the north that deal with incredible numbers of Foxes every season.

Leigh

NB. There is no need for this subject to turn into a slanging match. ;-)

That does seem an awful lot of foxes!!

I am not sure how long a season is, but is it possible say for there to have been originally 150 foxes, and then when some were shot, for other foxes gradually over the season to have come onto the estate and made new homes for themselves because (in their opinion!) there was the room?

It's interesting that those who shoot game organise or participate in fox shoots? As further back others were discussing whether a fox could be shot humanely and so on, or whether it would die a lingering death of injuries sustained from being shot.

What is the case with foxes shot on estates, and who are they shot by? It would
be interesetin g to know how many are killed outright.

I have heard of hunted foxes someteimes dying of pneumonia when they go to hide uup in land drains, because of their cooling body temperature in damp conditions. That can't be a very nice way to die. I dislike the thought of any animal being killed, but realise there are many aspects to it. If the fox does have to be controlled, (I am thinking of the wider issures here mentioned by I beleive it was Alan J) perhpas shooting is best?

I'm sitting on the fence at the mement!!

Quote
"I have been intensively trained at 4 different schools of infantry in shooting and field craft skills & I am a close-quarter battle instructor, yet I cannot guarantee killing a fox outright at 25 yards with a shotgun"
Col. Hancock.

Although there are quite a few shotgun pellets in a cartridge they are quite light. This is what allows a bird like a Pheasant to be shot without being blown to bits. This also means that the penetration is not so good at any range which you are likely to hit a fox. At any rate, in daylight, it is a very lucky shot which kills a fox outright. As the law stands, a high-powered rifle is the only allowed gun for deer and this would be the best gun for fox. Of course with this the risks to passers by are greatly increased. The bullets travel further and do more damage if they hit anything including humans!

John

Lindsay, I agree that it does seem to be a lot of Foxes. But I can assure you that if you speak to anyone who lives on a large Farm or Estate, they will have similar numbers and more ! The shooting of Foxes is NOT undertake lightly and does not follow the same format as "organised" pheasant shoots at all. For a start , there will only be one gun (or maybe two) that will take part. I can not speak for all shoots but usually it is carried out by a skilled marksman (using a rifle**) who has a specialist knowledge of shooting foxes and not your "average" gun. You have to understand that the marksman , will shoot to kill. It is never his (or anyone elses intention) to wound an animal. Most are killed outright, but on the odd occassion that this is not the case, the gun will try his best to finish the job as quickly as possible.

I do not know the answer to the Fox Problem Lindsay. I do know that Shooting, if not carried out by a "specialist" is not the answer.

To try and put a bit of perspective into this: what about all the thousands upon thousands of foxes that suffer long lingering deaths after being struck by motor vehicles? Do all the drivers return to see if the animal has been killed outright, or do they just drive on ?

Leigh

**John has explained about shot, so I do not need to.

I can back this up by telling you about a call out we had last year to a farm, where a fox, with 3 legs was witnessed slaughtering lambs on several evenings, but was impossible to shoot at due to close proximity of ewes/buildings etc. We took 4 couple of hounds to the farm yard, and as we discussed the problem this fox had been causing with the farmer, it limped across the lambing paddock with afterbirth in its mouth. The hounds saw it, which is very unusual as normally they work 100% by scent, and within seconds it had been killed. Closer inspection showed the leg had been shot off, probably a few weeks before hand, it was full of lead, infection & fly strike and newborn lambs were all it had the energy to catch. It had an instant death by hounds, far better than the lingering torture it had had to endure thus far, by a shotgun.