> Unfortunately what you sugest and what is now happening are two different things as Isabels warden can testify :-(

absolutely, and over shooting is probably worse that no shooting at all, a massive growth in rabbits will be catastrophic, they are so destructive! look what theyve done in australia!

as ever its a case of balance...not always easy to attain.

thats why hiring someone else might be benfitial, such as the stalker i knew who would look into it. also if say a farmers hen house is being attacked, why not just wait at the hen house and shoot the one that comes? perhaps simplistic but then i'm no expert.

no its not. is a countryside pursuit.

natural selection is conducted by naturally occuring things, ability to catch prey, ability to create shelter etc...

LOL are you sure ? sorry Isabel couldnt resist that one ROFLOL

ROFL! :)

I grew up in Cumbria (Foot packs, except for one The Cumberland Farmers) and hunted mainly with the Eskdale (think terrain) or 'Eshdul' should I say ;)

My Father was Master of Mink Hounds (Otter Hound pack) and we lived in the Farmhouse of the Holker Hall estate, so Deer Stalking, Duck and Pheasant shoots were also part of my life.

So having first hand experience of both shooting and hunting I know which I'd prefer and a clean break to the neck is it. I never saw a 'Ripping apart' kill by Hounds Though I've seen plenty with my Sibes... the most traumatic injuries and 'Ripping' I ever saw were actually tourists dogs setting about our sheep!! ('Grockles!!')

Now retired from the BBC my Father is head of publications for BASC (British asos. for shooting and conservation) and I know he still maintains the same view as I, from first hand experience of both.

In the Aftermath of Chenobyl Hill Farmers had a meagre hand to mouth existence and worked all the hours god sent, Going off in that terrain with a gun or hiring a gun were not as black and white easy as one might imagine!! and nowadays the aftermath of Foot mouth and the general struggle of farming in modern UK. :(

Just come in on this post late but wonder :-
If foxes were eaten as food and sold as fox fillets at ASDA then farmers would be allowed to......
Remove their teeth,
cut their tails off,
keep them in tiny cages on mesh floors,
feed them on the same basic diet or force-fed all their short and miserable lives.
Then when ready for slaughter, they can freeze them, gas them, shoot them or electrocute them to death.
And we would pay.

Compared to many species, foxes (even during the hunting era) lived a wonderful life. In my very humble opinion of course, not very PC though.

> natural selection is conducted by naturally occuring things, ability to catch prey, ability to create shelter etc...

.....and predation by higher species.

yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn :( :( :(

In Germany they don't have fox hunting as it existed here, my breed is used to track & retrieve fox and it is all done with hunter & gun as can be seen here.    Most of the HPR breeds in Germany are used on foxes, no need for hounds and all are shot.

sorry meant to write rifles not shotguns.

>sorry meant to write rifles not shotguns.

There are different laws for the ownership of rifles and shotguns.

Ill bite since i need my mind taking off other matters..

Where to start...

Fox hunting was pest control - though now banned it remains the only species specific method of controlling fox populations that also promotes survival of the fittest.

The idea that 1 single fox is hunted for hours and hours on end until it drops from exhaustion is just not the case, in any set 'country' (area that a hunt covers) there will be many foxes - the fit ones get away and that is fine. Those who are not fit, either are old, ill or injured, do not get away. Over the course of one days hunting, hounds will usually find and subsequently lose a number of foxes and a kill is by no means a guarantee.

Comparing our concept of being chased and fearing death to a wild animals is not helpful, we have lost our abilities to cope with the idea of being predated upon, because we have wiped out all our predators. Wild animals have, if you will, zones of awareness, they can be aware of danger a mile away, aware of danger half a mile away... (and very frequently the fox is a LONG way from the hounds) and its only in the last closing stages of a hunt, the last few minutes that fox really IS aware he is in serious danger.

If wild animals spent their entire time panicking and terrified of potential danger they would all drop dead of heart attacks, because they are unlike us, never EVER totally safe, rarely out of hearing of potential danger etc. They have evolved to cope with this.

This isnt just theory, i have and im sure many others have, witnessed this for myself, seeing the fox idley wandering along a hedgerow or smartly nipping up a stream whilst the hunt are ten fields away making a right racket.... ive watched rabbits casually nibbling grass with just one ear cocked to a dog 100 yrds away.. this is their life and they do not think or react like we do.

Shooting foxes if done well is great, but unfortunately for many areas of the country, highly impractical - its incredibly difficult to safely shoot (to do so you must be aware of what ELSE is around you and many tragic accidents have occurred to both non target species and human beings) - the places foxes like to live and hunt are full of hedgerows - can you guarantee that you wont miss, your round go through the hedge and hit something or someONE on the other side? If you cant... you shouldnt shoot!

As already mentioned, someone paid to shoot foxes is paid to shoot foxes, not dally around checking if these are the old, weak, injured, ill foxes who will become serious pests or rogues who have learned that picking off newly born lambs is easier than 'working' for a living, shoot first, ask questions later.

Theres a lot said about snobbery, about red coats and toffs on horseback and this is yet another misconception. Plenty of hunts involve no horses at all, many more are farmers hunts with hairy cobs and retired race horses making up most of the field..

In any case, the field subsidise the hunting, for the priviledge of riding over other peoples land they pay a fair sum (not sure how much these days but hundreds), and this money pays for the hunt not only to go out several times a week in the season, but to perform low cost services such as removing fallen stock, putting down livestock and disposing of carcasses (something which is not a simple task at all given the various rules and regs).

Without the field these services just cannot be provided, and the best alternatives are prohibitively expensive - the worst ones are cheap... snaring is afaik, still legal (unless someone can tell me that this is no longer the case), this is a very cheap option but very inhumane, none species specific and does nothing towards promoting a health, trouble free population of any animal.

As long as you have a licence you can take a shotgun out and take pot shots at a fox and as far as i know as long as your INTENTION is to kill it quickly and minimise suffering it is not a crime to miss or injure the fox (though you probably get your licence removed if you badly injure or kill another person.. )

Surely the fact that hunt fields have increased since the ban, shows without shadow of a doubt that for the field, the death of the fox had absolutely nothing to do with the enjoyment of the hunt!

>Wild animals have, if you will, zones of awareness, they can be aware of danger a mile away, aware of danger half a mile away... (and very frequently the fox is a LONG way from the hounds) and its only in the last closing stages of a hunt, the last few minutes that fox really IS aware he is in serious danger.

The closest analogy I can think of is walking along the street, with all the traffic going past. We walk along and chat to each other, with the single biggest cause of premature human death only feet away, but we don't give it a thought. Yet when crossing the road, or walking along the hard shoulder of the motorway to get to an emergency phone, the awareness of danger is much stronger!

Saw this, it was really funny, and amusiing!! The things they do on that show!! lol!!

I didnt see the show, sounds comical though completely pointless (as Top Gear often is!)

I am totally against hunting. There is no need for it. It is inhumane..... There i said it. Thats my view and everyone else is entitled to theirs but i for one let out a huge sigh of joy when the hunting ban came in (even though it needs to be smartened up in a few areas)

So you disagree that there is any need to control pest numbers?

Or you disagree that there is any need to control foxes (and thus to consider foxes pests at all)?

Or you disagree with hunting as a form of pest control.

Can you identify another method of pest control that fulfulls ALL of these criteria:

Is species specific.
Promotes a healthy population by removing weak, injured or deformed, or old individuals.
Results in a clean, fast kill - no injured animals remain lingering for days or weeks.
Is financially viable.
Is adaptable to a variety of terrains/environments.

Playing the devils avocado here as is my wont - id re-read the actual legislation if i were you and perhaps retract that sigh of joy. The ban has done precisely ZERO for the welfare of foxes or hares, it is still legal to shoot them, snare them, and use a hawk on them - none of which fit all the above criteria. Oh and its still legal to hunt them too, with hounds... so long as you dont intend to kill them with the hounds but shoot or use a bird of prey instead.

So yay for a law thats done nothing but promote some of the cheaper, less humane methods of control and dupe people who thought that something was really being improved.

Or you disagree that there is any need to control foxes (and thus to consider foxes pests at all)?

Yes

> Or you disagree that there is any need to control foxes (and thus to consider foxes pests at all)?
>
> Yes

So you would prefer nature to control them.  How do you imagine that will pan out?  Starvation as food supplies deminish?  More encroachment into towns etc to scavange and risk the dangers there?

So you disagree that there is any need to control pest numbers?

Or you disagree that there is any need to control foxes (and thus to consider foxes pests at all)?

Or you disagree with hunting as a form of pest control.

Can you identify another method of pest control that fulfulls ALL of these criteria:

Before you jump the gun i did not say any of the above!!!!!! I said i am against hunting i.e hounds and horses.There are effective and more humane ways to control the fox population.

oh please can we have a yaaaaaaawwwwnnnnnn emoticon???  This has been dragged on so many times....we all have our own opinions....those who are antis are not likely to change and those of us who hunt are not going to either so it really is a pointless thread. Go read previous threads if you want to read all the fictional rubbish plus the truths.

Totally agree with Sam.

I agree with you as well, no need to start getting on high horses, some people are against, some are the opposite, its a matter of opinion, of which isnt really for this board...

Why isn't it for this board?  This is Foo.  If people are bored they are under no obligation to read let alone join in.

If they want to cause an argument, or a debate, whichever, all i am saying is that they should create a new post about fox hunting, then they can share their opinions there, makes sense, this was to discuss clarksons hunting.. thats all i am saying! Why are some people so quick to jump down others throats!

a debate, whichever, all i am saying is that they should create a new post about fox hunting, then they can share their opinions there, makes sense, this was to discuss clarksons hunting

Exactly, and as the OP is away now for a while, she can't comment furthur. It has gone off topic as it was never meant to discuss foxhunting (yet again yawnnnnnnn) nor off road driving (also yet again, the ramblers have for many years tried to remove off roaders from legal rights of way or 'green lanes' but again that is another topic).
So once again I agree with sam. if anyone wants to read the other topics regarding fox hunting they are there to be found, or if someone wants to start a topic regarding foxhunting that option is there also, but this is about Clarkson and the great ''foxhunt debate'' has taken it off topic. :)

Well thats me told!

Oh well, was taking my mind off of recent events but if its offending others ill go play elsewhere.

That was not directed at you Fredsmum. I happen to respect the stance you have made, you don't agree with foxhunting and I don't see that anyone should have a problem with that. 
I simply think it would be a shame to continue unless someone else wants to make a post directed at fox hunting, then those of us that do not wish to take part can ignore it.

No just so its clear it wasnt directed at you freds mum, you just innocently posted a post saying your opinion! It was the post after i was directing it at...

Hope i havent caused anyone offence, hate it when that happens! lol :)

I should have added a smiley face after. I said "thats me told" tongue in cheek. :-) I was not offended and realise that when i have such strong views on hunting things get firey so i agree, its best not to carry on with it on this thread.

haha! i can only do a smiley face on this thing, dont know how to do a tongue i dont think...
x

I am against Fox Hunting or any other Hunting for that matter, I have strong opinions on it and dont wish to get into a heated debate on this board (does seem to be the majority is for Hunting which surprises me) .
Think we are all entitled to our own opinion

> (does seem to be the majority is for Hunting which surprises me

As the main reason for mans association with the canine race has been as helper in hunting and then when he settled as a guardian of his flocks from wild predators then why would a group of dog owners being pro hunting be surprising.

i own a dog as i consider myself to be an animal lover, of all animals.

> i consider myself to be an animal lover, of all animals

I suspect every poster on CD is :-) (apart from baboons) (and possibly spiders)

i was making the point that even although many dogs were originally used for hunting, i dont have to be in favour of that to be a dog owner. i am one simply because i love dogs.

actually apart form spiders as you say :) though i dont like them being killed, just nowhere near me!

And one of the many good things about the hunt (in my opinion of course) is the stunning sight of the hounds in the pack running together across the fields - I could watch them all day. It amazes me how our local hunt have their hounds so fantastically trained - a lot of care and attention go into those dogs. :-)

> i was making the point that even although many dogs were originally used for hunting, i dont have to be in favour of that to be a dog owner.

No you don't :-) but nor do you have to be against it when you love all animals.  We share an interest in all animals living alongside in balance with our world, even spiders :-)  We just don't agree on the same solution on achieving that balance in the best way for all.

> (does seem to be the majority is for Hunting which surprises me)

or perhaps just the majority of those who reply Paddington Bear ;) 

It amazes me how our local hunt have their hounds so fantastically trained - a lot of care and attention go into those dogs.

having worked in hunt kennels (albeit as a groom) you are very correct in that a lot of time and effort goes into the training and care of hounds, and much as they are a working dog, kenneled, they are given and return a lot of love and affection from those that care for them. It is a 24/7 'job' -or should that be lifestyle- by genuine people with a love of animals and a deep respect for all things countryside. The pay is low, living conditions not always that grand, the hunt staff are dedicated to the animals in their care.