Buying through this banner helps support the forum!

View Poll Results: is fox hunting justifed?

Voters
9. You may not vote on this poll
  • no

    5 55.56%
  • yes

    3 33.33%
  • I can't decide

    1 11.11%
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 59

Thread: Fox Hunting

  1. #31
    confidentially pleased cacian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    13,930
    Quote Originally Posted by OrphanPip View Post
    They are slaughtered then skinned.
    oh dear. I don't know what is worse hunting or farming.
    and what a terrible waste.
    the height of modern living/civlisation and we are still slaughtering animals to suits our fantasies.
    it may never try
    but when it does it sigh
    it is just that
    good
    it fly

  2. #32
    Registered User prendrelemick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Yorkshire
    Posts
    4,871
    Blog Entries
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by cacian View Post
    that is one big contradiction of the century. to protect something is to let it roam. obviously a fox hunter has no understanding of anything here.



    irrational. protect to kill. where is the sense in that?


    did they? no surprise there then.




    let see thee is no morality here. it is not about ok or not ok. it is about a fox.
    a fix belongs to nature it is not a matter of morality but a matter of logic.
    like anything in life man destroys because he thinks he can rely on morality.
    lets turn the tables around and I decide to hunt the hunter instead? would it bother some? maybe not. and that is exactly the point.
    who cares. it is about hunting after all.




    that is not fair. that is waging war against it. fox hunting is taking away nature's supply.



    I am sorry this quite offensive. starvation is man's made. if a fox starves is because the hunter in general took away the food available in the wild. the more shooting of birds and whatnot and the more starving a fox becomes.
    again gun shooting. let's hunt with a gun let's take way the chain of food supply and the create another game. let shoot the animal instead because it has nothing left to eat.
    now we are finished with the animals. we have nothing to eat ourselves because we have shot everything.
    now let shoot each other instead. it is just a matter of time.
    guess what?
    a man deserves everything he gets and more.


    glad someone acted.
    rural belongs to everyone. it is not up to the rural ,man to decide alone. it is everybody's rural. let's put the facts right here.

    sorry prendrelmick this is nothing against or your beliefs but things are to be said otherwise it is everyone out for themselves.
    we are supposed to look up to our environment and not wage against it.
    if we do not we are to pay the consequences of our actions and let face the history of men is not looking good.
    starvation is just a way around the corner. it happened before it will happen again.
    destroying nature stock just because we think we do not like is never justified and here it starts with a fox.
    I would say that the fox is a creature that has adapted and benefited from human activity.
    ay up

  3. #33
    confidentially pleased cacian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    13,930
    Quote Originally Posted by prendrelemick View Post
    I would say that the fox is a creature that has adapted and benefited from human activity.
    in what ways has it adapted? it was already adapted before human activity took over it.
    it is now all over the place.
    it may never try
    but when it does it sigh
    it is just that
    good
    it fly

  4. #34
    Registered User prendrelemick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Yorkshire
    Posts
    4,871
    Blog Entries
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by mal4mac View Post

    I dislike Mick dismissing all "urban intellectuals" as simply "chattering classes". Some may be, but most deep & passionate thinkers have been urban (think of Dickens, Bertrand Russell,...) Mick sets up an image of reactionary country squires being "true thinkers", while suggesting there is something false about urban intellectuals. This really isn't going to help the cause of the countryside alliance - urban intellectuals, chattering or not, far outnumber reactionary country squires (thank goodness!)
    I think we are both invoking stereotypes here.
    ay up

  5. #35
    Registered User prendrelemick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Yorkshire
    Posts
    4,871
    Blog Entries
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by cacian View Post
    in what ways has it adapted? it was already adapted before human activity took over it.
    it is now all over the place.
    It has adapted to human activity moved into the city and become very numerous and successful. In the country it feeds on rabbits (introduced into this land by man) pheasant, grouse, lamb, roadkill etc. Man has also removed its competitors above it in the food chain. I doubt very much if it has ever had it so good.

    To expand the argument slightly, no species of animal or bird that is regularly hunted for "sport" will ever become endangered - because they are looked after. Even the RSPA and the RSPB admit that managed hunting grounds are richer in wildlife than adjacent areas because the habitats needed for the game also suits the wildlife.
    ay up

  6. #36
    confidentially pleased cacian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    13,930
    Quote Originally Posted by prendrelemick View Post
    It has adapted to human activity moved into the city and become very numerous and successful. In the country it feeds on rabbits (introduced into this land by man) pheasant, grouse, lamb, roadkill etc. Man has also removed its competitors above it in the food chain. I doubt very much if it has ever had it so good.

    To expand the argument slightly, no species of animal or bird that is regularly hunted for "sport" will ever become endangered - because they are looked after. Even the RSPA and the RSPB admit that managed hunting grounds are richer in wildlife than adjacent areas because the habitats needed for the game also suits the wildlife.
    a fox is our responsibility if we fail to manage it we should fail everything else in the horizon. a fox is just an allegory of how bad we are at managing anything that is given for free. carelessness weighs a price. everything is accounted for I believe.

    regular hunting will weigh the price too. the more of it and the less of our nature and wild life.
    the fox is one sing of this happening.
    hunting drives the fauna away from the habitat they are used to which means their chance of survival is slimmer then ever. birds and other hunted fauna learns to remember where the hunt progress and therefore learns to move away to hide.
    this is not a good sign. in the long term hunters are destabilising nature habitat and thus causing more extinction then ever before.
    animals are intuitive like us they know when the next hunt is going to be and so ensure they are no longer there. that is pushing them away.
    that is not a good thing.
    this is my opinion.
    Last edited by cacian; 04-27-2014 at 02:52 PM.
    it may never try
    but when it does it sigh
    it is just that
    good
    it fly

  7. #37
    Dance Magic Dance OrphanPip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Kuala Lumpur but from Canada
    Posts
    4,163
    Blog Entries
    25
    Humans would need to be hunting far more foxes than they are to threaten them realistically.

    Conservationist and ecologist acknowledge the necessity of hunting in some cases to preserve an ecosystem that is already disrupted by human activity. Deer populations in much of North America require hunting to keep them under control, otherwise they start to destroy habitat and endanger other more vulnerable species.

    Animals are threatened by the growth of cities, industry, commercial fishing, logging, and mining in many places, but hunting only serves a significant risk to a handful of African animals, like cheetahs and elephants. There needs to be some sort of economic incentive to drive people to hunt a species excessively (like elephant ivory, or the possible exception of "big game" that is hunted by rich sociopaths), otherwise most hunters are sensible enough not to threaten animal populations.
    "If the national mental illness of the United States is megalomania, that of Canada is paranoid schizophrenia."
    - Margaret Atwood

  8. #38
    Registered User prendrelemick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Yorkshire
    Posts
    4,871
    Blog Entries
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by cacian View Post
    a fox is our responsibility if we fail to manage it we should fail everything else in the horizon. a fox is just an allegory of how bad we are at managing anything that is given for free. carelessness weighs a price. everything is accounted for I believe.
    I agree with all of that...

    Quote Originally Posted by cacian View Post
    regular hunting will weigh the price too. the more of it and the less of our nature and wild life.
    the fox is one sing of this happening.
    hunting drives the fauna away from the habitat they are used to which means their chance of survival is slimmer then ever. birds and other hunted fauna learns to remember where the hunt progress and therefore learns to move away to hide.
    this is not a good sign. in the long term hunters are destabilising nature habitat and thus causing more extinction then ever before.
    animals are intuitive like us they know when the next hunt is going to be and so ensure they are no longer there. that is pushing them away.
    that is not a good thing.
    this is my opinion.
    ...and none of that.

    Here is my experience.

    I have a small farm and have recently started actively encouraging ground nesting birds by providing habitat areas for them. It has been very successful.

    A few miles away a farmer I know has taken the same measures and has had no success. The difference is that my farm is next to a grouse moor that has full time gamekeepers on it and they control the predators of grouse - most significantly crows and magpies. This gives snipe, lapwing, curlew, oyster catcher, pipit, skylark, grey partridge, a better chance on my land.
    Last edited by prendrelemick; 04-27-2014 at 04:18 PM.
    ay up

  9. #39
    TobeFrank Paulclem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Coventry, West Midlands
    Posts
    6,363
    Blog Entries
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by prendrelemick View Post
    The Hunts used to protect and encourage the fox - so that they could run them down and kill them with dogs and horses come the season of the year. Gamekeepers and Huntsmen used to come to blows over it. Now, in the countryside it's a rifle and night sight job.

    I didn't think hunting with dogs was a good thing, but I didn't agree with the ban for three main reasons.

    I knew people who hunted, and unlike the portrayal in the press, they were in the main rational and intelligent people, who had thought about the issues and come to the conclusion that hunting was morally ok. I also knew a couple of hunt saboteurs who would not consider any other point of view as relevant. I didn't hunt, but why should I wish to stop everyone else from hunting, what was it to do with me? Why should one group impose a narrow, ill informed, morality on another.

    Being a country boy the cruelty argument holds very little sway. I Know that whatever cruelty man does, Mother Nature will out do. There is no old age in the wild. Starvation is the only natural end for a fox, either through injury or disease or a bad winter.

    Finally, and most difficult explain, I resented the urban majority imposing its will on the rural minority over an issue about which it was not involved. Fox hunting polarized feelings of being misunderstood, we wanted to be left alone.
    The perception I have of pro-hunt people is of privileged people promoting their own sport at the expense of an animal. It may well be that my own working class chip on the shoulder attitude has made me susceptible to media portrayals of the pro fox hunting lobby. I can appreciate that there will be rational people who have considered the morality of hunting and support it. Unfortunately rational debate often leaves when the press get hold of something and they interview the extremists in order to fuel the story but not the debate.

    I understand the cruelty point. It's not an aspect I had considered in this discussion, but I am aware of nature's cruelty. I don't know whether it is a support for fox hunting - culling the aged foxes. I also don't think that because nature is cruel that we can condone it in ourselves.

    Consensus politics is never going to make us all happy, and it seems that this particular issue has a lot of aspects. What may be a personal prejudice - the class aspect - has seen other working class bloodsports - dog fighting etc be banned, but not fox hunting.

    I think a large part is the general attitude towards animals which sees the urban majority not understanding the country reality. (I have heard people say things like I eat pork and beef but not the lambs - as if a perceived cuteness makes eating the other species more justified). The urban majority may well be hypocritical - protecting wild foxes but happily consuming other animals.

    At the end of the day though management of wild species I can accept if it is based on a rational argument. I couldn't accept that fox hunting for sport is anything other than an indulgence that anyone really needs to do.

    I haven't read all this thread so apologies if I'm repeating. (Busy busy!!)

  10. #40
    Procrastinator General *Classic*Charm*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Leaning on this broken fence, between Past and Present tense
    Posts
    4,908
    Blog Entries
    18
    Justification depends entirely on your individual concern. Mine is animal welfare, meaning that I believe that all animals should live a life as free as possible from pain, stress, fear, frustration, and hunger. It also means that for me, in most cases, animals are better off dead than in a state of poor welfare. It also means that their death should be humane, if possible. I am not an animal rights weirdo, who thinks that everything has the right to be free or that alive is always better than dead or that humans should not "use" animals. Just to clarify- there is a BIG difference between animal welfare and animal rights.

    So, I believe that hunting for sport or pleasure is not justified because of the stress and fear experienced by the animals being hunted. It is also not justified because when the animals are killed, they are not killed humanely, and no, being shot is not a humane death. I don't believe in sport fishing for the same reasons. I also don't think it is fair for the hunting dogs who course but are then prevented from the kill, resulting in frustration.

    I do believe in controlled, government-authorized, humane cullings for overpopulated species in order to keep ecological balance in check.
    I'm weary with right-angles, abbreviated daylight,
    Waiting for a winter to be done.
    Why do I still see you in every mirrored window,
    In all that I could never overcome?

  11. #41
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    London
    Posts
    918
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by *Classic*Charm* View Post
    Justification depends entirely on your individual concern. Mine is animal welfare, meaning that I believe that all animals should live a life as free as possible from pain, stress, fear, frustration, and hunger. It also means that for me, in most cases, animals are better off dead than in a state of poor welfare. It also means that their death should be humane, if possible. I am not an animal rights weirdo, who thinks that everything has the right to be free or that alive is always better than dead or that humans should not "use" animals. Just to clarify- there is a BIG difference between animal welfare and animal rights.

    So, I believe that hunting for sport or pleasure is not justified because of the stress and fear experienced by the animals being hunted. It is also not justified because when the animals are killed, they are not killed humanely, and no, being shot is not a humane death. I don't believe in sport fishing for the same reasons. I also don't think it is fair for the hunting dogs who course but are then prevented from the kill, resulting in frustration.

    I do believe in controlled, government-authorized, humane cullings for overpopulated species in order to keep ecological balance in check.
    Are you a vegetarian?

  12. #42
    Procrastinator General *Classic*Charm*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Leaning on this broken fence, between Past and Present tense
    Posts
    4,908
    Blog Entries
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by Volya View Post
    Are you a vegetarian?
    I am not.

    (I could write pages in response to this question)
    Last edited by *Classic*Charm*; 04-28-2014 at 04:07 PM.
    I'm weary with right-angles, abbreviated daylight,
    Waiting for a winter to be done.
    Why do I still see you in every mirrored window,
    In all that I could never overcome?

  13. #43
    All are at the crossroads qimissung's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lost in the bell's curve
    Posts
    5,123
    Blog Entries
    66
    And why would you ask that? Do you think it would change the validity of her comment in any way?
    "The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its' own reason for existing." ~ Albert Einstein
    "Remember, no matter where you go, there you are." Buckaroo Bonzai
    "Some people say I done alright for a girl." Melanie Safka

  14. #44
    Procrastinator General *Classic*Charm*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Leaning on this broken fence, between Past and Present tense
    Posts
    4,908
    Blog Entries
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by qimissung View Post
    And why would you ask that? Do you think it would change the validity of her comment in any way?
    (I suspect I'm about to be called a hypocrite That's usually what comes next)
    I'm weary with right-angles, abbreviated daylight,
    Waiting for a winter to be done.
    Why do I still see you in every mirrored window,
    In all that I could never overcome?

  15. #45
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    London
    Posts
    918
    Blog Entries
    2
    You guessed correctly I do think it is hypocritical given you said 'I believe that all animals should live a life as free as possible from pain, stress, fear, frustration, and hunger' - Eating meat is not necessary and goes completely against that statement. You either accept this makes you a hypocrite, or you admit that you do not care as much about animals as you claim.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Two days ago he went out to hunt/hunting
    By Square in forum General Chat
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-26-2014, 10:20 PM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-24-2012, 05:31 PM
  3. Hunting
    By evansan7 in forum Personal Poetry
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 12-13-2011, 05:33 PM
  4. Deer hunting with Paul Harvey - John Malmin
    By jmalmin in forum Short Story Sharing
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-30-2010, 07:53 PM
  5. Hunting Up Some More Dialogues
    By The Comedian in forum Philosophical Literature
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-02-2010, 02:42 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •