| Author |
Message |
borgslayer
Rear Admiral
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 2646
Location: Las Vegas
|
 Sat Feb 19, 2005 1:12 pm Fox Hunting Ban in the UK |
|
This is a discussion on what people think about fox hunting.
First off the Pro Fox Hunting group which consist of mostly rich, and a few middle class Brits wants this sport to continue, while the Animal Rights activist want this sport to never become unbanned.
Now in my opinion these Foxes are innocent animals that has done wrong to society so the reason they should'nt be hunted anymore. Plus I don't believe hunting is a sport because it does nothing but kill lots of animals that can't produce in a population fast enough. So hunting just leads to extinction of animals.
I think these Pro Fox Hunting group does not care about nature, the reason I really do not like any of them. So I'm in support of the New UK Fox Hunting Ban.
|
|
|
Jeremy
J's Guy
Joined: 03 Oct 2002
Posts: 7823
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
|
| Sat Feb 19, 2005 2:30 pm |
|
| BBC News wrote: |
First arrests under new hunt laws
Four men have been arrested by police in Wiltshire in what is believed to be the first arrests under the new hunting legislation.
The men were found on an unclassified road near Malmesbury, with four dogs and the carcass of a hare.
A 53-year-old from Ireland and three men, aged 31, 32 and 33, from South Wales were arrested on suspicion of hunting with dogs.
The four have now been released on police bail pending further inquiries.
The men, who were arrested at 0400 GMT, are also being investigated over possible firearms offences relating to a modified air rifle and possible offensive weapons charges.
Wiltshire Police spokesman Dave Taylor said: "We would stress that they were nothing to do with any of the organised hunts."
In total it is believed more than 270 hunt groups set out on Saturday, just one day after the ban came in.
Anti-hunt groups - such as the League Against Cruel Sports - deployed 100 monitors at hunt meets to check for illegal activity.
Mike Hobday, from the league, said video evidence of the law being broken was to be passed onto police.
"Our evidence suggests that most hunts did operate within the law, many meeting and promptly going home and others peacefully exercising their hounds or drag hunting.
"However, we have received reports of what we believe is clearly illegal activity by a number of hunts across Britain."
The Countryside Alliance said the meets would show the new law was "impossibly difficult to determine" and open to different interpretations.
Chief executive Simon Hart said: "There has been hunting in England for 700 years. This [ban] may take two or three years, perhaps two or three months, to unpick.
"It will be nothing more than a temporary break in normal service." |
[/quote]
|
|
|
Seven of Nine
Sammie's Mammy
Joined: 16 Jun 2001
Posts: 7871
Location: North East England
|
| Sat Feb 19, 2005 2:56 pm |
|
I'm in support of the fox hunting ban. Dogs chasing a fox until it's too exhaused to run any further and then it being killed is just cruel. Anyway, as was shown today, there are plenty of ways that the hunts can continue without this cruelty. Have dogs sniff artificially placed scents is still legal, as is hunting rabbits (although I don't agree with that either). Hopefully this will all calm down soon, with the ban intact.
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Sat Feb 19, 2005 3:48 pm |
|
Without men to take their share of animals out of wilderness, =the balance is thrown off.
Just wait until you start dealing with Fox overpopulation, til theres not enough food in their forests, and they starve. I don't know what the fox situation is like in England, but in many places in the US deer overpopulation is becoming a HUGE problem because of a declining number of hunters. Deer are hit by cars in extreme numbers, deer in certain habitats are suffering from a lack of food, they've been destroying crops in farmlands, and they're basically infesting our urban, suburban, and rural areas.
Hunters are conservationists, and they better understand natural ecology than 99% of the environmental wackos who always think that the must superficial solution is the best.
That's just speaking from the perspective of American hunters, I really don't know the sitution in England well enough.
|
|
|
Seven of Nine
Sammie's Mammy
Joined: 16 Jun 2001
Posts: 7871
Location: North East England
|
| Sat Feb 19, 2005 5:21 pm |
|
I don't think the fox population is the issue here. Farmers are allowed to shoot foxes that are causing problems, and that's a more humane way of getting rid of them than hunting them with dogs.
I've just gone and looked up this issue, and found this:
| Quote: | The red fox, Vulpes vulpes, is found throughout most of the northern & some of the southern hemisphere, it is one of the few species that thrive alongside man. It has adapted perfectly to urban & suburban environments, this is probably due to it's unobtrusive behaviour, small size, about that of a large cat, & it's adaptability in eating just about anything, including, worms, beetles, berries, carrion, small rodents, rabbits, birds, & human waste.
There are many stories of foxes eating anything from children to cattle, sheep & cats. The fox is an opportunist & basically lazy. They will not bother with elusive prey, anything larger than a chicken or a young lamb. It would rather go scavenging which might produce an easier meal. Larger prey will be buried to insure against future hard times, when food may be scarce. There has never been a documented case of a fox killing a cat, it is usually the other way around, & only one case of an unprovoked attack on a human.
MISUNDERSTADINGS
The fear of foxes might be that man has always been nervous of animals that move around under the cover of darkness. Fox screams often wake & scare people, but they are no more than fox conversations. This is usually only problematic for short periods during autumn, when juveniles are dispersing & in the breeding season, between Christmas & late January.
The real fear of foxes probably stems from the hunters, who have a POSITIVE affect on the fox population in rural communities by continually disrupting territory boundaries, provoking more foxes to inhabit the area. In the south east of England hunters have an INSIGNIFICANT effect on population as most foxes live in urban environments where food is in abundance due to human waste, here the main causes of death is traffic. Many urban dwellers revel in the knowledge that a wild animal like the fox is likely to pass through their garden every night, they are also beneficial as they clear up a lot of what we waste & keep down the populations of many species of rodent. As foxes search for food in gardens, damage may occur, particularly where fish, blood or bonemeal fertilisers are confused with buried food. Most garden damage can easily be prevented by using chemical repellents which move foxes on humanely.
Concern is sometimes expressed over too many foxes being present in an area. The population like that of all carnivores, is self regulating & is limited by the amount of food & territory available. Cubs born simply replace the number of adults lost since the previous breeding season. Which counters the fox hunters claims of fox population control. Foxes are loners, not pack animals.
The fox is quick to recieve blame for behaviour that is usually the work of pet cats & dogs. It is a scavenger, looking for easy meals, so to attack a dog, cat, child, cow or sheep is a waste of effort. It is true that a fox will take livestock such as chickens, rabbits & guinea pigs if they are not properly secured. Captive fowl will always be in danger, as we clip their wings, preventing them from escape, & we keep them in high density in poorly secured cages. A fox will kill all of them, so that it can return & take them off to be buried for later use. As they can only carry one at a time, it will obviously take a while to cache all of them which they will if not disturbed, which they usually are. The behaviour of man in removing the birds escape response, & not providing adequate protection afterwards is more at fault than a hungry fox.
When a fox kills, it does so quietly, with a quick bite to the back of the neck. Many 'fox' attacks can be attributed to dogs, who attack the soft underbelly of their prey first. Hunters will say that hounds kill foxes with a quick bite to the back of the neck, whilst video footage will show them tearing at the foxes stomach. It is also true that many upland foxes will take lambs, but when you consider that a lamb is enough to feed it for a few days, then calculate the population size & deaths attributable to the fox, the blame must not lie entirely with the fox. Also the majority of lambs taken will already be dead (still born etc.) Wrestling a lamb & pulling it away from a far larger ewe would not be an easy task.
The incidents regarding foxes taking lambs is very small as even MAFF (Ministry of Agricluture, Fisheries & Foods) don't reagard the fox as 'vermin' or a 'pest'. Fox hunters on the other hand will tell of the fox mutillating the farmers livestock just to try & justify their method of 'pest control'. When what they are actually doing is to the contrary!
The foxhunter has been instumental in the conservation of foxes, as they project them from being a pest to that of fair game & a worthy, cunning oponent. By removing a fox from it's territory, they create space for another to move in. This disruption, as said above, allows more foxes to take up smaller territories, reducing conflict between them & allowing more individuals to breed. So because of the foxhunters themselves, & what they do they will always have a fox to hunt, which obviously suits them.
Two other common fears is that all foxes carry rabies & should be exterminated as they pose a threat to our health. In fact many on the european mainland do, but as the disease has yet to have reached much of France, it is not yet time to worry & as it is also carried by dogs & cats, should we also exterminate them? The other fear that we have is sarcoptic MANGE. This disease is carried by mites, which cause characterristic bald patches, usually originating at the base of the tail. This is canine mange which cannot harm cats or humans. Affected animals can be treated by medication in food. The mange mite can survive off its natural victims for a considerable period, so physical removal of infected animals will not create a mange free envionment.
The fox is a victim of much bad press, it deserves the right to a change of image & thanks to groups like THE FOX PROJECT & THE NATIONAL FOX WELFARE SOCIETY & various 'fox watch' tv programmes we are beginning to understand this red canine that dwells in our gardens & countryside.
Thanks to The Fox Project for the above information! |
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/munkeyboy/website.page4.html
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Sat Feb 19, 2005 5:30 pm |
|
I agree with the ban on it. I think hunting for sport is cowardly. Oh I can shoot a deer. You know how fierce they are! 
LightningBoy made an excellant point though. Sometimes it is needed to keep everything in check. But there needs to be a point where we allow them to at least flourish. We don't even do that. We kill faster than they breed. If we keep this up they will all die. Perhaps there are better ways of "keeping nature in check" without killing nature. To tell you th truth Im not to hunting savy. So I could be wrong. Im just saying I feel this is kinda...inhumane, but I could be wrong.
|
|
|
Lord Borg
Fleet Admiral
Joined: 27 May 2003
Posts: 11214
Location: Vulcan Capital City, Vulcan
|
| Sat Feb 19, 2005 6:43 pm |
|
I think the whole i dea is to keep thoese who hunt or fun to hunt the animal to extintion
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Sat Feb 19, 2005 8:49 pm |
|
NO. Do NOT ban Fox hunting there. Keep it.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
CJ Cregg
Commodore
Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 1254
|
| Sat Feb 19, 2005 10:11 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | NO. Do NOT ban Fox hunting there. Keep it. |
Too late, Its done!  Thats one of Tony Blairs pledges done from 1997 
|
|
|
Kyre
Commodore
Joined: 15 Mar 2002
Posts: 1263
|
| Sun Feb 20, 2005 11:19 am |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | NO. Do NOT ban Fox hunting there. Keep it. |
I want to be surprised, I really do.
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Sun Feb 20, 2005 1:20 pm |
|
I don't think there's been enough information presented to really make a decision. I do know that here in Maine if they banned deer and moose hunting, we'd be so overrun within five years it'd be terrifying. . Not to mention all the collateral damage. Hunting here is used as population control, and I'd say near all hunters eat what they shoot anyway. If it's just done as sport... then no.
Moose Collisions
1990: 359
1998: 859 - 5 fatalities
1999: 673
In 2002 there were over 4500 collisions with moose and deer.
Source
So, yeah, each situation is totally different.
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
1/1
Rear Admiral
Joined: 12 Apr 2002
Posts: 3311
Location: La La Land
|
| Sun Feb 20, 2005 3:31 pm |
|
I think fox hunting should be banned. I think its too cruel and there are other kinder ways to keep the fox population under control if necessary.
|
|
|
Lord Borg
Fleet Admiral
Joined: 27 May 2003
Posts: 11214
Location: Vulcan Capital City, Vulcan
|
| Sun Feb 20, 2005 4:36 pm |
|
| Theresa wrote: | I don't think there's been enough information presented to really make a decision. I do know that here in Maine if they banned deer and moose hunting, we'd be so overrun within five years it'd be terrifying. . Not to mention all the collateral damage. Hunting here is used as population control, and I'd say near all hunters eat what they shoot anyway. If it's just done as sport... then no.
Moose Collisions
1990: 359
1998: 859 - 5 fatalities
1999: 673
In 2002 there were over 4500 collisions with moose and deer.
Source
So, yeah, each situation is totally different. |
yeah thats pretty much why the hinting happens here, but the population would be waay diff if it was done as a sprot and ppl did it just or the sake of hunting one down, of course, here anything you shoo you pretty much have to do somthing with it
|
|
|
Jeremy
J's Guy
Joined: 03 Oct 2002
Posts: 7823
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
|
| Sun Feb 20, 2005 5:07 pm |
|
The interesting thing I found out today is that you can chase the foxes with dogs still, but the dogs are not allowed to kill them... So its kinda hardly done anything actually.
|
|
|
Seven of Nine
Sammie's Mammy
Joined: 16 Jun 2001
Posts: 7871
Location: North East England
|
| Sun Feb 20, 2005 5:09 pm |
|
The fox hunting that has been banned here was just done for sport. I don't mind hunting so much for population control or if the prey is eaten, but the way the dogs just tore up the foxes stomach was just cruel.
|
|
|
borgslayer
Rear Admiral
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 2646
Location: Las Vegas
|
| Sun Feb 20, 2005 5:13 pm |
|
First of all its not the animals fault that we have collisions with them.
If I decide that I should build a house in a forest then im going to have problems with animals coming into my house. So do I have the right to shoot them to extinction because I built my house in the forest? The Answer is no!
It is the peoples fault they are having collisions with animals, if we didn't build roads across a forest land we wouldn't have problems of deers and moose running into the roads crashing unto us.
Easy enough to understand...
|
|
|
Jeff Miller
Fleet Admiral
Joined: 22 Nov 2001
Posts: 23947
Location: Mental Ward for the Mentaly Unstable 6th floor, Saint John's 1615 Delaware Longview Washington 98632
|
| Sun Feb 20, 2005 5:13 pm |
|
To hunt something just for sport is wrong.
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Sun Feb 20, 2005 5:18 pm |
|
| borgslayer wrote: | First of all its not the animals fault that we have collisions with them.
If I decide that I should build a house in a forest then im going to have problems with animals coming into my house. So do I have the right to shoot them to extinction because I built my house in the forest? The Answer is no!
It is the peoples fault they are having collisions with animals, if we didn't build roads across a forest land we wouldn't have problems of deers and moose running into the roads crashing unto us.
Easy enough to understand... |
Well whats your solution? That Humans don't expand anywhere? Sorry, but if there is nicer places that can be built im for it. Even if it means relocating Deer. Although I agree that the way the foxes are killed are terrible, but I think that hunting to control the population is ok. Its just the methods that concern me.
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:49 am |
|
| Seven of Nine wrote: | | The fox hunting that has been banned here was just done for sport. I don't mind hunting so much for population control or if the prey is eaten, but the way the dogs just tore up the foxes stomach was just cruel. |
Then maybe you should have your Hunters shoot the Fox. 
|
|
|
Seven of Nine
Sammie's Mammy
Joined: 16 Jun 2001
Posts: 7871
Location: North East England
|
| Mon Feb 21, 2005 5:00 am |
|
This law is sooo complicated.
Our hunters can shoot the fox. They're even allowed to use two dogs to flush out a fox (but not rip it to pieces) to be shot. They're not allowed to chase it for miles until it's exhausted though, and they're not allowed to have their dogs kill it.
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Mon Feb 21, 2005 12:16 pm |
|
Here in America fox hunting is totally legal, however the hunters (or their dogs) don't kill the foxes, so therefore I don't see a problem with it. But chasing down a fox just to kill it? Doesn't really seem to make much sense.
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
