Banning Trail Hunting - impact on Deer recovery?

[jon 12]

I would hope that the rural communities band together to give dogs new homes if needed after this legislation?

A bit Tongue in cheek, but what about a buy back/ compensation scheme from the government for all the redundant dogs caused by their stupidity.

 

[Apthorpe]

A bit Tongue in cheek, but what about a buy back/ compensation scheme from the government for all the redundant dogs caused by their stupidity.

No chance. If the governmentnsuddenly started to compensate people for the consequences if their stupidity, they'd need all the wealth in the world.

 

[WW.]

We could fight dirty of course, and promise all Labour MPs that the packs will be put down in front of a poster saying "Killed by order of the Labour Government" and post each one on social media.

David.

That wouldn't be fighting dirty, it would be being honest.

 

[enfieldspares]

Yet again some in the hound sports fraternity do themselves no good.

When the Blair ban was promoted their spokesmen were on television terrifying the public with stories of foxes being "shot late at night with high powered rifles" and the danger this would create. Or "foxes being maimed by being blasted by shotguns" and "forced to suffer painful lingering deaths". So have no illusion that they sought to decry the use of firearms to control foxes and where happy to see that thrown under the bus.

Now they are saying that hounds will have to be put down.

So what do people think presently happens to these animals when no longer able to be hunted with? Because in my sixty plus years I have yet to see anywhere any "Old Hounds' Homes" for infirm or elderly such. These animals will not die "by order of the Labour Government" they will die because hunts have had twelve years to adapt to the ban on hunting foxes and switch to trail hunting and have not done so in a way that would have allowed natural reduction in pack sizes.

And if as they say they are "hunting a trail" then pray...as someone who's family hunted with the Quorn from the days of George Barker and later through the Murray-Smith masters and then after the M1 came to Leicestershire hunted with the Atherstone...why do they still ten years after the Blair ban on pursuing foxes do they still need terrier men if only "hunting a trail"?

So many mistruths and so much obfuscation that they themselves could easily resemble Tony Blair.

 

[SikaSeeker]

Yet again some in the hound sports fraternity do themselves no good.

When the Blair ban was promoted their spokesmen were on television terrifying the public with stories of foxes being "shot late at night with high powered rifles" and the danger this would create. Or "foxes being maimed by being blasted by shotguns" and "forced to suffer painful lingering deaths". So have no illusion that they sought to decry the use of firearms to control foxes and where happy to see that thrown under the bus.

Now they are saying that hounds will have to be put down.

So what do people think presently happens to these animals when no longer able to be hunted with? Because in my sixty plus years I have yet to see anywhere any "Old Hounds' Homes" for infirm or elderly such. These animals will not die "by order of the Labour Government" they will die because hunts have had twelve years to adapt to the ban on hunting foxes and switch to trail hunting and have not done so in a way that would have allowed natural reduction in pack sizes.

And if as they say they are "hunting a trail" then pray...as someone who's family hunted with the Quorn from the days of George Barker and later through the Murray-Smith masters and then after the M1 came to Leicestershire hunted with the Atherstone...why do they still ten years after the Blair ban on pursuing foxes do they still need terrier men if only "hunting a trail"?

So many mistruths and so much obfuscation that they themselves could easily resemble Tony Blair.

Most disciplines of field sports are happy to throw each other under the bus, nothing new there. Hounds are under the livestock umbrella. Why should hounds be given out to the general public, to be bred from and sold on. Years of breeding the best, these are kept in tight circles and shouldn’t be any other way.

 

[Bo Diddley]

The world is not perfect.
We go to war with each other and drop bombs on one another.
Hounds are led to the incinerator and shot.
Pigs are born, end up in a lorry to be taken to a fattening unit, and then end up back on the lorry for a trip to the abattoir.
We wring our hands in dismay...

Happy New Year, folks.

 

[Apthorpe]

Yet again some in the hound sports fraternity do themselves no good.

When the Blair ban was promoted their spokesmen were on television terrifying the public with stories of foxes being "shot late at night with high powered rifles" and the danger this would create. Or "foxes being maimed by being blasted by shotguns" and "forced to suffer painful lingering deaths". So have no illusion that they sought to decry the use of firearms to control foxes and where happy to see that thrown under the bus.

Et tu?

Now they are saying that hounds will have to be put down.

So what do people think presently happens to these animals when no longer able to be hunted with? Because in my sixty plus years I have yet to see anywhere any "Old Hounds' Homes" for infirm or elderly such. These animals will not die "by order of the Labour Government" they will die because hunts have had twelve

?

years to adapt to the ban on hunting foxes and switch to trail hunting and have not done so in a way that would have allowed natural reduction in pack sizes.

They have. Our local packs are all smaller and several have been lost along with bloodlines.

And if as they say they are "hunting a trail" then pray...as someone who's family hunted with the Quorn from the days of George Barker and later through the Murray-Smith masters and then after the M1 came to Leicestershire hunted with the Atherstone...why do they still ten years after the Blair ban on pursuing foxes do they still need terrier men if only "hunting a trail"?

They often don't have them and so what if they do? What they do is legal and there are plenty of legitimate uses for them.

So many mistruths and so much obfuscation that they themselves could easily resemble Tony Blair.

No more than those peddled by those who wanted to ban it, or for that matter the assorted useful idiots among other field sports practitioners who think they're doing a service by prejudiced opinions and shooting everyone in the foot.

 

[Ratel]

Sorry did not mean to like that, no offence.

I believe the hounds will be shot or dumped on the RSPCA.

If it goes through it needs radicl action. Start putting a pack down in Hyde.Park would certainly draw attention to what the Stasi Fabians have done and are likely to bring in.

 

[tarponhead]

These are dogs whose entire raison d'être is to go hunting in packs. One might as well try to conserve Atlantic salmon by keeping one in my child's aquarium. It is senseless.

There is no escaping the fact that this bill is being pushed by people who are so devoted to assaulting the traditional fabric and rural culture that they'd prefer to have thousands of dogs killed than leave things be. There is no aspect of animal welfare to this.

It’s odd that many of the same voices that want hunting with dogs banned want rewilding with wolves - dogs that hunt… bonkers, the lot of them. Better use of parliamentary time would be dealing with proper consequences for rural crime and civil disobedience by anti’s and other “activists” who can’t take an evidenced-based approach if it defies their ideology. Democracy it ain’t - I’ve been close to Government consultation and the nearest voices from the people ministers and civil servants know, get a disproportionate influence on Policy. Which is why so much is spent on lobbying.

 

[VSS]

If it goes through it needs radicl action. Start putting a pack down in Hyde.Park would certainly draw attention to what the Stasi Fabians have done and are likely to bring in.

No it wouldn't. It would simply reinforce the public's opinion that people who hunt are cruel.

 

[tusker]

The bed wetters want to ban trail hunting because it can be used as a smoke screen for hunting. Should the government ban Turkish barbers because they can be used for money laundering for the drug cartel,s?
If the hunts are hunting foxes then why not prosecute them using the hunting act legislation?
Tusker

 

[Ratel]

Sorry did not mean to like that, no offence.

I believe the hounds will be shot or dumped on the RSPCA.

No it wouldn't. It would simply reinforce the public's opinion that people who hunt are cruel.

You mean they have not got a full on belief already. Ok just let them go, wouldn't be too long before they found. Hell of a shock for the North London elite trying to stop them. They could very well feed themselves on London wildlife, aux naturelle for years, that should suit the antis. Non of your Red coated inbreds or rural scum being cruel as they categorise folk who hunt.

 

[25 Sharps]

Surely the immediate question is what happens to the existing hound packs? I can't see them being kept simply for the 'visuals' associated with a County country fair and the Boxing Day village parade.

K

Clean foot hunting, they go after a human scent, not an animal one.

At least that’s what @JL Grendel told me.

 

[Apthorpe]

No it wouldn't. It would simply reinforce the public's opinion that people who hunt are cruel.

The public don't give two farts either way about the issue.

 

[Apthorpe]

It’s odd that many of the same voices that want hunting with dogs banned want rewilding with wolves - dogs that hunt… bonkers, the lot of them. Better use of parliamentary time would be dealing with proper consequences for rural crime and civil disobedience by anti’s and other “activists” who can’t take an evidenced-based approach if it defies their ideology. Democracy it ain’t - I’ve been close to Government consultation and the nearest voices from the people ministers and civil servants know, get a disproportionate influence on Policy. Which is why so much is spent on lobbying.

Both are red herrings. What these activists actually want is to expropriate (steal) the property of rural dwellers, whole landscapes, and have it controlled by a quango, which purely coincidentally thennemploys the same individuals on large salaries.

This is really why.you've had these Guardian reading clots acting as useful idiots for the likes of Shrubsole, Monbiot etc. out creating trouble on Dartmoor, Berry Pomeroy etc. and what some of the mass of "environmental" levies you pay on everything is for.
They want a less violent Zimbabwe style land reform with them in charge but without them holding any actual responsibility, risk or costs for the consequences. That's what the taxpayer is for.

 

[Klenchblaize]

Clean foot hunting, they go after a human scent, not an animal one.

Perhaps the solution is for Antis to step-up as such volunteers.

Sadly the argument against following a human scent is surely that a Master has little ability to stop the pack opting to switch scent once in the field?

K

 

[cjm1066]

I walk my dog in a park in our village, perhaps at times 6 or more together. The dogs chase a squirrel - under the hunting act that's probably an offence?

 

[Klenchblaize]

I walk my dog in a park in our village, perhaps at times 6 or more together. The dogs chase a squirrel - under the hunting act that's probably an offence?

Is the dog given of "intent"?

K

 

[timbrayford]

Yet again some in the hound sports fraternity do themselves no good.

When the Blair ban was promoted their spokesmen were on television terrifying the public with stories of foxes being "shot late at night with high powered rifles" and the danger this would create. Or "foxes being maimed by being blasted by shotguns" and "forced to suffer painful lingering deaths". So have no illusion that they sought to decry the use of firearms to control foxes and where happy to see that thrown under the bus.

Now they are saying that hounds will have to be put down.

So what do people think presently happens to these animals when no longer able to be hunted with? Because in my sixty plus years I have yet to see anywhere any "Old Hounds' Homes" for infirm or elderly such. These animals will not die "by order of the Labour Government" they will die because hunts have had twelve years to adapt to the ban on hunting foxes and switch to trail hunting and have not done so in a way that would have allowed natural reduction in pack sizes.

And if as they say they are "hunting a trail" then pray...as someone who's family hunted with the Quorn from the days of George Barker and later through the Murray-Smith masters and then after the M1 came to Leicestershire hunted with the Atherstone...why do they still ten years after the Blair ban on pursuing foxes do they still need terrier men if only "hunting a trail"?

So many mistruths and so much obfuscation that they themselves could easily resemble Tony Blair.

Sadly true but there was no justification in the 2004 ban let alone anything proposed since. Arrogant attitudes by Hunt Masters is an entirely different matter.

 

[enfieldspares]

Sadly true but there was no justification in the 2004 ban let alone anything proposed since. Arrogant attitudes by Hunt Masters is an entirely different matter.

Yes. I agree. And the same "arrogant attitude" I've seen on the game field (in England) where the call goes out that "There may be duck so non-lead please unless you are taking it home." Despite all use on duck in England being long unlawful.

The law may be an ass but the law is the law. And as we see with Starmer's intention failure to comply has consequences.

Those consequences being that both attitudes have now brought us to this proposed trail hunting ban and to the lead shot ban extending across the board through a belief that had there been a clay pigeon exemption some would have used cartridges loaded for such on live quarry.

As I wrote here long ago when the Blair ban came in people follow hounds for three reasons.

For the frivolities and fornication that accompany it - the social side, the hunt ball and etc., for the the ride across country, or to see hounds work. All three could have continued without the fox with trails laid. Indeed in an increasingly urbanised countryside could have been better done with a trail to give longer "points". None of these if hunting a trail require terrier men.

But the "arrogant attitude" prevailed for the past decade plus and a newly elected government has lost patience.